# Black Diamond from Screen Innovations?



## Xyst

Has anyone heard anything about the new Black Diamond screen from Screen Innovations being released at EHX? They are supposed to preview it and it will be available in two different gains and fixed or flexible. That's all I know about it so far. I've been eyeballing it and haven't seen any info anywhere.


Thanks!


----------



## Xyst

Is anyone going to EHX that would be willing to stop by the booth and take a couple pictures of the Black diamond or get a few extra details?


Thanks y'all!


----------



## netzer0

I emailed them about it a couple weeks ago (my company is an SI dealer) and they told me that the Black Diamond screen would be out sometime in Q4. No specific date though. I am really looking forward to seeing this screen in action - everything I have seen on it looks awesome.


----------



## gt40

I spoke with them last week and the rep said they planned to ship in march. He said price talk would be mid to high 2k range on a 92" wide(not diagonal) They have pics in their gallery:

http://www.siscreens.com/gallery.html


----------



## Xyst

Appreciate the feed back! That sounds much more reasonable than a similar DNP model I looked at. The dealer in NYC was quoting several times that for a DNP. I am looking forward to hearing about this baby as the time draws near and hope that it can reasonably deliver on it's promises.


----------



## noah katz

Does anyone know who the mfgr of the Black Diamond is?


----------



## Peter_

Interesting.


I follow the topic to read the comments.


Peter


----------



## gt40




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/12836279
> 
> 
> Does anyone know who the mfgr of the Black Diamond is?



Here you go:

http://www.siscreens.com/


----------



## noah katz

Are you sure they make it, not just sell it?


I believe SI sold the original dnp Supernova, but put their own name on it.


It could be purchased for less as a Supernova, and I'm wondering if the same is true with the BD.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/12847884
> 
> 
> Are you sure they make it, not just sell it?
> 
> 
> I believe SI sold the original dnp Supernova, but put their own name on it.
> 
> 
> It could be purchased for less as a Supernova, and I'm wondering if the same is true with the BD.



I remember that dnp was the supplier for a while, and I'm personally not sure if the new Black Diamond is the same as the SuperNova Flex or not. It would seem like it is not simply because the Flex has been available for a couple years now and it seems that SI keeps pushing the release date back on this. If they were simply distributing a product, or recasting it, you would think they would have released this long ago.


----------



## Laserfan

Is the Supernova Flex black? What caught my eye about the BD was something I read where they described it as "looking like a plasma display when not On" or some such.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Laserfan* /forum/post/12852449
> 
> 
> Is the Supernova Flex black? What caught my eye about the BD was something I read where they described it as "looking like a plasma display when not On" or some such.



No, the Supernova is more of a silver... here 


I'm not sure I'd go so far as one of these black screens looks "like a plasma" when off. I would assume that has a lot to do with how you frame it, but you can make your own call there. Here. 

The 1st 2 pictures there are of the new black diamond.


I'm not sure if this is going to work as well as they claim it to, from everything I've read on the Mirage and the SuperNova they're just not up to par...they work great in the dark, and they work okay with some ambiant light, but I'm not expecting miracles out of this. Hopefully just an incremental improvement.


I'm still excited about it though, and looking forward to the release none-the-less. My hope is that this is a brand new material and not the recycled SuperNova as those screens have not been reviewing terribly well.


----------



## Laserfan

Well, I can't find it again but I'd read that someone who'd seen it said it looked like a flat panel display when off. Hard to tell from the pics, the gallery shot on the left looks pretty dark though.


Their website seems hosed-up atm but hopefully more & better info will come forward soon...


----------



## Moa

Been waiting for it for a long time

However they keep on postponing which is not very promissing about its performance... So far nobody has seen any demo with their screen. It's quite disapointing

We'll see


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Moa* /forum/post/12864824
> 
> 
> Been waiting for it for a long time
> 
> However they keep on postponing which is not very promissing about its performance... So far nobody has seen any demo with their screen. It's quite disapointing
> 
> We'll see



Agreed, by the time they finally get around to releasing it I'll probably just buy a house and build a dedicated theater instead.







I seem to remember someone posting a while back that they had seen it in action and were very impressed by it. Maybe we'll be surprised.


----------



## beyondballistic

SI just released a video of the BD at youtube.com/watch?v=ESAiUf6mV20 . I'm also hearing that March is becoming a pretty firm release date for the BD. From what I've heard the BD is a variation on the Sony's DynaClear screen but the gain is different and SI is bringing the screen to market with a different substrate that is far more resilent than the tissue thin potato chip bag texture of the DynaClear. SI has an exclusive on the technology so the mfg discovery is moot.


----------



## Laserfan

Thanks for the link--the one shot therein where the ambient light was "dark" there didn't seem to be much difference from the non-BD screen. Still, I'm excited about this and look forward to their offerings (two gains to choose from?) ASAP.


Maybe I'll wander-in there one day and see what they can tell me (north Austin).


----------



## beyondballistic

In a dark environment, the fact there wasn't a difference is a good thing. The physics involved in creating a light tolerant projection screen typically creates some give and take that skews the picture in a "traditional" home theater environment. The Supernova has a noticable hot spot issue, Greyhawk has a blue push, etc. Granted, this video is not proof positive of substantial gains (no pun intended) in moving two piece projection forward. They'll need to show a more natural setting with real life conditions with various angles, intensities and types of light to demonstate the claims for BD. But I like what I see so far...


----------



## Laserfan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *beyondballistic* /forum/post/12894541
> 
> 
> The physics involved in creating a light tolerant projection screen typically creates some give and take



Of course, but I was merely looking for perfection in all aspects! Brighter whites! Blacker blacks! In bright ambient or dark! In sickness and in health! Til death do us part!


----------



## noah katz

Anyone know what the two gains are?


----------



## beyondballistic

I remember someone from SI telling me the two gains are 1.4 and .85 and the half gain angle is 45.


----------



## CreativeHT

Hello,

I'm building my first home theater and new to AVSforum. This is my first post so I hope this info is helpful.


The final specs have not been ironed out yet, but the High gain and the low gain versions are going to be somewhere around 1.3-1.4 and .08-.09 respectively. The screen material is different from the old Visage screens but is supposed to outperform it 10:1.


One area that bums me out a bit is the fact that the biggest screen size you can get is 110" other wise you have to go to a 2.35:1 screen which can get to 133". I was hoping to put a 120" screen on my wall due to the fact that my head will be somewhere between 14-15ft back (first row) and second row will be 19-20ft back (second row).


Does anyone have any perspective on whether a 110" screen will look to small at that distance? I am thinking about useing either the new Epson 1080UB or the Sony VW60 if that helps.


FYI:

Also, they now have the YouTube video posted on their website siscreens.com (somewhat higher resolution video).


----------



## noah katz

Bummer on the size.


I have a 133" 16:9 that I watch from between 11' and 14' depending on how many guests.


For me 110" would be too small, but no matter how big of a screen you get, you get used to it.


----------



## Xyst

Very nice video indeed!


Is it perfect in that it produces the same picture in light as in dark? No, but I don't expect it to either. It looks like it will give me a watchable picture when I want have a lamp on in the room.


One thing that I am very cautious about with this screen and this video is they have not shown the lighting in the room. From the video you can tell it is fairly bright (or the camera is adjusted to show that) in the room, but they are not showing the light source...can lights, lamps, torch lights etc. Now are they showing placement...this would go a long way towards demonstrating this screens capabilities. Again, with this type of technology I'm not expecting miracles but I do enjoy what I see so far!


Thanks for sharing the video...if only March would get here! (And I could find a SI dealer!!!) I wonder if AVS would consider carrying SI?


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/12896692
> 
> 
> Anyone know what the two gains are?



I seem to recall there being mention of a 2.0 gain and a lower one but don't remember what. It's possible I made that up as I can't find mention of it anywhere.


----------



## noah katz

Another possible pitfall is that if videos are anything like screenshots, and I don't see why they wouldn't be, dynamic range limitations of the camera sensors crush blacks, making them look darker than they really are.


Years ago I'd see tons of screenshots w/inky blacks, of LCD pj's w/400:1 CR.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/12922280
> 
> 
> Another possible pitfall is that if videos are anything like screenshots, and I don't see why they wouldn't be, dynamic range limitations of the camera sensors crush blacks, making them look darker than they really are.
> 
> 
> Years ago I'd see tons of screenshots w/inky blacks, of LCD pj's w/400:1 CR.



You make a valid point Noah, and another good mention that ALL screen shots should be taken with a grain of salt. I know from my experience as a photographer that it's very easy to make a dim room look brighter than it actually is. In fact one of the harder things to accurately photograph is a dark scene. It is very easy to compensate for the low light to make the scene look much brighter than it is.


I've read all of the reviews I could get my hands on of the DNP SuperNova and the original SI Visage screens. Neither of those truly impressed me. Sony's Dynaclear, it seems, has mainly flown under the radar of reviews so it has been hard to get a decent opinion of it. There is an AVS member who is using one as his primary screen and has weighed in considerably.


The more you read, and the longer you look, it all comes back to light control. If the manufacturers pushing Black Screen technology can give those people with out man-caves even a little help then I'll embrace their ideas with open arms.


----------



## CreativeHT




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/12914076
> 
> 
> Very nice video indeed!
> 
> 
> Is it perfect in that it produces the same picture in light as in dark? No, but I don't expect it to either. It looks like it will give me a watchable picture when I want have a lamp on in the room.
> 
> 
> One thing that I am very cautious about with this screen and this video is they have not shown the lighting in the room. From the video you can tell it is fairly bright (or the camera is adjusted to show that) in the room, but they are not showing the light source...can lights, lamps, torch lights etc. Now are they showing placement...this would go a long way towards demonstrating this screens capabilities. Again, with this type of technology I'm not expecting miracles but I do enjoy what I see so far!
> 
> 
> Thanks for sharing the video...if only March would get here! (And I could find a SI dealer!!!) I wonder if AVS would consider carrying SI?



The only one I have found is Magnolia through Best Buy.


----------



## pottscb




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *beyondballistic* /forum/post/12891151
> 
> 
> SI just released a video of the BD at youtube.com/watch?v=ESAiUf6mV20 . I'm also hearing that March is becoming a pretty firm release date for the BD. From what I've heard the BD is a variation on the Sony's DynaClear screen but the gain is different and SI is bringing the screen to market with a different substrate that is far more resilent than the tissue thin potato chip bag texture of the DynaClear. SI has an exclusive on the technology so the mfg discovery is moot.



Now if they can do it for a small multiple of the $200 that the Sony Dynaclear costs I'll be impressed...I would've already bought the Sony if they would make anything bigger than 80"...my pjs 20 feet away and I can't squeeze the image any smaller than 92".


----------



## h00kemh0rns

Looks like I'll be one of the lucky ones that will get to view this in person at the SI office. I'm impressed by the video and want to see if it lives up to expectations. I'll be candid in my opinion and hopefully I can see a side by side with other screens (i.e. silhouette, visage, etc.)


I'm hoping this thing really lives up to the video and hype. And I'm sure SI is as I'll be first in line to buy the BD.


----------



## h00kemh0rns

BTW, if you have questions you'd like answered I can relay them to the owner of SI to get answered. He's a very grounded guy and just as enthusiastic as any of the home theatre guys around. I'm sure he'd be very open to the questions.


----------



## ngarn




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13073345
> 
> 
> BTW, if you have questions you'd like answered I can relay them to the owner of SI to get answered. He's a very grounded guy and just as enthusiastic as any of the home theatre guys around. I'm sure he'd be very open to the questions.



See if you can get any idea about price. It looks great from the video and photos but how it looks in real life is the important part.


I'm guessing the biggest competition in the market for them is going to be Stewart's Firehawk G3... Are they going to be willing to compete on price with Stewart? Are we talking about a fixed screen at 100+" for under $2500.


I don't think you can sell too many of them at prices much higher than that unless you can show a massive performance difference. (Stewart is still the industry standard.)


Thanks for the efforts!


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ngarn* /forum/post/13074145
> 
> 
> See if you can get any idea about price. It looks great from the video and photos but how it looks in real life is the important part.
> 
> 
> I'm guessing the biggest competition in the market for them is going to be Stewart's Firehawk G3... Are they going to be willing to compete on price with Stewart? Are we talking about a fixed screen at 100+" for under $2500.
> 
> 
> I don't think you can sell too many of them at prices much higher than that unless you can show a massive performance difference. (Stewart is still the industry standard.)
> 
> 
> Thanks for the efforts!



I was talking with the owner about a 110" and the tentative pricing was definitely under 2500. Also, the end of March is still firm for release date to the public. Regardless, will try to get some firm pricing the next time I go to SI.


I have a dedicated theatre room and was never contemplating the BD...figuring it was overkill. But, after listening to what the BD is capable of, and seeing it in the video, in a blackened room it sold me.


Watch the video again, there is an opening scene where it's in a completely blacked out room. If you watch the ceiling you'll notice the light 'scatter effect' of a typical screen. As the scene rolls on you see the screen roll up to reveal the BD...as it does the light scatter completely disapates from the ceiling. What does this mean? Supposedly higher contrast, deeper colors, and less 'washout.' So, even if you have a blacked out room you will benefit greatly from this type of screen.


This all remains to be seen in person but again if the video is remotely close...I'm sold. Honestly can't wait to see it live and in person. I'm going to be very hard on it to see if it's worth the difference in price. We'll see...


----------



## BillY2KFRC

This is looking very promising. Do you happen to know the gain? Will this be something that could be used with a short throw (11ft to a 92-100" screen) and a projector that isn't dead center on the screen? thanks.


----------



## Laserfan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13073345
> 
> 
> BTW, if you have questions you'd like answered...



Basic question: if this is a fabric material will it be made available as such, or will they only offer complete systems w/frame etc.?


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BillY2KFRC* /forum/post/13076332
> 
> 
> This is looking very promising. Do you happen to know the gain? Will this be something that could be used with a short throw (11ft to a 92-100" screen) and a projector that isn't dead center on the screen? thanks.




Gain is .85 or 1.4

Screen size is dependent on format you choose. Right now 16:9 will get you up to 110" whereas 2:35 can get you 133". I'm betting this will change as demand increases. The really cool thing with this screen is how black the screen is along with the attributes of light scatter/ambient lighting. The blackness eliminates the necessity for masking when going from 4:3, 16:9 to 2:35 and want to see if it's as good as I expect when switching formats.


I don't see why your conditions would hinder the screen operation/specs. Could you be more specific on how off center your projector will be, what projector you're using?


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Laserfan* /forum/post/13076721
> 
> 
> Basic question: if this is a fabric material will it be made available as such, or will they only offer complete systems w/frame etc.?



Ryan stated to me that the Tsystem mount is made for switching out the screen material allowing for easy upgrades (like what I'll be doing initially.) I'll confirm that the screen material would be made to order without ordering the complete system.


----------



## Laserfan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13082031
> 
> 
> I'll confirm that the screen material would be made to order without ordering the complete system.



Muchas gracias!










Look forward to your eyewitness report!


----------



## noah katz

Will they have electric versions? If so, could you ask the price on a 1.4 gain 133" 2.35:1?


I presume it's angular reflective as opposed to retroreflective, which means hotspotting can be an issue.


Please view w/that in mind, especially the 1.4 gain.


Thanks


----------



## BillY2KFRC




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13082017
> 
> 
> Gain is .85 or 1.4
> 
> Screen size is dependent on format you choose. Right now 16:9 will get you up to 110" whereas 2:35 can get you 133". I'm betting this will change as demand increases. The really cool thing with this screen is how black the screen is along with the attributes of light scatter/ambient lighting. The blackness eliminates the necessity for masking when going from 4:3, 16:9 to 2:35 and want to see if it's as good as I expect when switching formats.
> 
> 
> I don't see why your conditions would hinder the screen operation/specs. Could you be more specific on how off center your projector will be, what projector you're using?



The .85 might be perect for my application. My projector is lined up vertically with the top of the screen, however it is approx. 30-40% off horiz. center. I have a door unfortunately placed dead-center at the rear of my theater, so it needs to be off center. I am using an RS1, and currently project on an Elite 92" High Contrast Gray 1.0 screen.


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Laserfan* /forum/post/13084727
> 
> 
> Muchas gracias!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Look forward to your eyewitness report!



Screen material will be available by itself. You won't need to purchase the whole system if you're looking to use within an existing frame.


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ngarn* /forum/post/13074145
> 
> 
> I'm guessing the biggest competition in the market for them is going to be Stewart's Firehawk G3...



They've already demo'd the BD against Stewarts entire line with some other customers. There was no competition between BD and Stewarts per customer reactions.


Obviously this is all third hand info and I'm asking if he can set up something similar for my visit. When I was there last they only had a couple pieces of the BD material. Not enough really suitable for a good showing. The actual screens were going to some large events (forget the names off hand) one being in Canada the other in Cali/west coast area. Anyways, when they get back in I'm hoping to see these perform against the perverbial 500 lb gorilla screens.


Some more tidbits of info on these screens per Ryan:

BD is completely different than any other coated or pvc material because of the optics. The optics create around a 3x improvement in contrast. Also, unlike traditional screens BD does not have the issues with color accuracy when used in a theater with painted walls. For instance if you have a burgundy room you will see a red push. BD controls the porjectors light, therefore not allowing the light to reflect all over the room (light scatter.)


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/13086065
> 
> 
> Will they have electric versions? If so, could you ask the price on a 1.4 gain 133" 2.35:1?



Yes, they will be available in Q2. No idea on pricing yet.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/13086065
> 
> 
> I presume it's angular reflective as opposed to retroreflective, which means hotspotting can be an issue.



It is angular reflective. Hotspotting supposedly has been eliminated due to optics used. I'll be able to better determine if this is true after the demo.


----------



## AaronS

So does anyone know if it is a retroreflective screen? The characteristics would suggest it is, but that is never stated.


AaronS


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AaronS* /forum/post/13109698
> 
> 
> So does anyone know if it is a retroreflective screen? The characteristics would suggest it is, but that is never stated.
> 
> 
> AaronS



Angular, with a 44% viewing angle. I got this info from Screen Innovations on Tuesday.


----------



## noah katz

"Angular, with a 44% viewing angle."


That must be for the low gain screen.


We'll just have to wait and see on the high gain.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/13111587
> 
> 
> "Angular, with a 44% viewing angle."
> 
> 
> That must be for the low gain screen.
> 
> 
> We'll just have to wait and see on the high gain.



It's on the "high" gain screen. I asked about the screen gains and was told 1.3, and it seemed that was the only one coming out. I think I asked for confirmation there would be just the one, but not 100% sure if I did.


If you call, they will take your contact info and put you on a list to get a screen sample, which they hope to send out in March.


----------



## Talontsi96

Anyone have an idea of what the pricing on this screen material will be?


----------



## Laserfan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13105490
> 
> 
> ...Some more tidbits of info on these screens per Ryan: BD is completely different than any other coated or pvc material because of the optics. The optics create around a 3x improvement in contrast. Also, unlike traditional screens BD does not have the issues with color accuracy when used in a theater with painted walls. For instance if you have a burgundy room you will see a red push. BD controls the porjectors light, therefore not allowing the light to reflect all over the room (light scatter.)



This makes great sense and is very encouraging, even to those of us with "bat caves" i.e. I can see the reflected light everywhere in the room, and like the idea that BD might minimize it. You're really on the hook now Mr. Horns--looking forward to your viewing & report!


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Laserfan* /forum/post/13114039
> 
> 
> This makes great sense and is very encouraging, even to those of us with "bat caves" i.e. I can see the reflected light everywhere in the room, and like the idea that BD might minimize it. You're really on the hook now Mr. Horns--looking forward to your viewing & report!




Haha! Keep me on the hook....I think Ryan is going to demo this for me just to have me stop pestering him







Two weeks I should get my first demo with another to follow about 2-4 wks later.


I'll probably have firm pricing in two weeks as well. Ryan's goal is to get this bleeding edge technology out there while cutting into the price point set by the 900 lb gorillas in the industry. I fully expect these to undercut the most expensive offered, by say the Stewarts, by a good 20-30%.


Again, that's my gut feel...nothing firm yet...so don't hold me to it YET.


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Talontsi96* /forum/post/13112224
> 
> 
> Anyone have an idea of what the pricing on this screen material will be?




Nothing firm yet but it's been eluded that 110" 16:9 would be in the ball park of ~2300


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13114507
> 
> 
> Nothing firm yet but it's been eluded that 110" 16:9 would be in the ball park of ~2300



Not bad, and if dealers get a very favorable cost on these, street price could be under $1500 for that one.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13114496
> 
> 
> Haha! Keep me on the hook....I think Ryan is going to demo this for me just to have me stop pestering him
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Two weeks I should get my first demo with another to follow about 2-4 wks later.



Any chance SI would let you take some pics?


----------



## Mikenificent1

Most importantly, besides price (for a 92"










Can you confirm if it hot spots at short throw (1.4), and if there is any sheen or sparklies with the material. I asked a rep, he asked me my setup, and then never responded afterwards which looks like a bad sign.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13160354
> 
> 
> Most importantly, besides price (for a 92"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can you confirm if it hot spots at short throw (1.4), and if there is any sheen or sparklies with the material. I asked a rep, he asked me my setup, and then responded afterwards which looked likle a bad sign.



I asked Ryan at SI if the screen surface would show and his answer was no.


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13118395
> 
> 
> Any chance SI would let you take some pics?



I don't see why not but obviously I can't commit without Ryan's nod.


Man, it's getting close to when I'll be heading over...can you hear my anticipation?


----------



## Xyst

I heard from SI that the release will be in April and that they may sell direct to people that do not have a dealer close to them.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/13222346
> 
> 
> I heard from SI that the release will be in April and that they may sell direct to people that do not have a dealer close to them.



AV Science is planning to be a dealer for SI, which means these screens should be available through mail order and for less than the MSRP price the manufacturer will want for a direct order.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13160522
> 
> 
> I asked Ryan at SI if the screen surface would show and his answer was no.



It can still hot spot though. Screens like the DNP Supernova and the standard Firehawk need a long throw setup to minimize hot spotting, I wonder if the BD is any different. SI hasn't responded to my emails, and I'm a potential buyer, imagine if you have questions after the sale!! I guess I'll have to look else where.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13225503
> 
> 
> It can still hot spot though. Screens like the DNP Supernova and the standard Firehawk need a long throw setup to minimize hot spotting, I wonder if the BD is any different. SI hasn't responded to my emails, and I'm a potential buyer, imagine if you have questions after the sale!! I guess I'll have to look else where.



You have to expect the FH to show screen surface, since it is a grey screen. I think the Supernova may be grey as well.


When I called and asked questions on the phone two weeks ago, the people at SI were very helpful. Both Shannon and Ryan spent plenty of time patiently answering all of my questions. Plus, if you bought a Black Diamond from AV Science, you could certainly count on excellent follow-up service from your dealer.


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13225503
> 
> 
> It can still hot spot though. Screens like the DNP Supernova and the standard Firehawk need a long throw setup to minimize hot spotting, I wonder if the BD is any different. SI hasn't responded to my emails, and I'm a potential buyer, imagine if you have questions after the sale!! I guess I'll have to look else where.



Black Diamond is new technology not prone to hot spotting as in the past per Ryan. Next week should be my demo and I'll try to take pics and give you an honest critique.


As far as being unresponsive, you seem to be in the minority since everyone that's attempted to contact them (email or phone) have had no probs. Give them a call they'll be able to assist right away. Great people to talk with.


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/13222346
> 
> 
> I heard from SI that the release will be in April and that they may sell direct to people that do not have a dealer close to them.




Dell will be selling them online as well.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13229352
> 
> 
> Black Diamond is new technology not prone to hot spotting as in the past per Ryan. Next week should be my demo and I'll try to take pics and give you an honest critique.
> 
> 
> As far as being unresponsive, you seem to be in the minority since everyone that's attempted to contact them (email or phone) have had no probs. Give them a call they'll be able to assist right away. Great people to talk with.



I learned yesterday when I called too late in the day to reach Shannon and Ryan that the two of them were going to be away from the office Tuesday and Wednesday. Got me thinking maybe they went somewhere to demo the Black Diamond.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13229352
> 
> 
> Black Diamond is new technology not prone to hot spotting as in the past per Ryan. Next week should be my demo and I'll try to take pics and give you an honest critique.



If all they say is true, then it is the screen I've been waiting forever for! I can't wait to see it for myself.


When you see it make note of which gain screen you are looking at, the size of the screen, and how far the lens is from the screen. When the room is dark, move your head side to side to see if there is a hot spot (portion of the screen is brighter than the rest and the brioght spot moves when your head moves), also during bright parts of the screen, especially white, take notice if there are any sparklies, sheen, or if whites look crushed. Thanks.


----------



## Guinness77

Does anybody know if AVS is getting a review sample?


Thanks


----------



## Michael W.

For those in the SF Bay Area, Magnolia Hi-Fi across the street from the Valley Fair Mall has the Black Diamond screen, they have a JVS RS-1 displaying on it.


I am in the process of building a HT and have been having fits trying to figure out which screen to get. The BD looked pretty impressive, the guy at the store turned up all the lights in the room and the picture still looked good.


----------



## Michael W.

Due to the multipurpose nature of the room I am building I need to go with an electrical. So, for being future-proof I will likely get a 2.35:1 screen and work out some masking system for 16:9.


On the SI Black Diamond they are coming out with an electrical call the "Reference" model. In the photos they provide the screen looks like a non-tensioned screen, i.e. none of the curves of a tensioning system. But, the website states:


'"Super Flat" Rigid horizontal screen tensioning system'


Does anybody have any idea how they are doing the tensioning?


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Michael W.* /forum/post/13245257
> 
> 
> they have a JVS RS-1 displaying on it.
> 
> 
> The BD looked pretty impressive, the guy at the store turned up all the lights in the room and the picture still looked good.



That's all you can say about it??? You're killing me, that's the projector I have too (RS1), but live in NYC







lol Did you notice if it hotspot with the lights out, or there was any sheen on the screen?? When you say Magnolia Hi Fi, is that the same as Magnolia in Best Buy? If so maybe they'll have it around here soon too. Did they say how much it cost for the fixed screen?


----------



## Michael W.




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13245404
> 
> 
> That's all you can say about it??? You're killing me, that's the projector I have too (RS1), but live in NYC
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol Did you notice if it hotspot with the lights out, or there was any sheen on the screen?? When you say Magnolia Hi Fi, is that the same as Magnolia in Best Buy? If so maybe they'll have it around here soon too. Did they say how much it cost for the fixed screen?



Well... as a newbie to HT I don't really feel qualified to give much more than I did. I wasn't looking for hotspots or anything else, just took a quick look. The thing is, when I went there, I had never heard of a Black Diamond screen, now that I have read up here I know what to look for next time I go.


Yes, it is the same Magnolia as the Best Buy chain, but this Magnolia is a separate store so it is larger than most in-store Magnolias.


Hopefully some of the more experienced guys here in the SF Bay Area can go over there and give us their impression of the screen. I will go back there over the next day or two and take a closer look as well.


----------



## Michael W.




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13245404
> 
> 
> That's all you can say about it??? You're killing me, that's the projector I have too (RS1), but live in NYC
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol Did you notice if it hotspot with the lights out, or there was any sheen on the screen?? When you say Magnolia Hi Fi, is that the same as Magnolia in Best Buy? If so maybe they'll have it around here soon too. Did they say how much it cost for the fixed screen?



As far as price goes, the sales guy said the fixed screen they had was around $3k - $4k, but that was off the top of his head. I asked him to get me a quote on an electrical screen with Black Diamond. He called SI while I waited and since this is a new product coming out nobody had concrete info over at SI on price. The President of the company was on a flight somewhere but was going to call him back with some sort of pricing. I am still waiting for an answer.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Michael W.* /forum/post/13245485
> 
> 
> Well... as a newbie to HT I don't really feel qualified to give much more than I did. .



The great news is that you confirmed that it is the screen is out already. Thanks.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Michael W.* /forum/post/13245516
> 
> 
> As far as price goes, the sales guy said the fixed screen they had was around $3k - $4k, but that was off the top of his head..



$3-$4K?? Holy... That's a LOT more than what some people were saying around here!! Hopefully the top of his head was wrong lol.


----------



## noah katz

Mike,


Where is Valley Fair mall?


"Super Flat" Rigid horizontal screen tensioning system"


Perhaps they embed horizontal metal rods in the screen material.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Michael W.* /forum/post/13245257
> 
> 
> For those in the SF Bay Area, Magnolia Hi-Fi across the street from the Valley Fair Mall has the Black Diamond screen, they have a JVS RS-1 displaying on it.
> 
> 
> I am in the process of building a HT and have been having fits trying to figure out which screen to get. The BD looked pretty impressive, the guy at the store turned up all the lights in the room and the picture still looked good.



I just called SI and asked about this. The two individuals who know the most about the products are still away on business, but the person I did speak with, although not as up on the latest info, was doubtful it was a Black Diamond. It's not supposed to be out until April.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13247954
> 
> 
> I just called SI and asked about this. The two individuals who know the most about the products are still away on business, but the person I did speak with, although not as up on the latest info, was doubtful it was a Black Diamond. It's not supposed to be out until April.



Judging by the cost he was given plus this info, it was probably an older Visage then


----------



## Michael W.




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13248348
> 
> 
> Judging by the cost he was given plus this info, it was probably an older Visage then



I went back to the shop and it is, in fact, the Visage. Yesterday one guy told me it was the Black Diamond, which is the first I had ever heard of it. Today, one of the guys there more in the know said it was the Visage. The $3k - $4k makes more sense then.


They did confirm that the main guys are out at a trade show, I am waiting on pricing for the electric Black Diamond. Pretty sure I will go with the 133" 2.35:1 for my setup, this assuming the price isn't prohibitive.


----------



## Michael W.

For those asking about hot spotting.... Here is a picture I took of the Visage with a blue screen from the RS1:


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Michael W.* /forum/post/13248876
> 
> 
> I went back to the shop and it is, in fact, the Visage. Yesterday one guy told me it was the Black Diamond, which is the first I had ever heard of it. Today, one of the guys there more in the know said it was the Visage. The $3k - $4k makes more sense then.
> 
> 
> They did confirm that the main guys are out at a trade show, I am waiting on pricing for the electric Black Diamond. Pretty sure I will go with the 133" 2.35:1 for my setup, this assuming the price isn't prohibitive.



Sounds like MSRP for the fixed frame screen could be in the mid-2000s. I don't know what the discounted price would be, but considering High Powers and Silverstars seem to approach half off, it's possible that could sell for under $1500.


Didn't know it was supposed to be available as an electric screen. You sure about that?


----------



## Michael W.




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13249283
> 
> 
> Sounds like MSRP for the fixed frame screen could be in the mid-2000s. I don't know what the discounted price would be, but considering High Powers and Silverstars seem to approach half off, it's possible that could sell for under $1500.
> 
> 
> Didn't know it was supposed to be available as an electric screen. You sure about that?



Yes, very sure, it is even listed on their website:

http://www.siscreens.com/motorized.html 


"Coming Q1-2008


Elegant curved d écor case


Ultra Quiet Motor (The quietest in the industry) 43 dB from 3'


Screen Materials Silhouette & Lunar Gray, Black Diamond"


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Michael W.* /forum/post/13250971
> 
> 
> Yes, very sure, it is even listed on their website:
> 
> http://www.siscreens.com/motorized.html
> 
> 
> "Coming Q1-2008
> 
> 
> Elegant curved d écor case
> 
> 
> Ultra Quiet Motor (The quietest in the industry) 43 dB from 3'
> 
> 
> Screen Materials Silhouette & Lunar Gray, Black Diamond"



Thanks for the link. I thought I had read everything about the Black Diamond on their website, but I had not seen that. Or maybe it's new.


Now they are talking in terms of "Maximum Seamless Size", which I'm positive was not on the website just a few days ago. Before, 110" 16X9 and 133" 2.35:1 were supposed to be the largest sizes available. I was leaning towards the 133", but that will do a 16X9 of only 106.5" diagonal, and it would be nice to be able to go larger. Depends on how much the seam shows, of course.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Michael W.* /forum/post/13249138
> 
> 
> For those asking about hot spotting.... Here is a picture I took of the Visage with a blue screen from the RS1:



thanks michael, that's exactly what I'm trying to AVOID. I had the OEM version of the Visage from DNP, the Supernova, and THAT drove me nuts! Hopefuly the BD does not do this.


----------



## noah katz

"thanks michael, that's exactly what I'm trying to AVOID."


Mike,


Did it look that way in person?


I remember a show where Jason Turk posted a bunch of screenshots that looked like hotspotting, but he said that it didn't look that way in person.


----------



## noah katz

Where did you see that?


All I saw under "Performance" (their quotes) Model was


"Screen Sizes - 16:9 - 80", 92", 100", 106", 110", 119", 133""


----------



## Michael W.




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/13253719
> 
> 
> "thanks michael, that's exactly what I'm trying to AVOID."
> 
> 
> Mike,
> 
> 
> Did it look that way in person?
> 
> 
> I remember a show where Jason Turk posted a bunch of screenshots that looked like hotspotting, but he said that it didn't look that way in person.



Noah,


Watching movies I didn't notice it at all. When the blue screen came on it was amazing how much of a hot spot was there. That is when I whipped out my camera to take the photo.


----------



## Michael W.




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13251718
> 
> 
> Thanks for the link. I thought I had read everything about the Black Diamond on their website, but I had not seen that. Or maybe it's new.
> 
> 
> Now they are talking in terms of "Maximum Seamless Size", which I'm positive was not on the website just a few days ago. Before, 110" 16X9 and 133" 2.35:1 were supposed to be the largest sizes available. I was leaning towards the 133", but that will do a 16X9 of only 106.5" diagonal, and it would be nice to be able to go larger. Depends on how much the seam shows, of course.



From what I gathered on a 2.35:1, 133" was the max seamless size. I would have preferred 137" so that I can get a 110" 16:9, but if 133" is the max then I can live with it........barely.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Michael W.* /forum/post/13254140
> 
> 
> From what I gathered on a 2.35:1, 133" was the max seamless size. I would have preferred 137" so that I can get a 110" 16:9, but if 133" is the max then I can live with it........barely.



Right, 133" is listed as the maximum seamless size. I had the same thoughts, that 54"X127" would be perfect because it would give a good-size scope image and also give a 110" 16X9. I don't like the idea of getting less than 110" if I go with the scope screen. I was thinking yesterday I've got to mention this to SI and recommend they go up to 54"X127". Vutec makes a Silverstar in that size, which is what I may get if the Black Diamond doesn't work out.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/13253731
> 
> 
> Where did you see that?
> 
> 
> All I saw under "Performance" (their quotes) Model was
> 
> 
> "Screen Sizes - 16:9 - 80", 92", 100", 106", 110", 119", 133""



Go to the home page and click on 'tech specs' and it takes you here:

http://siscreens.com/specs.html


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13255054
> 
> 
> Go to the home page and click on 'tech specs' and it takes you here:
> 
> http://siscreens.com/specs.html



I'm glad to hear SI is using the embossing technique instead of glass beads for gain, or at least thats how it appears. So that should take care of any sheen. We'll see. Can't wait, April seems so damn far away lol.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/13253719
> 
> 
> "thanks michael, that's exactly what I'm trying to AVOID."
> 
> 
> Mike,
> 
> 
> Did it look that way in person?
> 
> 
> I remember a show where Jason Turk posted a bunch of screenshots that looked like hotspotting, but he said that it didn't look that way in person.



For me, that's exactly how it looked on the DNP Supernova that I used to own.


----------



## noah katz

"Go to the home page and click on 'tech specs' and it takes you here:

http://siscreens.com/specs.html "


Darn, I was hoping for a 133" 16:9.


Thanks


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/13259238
> 
> 
> "Go to the home page and click on 'tech specs' and it takes you here:
> 
> http://siscreens.com/specs.html "
> 
> 
> Darn, I was hoping for a 133" 16:9.
> 
> 
> Thanks



Possible, but you will have to wait longer for it and it will have a seam. The material is seamless up to just under 54" high.


It's black material, so maybe the seam will not even show.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Michael W.* /forum/post/13254140
> 
> 
> From what I gathered on a 2.35:1, 133" was the max seamless size. I would have preferred 137" so that I can get a 110" 16:9, but if 133" is the max then I can live with it........barely.



It will be more like 137". I got this from Ryan at SI today. The material is seamless up to just under 54" in height. No limit on width. The max height for their largest seamless 16X9 and their largest seamless scope screen are supposed to be the same. SI merely made an error in calculations and put down 133" when it should be as large as what just under 54" in height should give (137"-138" diagonal). They also thought 133" was a common screen size, after which I explained that was true only for 16X9 screens and mentioned Vutec makes a 54"x127" Silverstar scope screen that gives a 110" 16X9 image. I mentioned another AVS forum member and I both had issues with having to choose between a 110" 16X9 image if we bought the largest 16X9 screen, or just a 106.5" 16X9 image if we bought the largest scope screen. He thanked me for pointing out the error with the largest scope screen being listed as 133" and planned to work on the sizing calculations with the engineer.


----------



## Michael W.




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13261613
> 
> 
> It will be more like 137". I got this from Ryan at SI today. The material is seamless up to just under 54" in height. No limit on width. The max height for their largest seamless 16X9 and their largest seamless scope screen are supposed to be the same. SI merely made an error in calculations and put down 133" when it should be as large as what just under 54" in height should give (137"-138" diagonal). They also thought 133" was a common screen size, after which I explained that was true only for 16X9 screens and mentioned Vutec makes a 54"x127" Silverstar scope screen that gives a 110" 16X9 image. I mentioned another AVS forum member and I both had issues with having to choose between a 110" 16X9 image if we bought the largest 16X9 screen, or just a 106.5" 16X9 image if we bought the largest scope screen. He thanked me for pointing out the error with the largest scope screen being listed as 133" and planned to work on the sizing calculations with the engineer.



That is great news. Were you able to get any sort of pricing estimates from Ryan?


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Michael W.* /forum/post/13277880
> 
> 
> That is great news. Were you able to get any sort of pricing estimates from Ryan?



The electric will be considerably more than the fixed frame, like $4000 compared to $2500, but nothing is certain as to pricing yet. That's MSRP. I'm sure discounted cost has got to be lower.


----------



## noah katz

"The electric will be considerably more than the fixed frame, like $4000 compared to $2500,"


Ouch; I thought fixed frames were in general less expensive than the same screen with electric.


In any case, that bordering on gouging IMO; the electric mechanism should only add $500.


My electric 133" HP was only $1k.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/13281822
> 
> 
> "The electric will be considerably more than the fixed frame, like $4000 compared to $2500,"
> 
> 
> Ouch; I thought fixed frames were in general less expensive than the same screen with electric.
> 
> 
> In any case, that bordering on gouging IMO; the electric mechanism should only add $500.
> 
> 
> My electric 133" HP was only $1k.



I've looked at the prices for Da-Lite HPs. The electrics all seem to be around the same price, within a few hundred dollars from smallest to largest, which to me looks like most of the cost is in the roller mechanism. The Cinema Contour fixed frame has a huge range in price from smallest to largest, which looks like most of the cost is in the frame.


----------



## mcleo19

So then they will have a 110" 16:9 seamless available? Still no firm msrp for the fixed frame other than $2500?



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13261613
> 
> 
> It will be more like 137". I got this from Ryan at SI today. The material is seamless up to just under 54" in height. No limit on width. The max height for their largest seamless 16X9 and their largest seamless scope screen are supposed to be the same. SI merely made an error in calculations and put down 133" when it should be as large as what just under 54" in height should give (137"-138" diagonal). They also thought 133" was a common screen size, after which I explained that was true only for 16X9 screens and mentioned Vutec makes a 54"x127" Silverstar scope screen that gives a 110" 16X9 image. I mentioned another AVS forum member and I both had issues with having to choose between a 110" 16X9 image if we bought the largest 16X9 screen, or just a 106.5" 16X9 image if we bought the largest scope screen. He thanked me for pointing out the error with the largest scope screen being listed as 133" and planned to work on the sizing calculations with the engineer.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mcleo19* /forum/post/13285182
> 
> 
> So then they will have a 110" 16:9 seamless available? Still no firm msrp for the fixed frame other than $2500?



The prices are still estimates.


I talked to SI today. They went back to the drawing board over the size calculations, and the results are they found they can do 55.69" high on the scope screen and 55.39" high on the 16X9 screen. That means 130.87" wide for the scope screen and 113" diagonal for the 16X9 screen. The scope screen will do 113.7" diagonal when used for 16X9. It's on the website.


----------



## Mikenificent1

$2500 is for what size fixed screen? Anyone know the estimate for a 92" diagonal 16:9?


----------



## mcleo19

Thanks much for the info!



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13286769
> 
> 
> The prices are still estimates.
> 
> 
> I talked to SI today. They went back to the drawing board over the size calculations, and the results are they found they can do 55.69" high on the scope screen and 55.39" high on the 16X9 screen. That means 130.87" wide for the scope screen and 113" diagonal for the 16X9 screen. The scope screen will do 113.7" diagonal when used for 16X9. It's on the website.


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13289363
> 
> 
> $2500 is for what size fixed screen? Anyone know the estimate for a 92" diagonal 16:9?



I got the pricing list from Ryan along with him saying first orders will be taken towards the end of March ("most likely.") They've also increased the max sizes ( http://siscreens.com/specs.html )


*MSRP:*
*Theater Reference 16:9 fixed screen.*

Either .8 or 1.4 Gain
80 $2099
92 $2399
100 $2599
106 $2799
110 $2999
119 $3199 ***ONLY UP TO 113"****

*Cinema Reference 2.35:1 fixed screen.*

Either .8 or 1.4 Gain
80 $2099
92 $2399
100 $2599
106 $2799
110 $2999
119 $3199
133 $3399
160 $3799 ***ONLY UP TO 142"****


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13310364
> 
> 
> I got the pricing list from Ryan along with him saying first orders will be taken towards the end of March ("most likely.") They've also increased the max sizes ( http://siscreens.com/specs.html )
> 
> 
> *MSRP:*
> *Theater Reference 16:9 fixed screen.*
> 
> Either .8 or 1.4 Gain
> 80 $2099
> 92 $2399
> 100 $2599
> 106 $2799
> 110 $2999
> 119 $3199 ***ONLY UP TO 113"****
> 
> *Cinema Reference 2.35:1 fixed screen.*
> 
> Either .8 or 1.4 Gain
> 80 $2099
> 92 $2399
> 100 $2599
> 106 $2799
> 110 $2999
> 119 $3199
> 133 $3399
> 160 $3799 ***ONLY UP TO 142"****



Any word on what retractable screen prices will be?


Thanks!


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/13310853
> 
> 
> Any word on what retractable screen prices will be?
> 
> 
> Thanks!



Nothing as it's tentative to be released in 2nd Qtr...so you'd best look for that around the end of summer is my guess.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13310364
> 
> 
> I got the pricing list from Ryan along with him saying first orders will be taken towards the end of March ("most likely.") They've also increased the max sizes ( http://siscreens.com/specs.html )
> 
> 
> *MSRP:*
> *Theater Reference 16:9 fixed screen.*
> 
> Either .8 or 1.4 Gain
> 80 $2099
> 92 $2399
> 100 $2599
> 106 $2799
> 110 $2999
> 119 $3199 ***ONLY UP TO 113"****
> 
> *Cinema Reference 2.35:1 fixed screen.*
> 
> Either .8 or 1.4 Gain
> 80 $2099
> 92 $2399
> 100 $2599
> 106 $2799
> 110 $2999
> 119 $3199
> 133 $3399
> 160 $3799 ***ONLY UP TO 142"****



Just for clarification, SI is making the Black Diamond available in the same standard sizes that their current screens come in, except the 113 16X9 and the 142 2.35:1 are the largest seamless sizes they can do with the Black Diamond material. The cost for the 113 16X9 will be the cost of the 119 16X9. The cost for the 142 2.35:1 will be the cost of the 160 2.35:1. If you want a custom size, such as 84, it will be the cost of the 92, the next standard higher size. Hopefully, the street prices will be a lot lower.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13310364
> 
> 
> I got the pricing list from Ryan along with him saying first orders will be taken towards the end of March ("most likely.") They've also increased the max sizes ( http://siscreens.com/specs.html )
> 
> 
> *MSRP:*
> *Theater Reference 16:9 fixed screen.*
> 
> Either .8 or 1.4 Gain
> 80 $2099
> 92 $2399
> 100 $2599
> 106 $2799
> 110 $2999
> 119 $3199 ***ONLY UP TO 113"****
> 
> *Cinema Reference 2.35:1 fixed screen.*
> 
> Either .8 or 1.4 Gain
> 80 $2099
> 92 $2399
> 100 $2599
> 106 $2799
> 110 $2999
> 119 $3199
> 133 $3399
> 160 $3799 ***ONLY UP TO 142"****



Seems kind of odd pricing. Notice how the costs of the scope screens between 92 and 133 always go up by $200, whether the size increase is as small as 4 inches, as it is between the 106 and the 110, or as large as 14 inches, as it is between the 119 and 133. By comparison, the MSRP of the Vutec Silverstar is based on the square footage of the screen material added to the footage of the frame.


I guess the 133 scope is the one for me, since the 142 scope is $400 more for only 9" more size, and the width of the 142 is a fraction of an inch wider than my wall.


----------



## mcleo19

Does anyone have any idea of what the typical street price is as a percentage of MSRP? Or does anyone know what the MSRP's are for their current screens?


I am trying to make a decision on whether to wait for this screen or to go ahead and get a BW Carada....which will depend on my internal cost/benefit ratio. Hence, my interest in the pricing.


Thanks for all the information shared thus far! You guys are great.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mcleo19* /forum/post/13312116
> 
> 
> Does anyone have any idea of what the typical street price is as a percentage of MSRP? Or does anyone know what the MSRP's are for their current screens?
> 
> 
> I am trying to make a decision on whether to wait for this screen or to go ahead and get a BW Carada....which will depend on my internal cost/benefit ratio. Hence, my interest in the pricing.
> 
> 
> Thanks for all the information shared thus far! You guys are great.



I've seen Da-Lite HP screens sell for about 70 percent of MSRP and Vutec Silverstars for under 60 percent of MSRP.


I asked AV Science what kind of discount their other SI screens had, but it turned out they are not dealers for SI yet. Hopefully, they will be soon.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13310977
> 
> 
> Nothing as it's tentative to be released in 2nd Qtr...so you'd best look for that around the end of summer is my guess.



BLAST!!!! I made the silly assumption that they would be released at the same time.


----------



## phaselocd

Anyone know if they will sell just the screen material ?. I would like to just recover my DIY BO screen.


----------



## mcleo19

From the estimated MSRPs, it looks like the majority of the cost is in the actual material. But I imagine they would offer the material itself for those who just want to swap screens.


----------



## Mike N Ike




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13082031
> 
> 
> Ryan stated to me that the Tsystem mount is made for switching out the screen material allowing for easy upgrades (like what I'll be doing initially.) I'll confirm that the screen material would be made to order without ordering the complete system.





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13105395
> 
> 
> Screen material will be available by itself. You won't need to purchase the whole system if you're looking to use within an existing frame.



This the current status.


----------



## Tambiman

Has anyone seen it yet?


----------



## ngarn




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mcleo19* /forum/post/13312116
> 
> 
> Does anyone have any idea of what the typical street price is as a percentage of MSRP? Or does anyone know what the MSRP's are for their current screens?
> 
> 
> I am trying to make a decision on whether to wait for this screen or to go ahead and get a BW Carada....which will depend on my internal cost/benefit ratio. Hence, my interest in the pricing.
> 
> 
> Thanks for all the information shared thus far! You guys are great.



I was at Magnolia of Best Buy (a regular SI screens dealer) and got the retail pricing and unfortunately they are not willing to sell for less than retail. They stated that "because it was a special order item" the price was retail.










I guess our only hope is that Dell sells for less than retail or that AVScience becomes a dealer and decides to go less than retail.


I for one am not paying that high a retail price for a screen that I haven't had a chance to actually see for myself. I'd rather be certain of what I am getting with a Stewart Firehawk for $2500 +.


----------



## mcleo19

I know that Projector Zone is an SI dealer. I have contacted them regarding the pricing and they let me me know that they will have their pricing in the next couple of weeks. The other SI screens they sell are for less than retail, so I am hoping BD follows the same pattern.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ngarn* /forum/post/13349916
> 
> 
> I was at Magnolia of Best Buy (a regular SI screens dealer) and got the retail pricing and unfortunately they are not willing to sell for less than retail. They stated that "because it was a special order item" the price was retail.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess our only hope is that Dell sells for less than retail or that AVScience becomes a dealer and decides to go less than retail.
> 
> 
> I for one am not paying that high a retail price for a screen that I haven't had a chance to actually see for myself. I'd rather be certain of what I am getting with a Stewart Firehawk for $2500 +.


----------



## ChadZastrow

I saw a demo of the Black Diamond screen today at a show in Minneapolis, MN. It is unbelievable. The difference is unreal.


They put a normal highend white screen over half of the picture and it was night and day.


You will love it. I can't wait to get my hands on one. The one we saw was 80". They said they can do up to 150" seamless.


----------



## Tambiman

Wow, sounds great. What about the colors? No weird shifts? And shadow detail? Greetzz


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ChadZastrow* /forum/post/13366094
> 
> 
> I saw a demo of the Black Diamond screen today at a show in Minneapolis, MN. It is unbelievable. The difference is unreal.
> 
> 
> They put a normal highend white screen over half of the picture and it was night and day.
> 
> 
> You will love it. I can't wait to get my hands on one. The one we saw was 80". They said they can do up to 150" seamless.



They showed it with the lights all on at one point, right? And it still looked great?


Their website says:

Maximum Seamless Size

2.35:1 - 142" diagonal

16:9 -113" diagonal

4:3 - 93" diagonal


----------



## ChadZastrow

Look amazing with the room pitch black or full of light.


Great colors in light or dark.


----------



## Guinness77

That is good to hear. First and foremost I want the screen to be great with the lights off. Any sort of help with the lights on will be great, but I do not want that to impede its performance in the dark.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Guinness77* /forum/post/13368957
> 
> 
> That is good to hear. First and foremost I want the screen to be great with the lights off. Any sort of help with the lights on will be great, but I do not want that to impede its performance in the dark.



I like the idea of being able to watch in the daytime and would surely use it for that. But I also have white walls and a white ceiling, which could make this screen the best possible screen for me for watching at night.


If it were not good enough for watching in the daytime, I'd give more considerations to a high gain screen and darkening the room as the best way to go for night-time viewing, like I was doing before I found out about the Black Diamond.


I want to see one myself first, though, before ordering one.


----------



## moooog




hrd said:


> I like the idea of being able to watch in the daytime and would surely use it for that. But I also have white walls and a white ceiling, which could make this screen the best possible screen for me for watching at night.
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> 
> 
> Same situation for me hrd - white walls and white ceiling and I am not willing to paint them black, so even with perfect light control I can't use your typical "Theater" calibrations for iris, gamma, or contrast. I've been clicking on SI's website for what seems like a year - I'll likely buy one sight unseen. I also have 6 45" wood blind windows in my home theater room, and as far as I know SI is the first company making a electric motorized screen (that utilizes this kind of technology), which is a must for me.


----------



## Guinness77

hrd,

I really hope that the screen works well during the day with some light too. I just hope that it does not give up much at all during night time with the lights off. I do not have 100% light control (I have about 24 feet of windows), but I am working on some nice blackout curtains. My goal is with the curtains and screen during the day the image would be watchable.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ChadZastrow* /forum/post/13366094
> 
> 
> I saw a demo of the Black Diamond screen today at a show in Minneapolis, MN. It is unbelievable. The difference is unreal.
> 
> 
> They put a normal highend white screen over half of the picture and it was night and day.
> 
> 
> You will love it. I can't wait to get my hands on one. The one we saw was 80". They said they can do up to 150" seamless.



A Black Diamond should have been on display at the EHX show today. According to the article in the link, the EHX show is the "official launch" for the Black Diamond.

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/080303/20080303005250.html?.v=1


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ChadZastrow* /forum/post/13366094
> 
> 
> I saw a demo of the Black Diamond screen today at a show in Minneapolis, MN. It is unbelievable. The difference is unreal.
> 
> 
> They put a normal highend white screen over half of the picture and it was night and day.
> 
> 
> You will love it. I can't wait to get my hands on one. The one we saw was 80". They said they can do up to 150" seamless.



Do you know what projector was used?


----------



## mcleo19

ProjectorZone just released their pricing on the Black Diamonds:

http://www.projectorzone.com/screen-...reference.html 


Ugh...I am still debating on whether to pull the trigger and spending almost twice as much as a Carada BW. It pains me to think that the screen will cost more than the projector (HC4900)!


----------



## ngarn

I have a very strong feeling that I will not be able to see one of these screens before I purchase it. There are no dealers that display in the Indianapolis area that I can find.


Now that projectorzone.com has them up and listed should I pull the trigger and go for it? I will be using with the Sony Black Pearl (VW60) which I have been waiting to order until I decided on screen.


Still a bit undecided!


Thanks for the thoughts!


----------



## Tambiman

A Black Pearl on a Black Diamond? Sounds like art! And it 's actually a combo I'm thinking about too.









But the Black Diamond is not cheap, and nobody really knows if it 's really that good and how it behaves in a dark environment. So I would at least wait for some reviews. Actually, it 's exactly what I 'm going to do. Reviews should be out pretty soon.


----------



## mcleo19

Yes, I don't think I am going to get a chance to demo it as well, and would most likely buying it sight unseen. To be honest, SI's video has pretty much sold me...the screen appears to eliminate all of the light scatter in a dark room. There is one scene where you can see the light scatter disappears as they remove the regular screen. Very impressive...but I agree, I would feel more confident and willing to spend more once I can see it and/or have an impartial evaluation.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ngarn* /forum/post/13379849
> 
> 
> I have a very strong feeling that I will not be able to see one of these screens before I purchase it. There are no dealers that display in the Indianapolis area that I can find.
> 
> 
> Now that projectorzone.com has them up and listed should I pull the trigger and go for it? I will be using with the Sony Black Pearl (VW60) which I have been waiting to order until I decided on screen.
> 
> 
> Still a bit undecided!
> 
> 
> Thanks for the thoughts!



SI told me they want to get a screen to Jason to review in April. Also, AV Science might become a dealer, which means you may be able to buy a screen from a dealer that allows returns.


----------



## bri1270

I'm interested to know about their "Super Flat” Rigid Horizontal Screen Tensioning System for their retractable screens. I might buy one if it really works.


----------



## ngarn




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13383426
> 
> 
> SI told me they want to get a screen to Jason to review in April. Also, AV Science might become a dealer, which means you may be able to buy a screen from a dealer that allows returns.



I've already been waiting over 2 months for the dang screen to come out!










"First quarter" to those of us in the real world means the first 3 months of the year; not April.


Okay.... I'll get off my soap box now.


I didn't get Richard to email me back about them becoming an SI dealer. They might still be in negotiation. I am betting it's a bigger decision than I realize to take on another companies products.


Is there anyway Jason would be willing to chime in to confirm he will be reviewing the Black Diamond and roughly when in April he is scheduled to do so?


----------



## gmanhdtv

I viewed the Black Diamond this week at EHX....IMPRESSIVE in a brightly lit room, to say the least. Not really enough time spent to judge the overall performance of the image due to "show constraints". Demo was Transformers on HD DVD displaying the "I need a credit card sequence" and the projector was the new Projection Design Cineo30.


Incredible presentation of the ability to watch a front projection system under daytime lighting conditions. The image was intensely bright, well saturated colors and contrast looked good (pretty much a bright sunshine outdoor scene), so critical evaluation of black level and shadow detail was not possible.


The "gear girl" who caught my attention from SI claims the product will be available in either fixed or motorized configurations. I will be surprised if the material will allow motorized screens due to the design of the surface, but I really don't think she was that well versed in the technical aspects of the product.


The projector was to die for. You realize what your are missing (RS1 owner on 122" 2.35 screen) when you see an image with the light output at this level, better than plasma.


I was on a short schedule and wish I could have spent more time at their demo as well as others. Perhaps others will be able to provide additional facts that were available from SI at the show.


----------



## noah katz

A bright pj in this situation can be misleading.


Since the black level is set by the environment and not the pj, on-screen CR increases directly with the pj brightness.


----------



## FLBoy

I'd like to see how impressive it is with a projector the rest of us can afford.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gmanhdtv* /forum/post/13386280
> 
> 
> I viewed the Black Diamond this week at EHX....IMPRESSIVE in a brightly lit room, to say the least. Not really enough time spent to judge the overall performance of the image due to "show constraints". Demo was Transformers on HD DVD displaying the "I need a credit card sequence" and the projector was the new Projection Design Cineo30.
> 
> 
> Incredible presentation of the ability to watch a front projection system under daytime lighting conditions. The image was intensely bright, well saturated colors and contrast looked good (pretty much a bright sunshine outdoor scene), so critical evaluation of black level and shadow detail was not possible.
> 
> 
> The "gear girl" who caught my attention from SI claims the product will be available in either fixed or motorized configurations. I will be surprised if the material will allow motorized screens due to the design of the surface, but I really don't think she was that well versed in the technical aspects of the product.
> 
> 
> The projector was to die for. You realize what your are missing (RS1 owner on 122" 2.35 screen) when you see an image with the light output at this level, better than plasma.
> 
> 
> I was on a short schedule and wish I could have spent more time at their demo as well as others. Perhaps others will be able to provide additional facts that were available from SI at the show.



I think if you projected a 6500 lumens projector on ANY screen in a bright room, it would be watcheable. This test is of no value to me when it comes to evaluating the daylight viewing abilities of this screen, since I have not been able to find a decent 1080p projector in the under 15K price range that puts our more than 1600 raw lumens and I don't intend to spend more than 6K for a projector, anyways.


Someone at SI told me they had to somehow flatten the material to get it to work as an electric, and how that was why the electric screens would be not be out until months later.


----------



## mcleo19

Yes, that projector is a beast!!! I want to know the performance of the screen with a more affordable 1080p projector, like the HC4900!



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/13388098
> 
> 
> A bright pj in this situation can be misleading.
> 
> 
> Since the black level is set by the environment and not the pj, on-screen CR increases directly with the pj brightness.


----------



## Minawee

Just so everyone knows, I e-mailed Screen Innovations asking about screen samples of the new Black Diamond screens. I received the following reply:

_I am sorry but we are not giving samples. I understand if you don't want to wait, but it will be well worth it. No one will have the material till after our ship date of April the 18th. We will have a demo screen that will be sold for $199 if you would like to buy that. It is a 28 inch diagonal screen.


Thanks from SI Screens,

Shannon_


Too bad. I guess I can understand why they wouldn't want to send out any samples prior to the screen's actual availability, but at the same time, it has already been "officially launched" at EHX, so I dunno.


Anyhow, just thought I'd share.


-Paul


----------



## Mike N Ike

Thanks for sharing Paul. I'm not quite sure what that reply means. Is it saying they are not sending samples _right now_ or _never_. I was very interested in this screen but without a sample to see in my own environment I will not dropping $2 - $3k. And, on principal, not $199 for the privledge of deciding whether to buy the screen. Hope I'm just mis-interpreting .


Mike


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Minawee* /forum/post/13414477
> 
> 
> We will have a demo screen that will be sold for $199 if you would like to buy that. It is a 28 inch diagonal screen.
> 
> 
> Thanks from SI Screens,
> 
> Shannon[/i]



I would think the $199 would be refunded when you return the screen, no? Did they say when the demo screen would be available?


----------



## tds1

I am interested in the Black Diamond, although my room will basically have full light control. I was planning on having a 2.35:1 CIH setup, and this might not need masking when 16:9 programs due to the black color. It may not be perfect without masking, but it will be interesting to see how well it works for this purpose.


----------



## moooog

The black diamond screens come in two different gains, I believe .8 and 1.4. What would be the main determining factor for choosing which gain to purchase? Where the projector is placed? Dark Room vs light room?


----------



## juzmister

Is it acoustically transparent? Cheers


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *juzmister* /forum/post/13434481
> 
> 
> Is it acoustically transparent? Cheers



Nothing I have seen says that it is so I'm gonna say no its not.


----------



## Josh Z

The SI web site describes the Black Diamond as "award winning" (in quotes). Does anyone know what awards it's won? I don't see them mentioned on the site, and I'm interested. Thanks.


----------



## kayelefkay




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *juzmister* /forum/post/13434481
> 
> 
> Is it acoustically transparent? Cheers



No, it is not. I e-mailed to check. If they had an acoustically transparent retractable Black Diamond, that would be my perfect screen. Hopefully, they'll work on that.


----------



## Minawee




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13418747
> 
> 
> I would think the $199 would be refunded when you return the screen, no? Did they say when the demo screen would be available?



To be honest, after I got that reply, I really didn't care. If I'm looking for a screen NOW, and as a company, my small request for a 6" x 6" sample cannot be accommodated, then forget about it. I hate it when companies recite rules and deadlines as bible when they are the ones who set them in the first place, and then "hide" behind them. You know what? How about thinking outside your little box and try to come up with some sort of arrangement to accommodate the customer - even if I'm just ONE customer. I can think of a number of different ways that a sample could've been arranged for me and still secure the "secrecy" of the product. I would have agreed to pretty much any sort of deposit and return with "keep your mouth shut" stipulations just to fit into my time table. And then after the "launch" of the product (April 18th), instead of me posting on here how I didn't like my dealings with Screen Innovations, I would've been writing a highly praising post about my experience (whether I ended up actually getting a screen from them or not). It's all about how you deal with the people: BEFORE, during and after.


Anyhow, I presumed that when she said,

"_No one will have the material till after our ship date of April the 18th_." in her reply, I gathered that was the earliest anyone could get any samples.


-Paul


----------



## PeckerHead

Paul,


Surely you see why a company that doesn't know you from Adam is hesitant to trust you! Are you willing to trust me with a crap load of your own money? That is essentially what the company would be doing if they permitted you to have a sample in advance of release. As far as you know I could be your competitor and you would be giving me a headstart producing a competing product or time to release terrible ratings in advance of your release date. They would rather loose the sale to a small number of people than take a risk on a release date that is coming up very soon. A botched product release can bankrupt a small company, they just can't risk that.


I would, however, be surprised if members of the press are being prevented from testing the screens. Unlike releasing to any random person, the press members are known entities and SI can screen to whom they are willing to gamble their product launch with.


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *PeckerHead* /forum/post/13453985
> 
> 
> Paul,
> 
> 
> Surely you see why a company that doesn't know you from Adam is hesitant to trust you! Are you willing to trust me with a crap load of your own money? That is essentially what the company would be doing if they permitted you to have a sample in advance of release. As far as you know I could be your competitor and you would be giving me a headstart producing a competing product or time to release terrible ratings in advance of your release date. They would rather loose the sale to a small number of people than take a risk on a release date that is coming up very soon. A botched product release can bankrupt a small company, they just can't risk that.
> 
> 
> I would, however, be surprised if members of the press are being prevented from testing the screens. Unlike releasing to any random person, the press members are known entities and SI can screen to whom they are willing to gamble their product launch with.




I'm getting my first viewing tomorrow @ 10 a.m. SI is doing a show and tell for the press tomorrow at their office and I was graciously invited (no I am not press just an HT enthusiast.) I'll report back to give you my honest feedback.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13458710
> 
> 
> I'm getting my first viewing tomorrow @ 10 a.m. SI is doing a show and tell for the press tomorrow at their office and I was graciously invited (no I am not press just an HT enthusiast.) I'll report back to give you my honest feedback.



Thanks, h00kemh0rns, I'm looking forward to reading your report.


I just hope this demo is not as "loaded" as the one in Minneapolis, where the screen was the smallest size they make, or the one at EHX, where the projector had 6500 lumens. I realize it's easier to travel with an 80" screen than a 110" screen, and I heard the EHX demo was a joint demo, but it doesn't help me determine whether the screen will work for me unless the lumens and screen size are reasonably in the ballpark of what I would be using.


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13459520
> 
> 
> Thanks, h00kemh0rns, I'm looking forward to reading your report.
> 
> 
> I just hope this demo is not as "loaded" as the one in Minneapolis, where the screen was the smallest size they make, or the one at EHX, where the projector had 6500 lumens. I realize it's easier to travel with an 80" screen than a 110" screen, and I heard the EHX demo was a joint demo, but it doesn't help me determine whether the screen will work for me unless the lumens and screen size are reasonably in the ballpark of what I would be using.



The screen which has been traveling around is 92" and will be the same screen I'll be viewing/comparing against. As far as EHX I had mentioned one of the complaints on here was that the projector used was not in the avg price field. Ryan was adament that the projector used was only a 1000 lumen one. I'll press him more for info or how someone could mistake the Proj.Design Cineo30 as being used.


I agree, this will not be a huge leap if the screen can't perform with typical equipment that the majority of us own (anything from $1500 - $5000.) Sad that I can't afford a $35k projector...would be nice b/c then I'm sure I'd have about $100k in additional equipment


----------



## mrlittlejeans

Can you take your projector just for ****s and giggles?


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13460694
> 
> 
> The screen which has been traveling around is 92" and will be the same screen I'll be viewing/comparing against. As far as EHX I had mentioned one of the complaints on here was that the projector used was not in the avg price field. Ryan was adament that the projector used was only a 1000 lumen one. I'll press him more for info or how someone could mistake the Proj.Design Cineo30 as being used.
> 
> 
> I agree, this will not be a huge leap if the screen can't perform with typical equipment that the majority of us own (anything from $1500 - $5000.) Sad that I can't afford a $35k projector...would be nice b/c then I'm sure I'd have about $100k in additional equipment



92" sounds better. Chad Zastrow posted it was 80" at the show in Minneapolis, but he must have been talking width...it turns out 92" diagonal is also 80" wide.


If this screen pans out, I plan to get either the 110" 16X9 or the 133" scope screen, but I am open to running the image smaller in order to get the kind of bright plasma-like image I like if I have to. So smaller is doable for me, but it's very difficult to go beyond 1600 lumens with what's available today, especially in 1080p. I really thought I was going to be buying a high gain screen until I began following this thread on the Black Diamond.


I am disappointed the only way I can buy a 54"X127" scope screen, like the Silverstar comes in, and get a 110" image when doing 16X9, is by paying for the 160" scope screen. It's either get the 133" scope screen and get only about 106.33" diagonal when doing 16X9, or it's pay $400 more for a custom size for not even five more inches diagonal. You should mention to Ryan he'd be better off selling scope screens in standard sizes of 10' wide, 10.5' wide, and 11' wide. They have an 80" scope screen listed - it's only 64" diagonal when used for a 16X9 image - do they seriously expect to sell any of those? If the main limitation of this new material is that the sizes have to top out at smaller than a lot of customers want, it's bad marketing to make matters worse by reducing that largest size even further by making them even more expensive because they are considered "custom" sizes. The material is already expensive enough as it is.


----------



## mcleo19

I am looking forward to your evaluation as well. Please hook us up with all the details of the setup and your impressions.


THANKS!!!



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13458710
> 
> 
> I'm getting my first viewing tomorrow @ 10 a.m. SI is doing a show and tell for the press tomorrow at their office and I was graciously invited (no I am not press just an HT enthusiast.) I'll report back to give you my honest feedback.


----------



## noah katz

"I am open to running the image smaller in order to get the kind of bright plasma-like image I like if I have to."


This won't buy you much.


Our eyes', like our ears, respond logarithmicly to brightness, meaning it takes a big change to look like much, and on top of that most every pj decreases in brightness as the throw ratio is increased, which is how you'll make the image smaller unless you move the pj closer.


If you're considering a Silverstar I'd also consider a Hipower.


----------



## Jim HTPC

Might be beneficial to go to their home office with your projector. Maybe Southwest might fly close???


So for the cost of a RT ticket and a rental car you could see for yourself. Far better than spending $199 for a sample screen. Better meaning if you bought the screen and didn't like it, you would not be out the entire cost of the screen and shipping costs.


----------



## Jim HTPC

Did the Projection Design Cineo30 show RBE during the EHX show since it's a Single DLP chip?


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jim HTPC* /forum/post/13465837
> 
> 
> Might be beneficial to go to their home office with your projector. Maybe Southwest might fly close???
> 
> 
> So for the cost of a RT ticket and a rental car you could see for yourself. Far better than spending $199 for a sample screen. Better meaning if you bought the screen and didn't like it, you would not be out the entire cost of the screen and shipping costs.



Your assuming the $199 is not refundable once you return the screen.


----------



## Jim HTPC

Correct... I would still go on-site to "know" it's what you want. Unless you have disposable income to toss it away if you don't like it.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13389245
> 
> 
> I think if you projected a 6500 lumens projector on ANY screen in a bright room, it would be watcheable. This test is of no value to me when it comes to evaluating the daylight viewing abilities of this screen, ...



I was thinking about this, and initially I agreed 100% with you. Now I realized, if the screen didn't hot spot with that 6500 lumen beast, then it shouldn't with my 700 lumen RS1 (crossing fingers).


----------



## Numbacrunch

I am interested in this screen in that it may prove a practical solution for large screen viewing of dvd's in our living room (WAF and all that stuff is the real hurdle here).










The one question that has not been raised here is the effect of the specified '44-degree half-gain angle'. This specificaton seems to differ markedly in comparison to Screen Innovation's other screens' specifications which are in the range of ~ 74-degrees to 87-degrees.


I am assuming the referenced 44-degree angle is a spec similar to the oft cited 176-degree - 178-degree viewing angle for LCD displays. That would make it 22-degrees either right or left of the horizontal projector lens-to-screen axis before some portion of the screen lowers to half brightness for the viewer or am I missing something? I confess to not having any experience with projectors/screens (though I have seen them on commercial display).


In brief, is this something one should not be concerned with in considering this for a living room application? With a 1.5X to 2X viewing distance and a seating area approximately the width of the screen and directly in front of it, this would evidently not present a problem. Absent those constraints, is there an 'issue' with this aspect of the screen?


Also, is there a comparable limitation on the vertical axis, i.e, 22-degrees up or down comprising a '44-degree half-gain angle' in that direction?


----------



## Mike N Ike




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Numbacrunch* /forum/post/13466639
> 
> 
> I am assuming the referenced 44-degree angle is a spec similar to the oft cited 176-degree - 178-degree viewing angle for LCD displays. That would make it 22-degrees either right or left of the horizontal projector lens-to-screen axis before some portion of the screen lowers to half brightness for the viewer or am I missing something?



My interpretation of the half gain angle is the viewing angle point at which you have half gain. In this case that means to me that you would be 45 degrees left or right of center. Here is a description from ProjectorCentral.com. The keyword here to me is "viewing" angle.


"On any screen you get the brightest image when you look at it from a position directly in front of it, along the perpendicular axis to the center of the screen. Technically speaking, the brightness level at this viewing position is referred to as "Peak Gain at Zero Degrees Viewing Axis." As you move to the side and away from the center viewing position, the brightness of the image on any screen will drop, but on different screens the brightness will drop off more or less rapidly. A screen's half-gain angle is the viewing angle at which reflected light is reduced by 50% from the maximum that you get at the center, zero degree viewing position. "


----------



## noah katz

Your interpretation is not necessarily how the mfgr's specify it.


----------



## Mike N Ike

That is certainly true. What is your interpretation of SI's meaning?


----------



## Numbacrunch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mike N Ike* /forum/post/13469082
> 
> 
> My interpretation of the half gain angle is the viewing angle point at which you have half gain. In this case that means to me that you would be 45 degrees left or right of center. Here is a description from ProjectorCentral.com. The keyword here to me is "viewing" angle.
> 
> 
> "On any screen you get the brightest image when you look at it from a position directly in front of it, along the perpendicular axis to the center of the screen. Technically speaking, the brightness level at this viewing position is referred to as "Peak Gain at Zero Degrees Viewing Axis." As you move to the side and away from the center viewing position, the brightness of the image on any screen will drop, but on different screens the brightness will drop off more or less rapidly. A screen's half-gain angle is the viewing angle at which reflected light is reduced by 50% from the maximum that you get at the center, zero degree viewing position. "



Thank you for this.


I had been inclined to think this may have been an undefined or simply a marketing term. Subsequent posts indicate there may be less than uninversal agreement on the meaning.


That projector.com puts it forward with a well-defined meaning makes it useful for conversational purposes, at least here, but it would merit corroboration with SI that they use it with the same meaning.


Thanks again. I may give them a call on this.


----------



## h00kemh0rns

We spent most of the morning watching everything from 1080p to 1080i video covering movies, sports, television and everything in between. Two hours later I walked away completely blown away. So much so I guaranteed myself one of the first Black Diamonds as I placed my order before heading back to work.


Here are some quick notes that I took in my head:


• Tech writer from InsightMedia - http://www.insightmedia.info/ was there. Be on the look out April 1st for the article…no it won’t be an April’s fools joke. He walked away equally impressed and he hammered them technically from projector used to the screen technology.


• Used a JVC DLA-HD100 (600 lumens) - http://www.projectorcentral.com/JVC-DLA-HD100.htm 


• Motorized matte white 1.1 gain screen was used in comparison to the black diamond 1.4 gain screen.


• I guesstimated the half gain angle to be around 40 after walking around the screen. When I asked I was close with the demo as it was around 45. The production will be at 50 when it releases. The viewing angle (diff than half gain angle) is around 170/178 as I recall from memory.


• Light conditions were full on fluorescent lights, two thirds on, floor lamp full on, floor lamp half lit, and all off. Each were compared between the two screens with the same scene. Ryan went so far as to pick up the floor lamp and shine it directly on the two screens. The tech writer took a pic of this and I hope he uses all of the photos in the article as he got all lighting conditions perfectly after we previewed them. There was no comparison to the BD in regards to light absorption/reflection and contrast boost.


• I sat ~12’ from the screen dead center for the beginning. After which I walked around and viewed it at all angles and from range of 1’ to 20’ away. Only ding I would give it is when lights were all on and you viewed it at 

• The light absorption technology used is simply impressive. If you’re in a completely lit room the screen gives off an excellent contrast detail versus a washed out picture when looking at it with today’s typical screen. Even in a completely dark room the light reflected from the screen onto the walls/ceiling is dramatically reduced. This forced my eyes to focus more on the video/screen b/c I was immersed more into what was being played rather than the distraction of the light reflection.


• Screen material is proprietary to SI. They did simplify the technology at a 30,000 ft understanding elaborating a little on each layer. I’ll leave that explanation for the article coming from InsightMedia since the tech writer was keeping notes. What I do remember is that the process involves the layers to be built offsite at what I believe is more than one location. Then the layers are assembled in Austin. Almost sounds like a recipe that no one knows the complete ingredient list as they separate out the responsibility for each component.


• Pressed them on comparison to their competition and how it compared to some of the big names in the screen business. I won’t get into details as I promised not to say anything specific to what was discussed. However, what they have is night/day to what anything is out there now with a nominal price increase (~15% for the same size screen.)


• BD is planned to be in Best Buy/Magnolia HT stores with a similar demo that I viewed. When I do not recall…sorry.


• Motorized version is planned for Q2. Price is to be “considerably more than the fixed”…as expected but no definitive pricing obviously. Keep in mind that the fixed screen material is 20mm thick. They will have to figure out a solution to get it to roll up without the need of a motor the size of a bulldozer. The stuff resembles more of a metallic feel/weight than a screen material.


• They tossed around a couple of ideas such as working with projector manufacturers to get settings in order to calibrate your specific projector to the type of BD you have.


• Another idea tossed around is changing up the finish of the border to get the complete Plasma/LCD feel for living room application.


• FYI tidbit. The EHX demo used a Projection Design Cineo20 (1900 lumens; true lumens around 1100)


There might be more as it was a lot to immerse myself with. I will tell you that the video does NOT do this screen justice! If you’re still on the fence and not convinced to buy yet go hunt one down when it becomes available in Best Buy, spend the money to fly down to SI to view a demo, or wait until I get mine and we can watch some UT football games with a good beer.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13474172
> 
> 
> We spent most of the morning watching everything from 1080p to 1080i video covering movies, sports, television and everything in between. Two hours later I walked away completely blown away. So much so I guaranteed myself one of the first Black Diamonds as I placed my order before heading back to work.



Thnaks for the review, h00kemh0rns. I must have checked this thread 50 times today looking for it. It's good I can stay up late.


Did the image lose anything when the lights were on? How does it compare to a flat screen when the lights are on?


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13474395
> 
> 
> Thnaks for the review, h00kemh0rns. I must have checked this thread 50 times today looking for it. It's good I can stay up late.
> 
> 
> Did the image lose anything when the lights were on? How does it compare to a flat screen when the lights are on?



Sorry I guess I didn't elaborate more on quality. With lights full on or even on in a limited way there was some loss when compared to full off. But, it was MINIMAL to the point of I would have to nit pick this as well. When comparing to the matte white screen...no comparison as the Black Diamond was 100x the quality. The BD can be used in any environment with little to no real world limitations. Meaning that whether it's used in a living room or controlled media room the benefits are exponentially greater when compared to ANYTHING out on the market today.


----------



## noah katz

"What is your interpretation of SI's meaning?"


Doesn't matter, it'd also be a guess.


"Even in a completely dark room the light reflected from the screen onto the walls/ceiling is dramatically reduced."


Now that's an interesting point I hadn't considered.


Did the 1.4 gain number seem realistic?


----------



## panosp

h00kemh0rns: When watching a movie in a completely dark room, is the screen material black enough to eliminate the need for masking?


For example: if you watch on a traditional (traditional meaning matte white) 2.35:1 screen a 16:9 movie you need side masking. From what you saw, is the Black Diamond black enough so that side masking is not needed at all?


----------



## Kobe

h00kemh0rns - I have been waiting for such a post for the last month since I got to hear about Black Diamond. Still can you answer this:


1) How was the JVC HD100 mounted (ceiling, stand)? If ceiling, how high then?


2) What was the throw distance (short, long)?


3) What was the room like? Was it a bat cave or some walls/ceiling were light color?


3) Which screen was brighter in total dark when seating on axis? Could you estimate the brightness difference. How would you compare the peak whites on the matte white to BD?


4) How would you compare the image quality in total dark? Did you feel the BD was more film-like or plasma-like?


Thanks,

eagerly waiting


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13475255
> 
> 
> h00kemh0rns: When watching a movie in a completely dark room, is the screen material black enough to eliminate the need for masking?
> 
> 
> For example: if you watch on a traditional (traditional meaning matte white) 2.35:1 screen a 16:9 movie you need side masking. From what you saw, is the Black Diamond black enough so that side masking is not needed at all?



God, I wrote this in my notes but didn't copy them over. Pissed I didn't put this b/c this was an absolutely big thing.


Anyways, because of the light absorption properties and the fact the screen is already black there is absolutely no need for a custom masking system when switching from 16:9 to 2.35:1 formats. They provided this demo when watching Lord of the Rings and it was very good. You would have to be sitting quite close and look for the screen to see if it was masked or not.


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kobe* /forum/post/13475353
> 
> 
> h00kemh0rns - I have been waiting for such a post for the last month since I got to hear about Black Diamond. Still can you answer this:
> 
> 
> 1) How was the JVC HD100 mounted (ceiling, stand)? If ceiling, how high then?
> 
> 
> 2) What was the throw distance (short, long)?
> 
> 
> 3) What was the room like? Was it a bat cave or some walls/ceiling were light color?
> 
> 
> 3) Which screen was brighter in total dark when seating on axis? Could you estimate the brightness difference. How would you compare the peak whites on the matte white to BD?
> 
> 
> 4) How would you compare the image quality in total dark? Did you feel the BD was more film-like or plasma-like?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> eagerly waiting



1) It was mounted on a rack as though it was on the ceiling (if that makes sense.)


2) Proj. was approx 7-8 off the ground and about 16-18' from the screen.


3) Room was a typical conference room in an office environment. Only difference was no windows. They used the flourescent lights and floor lamp to show how the screen can offset direct light.


4) BD flat out kicked the matte white screen's (_|_) in every way. Contrast (deeper blacks), whites, light, dark, didn't matter.


5) I usually associate the description of video with 'film like' to that of the projector properties. However, what I saw is that the screen definitely improves contrast and whites significantly when you compare it to today's typical screen.


----------



## Kobe

Great to hear that h00kemh0rns. So BD was actually brighter in total dark? I just can't believe in that knowing that it is black. I just have to










I was sceptical about BD performance in total light controlled enviroment. I expected it to be dim. I once compared head to head a Stewart Firehawk and Studiotek 130 (properly setup). They are both 1.3 gain but Studiotek was just much brighter and vivid. The Firehawk had more depth, was more contrasty and had blacker blacks but was not so vibrant and lifelike as Studiotek. I thought the same would apply to Black Diamond comparing with it to a white screen. Did you have the same kind of feeling when switching between screens? Some brightly lit scenes (outdoors) would clearly exemplify what I mean. How did the screens compare in those scenes?


----------



## Mikenificent1




h00kemh0rns said:


> 1) It was mounted on a rack as though it was on the ceiling (if that makes sense.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4) BD flat out kicked the matte white screen's (_|_) in every way. Contrast (deeper blacks), whites, light, dark, didn't matter.
> 
> 
> No mention if you looked for hot spots, sheen/texture, or even sharpness. There is no way the BD could have been sharper than a matte white screen, so I doubt "in every way". I guess I'll have to wait to see it for myself
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully BestBuy gets it soon.


----------



## IanK

h00kemh0rns,


thanks so much for your post.


Did you happen to ask whether you were looking at the 0.8 or 1.4 gain version of the BD?


In terms of when a motorized version will be available and this issue of the 20mm thickness problem, the one positive thing i have heard from SI is that a "pull-up" version of the screen (for trade shows, etc) is going to be available at around the same time as the fixed. this suggests that a motorized version should not be impossible.


ian


----------



## IanK

sorry, i just noticed that it was the 1.4 gain used in the demo.


It would be great to know whether there was any hotspotting on that BD.


----------



## pottscb

OK, this is an open invitation to all AVS'ers...you guys all but a plane ticket (Southwest and Jetblue both fly here for cheap) and come down here to Austin and see it for yourself (I've got two spare beds and you can flip for my couch). SI says the mom and pop shop on Anderson Ln. here will have it first (end of April), and I know they have an RS1, Black Diamond and Pearl set up for viewing.


----------



## Laserfan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13474172
> 
> 
> We spent most of the morning watching everything...Here are some quick notes



Many thanks for your long post--one question: Is SI in Austin a walk-in-and-look shop or by-invitation-only?



> Quote:
> Screen material is proprietary to SI....the process involves the layers to be built offsite at what I believe is more than one location. Then the layers are assembled in Austin. Almost sounds like a recipe that no one knows the complete ingredient list...



If true, this is absolutely brilliant! These guys have apparently heard of that large country that starts with a "C"!!!


----------



## PeckerHead




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13474172
> 
> 
> the fixed screen material is 20mm thick



Is this number correct? That is more than 3/4 inch!


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pottscb* /forum/post/13476189
> 
> 
> OK, this is an open invitation to all AVS'ers...you guys all but a plane ticket (Southwest and Jetblue both fly here for cheap) and come down here to Austin and see it for yourself (I've got two spare beds and you can flip for my couch). SI says the mom and pop shop on Anderson Ln. here will have it first (end of April), and I know they have an RS1, Black Diamond and Pearl set up for viewing.



I'm hoping AV Science will have one soon that can de demoed. They're about 5 1/2 hours from here by car.


Don't know if Alan or Jason will let me sleep on the couch, though.


----------



## panosp

h00kemh0rns: Thanks for the masking answer. It sounds really promising!


Could you please answer some more questions?


1) "BD flat out kicked the matte white screen's (_|_) in every way. Contrast (deeper blacks), whites, light, dark, didn't matter"


Please watch carefully the SI demo video ( http://www.siscreens.com/videos/ ). Right before the middle

of the video you can see a (paused) hand projected on a conventional screen. The right wall and the ceiling of the room are visible as

they are lit by the reflection of the screen. Then the conventional screen is lifted up to reveal the BD.

What is really amazing is that the reflection of the screen completely disappears and we are not able to see the wall and ceiling any

more. (ie we are left in a totally black room). On the other hand -and this is bad- it's clearly visible that brightness is lost. Just look

carefully while the screen rolls up and compare the before and after (whites look more than grey).

Please comment on that. Were you able to make this kind of comparison? Did you notice a loss in brightness? The HD100 quite dim on

large screens already on its own (I plan to use the biggest possible) and this would be the most important decision factor for me.


2) From what I understand, this material is completely different to anything we have ever seen. To start with, 20mm thinness is exotic! Did

they mention how it gets shipped if you want to purchase only the material? Can it be rolled? Or is it shipped (due to limitation of the

fabric) in a frame? Also, did they mention if the material would work on a curved frame?


3) As Mikenificent1 asks, did you look for any hot spots? Was the sharpness even?



Thanks!


----------



## Josh Z

When viewing in a dark room, were there any problems with crushed shadow detail? That would be one of my concerns about a black screen.


----------



## FLBoy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *PeckerHead* /forum/post/13476279
> 
> 
> Is this number correct? That is more than 3/4 inch!



I was wondering the same thing. Did you mean 2.0 mm thick? That would seem more reasonable.


----------



## bud16415




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13476468
> 
> 
> Please watch carefully the SI demo video ( http://www.siscreens.com/videos/ ). Right before the middle
> 
> of the video you can see a (paused) hand projected on a conventional screen. The right wall and the ceiling of the room are visible as
> 
> they are lit by the reflection of the screen. Then the conventional screen is lifted up to reveal the BD.
> 
> What is really amazing is that the reflection of the screen completely disappears and we are not able to see the wall and ceiling any
> 
> more. (ie we are left in a totally black room). On the other hand -and this is bad- it's clearly visible that brightness is lost. Just look
> 
> carefully while the screen rolls up and compare the before and after (whites look more than grey).
> 
> Please comment on that. Were you able to make this kind of comparison? Did you notice a loss in brightness? The HD100 quite dim on
> 
> large screens already on its own (I plan to use the biggest possible) and this would be the most important decision factor for me.
> 
> 
> 2) From what I understand, this material is completely different to anything we have ever seen. To start with, 20mm thinness is exotic! Did
> 
> they mention how it gets shipped if you want to purchase only the material? Can it be rolled? Or is it shipped (due to limitation of the
> 
> fabric) in a frame? Also, did they mention if the material would work on a curved frame?
> 
> 
> 3) As Mikenificent1 asks, did you look for any hot spots? Was the sharpness even?
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks!



I haven't read this whole thread but have read it from the review done by hookemhorns on and also viewed the web page and the video you mentioned above.


I didn't see in the review where the projector was calibrated to one sample or the other. from the experimenting we have done over in the DIY screen forum I can say it's very hard to compare a white screen to a gray screen especially when the gray is a very dark gray that has angular gain properties. Reason being white to black calibration on the two samples will be far apart. With ambient light present a neutral gray screen even without the angular gain will normally produce higher levels of perceived CR and the reason I say perceived is because we are not just dealing with the projector, room and screen but also the iris in our eyes compensating for a change in light level.


In the video as panosp points out the wider dispersive white screen is throwing light to all corners of the room not just the viewer. Of course they have white walls that causes a secondary reflection back to the screen in the form of ambient combine the fact the projector was calibrated to the darker sample most likely and then you get secondary ambient coming onto the screen it's a very washed out image. And if by magic when the screen rolls up the perceived and real CR blooms thru. The music is just icing on the cake.


Screens are passive devices as I'm sure you have heard many times before, our eyes are not they adjust. I wont say this is not an excellent screen for ambient light viewing because I'm sure it is, but a fairer test would have been to compare it with a 1.1 gray screen approximately the same shade of gray and in a room where the walls and ceiling didn't add unduly by being white and also very close to the screen. lastly to be fair gray scale should be calibrated for both samples and shown one at a time. I have projected bright true white off of a coal black screen and had the full range of calibration under super bright indoor lighting. That's linked in one of the threads below in my signature if anyone wants to read it. It does require lumens and lots of them though.


No magic with this screen IMHO just lumens, FL's and gain and some simple rules of physics.


I'm still contemplating the idea they have for a special screen surface just for HD hmmmm


----------



## h00kemh0rns




Mikenificent1 said:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13475655
> 
> 
> 1) It was mounted on a rack as though it was on the ceiling (if that makes sense.)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4) BD flat out kicked the matte white screen's (_|_) in every way. Contrast (deeper blacks), whites, light, dark, didn't matter.
> 
> 
> No mention if you looked for hot spots, sheen/texture, or even sharpness. There is no way the BD could have been sharper than a matte white screen, so I doubt "in every way". I guess I'll have to wait to see it for myself
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully BestBuy gets it soon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry alot of this stuff stayed in my head and didn't make it in the post...
> 
> 
> Hot spots - none seen by anyone in the room and we looked at every feasible angle.
> 
> 
> Texture - It is smooth with no apparent flecks (as used by some manufacturers to boost brightness)
> 
> 
> Sharpness - yes it was sharper IMHO. Take it for what its worth...I saw the comparison and feel it was sharper. I wasn't the only one...
> 
> 
> Like I said...the video doesn't do it justice. I understand being skeptical but sometimes there are the real deals out there...this is one of 'em guys.
Click to expand...


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Laserfan* /forum/post/13476251
> 
> 
> Many thanks for your long post--one question: Is SI in Austin a walk-in-and-look shop or by-invitation-only?



SI is a walk in shop however the BD demo is a traveling unit. I don't know if it's there now or off at another trade show. Best to call.


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *PeckerHead* /forum/post/13476279
> 
> 
> Is this number correct? That is more than 3/4 inch!



20 mm thick was the quote I got from the Tech Officer.


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13476468
> 
> 
> h00kemh0rns: Thanks for the masking answer. It sounds really promising!
> 
> 
> Could you please answer some more questions?
> 
> 
> 1) "BD flat out kicked the matte white screen's (_|_) in every way. Contrast (deeper blacks), whites, light, dark, didn't matter"
> 
> 
> Please watch carefully the SI demo video ( http://www.siscreens.com/videos/ ). Right before the middle
> 
> of the video you can see a (paused) hand projected on a conventional screen. The right wall and the ceiling of the room are visible as
> 
> they are lit by the reflection of the screen. Then the conventional screen is lifted up to reveal the BD.
> 
> What is really amazing is that the reflection of the screen completely disappears and we are not able to see the wall and ceiling any
> 
> more. (ie we are left in a totally black room). On the other hand -and this is bad- it's clearly visible that brightness is lost. Just look
> 
> carefully while the screen rolls up and compare the before and after (whites look more than grey).
> 
> Please comment on that. Were you able to make this kind of comparison? Did you notice a loss in brightness? The HD100 quite dim on
> 
> large screens already on its own (I plan to use the biggest possible) and this would be the most important decision factor for me.
> 
> 
> 2) From what I understand, this material is completely different to anything we have ever seen. To start with, 20mm thinness is exotic! Did
> 
> they mention how it gets shipped if you want to purchase only the material? Can it be rolled? Or is it shipped (due to limitation of the
> 
> fabric) in a frame? Also, did they mention if the material would work on a curved frame?
> 
> 
> 3) As Mikenificent1 asks, did you look for any hot spots? Was the sharpness even?
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks!



1) Brightness level did not drop off in fact the inverse occured. What you're seeing is the dispersion (sp?) of light. It's not being scattered to the floor, walls, or ceiling rather concentrated back out.


2) They will be able to ship it rolled. As far as a curved frame I can't comment on this....read into that however you want.


3) No hotspots...sharpness dead on!


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *FLBoy* /forum/post/13476651
> 
> 
> I was wondering the same thing. Did you mean 2.0 mm thick? That would seem more reasonable.



Not a typo 20 mm. I asked the same thing especially when trying to get the T mounting system to work. Apparently the thicker the fabric the easier it is to get a flat/straight install (so long as you follow their install process.)


----------



## CADOBHuK

Black Diamond vs High Power?

The price sure puts them in different weight category, but I'm still curious.


----------



## panosp

h00kemh0rns: I appreciate your effort in answering all my questions. Thanks!


Before I discovered the BD I was looking for a curved 2.35:1 screen with 4-way masking; either commercial or DIY. My walls have a light color and there is no way I can't paint them to anything dark. What I read is extremely promising. If it actually works it will both eliminate the need of masking and the change of color. It seems like a real innovation. I'll be monitoring this thread and wait for any possible reviews in the next days.


----------



## mcleo19

Hey Hookem,


Do you know when your screen will arrive? Were you able to get any discount, or did you have to pay MSRP?


Thanks for all the info you have provided thus far, I will most likely put an order myself at my local authorized dealer.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mcleo19* /forum/post/13481651
> 
> 
> Hey Hookem,
> 
> 
> Do you know when your screen will arrive? Were you able to get any discount, or did you have to pay MSRP?
> 
> 
> Thanks for all the info you have provided thus far, I will most likely put an order myself at my local authorized dealer.



Someone mentioned an online vendor that sells the screens. It's in this thread. I priced out a few screens at their website and there was a very respectable discount. Shipping was reasonable as well, I think $83 for the largest one.


----------



## Xyst

h00kemh0rns,


I just wanted to say thank you very much for your review! I know that many of us here have been anxious about this screen for a long time and we greatly appreciate you stoking the fires. I can tell there's going to be a lot of sleepless nights waiting for the release (personally for the retractable model!)










Respectfully,

Andrew


----------



## truffleshuffle83

yes thank you. im interested in this screen as well and reviews have me stoked. i believe jason said avs will try and get one to review and depending on that they will carry it. so maybe we could get a powerbuy going if its possible


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mcleo19* /forum/post/13481651
> 
> 
> Hey Hookem,
> 
> 
> Do you know when your screen will arrive? Were you able to get any discount, or did you have to pay MSRP?
> 
> 
> Thanks for all the info you have provided thus far, I will most likely put an order myself at my local authorized dealer.



I was told that ship date would be 4/15 - 4/18...so I would have it a couple days later since I'm about a stones throw away.


Now as far as what I ended up paying is based on who I work for. We get a discount from SI but it wasn't enough for me to go blindly into buying a BD. The price difference, even after the discount, was several hundred dollars difference in what I was looking at getting. So, I was patiently waiting for this demo to convince me the extra money was worth it. Because trust me I could have invested that extra money into some other component/furniture in my HT build out.


After the two hour demo my eyes said "hell yeah"... That's all it came down to. You can be as anal as you want to be with the specs but ultimately its what your eyes tell you and mine said "buy, buy, oh and buy!" If SI was a publicly traded company I would say buy their stock.


----------



## moooog




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13482702
> 
> 
> If SI was a publicly traded company I would say buy their stock.



Too funny, I checked just that this morning.


----------



## Mikenificent1




h00kemh0rns said:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13475982
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry alot of this stuff stayed in my head and didn't make it in the post...
> 
> 
> Hot spots - none seen by anyone in the room and we looked at every feasible angle.
> 
> 
> Texture - It is smooth with no apparent flecks (as used by some manufacturers to boost brightness)
> 
> 
> Sharpness - yes it was sharper IMHO. Take it for what its worth...I saw the comparison and feel it was sharper. I wasn't the only one...
> 
> 
> Like I said...the video doesn't do it justice. I understand being skeptical but sometimes there are the real deals out there...this is one of 'em guys.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> now THAT'S impressive! thanks so much for the info!
Click to expand...


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13482702
> 
> 
> I was told that ship date would be 4/15 - 4/18...so I would have it a couple days later since I'm about a stones throw away.
> 
> 
> Now as far as what I ended up paying is based on who I work for. We get a discount from SI but it wasn't enough for me to go blindly into buying a BD. The price difference, even after the discount, was several hundred dollars difference in what I was looking at getting. So, I was patiently waiting for this demo to convince me the extra money was worth it. Because trust me I could have invested that extra money into some other component/furniture in my HT build out.
> 
> 
> After the two hour demo my eyes said "hell yeah"... That's all it came down to. You can be as anal as you want to be with the specs but ultimately its what your eyes tell you and mine said "buy, buy, oh and buy!" If SI was a publicly traded company I would say buy their stock.



h00kemh0rns, I'm curious...


Are you in the video business and have first-hand experience with a variety of projectors and screens?


Can you tell me why forum members are still posting to the other screen threads?


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13483114
> 
> 
> h00kemh0rns, I'm curious...
> 
> 
> Are you in the video business and have first-hand experience with a variety of projectors and screens?



No I am not in the business I am simply a consumer and HT enthusiast.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13483114
> 
> 
> Can you tell me why forum members are still posting to the other screen threads?



Why would I know this?


----------



## JohnG316

Hi Hookem,


Thank you so much for your interesting and informative posts. I'm also looking for a screen, but I have maybe two or three months before I have to have one. I'm interested in this one, but the size limitations are a bit frustrating. I wanted to go bigger than their "maximum one-piece" size limit.


I was wondering, and maybe you asked.... are they able to produce a larger screen by splicing two pieces of fabric together? At 20 MM thick, I can imagine this would be an exercise. I would only do this if the splice was nearly invisible when not being projected on, and totally transparent when the projector was on.


Any ideas? Did you ask about this?


I'm sure there are many others here who would like to go larger, so I can only guess there would be a large market if it were well-done.


Thanks! This is a very intriguing product. And I was all set to go with a Carada BW...


----------



## mcleo19




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13481962
> 
> 
> Someone mentioned an online vendor that sells the screens. It's in this thread. I priced out a few screens at their website and there was a very respectable discount. Shipping was resonable as well, I think $83 for the largest one.



Ah yes, that was me. Projectus is a local SI dealer and they are selling the BD on their website, projectorzone.com. I am pretty much sold and now just trying to decide what credit card to put is on.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *JohnG316* /forum/post/13483787
> 
> 
> Hi Hookem,
> 
> 
> Thank you so much for your interesting and informative posts. I'm also looking for a screen, but I have maybe two or three months before I have to have one. I'm interested in this one, but the size limitations are a bit frustrating. I wanted to go bigger than their "maximum one-piece" size limit.
> 
> 
> I was wondering, and maybe you asked.... are they able to produce a larger screen by splicing two pieces of fabric together? At 20 MM thick, I can imagine this would be an exercise. I would only do this if the splice was nearly invisible when not being projected on, and totally transparent when the projector was on.
> 
> 
> Any ideas? Did you ask about this?
> 
> 
> I'm sure there are many others here who would like to go larger, so I can only guess there would be a large market if it were well-done.
> 
> 
> Thanks! This is a very intriguing product. And I was all set to go with a Carada BW...



I asked about this. Larger screens with seams are something SI plans to do later on and they plan to do it for commercial customers who want really large screens, figuring it's not practical to have a seam for home theater use for just a bit more size. I think it's worth considering buying one with a seam. One person has posted in the screen forum that he doesn't notice the seam in his 159" High Power screen. Plus, SI admitted that the seam would be less obvious due to it being black. So, I'd say talk to SI about it if you want considerably larger than 113" 16X9 or 142" 2.35:1, and you don't mind the extra cost, and you don't mind waiting longer if SI does not want to make it right away, but I think the smaller the bump up in size you want over the maximum seamless size, the less worthwhile it is to do.


----------



## mcleo19




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *JohnG316* /forum/post/13483787
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks! This is a very intriguing product. And I was all set to go with a Carada BW...



I was in the same exact position as you were...and then I discovered Black Diamond! I was able to justify the extra cost to my wife as well as she hates watching TV in pitch black.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13483276
> 
> 
> No I am not in the business I am simply a consumer and HT enthusiast.



It was because you said you get a discount because of who you work for that I thought maybe you were in the business.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13483276
> 
> 
> Why would I know this?



It was just meant to be humorous, that here this great screen has come out and there's like three new threads in the last two days asking which screen should the OP get.


----------



## Tympani

Some thoughts...


Curious, will this screen profoundly impact the race for higher contrast/brighter lumen projectors, making these high spec (and more costly) PJ's less critical?


Also curious whether those poor souls who see DLP rainbows might fare better with this technology (or worse) i doubt that answer is out yet, just ruminating...


And lastly, a 20mm sheet rolled up in a motorized drop screen would be massive. Imagine an average thickness (10mm) area-rug with the general dimensions of a 110" diagonal screen, rolled-up. Now double that! I'm guessing you'd have a roll easily 10 inches in diameter! How's that gonna work?


----------



## speciman




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mcleo19* /forum/post/13484053
> 
> 
> Ah yes, that was me. Projectus is a local SI dealer and they are selling the BD on their website, projectorzone.com. I am pretty much sold and now just trying to decide what credit card to put is on.



I checked out both websites (Projectus & projectorzone) and I didn't see any Screen Innovations screens. Did SI take it away from them?


----------



## mcleo19




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *speciman* /forum/post/13487315
> 
> 
> I checked out both websites (Projectus & projectorzone) and I didn't see any Screen Innovations screens. Did SI take it away from them?



Holy crap! Ya, I don't know what happened. I will drop them a line to find out.


----------



## ngarn




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *speciman* /forum/post/13487315
> 
> 
> I checked out both websites (Projectus & projectorzone) and I didn't see any Screen Innovations screens. Did SI take it away from them?



No. I just called. They told me that they were asked to take it off their website but if you call you can still get a price quote emailed to you and no they won't get it any earlier than mid-April either.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ngarn* /forum/post/13488103
> 
> 
> No. I just called. They told me that they were asked to take it off their website but if you call you can still get a price quote emailed to you and no they won't get it any earlier than mid-April either.



I'm glad it was up, however briefly, because we were able to find out that the discounts on these screens will take a big bite out of the price.


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Tympani* /forum/post/13484866
> 
> 
> Curious, will this screen profoundly impact the race for higher contrast/brighter lumen projectors, making these high spec (and more costly) PJ's less critical?



As far as high CR, for on/off CR without lights on the screen won't affect that. These screens could get some people to only watch with lights on, at which point the CR of the projector won't matter as much (although the screen will help retain what CR is there).


As far as high lumen, it depends on what the lumens were for. If they were to fight other light (lights on or light coming into the room) then a screen like this could reduce the need for high lumens. However, if the extra light was just for lighting up a really big screen, then this "black" feature itself shouldn't change that. Could actually make it go in the opposite direction for some of us who use the High Power, since this screen is lower gain (at least in the ideal viewing positions) and so going to this screen could mean we need more light output from the projector.


I wonder if it would be possible to get a small sample. I would even be willing to pay something for one, but could talk to a friend who does reviews and see if he could get a sample to look at. Or maybe they would send one to Tryg. I think this screen could work well in his setup.


--Darin


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13484087
> 
> 
> It was because you said you get a discount because of who you work for that I thought maybe you were in the business.
> 
> 
> 
> It was just meant to be humorous, that here this great screen has come out and there's like three new threads in the last two days asking which screen should the OP get.



Ahh...sorry I misread your meaning with the other threads being posted. Guess it was too early to post my reply without having my coffee first...


I think if anyone is considering a similiar priced screen then they may want to wait. If they don't take what I, or what anyone else has written, at face value then as the saying goes _'the proof is in the pudding.'_ You will see in due time....however I'll be seeing it sooner than you in my HT room


----------



## panosp

darinp2: If the BD performs as advertised and h00kemh0rns is right, then this innovation will render the need for masking useless. With the 2-way or 4-way masking prices that companies charge, this sounds amazing to my ears!


----------



## Josh Z




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Josh Z* /forum/post/13476570
> 
> 
> When viewing in a dark room, were there any problems with crushed shadow detail? That would be one of my concerns about a black screen.



Any thoughts on this, h00kem?


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Josh Z* /forum/post/13492554
> 
> 
> When viewing in a dark room, were there any problems with crushed shadow detail? That would be one of my concerns about a black screen.
> 
> ...
> 
> Any thoughts on this, h00kem?



I'm not h00kem, but how could the screen even cause that? If a screen was really dark for the projected light (low gain) it might change the perception of things down low and how easy it is to see the levels there (since brighter images tend to make it easier to see details), but this screen isn't black from the front with the projector on. The "black" in black screens like this refers to how they look with things like light coming from big off angles (like light from above), or light at different wavelengths than most of those projected (like with Sony's black screen from a while ago that only reflected certain wavelengths well).


The gain from the projected light is what really matters to this in a truly dark room. As long as it is 1.0 or so then I don't think it should hurt the shadow detail compared to a matte white screen. In a light colored room with no lights on this screen could help how visible some shadow detail is by reducing the washout from light going to the walls and then coming back (basically by increasing how much of the ANSI CR from the projector is retained in the images).


--Darin


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13490864
> 
> 
> darinp2: If the BD performs as advertised and h00kemh0rns is right, then this innovation will render the need for masking useless. With the 2-way or 4-way masking prices that companies charge, this sounds amazing to my ears!



That's not true. The screen is not going to magically make a low contrast projector with poor black level into a high contrast PJ. If a projector is low contrast you will still see the black bars regardless of the screen. It would be possible to eliminate masking with a high contrast projector like the RS1/2, by reducing light scatter and reducing potential room interefercne, it would allow you to see its maximum potential which would probably be no visible black bars becuase of it's excellent black level.


----------



## Josh Z




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *darinp2* /forum/post/13492747
> 
> 
> The gain from the projected light is what really matters to this in a truly dark room. As long as it is 1.0 or so then I don't think it should hurt the shadow detail compared to a matte white screen. In a light colored room with no lights on this screen could help how visible some shadow detail is by reducing the washout from light going to the walls and then coming back (basically by increasing how much of the ANSI CR from the projector is retained in the images).



Good points. Thanks, Darin.


----------



## pottscb




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Laserfan* /forum/post/13476251
> 
> 
> Many thanks for your long post--one question: Is SI in Austin a walk-in-and-look shop or by-invitation-only?
> 
> 
> If true, this is absolutely brilliant! These guys have apparently heard of that large country that starts with a "C"!!!



They have a small showroom but prefer you call and make an appointment, so they can have the right setup ready when you arrive.


----------



## pottscb




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13488206
> 
> 
> I'm glad it was up, however briefly, because we were able to find out that the discounts on these screens will take a big bite out of the price.



hrd, I got a price quote before it was pulled from the website, but it surely wasn't discounted...is this an "industry-only" discount or do you know something special?


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pottscb* /forum/post/13496247
> 
> 
> hrd, I got a price quote before it was pulled from the website, but it surely wasn't discounted...is this an "industry-only" discount or do you know something special?



Since it's against forum policy to mention pricing other than MSRP, I'll PM you what I found.


----------



## panosp




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13495715
> 
> 
> That's not true. The screen is not going to magically make a low contrast projector with poor black level into a high contrast PJ. If a projector is low contrast you will still see the black bars regardless of the screen. It would be possible to eliminate masking with a high contrast projector like the RS1/2, by reducing light scatter and reducing potential room interefercne, it would allow you to see its maximum potential which would probably be no visible black bars becuase of it's excellent black level.



Indeed you are right. When I made my intial comment I had this in mind but it never made it in my "Spartan" posting. Maybe it's because I currently own a RS2 and unconsciously it's the reference point in my mind.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13497058
> 
> 
> Indeed you are right. When I made my intial comment I had this in mind but it never made it in my "Spartan" posting. Maybe it's because I currently own a RS2 and unconsciously it's the reference point in my mind.



Ahh, lucky you, you should probably not need masking if the screen does what they say it does. Hopefully it will be the same for me with my "lowly" RS1


----------



## JohnG316




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *JohnG316* /forum/post/13483787
> 
> 
> Hi Hookem,
> 
> 
> Thank you so much for your interesting and informative posts. I'm also looking for a screen, but I have maybe two or three months before I have to have one. I'm interested in this one, but the size limitations are a bit frustrating. I wanted to go bigger than their "maximum one-piece" size limit.
> 
> 
> I was wondering, and maybe you asked.... are they able to produce a larger screen by splicing two pieces of fabric together? At 20 MM thick, I can imagine this would be an exercise. I would only do this if the splice was nearly invisible when not being projected on, and totally transparent when the projector was on.
> 
> 
> Any ideas? Did you ask about this?
> 
> 
> I'm sure there are many others here who would like to go larger, so I can only guess there would be a large market if it were well-done.
> 
> 
> Thanks! This is a very intriguing product. And I was all set to go with a Carada BW...



OK, I got an official update from sales at SI on the size limitations and whether larger spliced screens will be available.


No information yet on cost or schedule, but they are experimenting with splicing and producing larger screens. We should have some information "soon," but no idea what "soon" means.


If I could get a 133 16:9 I would probably buy one in a cool second. Now I have to decide if I am going to buy a smaller screen or possibly pick up the Carada and maybe upgrade later as more options are available from SI.


Decisions, decisions!!


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *darinp2* /forum/post/13490331
> 
> 
> I wonder if it would be possible to get a small sample. I would even be willing to pay something for one, but could talk to a friend who does reviews and see if he could get a sample to look at. Or maybe they would send one to Tryg. I think this screen could work well in his setup.
> 
> 
> --Darin



It was said you can get a 26" screen for $199 and I assume the monet would be refunded once the screen is returned. I would be very interested in your opinion of this screen as I know your at least very critical of PJ performance (hopefully screens as well).


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13498610
> 
> 
> It was said you can get a 26" screen for $199 and I assume the monet would be refunded once the screen is returned. I would be very interested in your opinion of this screen as I know your at least very critical of PJ performance (hopefully screens as well).



I don't see why SI would refund the money. It will cost them money to ship it out, and if it comes back, it is as a used screen that no one would pay the full $199 for. The whole concept of selling a sample for $199 is ridiculous, anyway, as no one is ever going to buy such a thing.


----------



## panosp




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13502388
> 
> 
> I don't see why SI would refund the money. It will cost them money to ship it out, and if it comes back, it is as a used screen that no one would pay the full $199 for. The whole concept of selling a sample for $199 is ridiculous, anyway, as no one is ever going to buy such a thing.




To clarify the cost of the samples issue I contacted SI and was told that "Samples will be free and available after we begin shipping."


----------



## IanK




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Tympani* /forum/post/13484866
> 
> 
> Some thoughts...
> 
> 
> And lastly, a 20mm sheet rolled up in a motorized drop screen would be massive. Imagine an average thickness (10mm) area-rug with the general dimensions of a 110" diagonal screen, rolled-up. Now double that! I'm guessing you'd have a roll easily 10 inches in diameter! How's that gonna work?



I am waiting for the motorized version of BD and was also concerned about the thickness issue. I talked to SI yesterday about this.

It turns out the the fixed BD screen is 20mil thick (a mil is 1/1000 of an inch) not 20mm. So actually the fabric is not much different then std vinyl fabric. For the motorized version they will use a version that is slighter thinner then that. Bottom line, thickness should not be a problem.


Ian


----------



## bri1270

Does anyone know about the Super flat tension system for the roll down screens?


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *IanK* /forum/post/13503819
> 
> 
> I am waiting for the motorized version of BD and was also concerned about the thickness issue. I talked to SI yesterday about this.
> 
> It turns out the the fixed BD screen is 20mil thick (a mil is 1/1000 of an inch) not 20mm. So actually the fabric is not much different then std vinyl fabric. For the motorized version they will use a version that is slighter thinner then that. Bottom line, thickness should not be a problem.
> 
> 
> Ian



This would be my ignorance, or rather assumption, when I was told 20 mil. When Aaron said Mil I heard it as mm. Apologies if I relayed this info incorrectly.


----------



## noah katz

"When Aaron said Mil I heard it as mm."


I work in aerospace and we have that problem too.


----------



## majorloser

For what it's worth, I too got a chance to audition this screen at the Orlando EHX. I had a chance to hang around since it was the last day (Saturday) and talk to the SI people and the RBH group.


This screen is AWESOME. The had two different projectors for this setup. Even with the smaller projector on just part of the Black Diamond screen it really shined.


All I know is my Stewart Firehawk is getting replaced with one of these.


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *majorloser* /forum/post/13506623
> 
> 
> For what it's worth, I too got a chance to audition this screen at the Orlando EHX. I had a chance to hang around since it was the last day (Saturday) and talk to the SI people and the RBH group.
> 
> 
> This screen is AWESOME. The had two different projectors for this setup. Even with the smaller projector on just part of the Black Diamond screen it really shined.
> 
> 
> All I know is my Stewart Firehawk is getting replaced with one of these.




I think once people let their eyes do the talking alot will be in this same boat.

http://www.electronichouse.com/artic...m_of_a_screen/ 
_"This Diamond's a true gem."_


----------



## majorloser

I know this may sound stupid, but you don't realize how _black_ the screen really is till you look at it in the light with nothing projected on it.


It even looked good without masking at the show. But let's hope they get some sort of automated masking system in the future, though. You could buy somebody else's masking system like the Carada Masquerade, but it would be nice to get the whole package in one unit.


----------



## panosp




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *majorloser* /forum/post/13514293
> 
> 
> I know this may sound stupid, but you don't realize how _black_ the screen really is till you look at it in the light with nothing projected on it.
> 
> 
> It even looked good without masking at the show. But let's hope they get some sort of automated masking system in the future, though. You could buy somebody else's masking system like the Carada Masquerade, but it would be nice to get the whole package in one unit.




"you don't realize how black". This sounds contradictory to the need for automated masking you mention later on. Can you please clarify?

If you projected a 16:9 image on a 2.35:1 screen would you need masking or not? Is the material black enough so that it's not needed or not? What about light bleeding?


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *majorloser* /forum/post/13514293
> 
> 
> I know this may sound stupid, but you don't realize how _black_ the screen really is till you look at it in the light with nothing projected on it.
> 
> 
> It even looked good without masking at the show. But let's hope they get some sort of automated masking system in the future, though. You could buy somebody else's masking system like the Carada Masquerade, but it would be nice to get the whole package in one unit.



Not sure why you would even need masking. The 1.4 gain seemed to work great and I'll assume the .8 would only be better. If you have the money to burn and just want the aesthetic aspect of masking then do it. Otherwise IMHO, I dont think it would be frugal to use a masking system with the BD.


----------



## noah katz

As I believe was already stated, now matter how black the screen looks, the pj lights it up and too high a black level will be the issue.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/13519059
> 
> 
> As I believe was already stated, now matter how black the screen looks, the pj lights it up and too high a black level will be the issue.



Amen!! It's the PJ that will most determine whether or not you need masking NOT the screen. The BD should help a capable projector by imrpoving its ANSI contrast, but NOT just ANY projector.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13515978
> 
> 
> Not sure why you would even need masking. The 1.4 gain seemed to work great and I'll assume the .8 would only be better. If you have the money to burn and just want the aesthetic aspect of masking then do it. Otherwise IMHO, I dont think it would be frugal to use a masking system with the BD.



That's because you're forgetting that you saw the screen with a projector with a 30,000 : 1 contrast ratio and one of, if not THE best black levels! A screen can only reflect what the projector is displaying. If it were to do otherwise would be a distrortion. What you're describing is a screen that would have to CRUSH all low level grays and blacks, so that no matter what projector it is being used with (even for example a 1000:1 LCD projector which has light gray instead of truly black letterbox bars which VERY few PJ's do), the black bars will appear BLACK. This would also affect the part of the screen where there is actual movie content as well, blacks and grays would be crushed. This should explain why it's not the screen that dictates whether or not you need masking.


h00kemh0rns what projector will you be using the BD with?


----------



## panosp

Mikenificent1: According to your opinion does the RS2 qualify as a projector that wouldn't need masking when projecting on the BD?


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13526198
> 
> 
> Mikenificent1: According to your opinion does the RS2 qualify as a projector that wouldn't need masking when projecting on the BD?



H00kem saw the BD with your PJ (same unit different model#), and he states that he saw no need for masking with it. I would think with either a light controlled room and dark walls, or with the BD (if it meets it's expectations) and the RS2 is projecting at max throw (for the highest contrast ratio), you should not need masking IMO. Either way it doesn't look like you would want masking anyway so its probably a moot point.


----------



## panosp

Currently my walls have a light color and my RS2 is projecting on a 4:3 screen (which is under replacement, most probably by the BD in 2.35:1 format). If I were to go with any other screen than the BD I would definately need masking; although the RS2 has a high contrast and the top and below bars are almost black the white screen where the RS2 is not projecting any picture is extremely annoying and distracting.

I hope the BD solves this; I guess I have to see it with my own eyes to decide...


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13520752
> 
> 
> h00kemh0rns what projector will you be using the BD with?



Toss up right now and its all based on what I can get away with after finishing up the HT room build out...


JVC RS1

Espon 1080 UB

Panny AE2000


----------



## Mikenificent1

panosp just keep in mind if you use an anamorphic lense (as oppose to zooming) with your 2.35:1 screen that it will reduce the contrast and probably increase your black level.


H00kem go with the RS1 (especially if you don't want masking) so you can tell me how it looks with the BD when you get it


----------



## CCONKLIN1

what?????


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13538220
> 
> 
> panosp just keep in mind if you use an anamorphic lense (as oppose to zooming) with your 2.35:1 screen that it will reduce the contrast and probably increase your black level.
> 
> 
> H00kem go with the RS1 (especially if you don't want masking) so you can tell me how it looks with the BD when you get it


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13538220
> 
> 
> panosp just keep in mind if you use an anamorphic lense (as oppose to zooming) with your 2.35:1 screen that it will reduce the contrast and probably increase your black level.
> 
> 
> H00kem go with the RS1 (especially if you don't want masking) so you can tell me how it looks with the BD when you get it



AV Science had a great deal on the Epson Pro Cinema 1080 UB when it first came out, where they would give a thousand dollars of store credit with a purchase (this was the only way they could offer a deal what with Epson insisting the projector be sold at MSRP), but they stopped carrying the projector because of all the quality control issues. It's in the main thread in the over $3000 forum. I've seen lots of complaints about reliablity with Panasonics, too, so I'd recommend the RS1. My only reservation would be if you particularly like a very bright image and want a large BD.


----------



## whichPJ

I have been following this thread for a while. I'm considering a 110" 16:9 fixed BD with either Sony "Black pearl" VW60 or RS1. Any opinions?


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *whichPJ* /forum/post/13540734
> 
> 
> I have been following this thread for a while. I'm considering a 110" 16:9 fixed BD with either Sony "Black pearl" VW60 or RS1. Any opinions?



I have not seen the VW60, but I have seen a VW200. The VW200 was on a 92" screen and was dim even on that size screen in a bat cave. It had only a few hours on the bulb. Since the VW60 is rated at 100 less lumens than the VW200 by Sony, I would not expect the VW60 to be bright enough for my own tastes. The BD is not a high gain screen, but I believe, based on what some who have seen it have said, that it may appear punchier because of the way the black material concentrates the light compared to other screens with similar gains. I suggest getting as much feedback as you can on how well the BD performs with projectors than are not light cannons, as the early reviews come out, since you are wanting a decent sized screen, and decide how much importance a bright image has to you. I will probably get the same size screen as you, unless SI can make the seam a non-issue, in which case I may go larger, and I am going to wait for the early reviews and until I see a BD or two in action before deciding if an RS2 would be bright enough to be a good match with the BD or if I should get a light cannon. I think it's just too early now to know how the BD will perform in terms of brightness compared to the average 1.3 gain screen. In the first post below, a member says the image was "intensely bright" with a projector that may have been around only 1100 lumens, depending on calibration. I think that is a very, very good sign, but that it is too early to know how the RS1/2 or Sonys will look in terms of brightness.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...&postcount=132 

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...&postcount=165


----------



## Josh Z




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13538220
> 
> 
> panosp just keep in mind if you use an anamorphic lense (as oppose to zooming) with your 2.35:1 screen that it will reduce the contrast and probably increase your black level.



How would an anamorphic lens reduce contrast?


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Josh Z* /forum/post/13541810
> 
> 
> How would an anamorphic lens reduce contrast?



Not sure what he was referring to, but it can hurt ANSI CR (from reflections and general scatter going through a lens). As far as on/off CR out of the anamorphic lens or off the screen in a room without other lights on, the lens itself shouldn't change on/off CR. However, zooming to a bigger image will usually give less on/off CR out of the projector lens (most lenses have higher on/off CR, but less lumens, at the longer throw end of their zoom range). I would expect higher on/off CR in a room without other lighting by using the anamorphic lens, just because it is likely to use a higher on/off zoom position in the projector. That is assuming a single placement for the projector though. In a room with lights on and the same image width whether using the anamorphic lens or not, the lens can help both ANSI CR and on/off CR off the screen by making the images brighter (thus fighting that other light better), although that depends on whether the anamorphic lens is increasing light output more than it is decreased by using a bigger image portion of the zoom range in the projector lens. So, it gets a little complicated, with multiple effects here.


--Darin


----------



## CCONKLIN1

That was what I was wondering as well.

Best,

Chris


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Josh Z* /forum/post/13541810
> 
> 
> How would an anamorphic lens reduce contrast?


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *darinp2* /forum/post/13543661
> 
> 
> Not sure what he was referring to, but it can hurt ANSI CR (from reflections and general scatter going through a lens). --Darin



Obviously you did, you just said it yourself! What else would I have been talking about??


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13547115
> 
> 
> Obviously you did, you just said it yourself! What else would I have been talking about??



If you only meant ANSI CR and were not referring to on/off CR, why did you just say "contrast"? Do you feel your statement was correct if the on/off CR would actually go up with the lens instead of zooming?


--Darin


----------



## mcleo19

So, just to get this straight, max lumens is achieved at max zoom (projector close to the wall), at the expense of contrast?


----------



## mrlittlejeans




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mcleo19* /forum/post/13552287
> 
> 
> So, just to get this straight, max lumens is achieved at max zoom (projector close to the wall), at the expense of contrast?



In many cases yes. For the same size image, max zoom/shortest throw will yield you the lowest on/off CR and the highest lumens. It isn't always the case, but quite often that's the way it works.


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mcleo19* /forum/post/13552287
> 
> 
> So, just to get this straight, max lumens is achieved at max zoom (projector close to the wall), at the expense of contrast?



Not sure if you are referring to the front wall or back wall and it sounds like you might be using "max zoom" to mean further from the screen here. Just in case and to avoid confusion, as mrlittlejeans said, it is the shortest throw end of the zoom range which tends to be highest lumens and lowest on/off CR, with the way that lenses work.


--Darin


----------



## ngarn




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *whichPJ* /forum/post/13540734
> 
> 
> I have been following this thread for a while. I'm considering a 110" 16:9 fixed BD with either Sony "Black pearl" VW60 or RS1. Any opinions?



I've been trying to finalize my decision about this for months now. I decided on the VW60 after much debate over the Epson 1080UB, RS1, and Panny.


Panny: Apparently has dust issues.

Espson: I really like the initial posts about the Epson but after AVScience stopped recommending it I decided against it.

RS1: Still considered a great piece but many reviews of it in comparision to the VW60 had the VW60 with a sharper image with just as good perceived contrats. (I like that!)


If hrd thinks lumens are going to be an issue I don't know what to think. He must want a light cannon. If you are worried about I would strongly have you consider the new InFocus IN83. It's DLP and will set you back around 5K but it's a light cannon and with its new DarkChip4 I'm sure as great contrast.


I just hope I'm happy with my final decision of the Black Pearl on the Black Diamond.


Good luck!


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ngarn* /forum/post/13560063
> 
> 
> I've been trying to finalize my decision about this for months now. I decided on the VW60 after much debate over the Epson 1080UB, RS1, and Panny.
> 
> 
> Panny: Apparently has dust issues.
> 
> Espson: I really like the initial posts about the Epson but after AVScience stopped recommending it I decided against it.
> 
> RS1: Still considered a great piece but many reviews of it in comparision to the VW60 had the VW60 with a sharper image with just as good perceived contrats. (I like that!)
> 
> 
> If hrd thinks lumens are going to be an issue I don't know what to think. He must want a light cannon. If you are worried about I would strongly have you consider the new InFocus IN83. It's DLP and will set you back around 5K but it's a light cannon and with its new DarkChip4 I'm sure as great contrast.
> 
> 
> I just hope I'm happy with my final decision of the Black Pearl on the Black Diamond.
> 
> 
> Good luck!



I admit I do like a bright image. I also have white walls and a white ceiling, which has forced me to need a brighter image than others just to get something acceptable to watch. I have found that high bulb, dynamic mode, and, at times, maximum zoom, can go a long way to increase brightness. Because of this, I have high hopes I won't need a light cannon to get the kind of image I like on my upcoming BD. I'll get the screen that will let me watch in the daytime and will compensate for the white walls and white ceiling first, and decide on the ideal projector to pair with it after. The projector I currently have is 1100 ANSI lumens...no light cannon.


There's been debate about whether the VW200 is dim or not in the VW200 thread. Different takes on the subject, with some finding it dim and others not. Worth taking a look at the thread if you have not already.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13560382
> 
> 
> There's been debate about whether the VW200 is dim or not in the VW200 thread. Different takes on the subject, with some finding it dim and others not. Worth taking a look at the thread if you have not already.



I saw the VW200 and the VPL60 next to each other at the Sony store here in NYC. I'd say the 200 was just a hair dimmer than a JVC RS2 i had seen (both had newish bulbs). The 60 wasn't as sharp as the 200 but didn't notice a big brightness difference between the two. THe 60 was on a smaller screen under worse conditions than the 200. 200 was in a bat cave.


----------



## Xyst

We've all probably watched the video on SI's page a hundred times by now. Does any who has seen it in person have any action shots the can direct us too?


Thanks!


----------



## Kobe

"The silence before the storm"?


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kobe* /forum/post/13588537
> 
> 
> "The silence before the storm"?



I certainly hope so!


----------



## CADOBHuK




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mrlittlejeans* /forum/post/13552404
> 
> 
> In many cases yes. For the same size image, max zoom/shortest throw will yield you the lowest on/off CR and the highest lumens. It isn't always the case, but quite often that's the way it works.



What about the focus and sharpness? Wouldn't it be harder for the projector to keep the center and the edges of the screen in focus at shorter distance?


----------



## whichPJ

I have decided to go with the Black Pearl on a 110" 16:9 BD as well. Can't wait to see the BD. Has anyone ordered it already? Is the shipping date still firm at 04/21?


----------



## TJ Morgan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *whichPJ* /forum/post/13605774
> 
> 
> I have decided to go with the Black Pearl on a 110" 16:9 BD as well. Can't wait to see the BD. Has anyone ordered it already? Is the shipping date still firm at 04/21?



I'm picking up a 92" BD at SI in Austin for an install on the 21st. We are using it with a JVC DLA-HD100. I can't wait to set it up!


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *avdesignshouston* /forum/post/13607411
> 
> 
> I'm picking up a 92" BD at SI in Austin for an install on the 21st. We are using it with a JVC DLA-HD100. I can't wait to set it up!



Have you had a chance to demo the screen?


You have a nice website.


----------



## Kobe

avdesignshouston, please don't forget to post your impressions asap as you get it







There are people who climb the walls to get any info. I am particularly interested how the screen eliminates the scatter in a darkened room but with white walls. Is there any hotspotting? Is the screen surface more noticable when film viewing?


One importnat thing - could you please ask the SI when picking up if there are any recommendations as to how the projector should be mounted?


----------



## TJ Morgan

I personally haven't seen the screen. Both my business partner and another one of my best friends in the industry have seen the BD and were blown away. We sell the DNP Supernova and have used it in several different situations both where light is an issue and in dedicated media rooms. The Supernova, while a good screen does seem to hotspot badly at times. From what I understand, the BD does not.


The room we are using it in is a game room with several windows. We are doing motorized shades on the windows adjacent to the screen but the system will still be used during the day and with higher than normal light levels.


We are going to mount the projector as close as possible to the screen (9' for a 92") hoping for a little more light output.


I'll try and post pictures and feedback as soon as possible.


Thank you, hrs, for the comment on our website!


----------



## Kobe

Thanks a lot for reply avdesignshouston


----------



## Wilt

What are the chances of this screen being available in the UK? Zero probably.


----------



## anarkizt

Someone from minhembio.com who started a similar threasd like this one there emailed SI and asked, they said Black Diamond would be available in Europe end of April. (source, swedish - http://www.minhembio.com/forum/index...owtopic=194393 )


Im sitting here in Sweden hoping for this to be in some demo room real soon... Seems to be the best thing since sliced bread and I cannot understand why this thread hasnt received more attention.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *anarkizt* /forum/post/13617445
> 
> 
> Someone from minhembio.com who started a similar threasd like this one there emailed SI and asked, they said Black Diamond would be available in Europe end of April. (source, swedish - http://www.minhembio.com/forum/index...owtopic=194393 )
> 
> 
> Im sitting here in Sweden hoping for this to be in some demo room real soon... Seems to be the best thing since sliced bread and I cannot understand why this thread hasnt received more attention.



It probably has not received more attention because past light-rejecting screens could not get the job done, were not available over 100" diagonal, and were way overpriced.


----------



## Tympani




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13617909
> 
> 
> It probably has not received more attention because past light-rejecting screens could not get the job done, were not available over 100" diagonal, and were way overpriced.



But that's the reason it SHOULD be getting more attention


----------



## Josh Z




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *anarkizt* /forum/post/13617445
> 
> 
> Seems to be the best thing since sliced bread and I cannot understand why this thread hasnt received more attention.



Over the years, there have been a great many home theater products that _seemed_ to be the best thing since sliced bread, only to turn out in actual practice to be more like New Coke.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Tympani* /forum/post/13618433
> 
> 
> But that's the reason it SHOULD be getting more attention



I'm just glad I tuned into the thread and read enough of it to find out this item was likely to be much better than the other light-rejecting screens.


----------



## mcleo19

...and Crystal Pepsi if I may say.


But seriously, this product could me a major advance by really mitigating one of the bigger disadvantages of front projection, namely light control.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Josh Z* /forum/post/13618620
> 
> 
> Over the years, there have been a great many home theater products that _seemed_ to be the best thing since sliced bread, only to turn out in actual practice to be more like New Coke.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mcleo19* /forum/post/13619131
> 
> 
> ...and Crystal Pepsi if I may say.
> 
> 
> But seriously, this product could me a major advance by really mitigating one of the bigger disadvantages of front projection, namely light control.



I like to think of myself more as a realist. I don't expect this to be manna from heaven in that it lets me watch in full day light. Who knows? Maybe I'll be as shocked as everyone. Physics is still physics and even though Boeing proved you can patent them, I believe light control will still be important. My ultimate, read realistic, hope for this is that it lets those of us with white walls and ceilings, be able to enjoy a good looking projection system. And if I get to watch it during the day with the blinds shut, or at night with a lamp on, then I'm all for that too!


----------



## CCONKLIN1

sigh....I saw all the new posts today and got excited that there might be more info....

rats

Chris


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *CCONKLIN1* /forum/post/13620019
> 
> 
> sigh....I saw all the new posts today and got excited that there might be more info....
> 
> rats
> 
> Chris



I don't know if people typically get this excited about the release of a new screen, but I'd like to think we're doing a good job managing our anxiety!


----------



## noah katz

"I don't expect this to be manna from heaven in that it lets me watch in full day light."


Right, let's not forget that even if the screen reflected zero ambient light, the image brightness may be competing with 100's or even 1000's of ft-L of brightness if sunlight is coming in.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *avdesignshouston* /forum/post/13608712
> 
> 
> I personally haven't seen the screen. Both my business partner and another one of my best friends in the industry have seen the BD and were blown away. We sell the DNP Supernova and have used it in several different situations both where light is an issue and in dedicated media rooms. The Supernova, while a good screen does seem to hotspot badly at times. From what I understand, the BD does not.
> 
> 
> The room we are using it in is a game room with several windows. We are doing motorized shades on the windows adjacent to the screen but the system will still be used during the day and with higher than normal light levels.
> 
> 
> We are going to mount the projector as close as possible to the screen (9' for a 92") hoping for a little more light output.
> 
> 
> I'll try and post pictures and feedback as soon as possible.
> 
> 
> Thank you, hrs, for the comment on our website!



My suggestion is to show the client the image with the brightness settings maximized. Maximum zoom will help, but also put the bulb in high mode and set the display mode to dynamic. That way you'll both get to know the brightest the image can be and can maybe work down from there, depending on the clients preferences. The client might want to change settings from day to day to suit what's on the screen.


By the way, I asked SI about the motorized screens and learned the following: they don't know if 2.35:1 screens will be available in the motorized line, they expect 110" will be the largest 16X9 available in the motorized line, and they don't know the pricing of the motorized line yet.


----------



## Master843

Has there been a release date announced for when a fixed frame screen will be generally available for purchase for those of us who can't get it direct from SI? (I'm in the US)


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Master843* /forum/post/13629132
> 
> 
> Has there been a release date announced for when a fixed frame screen will be generally available for purchase for those of us who can't get it direct from SI? (I'm in the US)



I believe it is towards the end of April. Give SI a call and they should be able to tell you.


----------



## panosp

I was told by SI that they started selling screens last week and reached 300 units in the first three days.


Any lucky owner around to enlighten us?


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13629968
> 
> 
> I was told by SI that they started selling screens last week and reached 300 units in the first three days.
> 
> 
> Any lucky owner around to enlighten us?



I've been pestering Shanon and Ryan on the date given to me of 4/18 for shipping. If true I should have it early part of next week.


----------



## Ayla

I hope there will be an acoustically transparent version of the Black Diamond!


And I hope they will offer large 2.35:1 sizes in both fixed and motorized versions.


Looks like a great screen this one.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Ayla* /forum/post/13634198
> 
> 
> I hope there will be an acoustically transparent version of the Black Diamond!.



SI will have to believe there is enough demand for it and will have to believe it can be engineered without compromising the Black Diamond material too much. They want to concentrate on the motorized next, and selling larger seamed screens to commercial buyers, so it might be a way off before they would put any effort into it, if ever.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Ayla* /forum/post/13634198
> 
> 
> And I hope they will offer large 2.35:1 sizes in both fixed and motorized versions.



Someone at SI told me they were looking into making larger screens with seams, but whether they will or not will depend on how well they can engineer it without compromising the screen. The current plan is for the 110" 16X9 to be the largest motorized and they don't know about 2.35:1 because of the width issues with the case. Even if they do make a motorized in 2.35:1, it's possible it will top out size-wise at smaller than anyone would buy.


----------



## pottscb




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Master843* /forum/post/13629132
> 
> 
> Has there been a release date announced for when a fixed frame screen will be generally available for purchase for those of us who can't get it direct from SI? (I'm in the US)



April 18th is the planned ship date, SI said expect a week to 10 days to get to dealers...if no dealers in your area carry it and you're passing through central Texas you can schedule a private viewing at SI, or so they said. Just for reference, A&B TV in Austin is supposed to get the first demo model of the screen as its just down the road from SI and will be hand delivered, again, or so SI said.


Hope this helps...


----------



## Ayla




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13634782
> 
> 
> SI will have to believe there is enough demand for it and will have to believe it can be engineered without compromising the Black Diamond material too much. They want to concentrate on the motorized next, and selling larger seamed screens to commercial buyers, so it might be a way off before they would put any effort into it, if ever.
> 
> 
> 
> Someone at SI told me the they were looking into making larger screens with seams, but whether they will or not will depend on how well they can engineer it without compromising the screen. The current plan is for the 110" 16X9 to be the largest motorized and they don't know about 2.35:1 because of the width issues with the case. Even if they do make a motorized in 2.35:1, it's possible it will top out size-wise at smaller than anyone would buy.



Thanks for the reply.


I have written to SI asking the same.


Their homepage states that the "Reference" model, motorized screen will be out Summer 2008, with Black Diamond as an option. And:


Screen formats available in 2.35:1, 4:3, and 16:9

Screen sizes available from 80- 160 diagonal


That's much larger than just 110", and 2.35:1 is mentioned.


Personally, I would need a 325cm wide 2.35:1 screen, motorized.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Ayla* /forum/post/13634901
> 
> 
> Thanks for the reply.
> 
> 
> I have written to SI asking the same.
> 
> 
> Their homepage states that the "Reference" model, motorized screen will be out Summer 2008, with Black Diamond as an option. And:
> 
> 
> Screen formats available in 2.35:1, 4:3, and 16:9
> 
> Screen sizes available from 80- 160 diagonal
> 
> 
> That's much larger than just 110", and 2.35:1 is mentioned.
> 
> 
> Personally, I would need a 325cm wide 2.35:1 screen, motorized.



Someone at SI told me the current motorized line does not go any wider than 133 diagonal for the 16X9, and if you go into the screen calculator for the current motorized screen, you will see the drop down box for selecting screen size does indeed top out at 133. An option to calculate the specs for a 2.35:1 is not even offered. A 2.35:1 format motorized screen would be completely new as part of the new upcoming line, if they decide to go ahead with that format. The largest screen in the current motorized line, the 133 16X9, is only 116 wide, meaning they would have to be willing to go wider with the motorized case in the new line than they do in the current line in order to make the 2.35:1 screens wide enough to satisfy demand and they do not know if they want to go any wider yet. Personally, I would not be interested in a 2.35:1 screen any less than 10 ½ to 11 feet. If SI could go 6 wider on the case and make their 133 diagonal 2.35:1 available as a motorized screen, I would consider it, but since that would drop my 16X9 image down to 106.3, I would be more likely to go with the 110 16X9 instead. The 133 diagonal 2.35:1 would be about 122 wide. If you would drop your requirements down by about 5 width, that would give you what you desire.


Then there's the issue of the seam, which may limit the available size of the 16X9 to 113 diagonal and the 2.35:1 to 130.87 wide even in the fixed frame screens. A 325cm screen would not have a seam.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Ayla* /forum/post/13634901
> 
> 
> Thanks for the reply.
> 
> 
> I have written to SI asking the same.
> 
> 
> Their homepage states that the "Reference" model, motorized screen will be out Summer 2008, with Black Diamond as an option. And:
> 
> 
> Screen formats available in 2.35:1, 4:3, and 16:9
> 
> Screen sizes available from 80- 160 diagonal
> 
> 
> That's much larger than just 110", and 2.35:1 is mentioned.
> 
> 
> Personally, I would need a 325cm wide 2.35:1 screen, motorized.



I was told by SI they are working to get the motorized screen to market in August of this year. Granted there may be set backs, shortages, etc. But I would not think we will see it before that time.


----------



## HiDefLifestyle1

We're also being told our demo unit will ship on the 18th. We're extremely excited to get the unit setup in our showroom.


----------



## Steve Dodds

Having finally coughed up the money for a Firehawk (albeit used), you have no idea how depressing this thread is.


Could someone please report a negative experience.


----------



## panosp

lol


----------



## pottscb




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Steve Dodds* /forum/post/13644106
> 
> 
> Having finally coughed up the money for a Firehawk (albeit used), you have no idea how depressing this thread is.
> 
> 
> Could someone please report a negative experience.



Um...I'm thinking...uh, I got nothing!


This is exactly why I haven't bought a new screen OR pj yet...these are exciting/scary times for home theater buffs...the advancements and price erosion are having a close race where all consumers eventually win!


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Steve Dodds* /forum/post/13644106
> 
> 
> Having finally coughed up the money for a Firehawk (albeit used), you have no idea how depressing this thread is.
> 
> 
> Could someone please report a negative experience.



Hmmmm....I have to wait until next Tuesday to pick mine up? Is that negative enough?


----------



## panosp

h00kemh0rns: will you actually get yours on Tuesday?


----------



## anarkizt

Today I looked at flights from Stockholm to Texas... Im going crazy...


Anyone know of a review or something, just something to get the edge off? :S


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *anarkizt* /forum/post/13656947
> 
> 
> Today I looked at flights from Stockholm to Texas... Im going crazy...
> 
> 
> Anyone know of a review or something, just something to get the edge off? :S



h00kemh0rns reported the tech writer from InsightMedia was at the SI demo and was going to write an article about the Black Diamond on April 1st. Don't know what happened to that. It's kind of hard to find anything at their website.


You could always PM Jason and ask him to review the screen.


----------



## HiDefLifestyle1

Texas in two days... Central PA in one week... you should start seeing some major opinions very soon as long as they ship.


We're going to have ours displayed under a motorized Elite screen to showcase diference. Paired with a Cineversum Blackwing III projector (the JVC Dila Pro).


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13656849
> 
> 
> h00kemh0rns: will you actually get yours on Tuesday?



Yes I had called Shannon and she said the very first ones were being shipped out starting on Friday. Both her and Ryan said I can pick mine up from the shop on Tuesday...so yes, I'll be one of the first to have the BD.


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *anarkizt* /forum/post/13656947
> 
> 
> Today I looked at flights from Stockholm to Texas... Im going crazy...
> 
> 
> Anyone know of a review or something, just something to get the edge off? :S



Unfortunately the InsightMedia is subscription based (tried to coerse a copy from the reviewer to no avail...he simply said "You pretty much saw my reaction.") If anyone happens to have a subscription to IM plz post a copy or snipet of what was said. Would love to have his opinion...


Here are some other articles that I had come across:

_The picture appeared impressive enough, and then it hit you that most of the lights in the room were on. Quite a wow factor, and a nice job by Daren Egan of RBH crossing into the video realm with an explanation of the screen technology. *This Diamond's a true gem.*_
http://www.electronichouse.com/artic...m_of_a_screen/ 


_Part of what kept the RBH room score down was the fact that its video demo from SI and ProjectionDesign was so good with the Transformers HD DVD clip that it overshadowed the excellent audio coming from the room._
http://www.cepro.com/article/demo_al...the_rooms/K304


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13660474
> 
> 
> Yes I had called Shannon and she said the very first ones were being shipped out starting on Friday. Both her and Ryan said I can pick mine up from the shop on Tuesday...so yes, I'll be one of the first to have the BD.



4/18 is finally here, but it has come quietly. No update on the SI website. Not even a post to this thread for two days. So, I though I'd post this link to whet your appetites for a screen that is _now available_.









http://www.siscreens.com/gallery.html


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13675709
> 
> 
> 4/18 is finally here, but it has come quietly. No update on the SI website. Not even a post to this thread for two days. So, I though I'd post this link to whet your appetites for a screen that is _now available_.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.siscreens.com/gallery.html



Agreed, I'm eagerly awaiting some real world updates here!


----------



## TJ Morgan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13660474
> 
> 
> Yes I had called Shannon and she said the very first ones were being shipped out starting on Friday. Both her and Ryan said I can pick mine up from the shop on Tuesday...so yes, I'll be one of the first to have the BD.



I'll have one on Monday but unless my curiousity overcomes the outline for this install, I won't see it in action until Tuesday night at the earliest. I won't likely be able to comment until Wednesday night.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *avdesignshouston* /forum/post/13681100
> 
> 
> I'll have one on Monday but unless my curiousity overcomes the outline for this install, I won't see it in action until Tuesday night at the earliest. I won't likely be able to comment until Wednesday night.



Thanks for the heads up, especially the time line. If you can it would be great to see a couple of screen shots of the install in action, maybe one showing the light level and one showing how the screen performs in it...obviously, if at all possible. Wouldn't want your client thinking you're scouting the place for a later break in!


Thanks again!


----------



## panosp

avdesignshouston: which projector will you be using? What kind of light control do you have in the room? What is the color of the walls?


----------



## the rick

Hm, i'm eagerly awaiting this also. Sold a 113" 16:9 to a client with a DLA-HD1 (RS1)

Should be a fun system. I do however have to wait a month for the room to be finished


----------



## DP13




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *whichPJ* /forum/post/13605774
> 
> 
> I have decided to go with the Black Pearl on a 110" 16:9 BD as well. Can't wait to see the BD. Has anyone ordered it already? Is the shipping date still firm at 04/21?



When I bought my house I wanted a projector for everyday use...not just a theater room projector. With that being said, my projector is in the living room with 5 windows!!!







I did not want to go with a high end projector for the same reason, but wanted to get a projector with enough lumens to help with all the light in the living room and went with the HD400 from Mitsubishi. So far is has worked well during the day and works awesome at night







When I saw that the BD was coming out I new I had to get it to help my "light" problems. Needless to say, like many, I waited 4-5 months for it to come out and ordered mine the first week of April.







It should be in this week and I'll try posting pics from the BD ASAP.


----------



## whichPJ

I'm going crazy trying to find more about the Black Diamond and checking this thread every couple of hours...


----------



## anarkizt

Hehe, join the club!










Thanks for the links h00kem, they dont work though.










Very intrested in how the BD will perform in your environment DP13, you GOT to keep us less fortunate updated here. Any images, even of the shipping box will be enough for me by now.


----------



## DP13




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *anarkizt* /forum/post/13690642
> 
> 
> Hehe, join the club!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the links h00kem, they dont work though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Very intrested in how the BD will perform in your environment DP13, you GOT to keep us less fortunate updated here. Any images, even of the shipping box will be enough for me by now.



Will do. I'll do my best to show pictures so those debating to get a BD see how it looks and performs.


----------



## Kobe

DP13, I own you one for the pics. That may be a good Czech beer or Polish vodka. You choose


----------



## Scrimpin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DP13* /forum/post/13690673
> 
> 
> Will do. I'll do my best to show pictures so those debating to get a BD see how it looks and performs.



Eagerly awaiting, especially reviews on how well the light reflection/scatter is reduced (i.e. is it really as impressive as in the demo video).


----------



## Dr_Audio

I am in the waiting club too. I'm trying to be patient and projecting onto the painted wall of my recently finished theater with my Panasonic AE 2000U. I was going to purchase a Firehawk G3 and heard about the BD so I put that on hold to avoid buyers remorse. The funny thing is that the dark brown wall I'm projecting onto seems to give me a much higher image quality than the cheap white screen material a friend gave me. No hotspotting! LOL


----------



## tommy def

Just to let you guys know I ordered a 92" black diamond about a month ago. I have been keeping in touch with Shannon about when the screen will ship. I just called today and Shannon was not in the office. But I spoke to somebody else about the screen and they said that one of their machines that makes the Black diamond was broke and the screen will not ship for another three weeks. I also left a message on Shannon's voice mail to call me with any updates I will post what ever information I get.


----------



## panosp

This is really bad news...

I am currently waiting for my sample which should be due in the next days.


Anyone else with any news?


avdesignshouston and h00kemh0rns: did you get yours?


----------



## Dr_Audio

Tommy:

I just called SI and asked the lady that answers the phone there and she said that she hadn't heard anything about any machine being down. She said they were shipping. She also mentioned that a guy there named Paul Hernandez would be someone that would know more specifics if you needed it.


----------



## panosp

This sounds better. I also had some emails back and forth this afternoon with SI and there was no mention of shippments having come to a halt.


----------



## Scrimpin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13695935
> 
> 
> This sounds better. I also had some emails back and forth this afternoon with SI and there was no mention of shippments having come to a halt.



ditto for me


----------



## tommy def

I forgot to get the name of the person I spoke to, my mistake. I just called my rep and he said he heard something along those lines too, that something was wrong and it is going to take some time to start shipping. I will wait to hear from Shannon on this issue as she seams to always have up to date information on the Black diamond. Anyway I hope your right.


----------



## Dr_Audio

This is worse than being age 10 waiting on Christmas for the new GI Joe stuff in the middle of APRIL! I guess we never grow up. Our toys just get more expensive!

I haven't actually ordered a BD yet. I wanted to see some actual reviews on here from you guys and Jason Turk with AVS. For this much dough I want to have no regrets.


----------



## whichPJ

Just called SI and they said that they are encountering some technical difficulties and will not be able to ship BD for another 3-4 weeks. I'm totally bummed. Who knows if it'll be available even after 4 weeks!!! One of the home theater guys I contacted said(about 2 weeks ago) that he is hearing June/July release from inside sources. I didn't pay attention to him because that's not what I wanted to hear, but sounds like he may be telling the truth.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *whichPJ* /forum/post/13700520
> 
> 
> Just called SI and they said that they are encountering some technical difficulties and will not be able to ship BD for another 3-4 weeks. I'm totally bummed. Who knows if it'll be available even after 4 weeks!!! One of the home theater guys I contacted said(about 2 weeks ago) that he is hearing June/July release from inside sources. I didn't pay attention to him because that's not what I wanted to hear, but sounds like he may be telling the truth.



Maybe the home theater guy was referring to the release of the motorized screen.


----------



## whichPJ




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13701230
> 
> 
> Maybe the home theater guy was referring to the release of the motorized screen.




I don't think so, I wanted a fixed screen to begin with and decided to wait until the end of April for the total home theater installation because of BD. The installer tried to talk me into commiting right away and said that the BD realistically will not be available until late June/July...


Anyway, does anyone else have any updates about the latest status... I so...wish, I'm not right!!!


----------



## anarkizt

This is really sad. I can only hope they managed to send the screens to some people so that we can at least get some pics and reviews.


----------



## panosp

I have sent emails to all my SI contacts; so far there's no response.

Can anyone else confirm these bad news?


----------



## the rick

Wow, if this is true my customer won't be happy with this. Sending an email to my buyer now to see if he can find out anything.


----------



## Scrimpin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *anarkizt* /forum/post/13701956
> 
> 
> This is really sad. I can only hope they managed to send the screens to some people so that we can at least get some pics and reviews.




It would likely be wise to get a few in the hands of reviewers to build more demand while they iron out their production wrinkles.


----------



## mrlittlejeans

Weren't they supposed to be shipping these things this past Friday?


----------



## tommy def

I spoke with Shannon today and she confirmed what I did not want to hear. She told me that a defective part in their machine was causing a wrinkle in the screen but only on the 1.4 gain. So good news for .8 guys you should be getting yours on time. She also said that the company was having a meeting on the issue today to find out what the turn around time was and she would let me know tomorrow when They should be back on track.


----------



## the rick




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tommy def* /forum/post/13704016
> 
> 
> I spoke with Shannon today and she confirmed what I did not want to hear. She told me that a defective part in their machine was causing a wrinkle in the screen but only on the 1.4 gain. So good news for .8 guys you should be getting yours on time. She also said that the company was having a meeting on the issue today to find out what the turn around time was and she would let me know tomorrow when They should be back on track.



Thanks for the info, i hope to have a word soon also, its a 1.4 gain


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13695854
> 
> 
> This is really bad news...
> 
> I am currently waiting for my sample which should be due in the next days.
> 
> 
> Anyone else with any news?
> 
> 
> avdesignshouston and h00kemh0rns: did you get yours?



Yep, picked mine up today...and just got back in from a softball game. So no time to put together. But I plan to detail out the specifics with the install and performance in real world settings. Funny thing is that I already saw my screen as they were doing some QC demo and had some other engineers in the room checking it out as I showed up...so technically I know what it looks like.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13706695
> 
> 
> Yep, picked mine up today...and just got back in from a softball game. So no time to put together. But I plan to detail out the specifics with the install and performance in real world settings. Funny thing is that I already saw my screen as they were doing some QC demo and had some other engineers in the room checking it out as I showed up...so technically I know what it looks like.


----------



## Dr_Audio

On the gain issue. I do have a light controlled room with a dark flat brown ceiling and dark walls. I wanted the BD to help with light scatter with lights off and to have the rear lights on when guys are over to watch games and not have to sit in the dark. I was thinking that the lower gain screen would be what I need. I have a Panasonic AE 2000u 1080p. Any thoughts or suggestions?


----------



## panosp

h00kemh0rns: what is the gain of your screen? 0.8?


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13707444
> 
> 
> h00kemh0rns: what is the gain of your screen? 0.8?



Yes sir.


----------



## panosp

h00kemh0rns: According to what others are reporting the 0.8 gain is the reason why you actually received your screen (I am really glad for you). Which projector will you be using? When do you estimate you can give us some feedback?


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/13708079
> 
> 
> Yes sir.



Damn! I was hoping someone would review a 1.4 already!!


----------



## Scrimpin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Dr_Audio* /forum/post/13707063
> 
> 
> On the gain issue. I do have a light controlled room with a dark flat brown ceiling and dark walls. I wanted the BD to help with light scatter with lights off and to have the rear lights on when guys are over to watch games and not have to sit in the dark. I was thinking that the lower gain screen would be what I need. I have a Panasonic AE 2000u 1080p. Any thoughts or suggestions?



Same reason I am interested in the BD, light scatter. However, I am thinking the 1.4 gain because most projectors don't seem to have the horsepower to make a picture 'pop' with less than 1.0 gain. I know my present HS-20 wouldn't. I am wondering though that without the light scatter, perhaps lower brightness is all that is required to get a real good image. Thoughts anyone? What would be the advantage of the .8 vs 1.4 and vice versa.


----------



## HiDefLifestyle1

We're showing the .8 in our showroom with a BlackwingIII projector (tweaked JVC Pro Dila). I think the 1.4 will be overkill with a solid projector given the demo's i've seen on the BD. However our screen is shipping today so we haven't yet tested it in our theater room. We'll see soon!


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Dr_Audio* /forum/post/13707063
> 
> 
> I wanted the BD to help with light scatter with lights off and to have the rear lights on when guys are over to watch games and not have to sit in the dark.



Since this screen probably works by reflecting light from within certain angles and blocking the light coming in from sharper angles (like from the top and bottom), it may not work better with rear lighting than something like the Firehawk. Once somebody who can test which angles it reflects (has to reflect in a range where a projector can be placed) and which it mostly rejects we should have a better idea about the situations where it will work best. With this screen you might be better off using lighting that is more forward than rear lighting.


--Darin


----------



## Scrimpin

I look forward to hearing your review. Something else I have been wondering is if the 1.4 gain controls the light scatter as effectively as the .8 gain does. If not, the added gain (in a light controlled room) might not be much benefit as far as image brightness is concerned.


I am very interested in the BD due to solving the light scatter in my theater without turning it into a bat cave. Oddly enough, I was thinking of a new projector and my wife actually commented that she thought I should buy the BD first (she really doesn't want me to turn my theater into a bat cave







). After thinking about it, I am likely to get more mileage out of my HS-20 (now on bulb #3 and still under warranty until Christmas) and projectors just keep getting better and cheaper so the longer I wait the more I will get for my money. My concern with the .8 gain is that it might limit my projector choices down the road so I am eagerly awaiting reviews on the .8 vs the 1.4.


----------



## whichPJ

Just heard back from Shannon and she said the BD 1.4 should be shipped in about 3 weeks


----------



## CTO

First, thanks to all of you for your interest in SI's Black Diamond screen material. It has been years in development and we are very proud of the results. Based on what we've seen on this thread, I decided to post. Hopefully this will clear things up a bit regarding deliverables on these units.


Our new Black Diamond fixed screens have begun to ship. The incredible levels of excitement, enthusiasm, and pre-launch orders we have received have been phenomenal. As should occur with any completely new technology, the first production runs are being heavily scrutinized to insure optimal quality. This extra attention to the manufacturing process will limit production capacity for a short while. Both gains are being independently analyzed and may deliver at different paces. We appreciate your patience while we get ramped up to full capacity.


Since I am heavily focused on the launch of this product, I am not on the Forum daily. Feel free to reply to my post or PM me with questions, but please understand that my response might not be immediate.


Thanks again.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *CTO* /forum/post/13710310
> 
> 
> First, thanks to all of you for your interest in SI's Black Diamond screen material. It has been years in development and we are very proud of the results. Based on what we've seen on this thread, I decided to post. Hopefully this will clear things up a bit regarding deliverables on these units.
> 
> 
> Our new Black Diamond fixed screens have begun to ship. The incredible levels of excitement, enthusiasm, and pre-launch orders we have received have been phenomenal. As should occur with any completely new technology, the first production runs are being heavily scrutinized to insure optimal quality. This extra attention to the manufacturing process will limit production capacity for a short while. Both gains are being independently analyzed and may deliver at different paces. We appreciate your patience while we get ramped up to full capacity.
> 
> 
> Since I am heavily focused on the launch of this product, I am not on the Forum daily. Feel free to reply to my post or PM me with questions, but please understand that my response might not be immediate.
> 
> 
> Thanks again.



Hi Aaron, will screen samples of the 1.4 gain be available?


----------



## noah katz

"Something else I have been wondering is if the 1.4 gain controls the light scatter as effectively as the .8 gain does."


Higher gain means more directivity so whether light scatter effects are better or worse depends on where the light is coming from (its angle from screen perpendicular).


----------



## noah katz

Aaron,


Glad to see you here.


Could you tell us the gain vs. horiz/vert angles for both the .8 and 1.4, and more info on the sizes/availability/price of the electric versions?


Thanks


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13708650
> 
> 
> h00kemh0rns: According to what others are reporting the 0.8 gain is the reason why you actually received your screen (I am really glad for you). Which projector will you be using? When do you estimate you can give us some feedback?



I have the panasonic pt-ae2000u for my projector. The plan is to get the screen assembled tonight and this weekend is the beginning of the pro-install of my media/HT room. Not sure if it will all be done this weekend or not but first thing I wanted to get done is get the screen built up and do a quick demo in the room. Hope to have that done by no later Sunday...barring anything unforeseen.


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *CTO* /forum/post/13710310
> 
> 
> First, thanks to all of you for your interest in SI's Black Diamond screen material. It has been years in development and we are very proud of the results. Based on what we've seen on this thread, I decided to post. Hopefully this will clear things up a bit regarding deliverables on these units.
> 
> 
> Our new Black Diamond fixed screens have begun to ship. The incredible levels of excitement, enthusiasm, and pre-launch orders we have received have been phenomenal. As should occur with any completely new technology, the first production runs are being heavily scrutinized to insure optimal quality. This extra attention to the manufacturing process will limit production capacity for a short while. Both gains are being independently analyzed and may deliver at different paces. We appreciate your patience while we get ramped up to full capacity.
> 
> 
> Since I am heavily focused on the launch of this product, I am not on the Forum daily. Feel free to reply to my post or PM me with questions, but please understand that my response might not be immediate.
> 
> 
> Thanks again.




Aaron good to see you on here. And thank you for the level of support you've provided... From what I see so far SI has the makings of something really big.


Oh, and I'll get you my feedback asap just as soon as I get everything installed. Hoping this weekend to get at least the screen/projector viewing.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *CTO* /forum/post/13710310
> 
> 
> First, thanks to all of you for your interest in SI's Black Diamond screen material. It has been years in development and we are very proud of the results. Based on what we've seen on this thread, I decided to post. Hopefully this will clear things up a bit regarding deliverables on these units.
> 
> 
> Our new Black Diamond fixed screens have begun to ship. The incredible levels of excitement, enthusiasm, and pre-launch orders we have received have been phenomenal. As should occur with any completely new technology, the first production runs are being heavily scrutinized to insure optimal quality. This extra attention to the manufacturing process will limit production capacity for a short while. Both gains are being independently analyzed and may deliver at different paces. We appreciate your patience while we get ramped up to full capacity.
> 
> 
> Since I am heavily focused on the launch of this product, I am not on the Forum daily. Feel free to reply to my post or PM me with questions, but please understand that my response might not be immediate.
> 
> 
> Thanks again.



Aaron,


I just wanted to say thanks for dropping by and setting the record straight. There is obviously a lot of people here who want to see you succeed and we're happy to have you keep us posted. All the best with the roll out!


Andrew


----------



## TJ Morgan

After a little bit of a delay we were finally able to pick up the BD on Tuesday at around 11am.


Please keep in mind that we are still doing window treatments to the windows to the right side of the screen. This room gets a tremendous amount of light from those windows. I took these 2 pictures with my iPhone at about 2pm.


This room is very bright until the sun goes down. Look at the top left hand corner of the screen and notice how dark it looks compared to the rest of the screen. At 2pm with a ton of light in the room, the top left hand corner looked phenominal. The entire image across the screen was watchable from the DLA-HD100 in High lamp mode. The projector was mounted at 13'.


I know that I am not really being all that descriptive and I am sure there will be a lot of questions but I was truely blown away by this screen. At night it looked as good as any screen I have ever seen with no hotspotting. The image looked only marginally better with the room totally dark at night as opposed to having the lights full on.


We will begin using the Black Diamond in ALL applications from here on out.










[/IMG]









[/IMG]


----------



## whichPJ

avdesignshouston: Thanks for the post. Is this a 0.8 gain or a 1.4?


----------



## TJ Morgan

It's the 1.4


----------



## whichPJ




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *avdesignshouston* /forum/post/13720806
> 
> 
> It's the 1.4



So, they did ship out some1.4's. I can't wait to hear more from you. Are those things on the side and bottom of the screen in-wall speakers? They look pretty cool asthetically. When you get a chance, can you post some pics with the projector on? What size screen do you have? Thanks in advance for your response


----------



## anarkizt

THANK YOU for the pics, looks really good!


----------



## TJ Morgan

I didnt have a good camera with me nor the time unfortunately to take screen shots. I also purposely did not take pictures of it with the projector on with my iPhone because I'm sure people would complain that the screen is terrible because th pictures look so bad, it's out of focus, etc.

The things on the sides and bottom are the Martin Logan Voyage inwall speakers. We used the Dynamat Inwall kits to create enclosures in the walls for them. They sounded AWESOME and they look pretty cool too compared to your conventional inwall speaker.


----------



## TJ Morgan

The holes above and below the speaker on the right where where we had to cut and re route an 1.5" vent pipe! It kinda sucked since that was the only place for that massive speaker to go.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *avdesignshouston* /forum/post/13720806
> 
> 
> It's the 1.4



Does it have any sparklies/texture?


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *avdesignshouston* /forum/post/13720673
> 
> 
> After a little bit of a delay we were finally able to pick up the BD on Tuesday at around 11am.
> 
> 
> Please keep in mind that we are still doing window treatments to the windows to the right side of the screen. This room gets a tremendous amount of light from those windows. I took these 2 pictures with my iPhone at about 2pm.
> 
> 
> This room is very bright until the sun goes down. Look at the top left hand corner of the screen and notice how dark it looks compared to the rest of the screen. At 2pm with a ton of light in the room, the top left hand corner looked phenominal. The entire image across the screen was watchable from the DLA-HD100 in High lamp mode. The projector was mounted at 13'.
> 
> 
> I know that I am not really being all that descriptive and I am sure there will be a lot of questions but I was truely blown away by this screen. At night it looked as good as any screen I have ever seen with no hotspotting. The image looked only marginally better with the room totally dark at night as opposed to having the lights full on.
> 
> 
> We will begin using the Black Diamond in ALL applications from here on out.



Don't take this the wrong way, but I love you.







That is a truly beautiful install!


----------



## RufEdge

avdesignhouston;


Any thoughts that a .8 might have given better blacks? now that you are using it ...


BTW - great install.


----------



## TJ Morgan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13723050
> 
> 
> Does it have any sparklies/texture?



Amazingly, it didn't. That along with the hotspotting has always driven me crazy with the DNP Supernova's that we have sold a lot of and have on display at our store.


It is a smooth surface.


----------



## TJ Morgan

Here are a couple of other quick pictures of the install. Again these were taken with my iPhone so dont make fun of the picture quality, the customer's furniture selection







or that ugly Chief mount. I think I am going to replace it with the Omnimount PM2.


----------



## tiddler

I can't help but ask, why such a small screen? At least it looks pretty small. Is it just that the room is so big?


There was certainly lots of room on the wall. There does not appear to be a shortage of money to spend.


What size is the screen?


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tiddler* /forum/post/13727054
> 
> 
> I can't help but ask, why such a small screen? At least it looks pretty small. Is it just that the room is so big?
> 
> 
> There was certainly lots of room on the wall. There does not appear to be a shortage of money to spend.
> 
> 
> What size is the screen?



avdesignshouston said in earlier posts it was going to be a 92" and that they wanted bright.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...&postcount=264 
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...&postcount=267 


The room is not all that big. His recent post with the pic of the projector shows the projector is close to the rear wall at a throw distance of 13 feet.


I would personally want at least a 110" to 120" if I were sitting within 10 to 11 feet of the screen.


----------



## TJ Morgan

The customer actually wanted a 60-65" plasma and did not think they would get a good picture with a projection system. Money was not a huge issue but they watch a lot of TV in the late afternoon and early evening and needed something bright. I too would have preferred a larger screen but I went with a 92" in order to help produce as bright an image as possible under poor lighting conditions. Also, they are really just not into having a huge screen. The largest flat panel in the entire house is a 42" and they refuse to go any larger.


I may have not said this before but this is not a media room. It is actually a game room that has no window treatments and a ton of natural light coming in. We tinted the windows to the right of the screen and it helped a lot. I have some motorized Lutron shades on order for those windows as well but the other windows in the room will be left alone.


----------



## anarkizt

avdesign, thanks a whole lot for posting the pictures! On these pics though the screen looks a little bit "brighter" than I had anticipated and compared to the SIscreens gallery. I know that you take the pics with an angle towards the windows and that that is probably the issue. Now, my question, does the screen appear "black" in the room or does it really look like in the pictures, more like a darker shade of grey?


Also, in your opinion, how big is the need for masking with this screen, for instance when watching 2.35:1 material (in a dark room)?


----------



## TJ Morgan

The screen looks more dark grey than black. The pictures absolutely do not do it justice. I never really paid attention directly to the black bars in relation to masking. I would have to look at it again to say definitively but I would be perfectly fine without masking.


----------



## the rick

avdesign- looks almost exactly like the job I just sold!

My system:

113" 1.4 BD screen

DLAHD1 PJ

Martin Logan Passage x 3

Martin logan helos x 2 rears

Abyss woofer

Denon 3808ci with pro calibration setup

MX980 remote

Chief mount RPAU


I have a bit better light and customer has agreed to have at least some curtains

I am hoping for great things! I honestly have not been excited about a system install in quite a while to be honest, most of the stuff people can afford lately has been very average/normal the last 1.5 years


----------



## anarkizt

Thanks for the response avdesign! It doesnt make me want the BD any less...


----------



## Nedtsc




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *avdesignshouston* /forum/post/13727007
> 
> 
> Here are a couple of other quick pictures of the install. Again these were taken with my iPhone so dont make fun of the picture quality, the customer's furniture selection
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or that ugly Chief mount. I think I am going to replace it with the Omnimount PM2.



I 100% agree with the







BTW, great install.


----------



## the rick

Avdesign- which rack and in-ceiling speakers did you select?

Those are the voyages right?


edit- Have you seen the voyages with the black trim kit? I think it would look very nice in that room, it would take away the contrast in color between the screen frame and the speakers (if you choose the black finish)


----------



## TJ Morgan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *the rick* /forum/post/13735066
> 
> 
> Avdesign- which rack and in-ceiling speakers did you select?
> 
> Those are the voyages right?
> 
> 
> edit- Have you seen the voyages with the black trim kit? I think it would look very nice in that room, it would take away the contrast in color between the screen frame and the speakers (if you choose the black finish)



I haven't done them in Black yet. I thought the black would be a little much. I replaced the original white kits with the silver color change and I think they look pretty good. The customer preferred the silver also.


----------



## TJ Morgan

Sorry, yes they are the Voyage. I did 4 Helos 100 for the rear speakers. I used the Omnimount RSF. It is a great, inexpensive rack.


----------



## TJ Morgan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *the rick* /forum/post/13733078
> 
> 
> avdesign- looks almost exactly like the job I just sold!
> 
> My system:
> 
> 113" 1.4 BD screen
> 
> DLAHD1 PJ
> 
> Martin Logan Passage x 3
> 
> Martin logan helos x 2 rears
> 
> Abyss woofer
> 
> Denon 3808ci with pro calibration setup
> 
> MX980 remote
> 
> Chief mount RPAU



Are you happy with the ML Abyss? In my opinion the Depth is the way to go in terms of ML subs for a nice system (anything above that we use JL Audio). The Grotto is not bad for a small sub, but if I were going to do the Abyss or Dynamo I think you should definately try to sell 2 of them.


----------



## the rick




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *avdesignshouston* /forum/post/13736352
> 
> 
> Are you happy with the ML Abyss? In my opinion the Depth is the way to go in terms of ML subs for a nice system (anything above that we use JL Audio). The Grotto is not bad for a small sub, but if I were going to do the Abyss or Dynamo I think you should definately try to sell 2 of them.



Honestly, I own a depth personally. I have a hard time listening to a non servo controlled woofer in my own system, most others seem to sound very sloppy IMO. However, when budget calls....


I don't think the grotto has as much output as the abyss, but it has better SQ for sure.


----------



## batborsen

I thought this thread was about the bd, not audio stuff.


How come there is not a store on the internet where you can order the

0.8gain? As I understood it was shipped 18april!


Stores usually put items out for pre-order way before release.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *batborsen* /forum/post/13744881
> 
> 
> I thought this thread was about the bd, not audio stuff.
> 
> 
> How come there is not a store on the internet where you can order the
> 
> 0.8gain? As I understood it was shipped 18april!
> 
> 
> Stores usually put items out for pre-order way before release.



Projectorzone had the BDs listed at one time, but that was weeks before the release date and they were asked by SI to remove the ads until the official release data. I checked there over the weekend and they do not have the ads back up.


----------



## batborsen

Ok hrd! I understand. Thanks for the info!


----------



## panosp

avdesignshouston: like others I have been waiting eagerly some feedback from those lucky ones with the first BD in their hands. THANK YOU!


My questions (while I still wait for my BD material sample):


1) I see in the photos that the walls and ceiling are light-colored. How does the BD behave when the lights are off?

Did you notice any light scattering to the walls and ceiling? Would you say that the BD is far better than a normal white screen?

(like the video with the hand projected in the room with the light colored ceiling in the sicreens.com site?)


2) "The image looked only marginally better with the room totally dark at night"

Can you go into greater details? From what I understand you were expecting more than this.


3) Can you recall if the BD eliminates the need for masking? (when projecting a 16:9 image on a 2.35:1 screen)


These 3 factors are the key points that will either make me choose the BD or not...


----------



## TJ Morgan

The BD scattered virtually no light on the walls and ceiling from what I could tell. In my opinion, there's no reason to (other than price) ever use a white screen material as long as the BD is available.


The reason I said, "...looked only marginally better with the room totally dark at night" is because the image was phenominal with lots of ambient light present. It's hard to improve much on that.


I really didn't look at in relation to masking but I would think that in a fairly dark room, masking would not be needed.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13747044
> 
> 
> 2) "The image looked only marginally better with the room totally dark at night"
> 
> Can you go into greater details? From what I understand you were expecting more than this.



panosp, perhaps you thought avdesignshouston was saying the image looked only marginally better at night than it did during the day, when he likely meant the image looked only marginally better at night with the lights off than it did at night with the lights on.


----------



## noah katz

"I would think that in a fairly dark room, masking would not be needed."


I thought this was discussed already; anyway, if the pj doesn't have good CR the bars will be visible, because the job of the screen is to display what the pj projects.


----------



## panosp

avdesignshouston: I think I created confusion with my 2nd question. Let me completely rephrase it:


2) In a totally dark room, how does an image compare when projected on a traditional matte white screen vs the BD? Is the image the same or better?


----------



## yzf888

From what I've heard the BD is a variation on the Sony's DynaClear screen but the gain is different and SI is bringing the screen to market with a different substrate that is far more resilent than the tissue thin potato chip bag texture of the DynaClear.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13752230
> 
> 
> avdesignshouston: I think I created confusion with my 2nd question. Let me completely rephrase it:
> 
> 
> 2) In a totally dark room, how does an image compare when projected on a traditional matte white screen vs the BD? Is the image the same or better?



I'd also like to hear what avdesignshouston feels about the difference between BD and white, as well as if he feels the image is punchier in any way.


h00kemh0rns commented on this. It's in a follow-up on the same page as his initial review:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...&postcount=165


----------



## sauroneru




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *avdesignshouston* /forum/post/13720673
> 
> 
> At night it looked as good as any screen I have ever seen with no hotspotting.... We will begin using the Black Diamond in ALL applications from here on out.



I think he likes it as much as any white screen.


----------



## panosp

Grrr... until someone comes out with some concrete evidence in regards to why one should choose a BD screen over a regular white matte IN A DARK room (with light colored walls and ceiling) I simply can't justify the extra cost.


Now, is there someone - ANYONE- who can shed some light on this issue?


----------



## mcleo19




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13745328
> 
> 
> Projectorzone had the BDs listed at one time, but that was weeks before the release date and they were asked by SI to remove the ads until the official release data. I checked there over the weekend and they do not have the ads back up.



I don't think ProjectorZone will be putting them back on the website, as they took off all of their SI screens off of there, not just the BD. You can contact them over the phone and get pricing.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13753592
> 
> 
> Grrr... until someone comes out with some concrete evidence in regards to why one should choose a BD screen over a regular white matte IN A DARK room (with light colored walls and ceiling) I simply can't justify the extra cost.
> 
> 
> Now, is there someone - ANYONE- who can shed some light on this issue?



Read h00kemh0rns review in post 165 and read the next few h00kemh0rns posts on the same page. I put a link to post 165 a few posts before this. He clearly stated he felt the BD beat the white screen in every way. SI had a white screen at the demo for an A/B comparison.


----------



## panosp

Maybe I am not making myself clear enough:


1) h00kemh0rns saw the screen in a show in a NOT dark environment/room. He also -obviously- didn't have the time to play around and test (since its not his screen in his room)

2) As far as I can tell, the BD's main application/existence, is to make it possible to project images on a room with lights on. From what I have read/seen so far it beats anything out there hands down! But I am not interested in this since I am doing all my viewing in my living-room (which has light colored walls and ceiling) with the lights OFF!

3) There is no user so far (at least that we know of) who has done a A/B comparison of a BD vs a regular matte white screen in a DARK room. This is what actually interests me!

What I really want to know is:

a) is the BD superior to a matte white?

b) does the BD eliminate light scatter to the wall and ceilings when the wall and ceiling are light-colored? (like the video with the "hand" in the siscreens.com)

c) is the need for masking eliminated?


And BTW, h00kemh0rns has your screen been shipped to you??


----------



## David Kim




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13753871
> 
> 
> Maybe I am not making myself clear enough:
> 
> 
> 1) h00kemh0rns saw the screen in a show in a NOT dark environment/room. He also -obviously- didn't have the time to play around and test (since its not his screen in his room)
> 
> 2) As far as I can tell, the BD's main application/existence, is to make it possible to project images on a room with lights on. From what I have read/seen so far it beats anything out there hands down! But I am not interested in this since I am doing all my viewing in my living-room (which has light colored walls and ceiling) with the lights OFF!
> 
> 3) There is no user so far (at least that we know of) who has done a A/B comparison of a BD vs a regular matte white screen in a DARK room. This is what actually interests me!
> 
> What I really want to know is:
> 
> a) is the BD superior to a matte white?
> 
> b) does the BD eliminate light scatter to the wall and ceilings when the wall and ceiling are light-colored? (like the video with the "hand" in the siscreens.com)
> 
> c) is the need for masking eliminated?




Chill out dude. Did you read the review? Because if you did, you would have seen that a:



> Quote:
> Motorized matte white 1.1 gain screen was used in comparison to the black diamond 1.4 gain screen.



And also that:



> Quote:
> Light conditions were full on fluorescent lights, two thirds on, floor lamp full on, floor lamp half lit, and *all off*. Each were compared between the two screens with the same scene. Ryan went so far as to pick up the floor lamp and shine it directly on the two screens. The tech writer took a pic of this and I hope he uses all of the photos in the article as he got all lighting conditions perfectly after we previewed them. There was no comparison to the BD in regards to light absorption/reflection and contrast boost.



No one is telling you to go out and buy the screen. If you do all your viewing in the dark, then save some money and buy a white screen.


Just my 2¢


----------



## Josh Z

I'm going to back panosp up on this. I'd like to hear some real user reports on the circumstances he described (a darkened room with light colored walls), not just the results of the controlled demo.


----------



## anarkizt

I kinda agree with panosp too, as good as h00kem's review was, its only one review. I would also want to hear from many more users who have been experimenting back and forth and give more feedback. I guess not so many have got their screens installed yet?


Also would like to see a whole lot more pictures in this thread!


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Josh Z* /forum/post/13754051
> 
> 
> I'm going to back panosp up on this. I'd like to hear some real user reports on the circumstances he described (a darkened room with light colored walls), not just the results of the controlled demo.



h00kemh0rns said in post 332 that he picked his screen up on 4/22, so I expect we'll be hearing some user reports that compare how he feels about his screen at home to how he felt about the one at the demo soon. He may have detailed what his room conditions are like somewhere in this thread.


Whether he has a white screen around to compare it to, I don't know.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13753871
> 
> 
> Maybe I am not making myself clear enough:
> 
> 
> 1) h00kemh0rns saw the screen in a show in a NOT dark environment/room. He also -obviously- didn't have the time to play around and test (since its not his screen in his room)
> 
> 2) As far as I can tell, the BD's main application/existence, is to make it possible to project images on a room with lights on. From what I have read/seen so far it beats anything out there hands down! But I am not interested in this since I am doing all my viewing in my living-room (which has light colored walls and ceiling) with the lights OFF!
> 
> 3) There is no user so far (at least that we know of) who has done a A/B comparison of a BD vs a regular matte white screen in a DARK room. This is what actually interests me!
> 
> What I really want to know is:
> 
> a) is the BD superior to a matte white?
> 
> b) does the BD eliminate light scatter to the wall and ceilings when the wall and ceiling are light-colored? (like the video with the "hand" in the siscreens.com)
> 
> c) is the need for masking eliminated?
> 
> 
> And BTW, h00kemh0rns has your screen been shipped to you??



You obviously don't read this thread carefuly because some of your questions you have been asking (some repeatedly) have already been answered. For example, Hookem said last week he already picked up his screen...


----------



## batborsen

For those who wonder about the lightscatter in a dark room, I thing SI:s video talk for itself! Look at the ceiling and walls, one can clearly see how there is reflected light when the white screen is down, but when it comes up

and the bd takes over, still keeping your eyes at the wall and ceiling, the reflections are GONE! Or at least it is doing a hell of a job, even if there should be a little left, that you cannot make out in the video.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13753871
> 
> 
> Maybe I am not making myself clear enough:
> 
> 
> 
> b) does the BD eliminate light scatter to the wall and ceilings when the wall and ceiling are light-colored? (like the video with the "hand" in the siscreens.com)



Also if the most important thing to you is the light scatter issue, I can tell you with out a doubt a DNP Supernova has virtually no light scatter, I had a white ceiling and you could not tell it was there when the room was dark. Unfortunately that was one of the few things impressive about it, besides reduced light scatter, contrast, and black level, all other aspects of a matte white screen is better IMO. Supposedly the latest versions of the screen are improved, but you need a pretty long throw (~1.8 and back) with them.


----------



## DP13

Also would like to see a whole lot more pictures in this thread!







[/quote]


OK, so after giving me an arrival date, my dealer here in Houston could not come through with my original order...1.4gain 100" BD. They called me yesterday saying that they had a 110" 1.4 gain BD instead for me...at no additional price...WOW!!! Well, here are some pics...I just picked it up 30 minutes ago and I'll install it this weekend.


PS-AVDESIGNSHOUSTON, did the screen you installed looked like this before install? Let me know, thx!


----------



## DP13

By the way....

Here are some pics of where my screen is going to go. That big gap is where it was originally going to fit the 100" but now I have a 110" so it will cover the whole gap. Remember, my install is in a living room for everyday use...not a theater room. I'm adding curtains to help the ambient light. As you can see...a lot of windows.


----------



## anarkizt

Nice! Thanks a lot DP13! Seeing the box and the screen material is of great value to me! The screen in your picture looks much more "black" than what I have seen in other pics, which is nice.










How difficult is it to assemble? Wouldnt wanna ship it all the way to sweden with the 25% v.a.t., super high customs charge and whatever just to break it when it comes to installing. :x


----------



## DP13




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *anarkizt* /forum/post/13755247
> 
> 
> Nice! Thanks a lot DP13! Seeing the box and the screen material is of great value to me! The screen in your picture looks much more "black" than what I have seen in other pics, which is nice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How difficult is it to assemble? Wouldnt wanna ship it all the way to sweden with the 25% v.a.t., super high customs charge and whatever just to break it when it comes to installing. :x



Yeah, I was relieved too when I saw that it looked darker...but I have to wait and see how it will look when its up.


Based on the instructions, it looks simple. There's not a whole lot of hardware included...its mostly attached to the frame already. I think the difficult thing is attaching the screen to the frame.


----------



## batborsen

Dp13, are you sure you got the 1.4? it looks pretty dark! looks a lot like the one

in the si video, wich is the 0.8 according to Shannon!


avdesignhouston:s looks more lighter grey.


----------



## panosp

David Kim and Mikenificent1: I don't want to go into any argument. All I am saying is that we need more actual feedback. And by the way, nobody is pushing me for a BD; in fact I have voluntarily stopped my home theatre upgrade in anticipation of the BD for over a month now. I really wish the BD is the answer to my needs & prayers!


DP13: Which projector do you use? Please let us know how it looks in the night when all lights are off.


Update: I have been informed by SI that my sample was shipped today.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13755915
> 
> 
> David Kim and Mikenificent1: I don't want to go into any argument. All I am saying is that we need more actual feedback. And by the way, nobody is pushing me for a BD; in fact I have voluntarily stopped my home theatre upgrade in anticipation of the BD for over a month now. I really wish the BD is the answer to my needs & prayers!
> 
> 
> DP13: Which projector do you use? Please let us know how it looks in the night when all lights are off.
> 
> 
> Update: I have been informed by SI that my sample was shipped today.



I emailed Shannon on the 21st asking it it were possible to get a screen sample and did not hear back. Good to hear they are available. I'm going to give her a call.


----------



## pottscb




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DP13* /forum/post/13755090
> 
> 
> Also would like to see a whole lot more pictures in this thread!



OK, so after giving me an arrival date, my dealer here in Houston could not come through with my original order...1.4gain 100" BD. They called me yesterday saying that they had a 110" 1.4 gain BD instead for me...at no additional price...WOW!!! Well, here are some pics...I just picked it up 30 minutes ago and I'll install it this weekend.


PS-AVDESIGNSHOUSTON, did the screen you installed looked like this before install? Let me know, thx![/quote]


Does the BD come rolled up or is this a retractible screen? Either way, I guess the material CAN be rolled!


----------



## technodude

Guys, my 1.3 gain BD screen will be delivered tomorow, I will have some pics and thoughts up in the evening.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *batborsen* /forum/post/13755692
> 
> 
> Dp13, are you sure you got the 1.4? it looks pretty dark! looks a lot like the one
> 
> in the si video, wich is the 0.8 according to Shannon!
> 
> 
> avdesignhouston:s looks more lighter grey.



there isn't as much light in the room, AV's pic showed direct sunlight on the screen, that could be why.


Either way it looks nice!


----------



## Moa

Anybody knows some ealer that cold ship intenationally ?

I live currently in japan and I strongly doubt I will see som BD available in shops here anytime soon...


----------



## DP13

*Batborsen*, YES it's the 1.4 BD. When I received the call asking me if I was interested in the 110", obviously I said yes but I wanted to make sure 1: the dimensions would fit my wall 2: that it was a 1.4 gain screen....so yes...I'm sure it's a 1.4 gain screen. Mikenificent1 is right, the room where I took the picture is way darker compared to the picture from avdesignshouston.

*Panosp*, go to........ http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...2#post13686592 

I'll be attaching pictures with "lights ON and lights OFF"

*Pottscb*, it did come rolled up and its not a retractable screen. At least mine isn't.


----------



## DP13

Ok, so I lied and said I would install my screen this weekend. Well, not intenionally. I got to work and could not stop thinking about my new BD sitting at home for days waiting to be installed so I left early and I put it together. Here are some pics....enjoy:


PS: The camera on one of the shots picked up way more light scatter that you could actually see. On the picture with the lights on...that light scatter is really not noticeable that much without the camera (A light I had on was also giving out some light scatter. Look towards the middle top part of the picture...that's part of the light...not the projector). Also, the closer the screen is to walls, the more light scatter you will have....I've noticed some light scatter to the left of the screen because it is almost adjacent to the wall when the lights are off. I'll post more pictures tomorrow. The picture with the lights off shows hardly any light scatter but it does give some...but not much. No hotspotting though!!! Also I tried using as many lights on as possible, I'll take pictures with actual sunlight so I won't get reflection and/or lightscatter from the lamps and lights I had on. By the way, I have light colored walls.

Judge for yourself. I took pictures with the lights on and lights off of the same image. The picture looks great with a lot with ambient light...but it did a heck of a job with the lights off as well. Open both attachments at the same time and you compare.

Ok I'll stop now...I'm starting to sound like a seller and I'm sure SI is loving me right now. Anyways...can you tell I'm excited?


----------



## panosp

DP13:


First of all thanks for the pictures!


1) Which projector do you use?

2) "The picture with the lights off shows hardly any light scatter but it does give some"


By saying "some", does this mean that your viewing gets a little bit "distracted" by the "glare" of the ceiling and/or the left wall? In other words, is the wall and ceiling visible?

Is the scattering/reflections elimination similar to the SI video with the projected hand? (middle of video on their main www.siscreens.com page)

(I have a Drapper matte white 1.0 gain screen with light colored walls and ceiling and the reflections/scatter from the screen are so great that I get distracted)


----------



## Kobe

DP13:


I am too mostly interested in BD performance with lights OFF and in light colored walls enviroment. Can you comment on the below assuming lights OFF:


1) How about picture brightness? Are the peak whites OK (are they really bright and punchy)? With a black screen I would expect bright colors in picture to be dulled a lot.


2) Can you get a matte white screen (any kind, even a small sample) to compare it directly to BD and take some pictures? If not, maybe you can try a white sheet of paper?


3) Is your projector ceilling mounted? How close to the ceilling?


Thanks a lot for info, kudos to you.


----------



## Mikenificent1

To those that already have their BD's or installed them for others, how is the uniformity? Judging by the pics I've seen and SI's video, I can see brightness differences laterally (ex. left side of the screen looks darker than the right side). How far to the left or right do you have to go from center before you notice a drop in brightness on any part of the screen?


And like Kobe suggested, for those with the 1.4 BD, if you put a peice of paper in front, which is brighter with a projected image, BD or the paper?


PS, if any of you have Ice Age 2, the beginning scene with all the bright snow and ice will clearly show if there will ever be issues with sparklies or sheen, so if you have it, please let us know.


PPS lol, if you're going to take ambient light screen shots, include dark scenes like batman returns, LOTR etc (any scene with a lot of black in it). That's the TRUE test of how well a screen rejects ambient light, by judging it's black level with lights on.


Thanks

Mike


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13761633
> 
> 
> PPS lol, if you're going to take ambient light screen shots, include dark scenes like batman returns, LOTR etc (any scene with a lot of black in it). That's the TRUE test of how well a screen rejects ambient light, by judging it's black level with lights on.



I would also like to see pictures with either the projector off or with the light from the projector blocked. That way we just see what the screen is doing with the ambient light. It would help to know which direction the ambient light is coming from though.


If I had one of these screens I would probably take a flashlight and point it at the screen from different angles to see what light is getting reflected back toward the viewer and what is getting rejected (and how much). With the projector off, on a black frame, or blocked. Basically, check different angles from the sides and also from the top and bottom to see what is getting rejected. The SuperNova from DNP mostly blocked from the top and bottom. I understand the X-Screen mostly blocks from the sides. I wonder if this is doing both with just a viewing cone in the center.


--Darin


----------



## batborsen

Very good questions Mike! +1

Looking forward for answers on those questions too!


----------



## whichPJ

whatever happened to h00kemh0rns : he was supposed to install his screen this past weekend!!!


----------



## Numbacrunch

Can anyone comment on the black bars (either horizontal or vertical) on other than 16:9 material.


The slight cant to the left on DP13's screens shots (most evident on the one with the lights on) shows the image-less portion of the screen in the upper right corner. In the image with the lights off it cannot be distinguished from the black frame (at least to me from that photo).


My question is:

Is there an 'awareness' of the black border areas or do they pretty much blend with the bordered surround?
This may obviate the need for masking. One might get a sufficiently large screen without much of a concern for the exact placement of a projector or just be content to watch either 16:9 or 4:3 TV on the center portion of the screen with, say 2.35 or 2:66 filling the screen from side to side. Not CIH, but another way to go without the 'black bars' that some find distracting.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13755915
> 
> 
> Update: I have been informed by SI that my sample was shipped today.



I talked to Shannon, SI's director of sales, today about getting a sample and ended up asking a whole bunch of other questions.


She said the first sample went out yesterday and they have two more available. They want $25 for one, to cover FedEx shipping. Call if you want a screen sample and are willing to pay the $25. I suppose those of you who live near SI might be able to get one for free.


They are currently focused on making the motorized version of the Black Diamond available. The planned launch date for the motorized version is August 30th.


Because they are focused on the motorized version, they do not expect to look into making larger versions with a seam until January. Shannon mentioned how the plan to make larger screens was for sales to commercial users, but we talked a bit about the interest in this from home theater users, which I know they have heard about from more forum members than just me.


I mentioned people use width for measuring 2.35:1 screen size and said it would be nice if they would switch the stock sizes for the 2.35:1 screens so that the 133" diagonal was replaced with the 142" diagonal. 142" diagonal is the maximum seamless size. The problem now is some customers want as large a screen as possible and anyone who looks into buying the 142" diagonal finds out it is considered a custom size and will cost the price of the next larger stock size, which at 160" is a whopping $400 more. $400 more for just 9" more screen. The advantages of their making 142" a stock size is it makes it more affordable for the customer by bringing the price close to the price of the 133", plus they can advertise they have an 11-foot screen (142" diagonal is 130.8715" wide and nothing is stopping them from making the screen a full 132" wide so that they can say it is a full 11 feet wide even though the 2.35:1 ratio is slightly off), plus the 11-foot wide screen would allow a customer to display a larger 16X9 image than the 106.3" diagonal the 133" would do. Scope screen customers are looking for screens in 10-foot, 11-foot, 12-foot width, etc. Shannon said she would mention it to the appropriate people at SI.


They want dealers to sell at MSRP.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13763414
> 
> 
> She said the first sample went out yesterday and they have two more available. They want $25 for one, to cover FedEx shipping. Call if you want a screen sample and are willing to pay the $25.



Thanks for the info, I just ordered mine!


----------



## panosp

hrd: that first sample that went out yesterday is mine and its on its way to Greece


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13763778
> 
> 
> hrd: that first sample that went out yesterday is mine and its on its way to Greece



I know! She did mention it was going out of the country, as did the person I spoke with yesterday when Shannon was not in. That was the only one sent out so far.


----------



## Mike N Ike

Just placed my order for the 1.4 sample. Lady said she had taken several sample orders this morning. Didn't know how many were available.


----------



## BigDallas

This discussion thread has been great. After following the tiny Sony screen and almost buying the DNP (didn't like the hotspoting), I just ordered a 1.4 BD screen today from ProjectorZone.com.


My challenging family room:

I have 7' x 30' of windows (Southern exposure) on one wall and a couple on the northern side. Even with a covered patio, 80% solar screens, and blinds, it is tough to find a solution. I have a PT-AX200U (2000 lumens) with the brightness at +20%. My first 220W bulb lasted only 314 hours.


Shannon was probably referring to me about people asking about large custom sizes. It seems about half the movies on Bluray are 2.35:1 and half are 16:9. We wanted the largest 16:9 possible, with the ability to display 2.35:1 at a decent size. So I ordered a 2.35:1 128" diagonal (118" W x 50.2" H) and asked they keep the height at 55.69". I couldn't fit a 133" 2.35:1 width. In 16:9 format, this also give me >113" diagonal & 99" W using the same screen. This also saves SI from having to cut the roll and waste.


Beware that custom sizes are not refundable. But neither are burned up bulbs.







I hope the BD does the job because I just can't justify a Mit FL7000U (5000 lumens & $15K ouch!). Hopefully some affordable >3K lumen 1080p projectors will come out soon. Any other ideas are welcome.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BigDallas* /forum/post/13764571
> 
> 
> This discussion thread has been great. After following the tiny Sony screen and almost buying the DNP (didn't like the hotspoting), I just ordered a 1.4 BD screen today from ProjectorZone.com.
> 
> 
> My challenging family room:
> 
> I have 7' x 30' of windows (Southern exposure) on one wall and a couple on the northern side. Even with a covered patio, 80% solar screens, and blinds, it is tough to find a solution. I have a PT-AX200U (2000 lumens) with the brightness at +20%. My first 220W bulb lasted only 314 hours.
> 
> 
> Shannon was probably referring to me about people asking about large custom sizes. It seems about half the movies on Bluray are 2.35:1 and half are 16:9. We wanted the largest 16:9 possible, with the ability to display 2.35:1 at a decent size. So I ordered a 2.35:1 128" diagonal (118" W x 50.2" H) and asked they keep the height at 55.69". I couldn't fit a 133" 2.35:1 width. In 16:9 format, this also give me >113" diagonal & 99" W using the same screen. This also saves SI from having to cut the roll and waste.
> 
> 
> Beware that custom sizes are not refundable. But neither are burned up bulbs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hope the BD does the job because I just can't justify a Mit FL7000U (5000 lumens & $15K ouch!). Hopefully some affordable >3K lumen 1080p projectors will come out soon. Any other ideas are welcome.



So you're going to get the maximum seamless height and reduce the width enough to fit it. The wall I like to use is too narrow to fit their 142" 2.35.1, by less than an inch, of course, so it's either use a different wall, get a smaller width, or get a 16X9. I was considering a seamed 133" or 144" 16X9, since that would give me a good size scoped image, but after Shannon told me today the seam issue would not be resolved until next year, I realized I had to make my decision based on the maximum seamless sizes available now or slightly smaller.


Si told me the largest seamless height for a 16X9 is 55.39", which is .3" shorter than your 55.69", which means the largest 2.35:1 screen will do a slightly larger 16X9 image than the largest 16X9 screen.


----------



## Dr_Audio

I still haven't decided which gain to choose. Again, my room is light controlled with very dark, flat walls and ceilings and I have a Panny AE 2000u. The SI screen calculator tells me to go with the .8 but I'm worried that after the bulb gets a few hours on it I may have a dim picture. Any thoughts? Also, is everyone convinced that this screen will look better than a Stew Firehawk G3? That's the only other I'm comparing to. I just hope the whites are good too.


----------



## BigDallas

Why don't you get both?


SI charged me the price of a 133" 2.35:1 screen with the maximum height for 16:9. Less work for them and good for me.


Best regards,


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Dr_Audio* /forum/post/13766131
> 
> 
> I still haven't decided which gain to choose. Again, my room is light controlled with very dark, flat walls and ceilings and I have a Panny AE 2000u. The SI screen calculator tells me to go with the .8 but I'm worried that after the bulb gets a few hours on it I may have a dim picture.



What lumens value did you use? My understanding is that the AE2000 has modes where it puts a filter into the light path to get better color balance and CR, but that these modes are dimmer. That is the way it works on my AX100. So, the main calibrated mode I use is quite a bit dimmer than the projector specs. The review on projectorcentral.com for the AE2000 says:


> Quote:
> As far as brightness is concerned, there is quite a range of options on the AE2000. The preset video optimized modes, Cinema 1, 2, and 3, are color balanced and set for optimal video performance. They vary somewhat in gamma and color temperature, but not much in brightness. On our test sample they measured 345, 390 and 370 ANSI lumens respectively.



--Darin


----------



## HDGreg

This screen seems like a dream come true! However, I cannot find any dealer that has pricing posted yet. Am I looking in the wrong places?


----------



## tommy def

I got the screen today and I will be installing it on Friday. Hopefully I will have the screen and projector running by Saturday. When everything is set up I will try to answer some questions as soon as possible.


----------



## PeckerHead




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *HDGreg* /forum/post/13766552
> 
> 
> This screen seems like a dream come true! However, I cannot find any dealer that has pricing posted yet. Am I looking in the wrong places?



According to ProjectorZone, SI has revoked all internet sales priveledges. This means that all dealers were required to remove all SI screens from their websites. You can call and get pricing, but the prices cannot be publicly posted. I called ProjectorZone and it took them about an hour to get me a written quote.


----------



## HDGreg

So how about a retail hint! Say approx, 52x118 2.35 screen...$1500-$2000-$2500


----------



## the rick




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *HDGreg* /forum/post/13767621
> 
> 
> So how about a retail hint! Say approx, 52x118 2.35 screen...$1500-$2000-$2500



Sorry, I did the calculator wrong.

The correct info:

2.35 ratio, 50.59" high image, 118.89" wide image


$3399 retail (standard black velvet border)


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *HDGreg* /forum/post/13767621
> 
> 
> So how about a retail hint! Say approx, 52x118 2.35 screen...$1500-$2000-$2500



Take a price from the MSRPs on page 4 of this thread, knock off a third, add about $140 for shipping.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...&postcount=101


----------



## anarkizt

Here is what im wondering and I dont think we have got a definite answer on, sure the BD gives great Black levels for us LCD-people, BUT how are the white levels?


Consider this very nice sketch;


Reference:

BTB........................................................W TW

|--------------------------------------------|



Normal white screen:


......|----------------------------------|



Normal grey screen:

...|----------------------------------|



BD?

..|-----------------------------------------|



So - can the BD give us great whites as well as great blacks? I would love to see some pictures BD sample on a white screen and vice versa!


----------



## HDGreg

Thanks, I missed it before. Please someone post screen shots of your setup with ambient light. (I just want to see it for real!)


----------



## Dr_Audio




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *darinp2* /forum/post/13766543
> 
> 
> What lumens value did you use? My understanding is that the AE2000 has modes where it puts a filter into the light path to get better color balance and CR, but that these modes are dimmer. That is the way it works on my AX100. So, the main calibrated mode I use is quite a bit dimmer than the projector specs. The review on projectorcentral.com for the AE2000 says:
> 
> --Darin



Great point! I didn't think about that Darin. I was only looking at the full specs listed for the projector. That really screws up my whole thought process on this thing. LOL I want good black levels and no sparklies but I don't want to have to increase my bulb from eco mode to have a bright enough picture. Are you suggesting I go with the 1.4? I guess I really need a review from someone that has the same projector with either screen gain first. I'm also concerned about how good the white levels will be with this screen.


----------



## DP13

Sorry for not responding to some of your questions. When I picked up my screen I stated I would install it over the weekend because I knew I would have to go out of town. I got anxious and istalled it the same day. I turned the projector on for about 30 minutes and posted some pictures. Since then I have not been able to watch a Blu-Ray movie, video games, anything. When I get back this weekend I'll reply and answer some of the questions out there. I did call home and asked for a picture of just the screen. Remember, my set up is in a living room. This is with natural light coming out of 6 windows mainly to the right of the screen. You'll be able to tell where the light is coming from on the screen.


----------



## technodude

Anybody notice the darker/lighter bands running accross the screen verticaly? Dp13's photo above has them and so does my 1.3 BD screen. They are even visible while playing a movie and totaly distracting, what gives? Is this due to the rolled up shipping and will fade or what?


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DP13* /forum/post/13770496
> 
> 
> Sorry for not responding to some of your questions. When I picked up my screen I stated I would install it over the weekend because I knew I would have to go out of town. I got anxious and istalled it the same day. I turned the projector on for about 30 minutes and posted some pictures. Since then I have not been able to watch a Blu-Ray movie, video games, anything. When I get back this weekend I'll reply and answer some of the questions out there. I did call home and asked for a picture of just the screen. Remember, my set up is in a living room. This is with natural light coming out of 6 windows mainly to the right of the screen. You'll be able to tell where the light is coming from on the screen.



Judging by that picture, the BD's ambient light rejection (at least with sunlight), doesn't appear to be that great, ok at best, when you consider that what your seeing with no projected light is as black as the screen will ever be. Same situation as AVHouston's pic, although his was brighter. The results appear as good as an ordinary grey screen, with the exception of hot spotting and/or sparklies which all grey screens with gain I've ever seen have. That in itself IS an advancement in screen performance, but not revolutionary as SI implies with their marketing. I guess that's why SI was using the .8 version at most of their shows. With household lights it's probably a lot better, since that's how the Dynaclear was as well. We'll know for sure when we see more pics.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *technodude* /forum/post/13770632
> 
> 
> Anybody notice the darker/lighter bands running accross the screen verticaly? Dp13's photo above has them and so does my 1.3 BD screen. They are even visible while playing a movie and totaly distracting, what gives? Is this due to the rolled up shipping and will fade or what?



I suggest you give SI a call and ask to speak to Ryan about this.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *technodude* /forum/post/13770632
> 
> 
> Anybody notice the darker/lighter bands running accross the screen verticaly? Dp13's photo above has them and so does my 1.3 BD screen. They are even visible while playing a movie and totaly distracting, what gives? Is this due to the rolled up shipping and will fade or what?



I did, but I thought that was due to his camera or my my monitor. That would bother me a LOT. I would call SI and ask them ASAP. Do the "bands" change/move when you move from left to right? If so, it might be due to the screen's viewing cone. In all the screen shots I've seen of the BD, one side of the screen has always been darker than the other. That's why I asked about the screens uniformity.


PS: Maybe that was the "issue" SI was referring to with the 1.4 gain screens....?


----------



## bud16415




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13770706
> 
> 
> Judging by that picture, the BD's ambient light rejection (at least with sunlight), doesn't appear to be that great, ok at best, when you consider that what your seeing with no projected light is as black as the screen will ever be. Same situation as AVHouston's pic, although his was brighter. The results appear as good as an ordinary grey screen, with the exception of hot spotting and/or sparklies which all grey screens with gain I've ever seen have. That in itself IS an advancement in screen performance, but not revolutionary as SI implies with their marketing. I guess that's why SI was using the .8 version at most of their shows. With household lights it's probably a lot better, since that's how the Dynaclear was as well. We'll know for sure when we see more pics.



I pretty much said the same thing back in post #184.


I don't know of a method where a screen can reject ambient light and except and reflect projected light. The only two ways that can happen is if the source of the ambient is striking the screen at a totally different angle than the projected light and then is ether retro reflected back to where it came from or in the case of surface sheen on the screen it skips off at a angle equal to the one it hit the screen at. The other mode grays work at is by absorbing some part of the ambient. It also absorbs some amount of the projected but with a strong lumen projector you can suffer the loss to combat the ambient.


The above photo shows some percentage of the window light changing and brightening the surface, ruling out to some extent the retro properties. The photo way back in the thread at an extreme angle off to the side shows the sheen component to the rejection of the ambient coming from the side. That light will keep going and bounce off the wall surfaces and eventually back at the screen.


I'm a huge proponent of neutral gray screens for their ability to darken the black end of the image when there is some ambient. Like posted above when a projector projects black its sending out no light or at least trying to send no light. it then becomes a case of perceived contrast. But like I said before the SI video with the screen rolling up isn't a fair test or even a comparison because the projectors gray scale calibration was done to the dark screen, leaving an abundance of extra scattered light in the room in the form of ambient on top of a image that was already too bright due to calibration.


And please don't get me wrong I feel this screen will go a long way to improving a poor image due to some ambient light, but light is light ambient or projected and if the ratio of ambient to projected gets too high IMHO nothing is going to completely solve that problem except huge amounts of lumens and even darker screens.


My DIY painted gray screen has these same properties and works to give the perception of black under fairly high ambient levels, and if I were to roll a white screen up in front of it the results would be equally impressive.


----------



## noah katz

anarkizt,


Your question doesn't really make sense when applied to a passive device like a screen.


"I don’t know of a method where a screen can “reject” ambient light and except and reflect projected light."


You need to read more.


Besides what you mentioned, there's the Chromavue's wavelength-dependent reflectivity that reflects most of the light from a pj and a much smaller % of full-spectrum ambient light.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bud16415* /forum/post/13771125
> 
> 
> I don't know of a method where a screen can reject ambient light and except and reflect projected light.
> 
> 
> And please don't get me wrong I feel this screen will go a long way to improving a poor image due to some ambient light, but light is light ambient or projected and if the ratio of ambient to projected gets too high IMHO nothing is going to completely solve that problem except huge amounts of lumens and even darker screens.



Like Noah mentioned, "light" is not "light". Fluorescent and incadescent light are composed of a smaller spectrum of visible light as opposed to sunlight which pretty much runs the gamut. If the BD is using Sony's technology then it should help by filtering certain wavelengths, while allowing others to reflect. We shall see.


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *anarkizt* /forum/post/13768714
> 
> 
> Here is what im wondering and I dont think we have got a definite answer on, sure the BD gives great Black levels for us LCD-people, BUT how are the white levels?
> 
> 
> Consider this very nice sketch;
> 
> 
> Reference:
> 
> BTB........................................................W TW
> 
> |--------------------------------------------|
> 
> 
> 
> Normal white screen:
> 
> 
> ......|----------------------------------|
> 
> 
> 
> Normal grey screen:
> 
> ...|----------------------------------|
> 
> 
> 
> BD?
> 
> ..|-----------------------------------------|
> 
> 
> 
> So - can the BD give us great whites as well as great blacks? I would love to see some pictures BD sample on a white screen and vice versa!



What you describe isn't possible without having a screen you plug in, or something similar (like a chip that senses how much light is hitting it and changes the gain). A screen is going to have the same gain for a small amount of red hitting it vs a larger amount of red hitting it, same for green, and same for blue, at least in the range we are talking about here. Of course people want a screen that has lower gain for dark gray than for white, but it doesn't exist.


Screens like the BD try to treat light straight from the projector differently than other light in the room and reflections off things in the room. But for video black from the projector and video white from the projector, the screen will have the same gain for both (other than color balance issues, like if the video black from the projector has different color balance than video white from the projector and the screen has different gains for different colors).


--Darin


----------



## anarkizt

Thanks for clearing that up. I guess I just hope that the BD will be a miracle screen, and after some research I now see that it probably isnt.







Still seems to be a very good screen though! The "bars" seems a bit disturbing though...


----------



## bud16415




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13772221
> 
> 
> Like Noah mentioned, "light" is not "light". Fluorescent and incadescent light are composed of a smaller spectrum of visible light as opposed to sunlight which pretty much runs the gamut. If the BD is using Sony's technology then it should help by filtering certain wavelengths, while allowing others to reflect. We shall see.



I do understand in theory a screen could be made to filter all light except in the range of the RGB a given projector can produce so under wide spectrum light most would be filtered and the screen would look almost black. I'm not sure if in that case all projectors would work equally well with a RGB screen.


Such a screen I would think would be shown in a well lit room with people sitting around doing normal activities.


For comparison here is a screen shot of my DIY gray screen with (8) 60 w flood lights on. If I had a white screen I would be seeing nothing on the screen if calibrated as I have it.

 


My only point was gray with gain can do the type of things the SI video showed to some extent without having the filtering coatings. I have no idea how it works and I'm as interested as everyone else to see the screen shots come in from the people that are getting the first screens.


----------



## Nedtsc




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DP13* /forum/post/13755185
> 
> 
> By the way....
> 
> Here are some pics of where my screen is going to go. That big gap is where it was originally going to fit the 100" but now I have a 110" so it will cover the whole gap. Remember, my install is in a living room for everyday use...not a theater room. I'm adding curtains to help the ambient light. As you can see...a lot of windows.



Those comparison on a bright scene are actually quite disappointing. I'm not sure what's the advantage of BD except for the lack of hot spotting.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Nedtsc* /forum/post/13773233
> 
> 
> Those comparison on a bright scene are actually quite disappointing. I'm not sure what's the advantage of BD except for the lack of hot spotting.



Right, the second pic DP13 posted is more washed out than I was hoping for. I have white walls and a white ceiling and so wanted the BD to help with that, but at the price it goes for I need to be able to watch in the daytime with the sun coming into the room as well. Maybe a high lumens projector with the BD is the only ticket for reasonable daytime watching.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DP13* /forum/post/13755185
> 
> 
> By the way....
> 
> Here are some pics of where my screen is going to go. That big gap is where it was originally going to fit the 100" but now I have a 110" so it will cover the whole gap. Remember, my install is in a living room for everyday use...not a theater room. I'm adding curtains to help the ambient light. As you can see...a lot of windows.



Hey, DP13, I didn't realize this before, but you have THE PERFECT room setup for a rear projection screen which would have much better ambient light rejection than the BD. Unfortunately the best screens like the Stewart starglass are around $8K. You would install the PJ in the other room behind the screen. Just thought I would throw that idea out there.


----------



## Nedtsc




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13774272
> 
> 
> Hey, DP13, I didn't realize this before, but you have THE PERFECT room setup for a rear projection screen which would have much better ambient light rejection than the BD. Unfortunately the best screens like the Stewart starglass are around $8K. You would install the PJ in the other room behind the screen. Just thought I would throw that idea out there.



There are other manufacture out there costing $500 onwards.


----------



## Nedtsc




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13773659
> 
> 
> Right, the second pic DP13 posted is more washed out than I was hoping for. I have white walls and a white ceiling and so wanted the BD to help with that, but at the price it goes for I need to be able to watch in the daytime with the sun coming into the room as well. Maybe a high lumens projector with the BD is the only ticket for reasonable daytime watching.



Try rear projection if you have the space.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Nedtsc* /forum/post/13774746
> 
> 
> Try rear projection if you have the space.



You mean project from behind onto a large screen? Someone who owned a showroom showed me his setup to do that and claimed it gave a brighter image. I don't have the space for that, unless I used mirrors, like he did. I have less than 17 feet.


----------



## noah katz

"If I had a white screen I would be seeing nothing on the screen if calibrated as I have it. "


I don't know what your calibration is, but it seems to me the picture would be just as visible w/a white screen, which would just raise black levels and white levels equally.


Which isn't to say you'd like it as much.


----------



## panosp

I was searching the net a few hours ago and I was astonished by what I found:


Screen Innovations was producing a screen (prior to 2006) named 'Mirage', which was later (in 2006) renamed to 'Visage' which now (in 2008) is called 'Black Diamond'???


Look for yourselves:

http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/p...vations-visage (Read the review and be amazed by the similarities)

http://www.projectorreviews.com/proj...ions/index.php 


So, what to do we have here?

The same product simply renamed (dictated by marketing) or product evolution? (version1='Mirage' -> v.2='Visage' -> v.3='Black Diamond')


I trully hope for the 2nd...


----------



## Moa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13774933
> 
> 
> I was searching the net a few hours ago and I was astonished by what I found:
> 
> 
> Screen Innovations was producing a screen (prior to 2006) named 'Mirage', which was later (in 2006) renamed to 'Visage' which now (in 2008) is called 'Black Diamond'???
> 
> 
> Look for yourselves:
> 
> http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/p...vations-visage (Read the review and be amazed by the similarities)
> 
> http://www.projectorreviews.com/proj...ions/index.php
> 
> 
> So, what to do we have here?
> 
> The same product simply renamed (dictated by marketing) or product evolution? (version1='Mirage' -> v.2='Visage' -> v.3='Black Diamond')
> 
> 
> I trully hope for the 2nd...



You're probably joking or havent read much from avsforum... Go and get a second hand Mirage, they must be cheap... As far as I am concerned it will be a BD


----------



## Kobe

Hehehe! Panosp, you have now cut some sales for SI.


In this case what we really need is a shootout of Visage and Black Diamond. Are there any major improvements or just minor refinements? I would expect the second to be the case. I think SI lowered the gain to get rid of hotspotting. This was mentioned in both Visage's reviews. But for sure at the cost of picture brightness. Those with ambient light coming from behind the projector should get a Firehawk. There was also a mention of the projector's placement - near top or bottom of the screen for best performance. Does this holds to BD as well?


Somebody from SI should now speak out here and clarify what distinguishes Black Diamond from Visage. What are the real improvements?


----------



## noah katz

AFAIK the Mirage and Visage were Supernova's OEM'd from dnp.


----------



## Nedtsc




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/13776815
> 
> 
> AFAIK the Mirage and Visage were Supernova's OEM'd from dnp.



It is.


----------



## haarec

Hmm, after a quick research I believe that Black Diamond screen is dnp material with added one (1.4 gain) or two (0.8 gain) dark grey layer on the front side which makes it "black". All love the idea of Black Diamond and hope that this time it happens.


----------



## bud16415




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/13774917
> 
> 
> "If I had a white screen I would be seeing nothing on the screen if calibrated as I have it. "
> 
> 
> I don't know what your calibration is, but it seems to me the picture would be just as visible w/a white screen, which would just raise black levels and white levels equally.
> 
> 
> Which isn't to say you'd like it as much.



True a neutral gray screen will lower both white and black levels equally, just like a ND filter. And the payoff comes with now being lower a higher lumen projector is required to bring the brightness back to par on the gray screen. If the outside ambient level hasn't changed you now have changed the balance of power between the projector and the ambient.


The issue of gray scale calibration on a darker screen is that lumens have to be raised to center the range equally between white and black. A different calibration settings would be needed for white. I know the gain numbers could be reported as being the same but it's been my finding when the gain comes in the form of sheen on these dark screens calibration is different. I don't understand why but I suspect first the gains are overstated and secondly somehow really low end blacks and darks on the newer higher CR projectors contain very little light to make use of the gain. But when calibrated with ambient in the room that competition the projector wins on the whole by having higher lumens it only ties or looses down near black depending on how much ambient we are talking.


So in my case with the projector set up for a dark screen and the room filled with ambient switching to a white screen like they did in the SI movie my black detail would be wiped out totally because of the combined effect of the ambient and projected light showing me the true color of the screen.


And true in my setup we would be comparing a much lower gain screen with the gray as to a 1.0 gain white screen, and like I said before I don't know how this screen works and I'm sure it's a fine screen given the right projector and a reasonable amount of ambient and wall colors combined. I have been reading a lot of very high expectations for this screen rooms with southern exposure window walls etc. I think and this is just my opinion that's a long stretch asking for FP to produce any kind of good PQ with those kinds of outside ambient levels.


----------



## PeckerHead

I am a bit confused. Many people here are talking about the poor ambient light rejection that can be seen in some pictures, but to me the rejection is as expected. With the ambient light visible in these pics, a regular TV (DLP, LCD, CRT, or Plasma) would be nearly useless so why would anyone expect a projector to look perfect? Light is hard to handle and in these pics the ambient light is shining directly on the screen. This screen was made to handle ambient light, but I seriously doubt they were trying to handle a spot light or the sun directly.


When a person speaks of anything ambient, they are talking about something that encompasses the entire environment. The amount of light in the room is included in this definition, but not focused areas. Get some curtains!


----------



## Mikenificent1











> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *haarec* /forum/post/13777061
> 
> 
> Hmm, after a quick research I believe that Black Diamond screen is dnp material with added one (1.4 gain) or two (0.8 gain) dark grey layer on the front side which makes it "black". All love the idea of Black Diamond and hope that this time it happens.



Do some longer research then, because that is not the case.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Moa* /forum/post/13775576
> 
> 
> You're probably joking or havent read much from avsforum... Go and get a second hand Mirage, they must be cheap... As far as I am concerned it will be a BD



YOU must be joking, because you clearly know nothing about these screens. They are not the same. Just by looking at the screen shots that the people posted here you would be able to tell they are not the same, as oppose to actually reading the info about both of them. SO read more on the AVS rather than spreading erroneous info!


----------



## DP13

I was so willing to post more pictures on this forum so some of you debating to get a BD would get a better feel for it. I was actually going to post pictures with a white screen and the BD. But after reading some of the comments, it would be like posting pictures to convince you all to get a BD. That's not the case...at least not my case...I'll leave that for SI or the dealers. For that you all can wait for a sample or wait for your dealer to get a BD set up as a sample so you can actually see it. I got in from out of town last night and had time to enjoy the screen. It works for me...better than a white screen would due to my living room setup...and thats all that matters.


----------



## panosp

DP13: "But after reading some of the comments..."

I hope none of my comments qualify for your statement as I TRULLY want the BD to work in my home theater! Like I said before, I have halted the upgrade of my HT for over a month now and I am anxiously waiting for Tuesday when my BD samples will arrive. So, PLEASE (!!!) post some photos, I am dying to see them!




My comments about the 'Mirage' -> 'Visage' -> 'Black Diamond' were passed to SI yesterday night. Today I received some very interesting feedback which I will share with you. This is what SI told me:



"Black Diamond is a 9x optical improvement over Visage. The Visage only filtered unwanted ambient light from to top and bottom of the screen where Black Diamond filters light from all directions “even light within the path of the projector” . This is what makes the contrast improvement possible. Visage washed out with sidelight or light in the path of the projector the same way a high gain screen does.


Two other main goals with Black Diamond.


1. BD had to be at half the price of Visage.

2. BD had to be roll-able in a fixed format, not shipping in crates like Visage.

3. BD had to be able to use the optics on motorized...."



An other interesting point is that the BD material is "directional", ie I have to make sure to hold the material right side up. The production guys have actually put arrows on the back of the samples.

So, in my opinion, the BD material has to be something really special...


I also asked about the vertical lines that appeared on the 2 screens that have already been purchased and are visible on the posted photos. I was told that this material shouldn't have been shipped and it is being replaced as we speak.


----------



## anarkizt

First of all, kudos to those who post pictures, the pics are 99% of the reason I keep coming to this thread hoping for some new posts.










Panosp, that is very good to hear (about the lines and how it is an improvement over previous models)!


----------



## Dr_Audio

Thanks Panosp for making a call and getting that info. Much appreciated. To me that's what this thread is all about. To get info from both sides to be able to make an informed decision before spending some bucks. I am still projecting onto my painted dark brown wall until I decide between a BD and Stew Firehawk G3. As good as the wall looks I would hope that either screen would make me feel good or great for spending a couple grand.


----------



## TJ Morgan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Nedtsc* /forum/post/13774746
> 
> 
> Try rear projection if you have the space.



Not to steer the subject away again but here is a rear projection setup I did at my store with a Vutec 92" and Mits HC4900 (throw distance about 10'). The room the projector is in must be dark. As you can tell, the light doesn't seem to bother the screen too much on the outside.

Don't slam the iPhone pic either. I know I need quit using it but it is so convenient.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *PeckerHead* /forum/post/13777616
> 
> 
> I am a bit confused. Many people here are talking about the poor ambient light rejection that can be seen in some pictures, but to me the rejection is as expected. With the ambient light visible in these pics, a regular TV (DLP, LCD, CRT, or Plasma) would be nearly useless so why would anyone expect a projector to look perfect? Light is hard to handle and in these pics the ambient light is shining directly on the screen. This screen was made to handle ambient light, but I seriously doubt they were trying to handle a spot light or the sun directly.
> 
> 
> When a person speaks of anything ambient, they are talking about something that encompasses the entire environment. The amount of light in the room is included in this definition, but not focused areas. Get some curtains!



Good point, the pics that are less flattering to the BD really have to have a CRT or flat panel next to the BD, with the same type of ambient light shining directly on it, to make a fair comparison. The bottom line is I want to be able to watch in the daytime with white walls, a white ceiling, and the sun streaming in but not shining directly on the TV. Those are my daytime viewing conditions now and they present no problem in allowing me to watch a 20" Sony Trinitron CRT without a washed out image. On occasion, the sun shines directly onto the CRT and is not very watchable...I have to use curtains then and don't expect the BD to perform any better under those conditions and don't need it to. The second reason I want the BD is for when I watch under the best conditions I can achieve, which is at night with all the lights off, but which is so compromised by white walls and a white ceiling that it's not even worth thinking about getting a high-contrast projector.


----------



## Nedtsc




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DP13* /forum/post/13778525
> 
> 
> I was so willing to post more pictures on this forum so some of you debating to get a BD would get a better feel for it. I was actually going to post pictures with a white screen and the BD. But after reading some of the comments, it would be like posting pictures to convince you all to get a BD. That's not the case...at least not my case...I'll leave that for SI or the dealers. For that you all can wait for a sample or wait for your dealer to get a BD set up as a sample so you can actually see it. I got in from out of town last night and had time to enjoy the screen. It works for me...better than a white screen would due to my living room setup...and thats all that matters.



Thanks for your picture and I'm glad it works for you.


Comparison at this time should be made with a gray with similar gain screen. We all know it is better than white screen.


We are all desperate for a good ambient rejection screen that we want it to work so badly. Let's try to be more objective and wait for more pics and hopefully shootouts to know its advantage/s and limitation.


----------



## Mike N Ike




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13778675
> 
> 
> .... An other interesting point is that the BD material is "directional", ie I have to make sure to hold the material right side up. The production guys have actually put arrows on the back of the samples.



Do we know if the arrows would be mounted in one direction for a ceiling mounted PJ and in the other direction for a table mount?


----------



## panosp

For the time being no



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mike N Ike* /forum/post/13781928
> 
> 
> Do we know if the arrows would be mounted in one direction for a ceiling mounted PJ and in the other direction for a table mount?


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DP13* /forum/post/13778525
> 
> 
> I was so willing to post more pictures on this forum so some of you debating to get a BD would get a better feel for it. I was actually going to post pictures with a white screen and the BD. But after reading some of the comments, it would be like posting pictures to convince you all to get a BD. That's not the case...at least not my case...I'll leave that for SI or the dealers. For that you all can wait for a sample or wait for your dealer to get a BD set up as a sample so you can actually see it. I got in from out of town last night and had time to enjoy the screen. It works for me...better than a white screen would due to my living room setup...and thats all that matters.



DP13,

Your set-up is almost identical to mine and if you have a few extra shots, I would love to see additional screen shots (lights on and off) of so additional material. I understand if you don't want to post them on the forum.


With that said I have a question as well. It would make sense to me, foolish as it may sound, that the projector would need to be re-calibrated to work best with ambient light. If a projector is calibrated to show accurate colors with no interference, wouldn't you need to tweak it for the interference from either an incandescent bulb or even sun light coming through? I would think one could simply store a setting in the projector to help adjust for that. I don't think it will make it perfect, but I imagine it would help with some of the color inaccuracies that may occur. Is this correct?


Thanks so much for your feedback. Those of use who haven't pulled the trigger yet are extremely grateful!!!


Andrew


----------



## DP13




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/13785797
> 
> 
> DP13,
> 
> Your set-up is almost identical to mine and if you have a few extra shots, I would love to see additional screen shots (lights on and off) of so additional material. I understand if you don't want to post them on the forum.
> 
> 
> With that said I have a question as well. It would make sense to me, foolish as it may sound, that the projector would need to be re-calibrated to work best with ambient light. If a projector is calibrated to show accurate colors with no interference, wouldn't you need to tweak it for the interference from either an incandescent bulb or even sun light coming through? I would think one could simply store a setting in the projector to help adjust for that. I don't think it will make it perfect, but I imagine it would help with some of the color inaccuracies that may occur. Is this correct?
> 
> 
> Thanks so much for your feedback. Those of use who haven't pulled the trigger yet are extremely grateful!!!
> 
> 
> Andrew



-That is correct. My projector has 3 memories. I've re-calibrated every memory for different times of the day. 1 for when ambient light is at its most (daylight), 2 when ambient light is drastically reduced (night) and 3, for other scenarios, sports, etc. This way the picture is at its best and its as simple as pressing one button on the remote.

-Sorry about the pictures. I won't be posting anymore. I'm sure that people with the BD or with samples of the BD, will agree. The camera shows way more light than there actually is. What you see is not what the camera sees. Its almost as if the camera picks up the light the BD hides to the naked eye.

-Trust me, those that have the BD or the sample, try it, you will know exactly what I'm talking about.


----------



## Frank Derks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DP13* /forum/post/13786265
> 
> 
> -That is correct. My projector has 3 memories. I've re-calibrated every memory for different times of the day. 1 for when ambient light is at its most (daylight), 2 when ambient light is drastically reduced (night) and 3, for other scenarios, sports, etc. This way the picture is at its best and its as simple as pressing one button on the remote.
> 
> -Sorry about the pictures. I won't be posting anymore. I'm sure that people with the BD or with samples of the BD, will agree. The camera shows way more light than there actually is. What you see is not what the camera sees. Its almost as if the camera picks up the light the BD hides to the naked eye.
> 
> -Trust me, those that have the BD or the sample, try it, you will know exactly what I'm talking about.



If you use automatic light metering settings on your camera it tends to overexpose the image you capture if you measure from a dark surface.

The image appears lighter than it should be.


You must use manual exposure settings and measure from a 'grey card' ( http://www.photography.ca/phototips/meter.html ) at the screen location.

Use the measured settings to capture an image that will give a better impression of what you see.


----------



## mrlittlejeans

Did I miss something? Did someone attack DP13 or his screen? I don't see anything here that should cause offense.


----------



## Moa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13778326
> 
> 
> YOU must be joking, because you clearly know nothing about these screens. They are not the same. Just by looking at the screen shots that the people posted here you would be able to tell they are not the same, as oppose to actually reading the info about both of them. SO read more on the AVS rather than spreading erroneous info!



Ever heard about irony Mikenificent1 ?

Read my post again... Or think a bit more before posting... Thanks


----------



## Scrimpin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13774933
> 
> 
> I was searching the net a few hours ago and I was astonished by what I found:
> 
> 
> Screen Innovations was producing a screen (prior to 2006) named 'Mirage', which was later (in 2006) renamed to 'Visage' which now (in 2008) is called 'Black Diamond'???
> 
> 
> Look for yourselves:
> 
> http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/p...vations-visage (Read the review and be amazed by the similarities)
> 
> http://www.projectorreviews.com/proj...ions/index.php
> 
> 
> So, what to do we have here?
> 
> The same product simply renamed (dictated by marketing) or product evolution? (version1='Mirage' -> v.2='Visage' -> v.3='Black Diamond')
> 
> 
> I trully hope for the 2nd...



And at 50% lower msrp no less!! That's evolution in my books.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *avdesignshouston* /forum/post/13779435
> 
> 
> Not to steer the subject away again but here is a rear projection setup I did at my store with a Vutec 92" and Mits HC4900 (throw distance about 10'). The room the projector is in must be dark. As you can tell, the light doesn't seem to bother the screen too much on the outside.
> 
> Don't slam the iPhone pic either. I know I need quit using it but it is so convenient.



avdesignhouston,


In your opinion, how did the BD in ambient light compare to a rear projection set-up?


Thanks,

Andrew


----------



## David Kim




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13774933
> 
> 
> I was searching the net a few hours ago and I was astonished by what I found:
> 
> 
> Screen Innovations was producing a screen (prior to 2006) named 'Mirage', which was later (in 2006) renamed to 'Visage' which now (in 2008) is called 'Black Diamond'???
> 
> 
> Look for yourselves:
> 
> http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/p...vations-visage (Read the review and be amazed by the similarities)
> 
> http://www.projectorreviews.com/proj...ions/index.php
> 
> 
> So, what to do we have here?
> 
> The same product simply renamed (dictated by marketing) or product evolution? (version1='Mirage' -> v.2='Visage' -> v.3='Black Diamond')
> 
> 
> I trully hope for the 2nd...




The Mirage/Visage are *NOT* the same as the Black Diamond screen.


The biggest difference is the fact that the Mirage/Visage is a HARD glass screen. I went to Las Vegas to see a demo of the Mirage and its not a flexible material like the black diamond is, but a hard glass material.


The other major difference is the gain. The Mirage/Visage had a gain of 2.0, which has a lot to do with the hotspotting problem. The Black Diamond has a gain of 1.4 or 0.8.


The actual technology might be similar, but they are most definitely not the same screen.


Just my 2¢

David


----------



## Lawguy

The pictures that I have seen posted here do not seem to support the Black Diamond's claims of ambient light rejection.


What they do show is that if you take the time to steer ambient light away from your screen, you can watch your projector with some lights on.


I do this now with my High Power screen. I have lots of canned lighting in my room, none shines on the projector. Where I sit, I can have enough light to read or do anything but the screen is isolated from that light. The BD may also be good in those situations, but I don't see any evidence that it "rejects" ambient light. How would it know what light is ambient and what light comes from the projector?


----------



## pottscb




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *avdesignshouston* /forum/post/13779435
> 
> 
> Not to steer the subject away again but here is a rear projection setup I did at my store with a Vutec 92" and Mits HC4900 (throw distance about 10'). The room the projector is in must be dark. As you can tell, the light doesn't seem to bother the screen too much on the outside.
> 
> Don't slam the iPhone pic either. I know I need quit using it but it is so convenient.



Was this pic of a Silverstar? If not, what finish was it?


Thanks,


----------



## Lawguy

pottscb,


That is a rear projection screen in that picture, not a front projection screen.


----------



## haarec

Interesting link in a matter of ambient light rejecting screens is on http://www.usnippura.com/blueoceanbo...projection.htm


----------



## panosp

Ok, big day today; I received the samples (1 day earlier than expected) - BIG THANKS to SI for this.

They are 3 in total: 1 big is .8 gain, 1 big is 1.4 gain and the 3rd is a really small one.


I've been doing some preliminary viewing and I am expecting more people tonight (more eyes needed for this). I am posting a simple photo for the time being as-is without any comments.


On the left is the BD 1.4 and on the right is the BD .8

Both are sticked with scotch tape on my Drapper 1.0 Matte White.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *haarec* /forum/post/13798882
> 
> 
> Interesting link in a matter of ambient light rejecting screens is on usnippura.com/blueoceanbos-ffrontprojection.htm



Right. Different screens will have different characteristics and will reflect light differently. See how they stress the control of certain kinds of ambient light in setting up that screen?


If you must have light in your room, position it around the characteristics of the screen. For instance, the High Power is a retroreflective screen. Light that is outside the viewing cone will not be reflected tot he viewer as strongly. Thus, place lighting where it can do the least amount of damage to the picture.


You can't buy any screen and expect it to do magic. The key is to control the light in your room. Again, how does the BD know which light is ambient and which comes from the projector? If it can't know this, how can it reject ambient light?


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13800050
> 
> 
> Ok, big day today; I received the samples (1 day earlier than expected) - BIG THANKS to SI for this.
> 
> They are 3 in total: 1 big is .8 gain, 1 big is 1.4 gain and the 3rd is a really small one.
> 
> 
> I've been doing some preliminary viewing and I am expecting more people tonight (more eyes needed for this). I am posting a simple photo for the time being as-is without any comments.
> 
> 
> On the left is the BD 1.4 and on the right is the BD .8
> 
> Both are sticked with scotch tape on my Drapper 1.0 Matte White.



The 1.4 gain sample appears to be hotspotting.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/13800093
> 
> 
> Again, how does the BD know which light is ambient and which comes from the projector? If it can't know this, how can it reject ambient light?



This has been covered MANY MANY times: it

'knows" it's ambient light by the angle of incidence and wave length, it's not rocket science. If you don't understand this that's fine, but don't say something "can't" do anything till you know all the facts.


----------



## Frank Derks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13800050
> 
> 
> Ok, big day today; I received the samples (1 day earlier than expected) - BIG THANKS to SI for this.
> 
> They are 3 in total: 1 big is .8 gain, 1 big is 1.4 gain and the 3rd is a really small one.
> 
> 
> I've been doing some preliminary viewing and I am expecting more people tonight (more eyes needed for this). I am posting a simple photo for the time being as-is without any comments.
> 
> 
> On the left is the BD 1.4 and on the right is the BD .8
> 
> Both are sticked with scotch tape on my Drapper 1.0 Matte White.



That's looking awful. looks like the 1.4 samples is having banding issues and the low gain (light loss actually) has uniformity issues.


From other post I understood that the screen material might be directional.

Perhaps the downside is up?


BD owners are too quite lately...


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13800349
> 
> 
> This has been covered MANY MANY times: it
> 
> 'knows" it's ambient light by the angle of incidence and wave length, it's not rocket science.



Right. If you don't properly control the light in your room, the screen will not work as expected. That is my point. It is no different than other screens in that respect.


What is it about the wavelength of ambient light that is different than projected light?


From the pictures that I see, the ambient light that is coming from the right side of the screen is not being rejected. It is clearly visible.


----------



## Frank Derks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13800349
> 
> 
> This has been covered MANY MANY times: it
> 
> 'knows" it's ambient light by the angle of incidence and wave length, it's not rocket science. If you don't understand this that's fine, but don't say something "can't" do anything till you know all the facts.



The wave length bit can't be the case as red from the projector has the same wavelenght as red in natural white light. As do blue and green.


----------



## Lawguy

Frank is right. We all want 6500k color temperatures, right? Hold a colorimeter out a window on a cloudy day and see what reading you get. It will be a perfect 6500K. If that is the wavelength of light that the screen is rejecting, there is a problem.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Frank Derks* /forum/post/13800396
> 
> 
> The wave length bit can't be the case as red from the projector has the same wavelenght as red in natural white light. As do blue and green.



Last time I checked, light was composed of more than red, green, and blue wavelengths. Obviously the screen will have to reflect those colors regardless of source, but all others are filtered out. This is also why the screen is better with light bulb ambient light compared to ambient sunlight. Yourself and Lawguy obviously have not read much on the technology, it's a good read, it's necessary to read before you guys make false statements.


Nevermind the washed out white wall below which is impressive, but even more impressive is notice the excellent black levels of the aspect ratio bars on the Sony screen. The BD is suppose to be even better. THIS IS AMBIENT LIGHT, and IT IS BEING REJECTED.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/13800428
> 
> 
> Frank is right. We all want 6500k color temperatures, right? Hold a colorimeter out a window on a cloudy day and see what reading you get. It will be a perfect 6500K. If that is the wavelength of light that the screen is rejecting, there is a problem.



Color temperature and wavelength are NOT the same.


----------



## Frank Derks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13800609
> 
> 
> Last time I checked, light was composed of more than red, green, and blue wavelengths. Obviously the screen will have to reflect those colors regardless of source, but all others are filtered out. This is also why the screen is better with light bulb ambient light compared to ambient sunlight. Yourself and Lawguy obviously have not read much on the technology, it's a good read, it's necessary to read before you guys make false statements.
> 
> 
> Nevermind the washed out white wall below which is impressive, but even more impressive is notice the excellent black levels of the aspect ratio bars on the Sony screen. The BD is suppose to be even better. THIS IS AMBIENT LIGHT, and IT IS BEING REJECTED.



Before commenting on my understanding of technology you should brush up yours before all else.


There is no point in filtering of other wavelengths. The 'filtered' red, blue and green from the ambiant light will still blot out the red, blue and green from the projector.


That sony screen works with polarization filters. Since the ambiant light isn't polarized the screen blocks it.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Frank Derks* /forum/post/13800796
> 
> 
> Before commenting on my understanding of technology you should brush up yours before all else.
> 
> 
> There is no point in filtering of other wavelengths. The 'filtered' red, blue and green from the ambiant light will still blot out the red, blue and green from the projector.
> 
> 
> That sony screen works with polarization filters. Since the ambiant light isn't polarized the screen blocks it.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13800663
> 
> 
> Color temperature and wavelength are NOT the same.




Explain what you mean about filtering certain wavelengths.


----------



## noah katz

"There is no point in filtering of other wavelengths. The 'filtered' red, blue and green from the ambiant light will still blot out the red, blue and green from the projector."


You seem not to grasp the principle of wavelength-selective reflectivity and its benefits.


If the visible spectrum is 3000 A wide and a pj emits 3 colors each in a band 100 A wide, then a screen that reflects only those 3 bands would reflect 10% of ambient light, thereby increasing CR by 10X.


----------



## tommy def

I'm waiting for a friend to come by with his camera to take some pics so I can get them up. I have a 1.4 with a Sony pearl ceiling mounted about 12 feet away. I'm coming from a 60" Kuro, and I must say with the lights off and at night it looks just as good. I haven't noticed any hotspoting at all. I've noticed when watching sports and bright programs the picture quality is pretty much the same whether the lights are on or off, witch is pretty cool. Now for a dark movie it is a different story. Turning the lights on while watching the Matrix there was a big difference but still very watchable. Much better the any other screen I've seen with the lights on. Anyway enjoying mine very much and I hope you guys are as lucky.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tommy def* /forum/post/13801794
> 
> 
> I'm waiting for a friend to come by with his camera to take some pics so I can get them up. I have a 1.4 with a Sony pearl ceiling mounted about 12 feet away. I'm coming from a 60" Kuro, and I must say with the lights off and at night it looks just as good. I haven't noticed any hotspoting at all. I've noticed when watching sports and bright programs the picture quality is pretty much the same whether the lights are on or off, witch is pretty cool. Now for a dark movie it is a different story. Turning the lights on while watching the Matrix there was a big difference but still very watchable. Much better the any other screen I've seen with the lights on. Anyway enjoying mine very much and I hope you guys are as lucky.



Tommy,


I'm glad to hear that you're enjoying your screen, and I think there are a lot of us that are more than a little envious!!! Thanks for keeping us posted, and while we all know that screen shots can't do the product justice, it's still nice to see what you're working with.


When you have used the screen with the lights on, are you talking about in-ceiling lights (i.e. "cans") or are you using a table lamp? I'm trying to determine if the light in your room is directed away from your screen or not.


Thanks again, and we're all looking forward to your pictures!


Andrew


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Frank Derks* /forum/post/13800796
> 
> 
> Before commenting on my understanding of technology you should brush up yours before all else.
> 
> 
> There is no point in filtering of other wavelengths. The 'filtered' red, blue and green from the ambiant light will still blot out the red, blue and green from the projector.
> 
> 
> That sony screen works with polarization filters. Since the ambiant light isn't polarized the screen blocks it.



i'll "comment" again, you made it even more clear you have no idea how the technology works. What projector do YOU have that has polarized light out of the lens, therefore allowing the screen that you made up, to reflect it????? Since you erroneously CLAIM that is how the Sony works. I didn't think so. Or maybe lawguy has one? His post would indicated he believes what you are saying. Both of you are obviously talking out of your @$$es. Read Noah's post for a clue, you both need it.


From Ultimate AV, and there are many others: "It does this by reflecting the light only at certain primary red, green, and blue wavelengths, but not at others. In other words, it reflects light from projectors (which project only red, green, and blue) while rejecting light at other wavelengths.


Product Description:Sony projector screen is designed to reflect RGB wavelength band selectively while other bands are absorbed without being reflected. This characteristic of the screen provides higher contrast in ambient light conditions and realizes ultimate black level on the front projection screen. HMMMM, NO mention of polarization here....


Original Patent from IBM who invented the technology:

A method and systems for projecting an image onto a screen in high ambient light. The image is composed as pixels comprising selected intensities of preselected bands of visible light. The pixels are created by modulating three frequencies of light corresponding to hues in the red, green, and blue spectrum. The modulated light selectively generates pixels of a frame of the image. A diffusive projection screen has a triple bandpass light filter surface that selectively transmits preselected bands of light frequencies around the red, green, and blue spectrums of the modulated light source. The triple bandpass light filter is used with projection screens in front and rear projection systems. The hues of red, green, and blue may be generated from LEDs or from extracting the frequencies from a broadband source. The modulator system may comprise a time multiplexed single modulator design or a triple modulator design.

That's how the color filtering part of the screen works.


And this is the angle of incidence light filtering of the screen










All conclusive evidence of how the screen REALLY works and at the same time that you both have no idea what you are talking about and do harm to people trying to learn at this forum, rather than good.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tommy def* /forum/post/13801794
> 
> 
> I'm coming from a 60" Kuro, and I must say with the lights off and at night it looks just as good.



Wow, now that's saying something!!


----------



## Lawguy

I'll admit that I have no idea of how the Sony screen works. None whatsoever. I also admit that I have very little idea about the wavelengths of light. I suspect that I am not alone in that and that people are blindly relying on marketing materials in forming their opinions and regurgitating it as gospel.


By the way, I don't mean to imply, and have not stated that the BD is a poor choice for a screen. My sole point is that it is not magic. If you hang one up in a room with no thought to light control, you will be disappointed. If it works for you under those circumstances, you just got lucky. My point is to think about the entire environment and not to rely on a screen to defeat the Sun or improperly placed room lighting. Does anyone dispute this point?


Here is what I do know and it casts doubt on the hypothesis that rejection of certain wavelengths of light is a means to combating ambient light. Most importantly, this view comports with what my eyes tell me is happening from the pictures. As an aside, no one appears to be arguing the the angle of incidence approach in the BD is any different in the BD than in any other kind of screen, especially higher gain screens.


The visible spectrum of light is a narrow one, with wavelengths of between 400 to 700 nanometers. The color with the shortest wavelength is Violet at around 400 nm and the longest is red at about 650 nm. Thus, if any light is beyoned the range, it cannot impact image quality because it is invisible to us.


What we consider to be ambient light is white light. White light is not the light of a single color, or frequency. Instead, it is made up of many color frequencies. You can easily see that this is true by passing white light through a prism. This is exactly what many projectors do. Others use polarizers to seperate out the R, G and B components of light from a white light. Projectors then recombine the R, G and B components of light as necessary to create the shades of color between then, including secondary colors. When I referred to light at 6500k before, it was to demonstrate the principle that projected light and natural light are essentially the same things and will be perceived as such by the eye and the screen.


So again, I ask, what wavelengths of visible light are being rejected by these screens that would not be necessary in front projection? From the pictures that have been shown, it is clearly not rejecting sunlight (white light). If you accept that it is not rejecting this kind of light, you must concede that it is really not rejecting much of anything because sunlight is comprised of all the colors of the visible spectrum.


Again, your eyes can easily tell everyone what is happening. Look at the pictures that have been posted. Every screen can be made to look a like a miracle if displayed under conditions that don't reveal its flaws. The key is to see what happens when set up under non-ideal condiitons. Most of you that are interested in this screen have rooms with an ambient light problem. How do you know if your room creates an environment where the BD can shine? Maybe you are better off investing in good blackout window coverings and moving the lights around in your room?


----------



## Lawguy

By the way, I do not see any claim at all on the Screen Innovations website that the BD rejects certain frequncies of light. I also see no referrence to any patented technology that has been employed in the BD screen.


So, the manufacturer of this screen appears not to be claiming that this screen rejects certain wavelengths of light and does not claim that its screen is using any patented technology.


What is the source of these claims?


----------



## bud16415




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13800050
> 
> 
> Ok, big day today; I received the samples (1 day earlier than expected) - BIG THANKS to SI for this.
> 
> They are 3 in total: 1 big is .8 gain, 1 big is 1.4 gain and the 3rd is a really small one.
> 
> 
> I've been doing some preliminary viewing and I am expecting more people tonight (more eyes needed for this). I am posting a simple photo for the time being as-is without any comments.
> 
> 
> On the left is the BD 1.4 and on the right is the BD .8
> 
> Both are sticked with scotch tape on my Drapper 1.0 Matte White.



In the samples posted above in the screen shot, we know the background screen is 1.0 gain the left sample is said to be 1.4 and the right .8


Shouldn't the 1.4 gain sample show a brighter image than the 1.0?


I used a color picker tool to sample the photo and the 1.0 gray measures RGB 155,153,154 at the top of the photo where the 1.4 gain measures RGB 142,132,143.

The yellow show about the same point spread drop on the 1.4 sample.


The .8 gain sample shows a darker value as you would expect from a .8 compared to a 1.0 gain.


I do see where the photo was taken slightly off axis maybe 25 degrees is that enough that we have crossed the half gain point?


Did the 1.4 sample look brighter on axis?


There does seem to be a great deal of variance across the samples. The Drapper screen doesn't show hardly any and when I measure it with the color picker shows very little also.


----------



## Scrimpin

I had the same observations, i.e. curious why the 1.4 gain appeared darker than the white screen. I also noticed the hotspotting but it looked to me like a wave in the fabric moreso than hotspotting. Could you turn the 1.4 upside down and reshoot. Some have commented about the directionality of the fabric possibly affecting the reflection (this would almost the screen both a positive or negative gain then wouldn't it?). IMO, it is not fair to critique using only a patch of fabric, but if you could check the direction and try it upside down it would be helpful.


Any chance that someone from SI could answer questions about this? Lots of potential buyers (at least I definitely am) but where I am located there is no access to an actual demonstration so I need to rely on what I am seeing and reading elsewhere.


Anyone know of any AVmags or websites palnning to do a review on the BD?


----------



## panosp

1) The material is quite thick and very difficult to stick in a flat fashion with scotch tape on the Drapper. This is why the 1.4 appears uneaven (with horizontal "wripples"). The .8 was and is more flat.

2) Both the samples have directional arrows on the back; both were correctly placed with the arrows pointing UP

3) The photo was taken indeed on approximate 25 degrees axis

4) No matter what tests I did yesterday both samples made the white colors either grey and/or pink/purple

5) Regarding hotspotting: my viewing distance from the screen is 4.5 meters. The sofa is 3 meters wide. The current Drapper screen is 2.7 meters wide. Sitting on the far left position on the sofa and looking at the projected image on the furthest at appears a lot dimmer than the middle (and vice versa). The 2.35:1 screen I wish to have will be 3.1 meters wide. I simply don't see how this would work without a curved screen.


I did lots of testing yesterday; will do more tomorrow with people I am expecting to visit.

I still don't wish to go into any concrete results as the people who will visit are HT specialists who are eager to see for themselves the BD.

For the time being:


a) If you want me to post any specific photos let me know

b) Any of you having already a BD installed please do a simple test: grab an A4 white paper (just a simple A4 paper) and place it on top of your BD screen. Project a WHITE image and let us know please of your impressions.


----------



## bud16415




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13804795
> 
> 
> 1) The material is quite thick and very difficult to stick in a flat fashion with scotch tape on the Drapper. This is why the 1.4 appears uneaven (with horizontal "wripples"). The .8 was and is more flat.
> 
> 2) Both the samples have directional arrows on the back; both were correctly placed with the arrows pointing UP
> 
> 3) The photo was taken indeed on approximate 25 degrees axis
> 
> 4) No matter what tests I did yesterday both samples made the white colors either grey and/or pink/purple
> 
> 5) Regarding hotspotting: my viewing distance from the screen is 4.5 meters. The sofa is 3 meters wide. The current Drapper screen is 2.7 meters wide. Sitting on the far left position on the sofa and looking at the projected image on the furthest at appears a lot dimmer than the middle (and vice versa). The 2.35:1 screen I wish to have will be 3.1 meters wide. I simply don't see how this would work without a curved screen.
> 
> 
> I did lots of testing yesterday; will do more tomorrow with people I am expecting to visit.
> 
> I still don't wish to go into any concrete results as the people who will visit are HT specialists who are eager to see for themselves the BD.
> 
> For the time being:
> 
> 
> a) If you want me to post any specific photos let me know
> 
> b) Any of you having already a BD installed please do a simple test: grab an A4 white paper (just a simple A4 paper) and place it on top of your BD screen. Project a WHITE image and let us know please of your impressions.



You might want to double sticky tape the samples to some thin plywood or something like that and hang them with wires or string in front of the screen. The wood will force the sample to be flat and I would be worried about the tape leaving residue on the screen.


By all rights the 1.4 sample should have required you to lower your brightness some when sitting in the center seat location doing a calibration of gray scale. What you said is the whites were darker in all seating locations.


I also didn't read on the SI page about the filtering aspect of the screen (could have missed it) I was at first under the understanding as some were that the screens main ambient weapon was the angle of reflection thing also.


The thing with most dark screens is the attenuate a lot of projected light thru absorption but get the overall light back thru angular gain methods. The way this often plays out is a 1.4 white screen has a wider half gain angle than a 1.4 gray screen. Both should be the same brightness straight on but could be far different at 25 degrees.


This is just my opinion and I could be wrong..


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/13804022
> 
> 
> So again, I ask, what wavelengths of visible light are being rejected by these screens that would not be necessary in front projection?
> 
> From the pictures that have been shown, it is clearly not rejecting sunlight (white light). If you accept that it is not rejecting this kind of light, you must concede that it is really not rejecting much of anything because sunlight is comprised of all the colors of the visible spectrum.



Remember our good ol' friend ROY-G-BIV? So just from a color standpoint (not wavelength), then it would filter out orange, yellow, and violet, half of the colors of the spectrum. That's a generalization, but just goes to show that it's not just RGB.

Your second assumption is severely flawed. One similar analogy would be, "because the subwoofer is not full range (it can't play to 20Khz), it won't have good bass". Clearly not the case. Sunlight is a broadband source of light, where as inddor light is comprised of a narrower band of light, which therefore would be easier to filter than sunlight. So it IS possible that the BD is not very effective at rejecting sunlight, yet excellent at rejecting indoor light. Remember also, unless you have a skylight, sunlight will be reflecting horizontally through windows, where as most lights are on the ceiling refelcting vertically on the screen, which could aslo be one of the screens strengths (i.e. it's more directional in the vertical plane, remember the samples had to be oriented up or down), which would be another reason why it would reject indoor light more effectively.


No one is claiming magic, ovbiosuly the better the setup, the better the results.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/13804057
> 
> 
> By the way, I do not see any claim at all on the Screen Innovations website that the BD rejects certain frequncies of light. I also see no referrence to any patented technology that has been employed in the BD screen.
> 
> 
> So, the manufacturer of this screen appears not to be claiming that this screen rejects certain wavelengths of light and does not claim that its screen is using any patented technology.
> 
> 
> What is the source of these claims?



Same way it never mentioned that it was using DNP's technology in it's Mirage/Visage screens. Why would they remind people they could go somewhere else for the same thing for cheaper!!! Although this time around they have a better product than the OEM, but still a lot more expensive. Again all you're doing is ASSUMING.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13805271
> 
> 
> Remember our good ol' friend ROY-G-BIV? So just from a color standpoint (not wavelength), then it would filter out orange, yellow, and violet, half of the colors of the spectrum.



Are you claiming that the BD rejects orange, yellow and violet light?


I find no evidence from SI that it filters out any kind of light.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13805334
> 
> 
> Same way it never mentioned that it was using DNP's technology in it's Mirage/Visage screens. Why would they remind people they could go somewhere else for the same thing for cheaper!!! Although this time around they have a better product than the OEM, but still a lot more expensive. Again all you're doing is ASSUMING.



You are assuming something. Why would you assume that it filters anything if it is nowhere in the Tech Specs for this screen and not listed anywhere on the website at all?


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13804795
> 
> 
> b) Any of you having already a BD installed please do a simple test: grab an A4 white paper (just a simple A4 paper) and place it on top of your BD screen. Project a WHITE image and let us know please of your impressions.



+1


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/13805376
> 
> 
> You are assuming something. Why would you assume that it filters anything if it is nowhere in the Tech Specs for this screen and not listed anywhere on the website at all?



SHOW ME WHERE THEY LIST AAAAAANY "TECH SPECS" ON WHAT TECHNOLOGY THEY ARE USING ON THEIR WEBSITE!!!! THEY DON'T!! THAT'S WHY YOU DON'T SEE IT!


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13805439
> 
> 
> SHOW ME WHERE THEY LIST AAAAAANY "TECH SPECS" ON WHAT TECHNOLOGY THEY ARE USING ON THEIR WEBSITE!!!! THEY DON'T!! THAT'S WHY YOU DON'T SEE IT!




Right. So how can you assume that this is the way the screen works?


----------



## panosp

Guys, sorry to disturb this interesting scientific approach and debate.


Can we please move on with this and discuss actual stuff about the BD?


----------



## Frank Derks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13803187
> 
> 
> i'll "comment" again, you made it even more clear you have no idea how the technology works. What projector do YOU have that has polarized light out of the lens, therefore allowing the screen that you made up, to reflect it????? Since you erroneously CLAIM that is how the Sony works. I didn't think so. Or maybe lawguy has one? His post would indicated he believes what you are saying. ....



My mistake that I assumed your example was the technology Sony demonstrated a while ago using a screen with a polarized surface.

The projector needed a polarizing filter in front of the lens to make it all work.

It looked very impressive on the 3x2 foot example they could produce at the time. By rotating the lens mounted polarization filter it was possibele to tune the brightness.


Now do you understand how that screen system functions?


----------



## mrlittlejeans

For those Americans unfamiliar with A4, it is the size of the paper. You could just as easily use letter or legal.


I noticed a very strong blue push in the pictures dp13 posted but don't know what it was related to and likely won't as he is not posting pics anymore.


Thank you panosp for your posts. It looked like there was noticeable screen texture, similar to the silkscreen effect on rptvs. Do you notice this in person?


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13805740
> 
> 
> Guys, sorry to disturb this interesting scientific approach and debate.
> 
> 
> Can we please move on with this and discuss actual stuff about the BD?



How are the light filtering properties of the screen, or lack of them, not "stuff about the BD?"


----------



## panosp




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/13806230
> 
> 
> How are the light filtering properties of the screen, or lack of them, not "stuff about the BD?"




What I meant is instead of going back and forth in an endless debate regarding the BD technology (which noone except the SI stuff really know), it would be better -at least this is my opinion- to hear from people who have actually seen or purchased the BDs.


----------



## panosp

mrlittlejeans: "Thank you panosp for your posts. It looked like there was noticeable screen texture, similar to the silkscreen effect on rptvs. Do you notice this in person?"


Sorry but I don't understand what you mean. Can you please rephrase?


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13806271
> 
> 
> What I meant is instead of going back and forth in an endless debate regarding the BD technology (which noone except the SI stuff really know), it would be better -at least this is my opinion- to hear from people who have actually seen or purchased the BDs.



I agree wholeheartedly. It's one thing to endlessly theorize the pluses and minuses of future technology like LED and laser and 4K, which happens on these forums all the time, but the BD is already out and in the homes of forum members who are posting on this thread and it is obviously working well for some. If anyone doubts that it works, he can go check one out. Also, debating whether it is or is not a miracle screen when direct sunlight is shining onto it or bright flourescent lights are shining onto it is probably of little use to most of the members here who want to use a BD under the same reasonable circumstances that they use a CRT or flat panel.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Scrimpin* /forum/post/13804623
> 
> 
> I had the same observations, i.e. curious why the 1.4 gain appeared darker than the white screen.



A black, silver, or grey screen is going to look darker when it's just a small sample up against a white screen. If you put a small Silverstar sample up against a large High Power screen, the whites will look whiter on the High Power than they will on the Silverstar, because the High Power is a white screen and the Silverstar is a silver screen. However, on a full-size Silverstar, the whites look great, I think "over-the-top" was how Tryg described the whites in his Silverstar review. This is because it is the contrast between dark and light colors is what matters.


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13806493
> 
> 
> If you put a small Silverstar sample up against a large High Power screen, the whites will look whiter on the High Power than they will on the Silverstar, because the High Power is a white screen and the Silverstar is a silver screen.



If you view both at their peak gains the whites will look whiter on the High Power not because it is white, but because it has more peak gain than the Silverstar from the testing I've done, despite the manufacturers claim of almost twice the gain with the Silverstar. If you move off axis to a position where the Silverstar has more gain, the whites will look whiter on the Silverstar than on the High Power. A matte white screen is white, but whites will look whiter on a Silverstar sample if viewing from a high gain position for it.


--Darin


----------



## Lawguy

This started because I was commenting on screen shots that looked unremarkable. In spite of this, some continued with the hype that there was something magic going on with the BD.


I regret that my real point is getting lost in all this. That point is that efforts are best directed controlling the light that you have in your room. No screen will be able to combat the sun or improperly placed room lighting.


Like any screen, you have to consider the design of the BD in order to maximize how good the image will ultimately look. The BD's properties will let a purchaser know how best to use it and how lights of various kinds in various places will affect it.


I am sure that I have not stopped any purchaser from posting his impressions. If I have given some prospective purchasers pause in considering whether to take the plunge, I am glad. People should know what they are buying.


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/13806922
> 
> 
> Like any screen, you have to consider the design of the BD in order to maximize how good the image will ultimately look. The BD's properties will let a purchaser know how best to use it and how lights of various kinds in various places will affect it.



Yep. Once I get a sample, one of the first things I plan on doing is to try to figure out what it does. Like which angles it largely blocks, which it mostly reflects, etc.


I doubt it is using color filtering by wavelength as doing much of that requires having a very good idea which wavelengths the projector is projecting. UHP lamps should be somewhat standard, but I don't know how well those line up with Xenon lamps or what we are likely to get with LEDs. I talked to a Sony rep at one show about whether Xenon would work with their screen that was blocking different wavelengths and my memory is that he said he didn't think it would work very well.


--Darin


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *darinp2* /forum/post/13807099
> 
> 
> Yep. Once I get a sample, one of the first things I plan on doing is to try to figure out what it does. Like which angles it largely blocks, which it mostly reflects, etc.
> 
> 
> I doubt it is using color filtering by wavelength as doing much of that requires having a very good idea which wavelengths the projector is projecting. UHP lamps should be somewhat standard, but I don't know how well those line up with Xenon lamps or what we are likely to get with LEDs. I talked to a Sony rep at one show about whether Xenon would work with their screen that was blocking different wavelengths and my memory is that he said he didn't think it would work very well.
> 
> 
> --Darin



I knew that you would, Darin.


----------



## bud16415




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *darinp2* /forum/post/13807099
> 
> 
> Yep. Once I get a sample, one of the first things I plan on doing is to try to figure out what it does. Like which angles it largely blocks, which it mostly reflects, etc.
> 
> 
> I doubt it is using color filtering by wavelength as doing much of that requires having a very good idea which wavelengths the projector is projecting. UHP lamps should be somewhat standard, but I don't know how well those line up with Xenon lamps or what we are likely to get with LEDs. I talked to a Sony rep at one show about whether Xenon would work with their screen that was blocking different wavelengths and my memory is that he said he didn't think it would work very well.
> 
> 
> --Darin



Get a flashlight and take your sample in a dark room. Place a yellow filter over the light and the screen should suck it all up if it's filtering yellow. Place a red filter over the light and the screen sample should bloom red if it's passing red.


----------



## noah katz

The problem with going by screenshots is that cameras mess with the ends of the IRE scale.


Rather than post a shot and then say it actually looked better, it would be better to either delete the pic's or edit them so that they are a fair approximation.


----------



## bud16415

I have had a little time to think about the post from this morning that showed the two samples 1.4 and .8 against the 1.0 screen and the fact the photo showed a wide variance across the samples.


When any screen has a lot of angular gain enhancement it becomes more and more necessary the screen is flat and square to the projector source. Any waves in the sample cause that area of the sample to be at a different point in regards to viewing angle. That is most likely what is causing the gradient across the sample and could also be causing the appearance of a hot spot. The hot spot if it was that with that small of a sample should be the whole sample if the sample were to be placed near the center of the screen.


----------



## panosp

Following the feedback and advise from the SI stuff, I am creating 2 MDF thin plates on which the samples will be permanently glued. This way they will be perfectly flat. I will post new photos tomorrow.


----------



## Frank Derks

Can you also take shots with the arrow down and sideways to see the effect for comparison?


----------



## panosp




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Frank Derks* /forum/post/13808485
> 
> 
> Can you also take shots with the arrow down and sideways to see the effect for comparison?



Sure, I will do this tomorrow


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13808222
> 
> 
> Following the feedback and advise from the SI stuff, I am creating 2 MDF thin plates on which the samples will be permanently glued. This way they will be perfectly flat. I will post new photos tomorrow.



What kind of glue did they recommend? I don't think elmers would hold the material tight, while epoxy might melt the material...


----------



## panosp




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13808581
> 
> 
> What kind of glue did they recommend? I don't think elmers would hold the material tight, while epoxy might melt the material...



They didn't recommend anything specific as (I assume) the samples are small in dimensions. As long as they remain perfectly flat anything will do.

On the other hand if I were to DIY a full screen based on the BD material gluing and/or permanently tensioning the beast would be a challenge on its own.

For the time being I haven't reached that point in thinking....


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13808567
> 
> 
> Sure, I will do this tomorrow



You Rock panosp! Thanks for all of the feed back, we're all thrilled to have some real world feedback.


----------



## Burt McGurt

Thats interesting that the samples you got panosp are the material only. My .8 gain sample came attached to a hard glossy piano black plastic board. Dimensions of the board are 15" x 7". The Sample dimensions are 9" x 7".


----------



## tommy def




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/13803042
> 
> 
> Tommy,
> 
> 
> I'm glad to hear that you're enjoying your screen, and I think there are a lot of us that are more than a little envious!!! Thanks for keeping us posted, and while we all know that screen shots can't do the product justice, it's still nice to see what you're working with.
> 
> 
> When you have used the screen with the lights on, are you talking about in-ceiling lights (i.e. "cans") or are you using a table lamp? I'm trying to determine if the light in your room is directed away from your screen or not.
> 
> 
> Thanks again, and we're all looking forward to your pictures!
> 
> 
> Andrew



I will have the pics tomorrow, sorry I got home late today. Anyway my room has four cans and they are slightly pitched away. I will take some pictures of that too so you can see.


----------



## panosp




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Burt McGurt* /forum/post/13809597
> 
> 
> Thats interesting that the samples you got panosp are the material only. My .8 gain sample came attached to a hard glossy piano black plastic board. Dimensions of the board are 15" x 7". The Sample dimensions are 9" x 7".



I too have this sample.

If you look my first posting (when I initially received the samples on Monday) I refered to a 3rd small sample. Since it is too small compared to the other 2 I am not using it at all.


----------



## haarec

Two things are coming to my mind looking at the picture. Number one: where is BLACK color of the material seen on SI pictures - 1,4 sample here looks grey and 0,8 too and what is real gain of Black Diamond material. Number two is what we all (probably) forgot: how much light do we need to make 120" screen USEFUL, which means to have not only a good black level but also satisfying WHITE level.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *haarec* /forum/post/13811871
> 
> 
> Number two is what we all (probably) forgot: how much light do we need to make 120" screen USEFUL, which means to have not only a good black level but also satisfying WHITE level.



Speak for yourself, don't include others on this board. Only an amature would just decide to use a 120" screen and "forget" to consider if he has enough lumens to light it up satisfactorily! Nevermind the fact that not everyone will even be using that size.

Although, I'm sure there at least a few users, especially the people ordering the largest sizes, who did not "forget" but think they have enough horse power to light up the BD, but might be dissapointed when they see the results. Even if the BD were exactly 1.4 gain, it would not be enough for some of the sizes people are thinking about IMO.


----------



## pottscb




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *darinp2* /forum/post/13806695
> 
> 
> If you view both at their peak gains the whites will look whiter on the High Power not because it is white, but because it has more peak gain than the Silverstar from the testing I've done, despite the manufacturers claim of almost twice the gain with the Silverstar. If you move off axis to a position where the Silverstar has more gain, the whites will look whiter on the Silverstar than on the High Power. A matte white screen is white, but whites will look whiter on a Silverstar sample if viewing from a high gain position for it.
> 
> 
> --Darin



This has not been my experience, I agree with hrd...a grey screen with high positive gain (~6.0 Silverstar) will not appear to have as bright of whites as a white screen of ~3.0 gain (Hi-Power). The best way to see this is to have two unity gain screens (1.0) next to each other, a grey and a white, and see which one produces the whitest white (the white one, in my experience). Now, move the comparison to an increased gain grey screen (Stuart Greyhawk 1.3 gain) and do the same experiment...the 1.3 gain grey will have brighter colors than the 1.0 gain grey and maybe even the 1.0 gain white, but the grey screen color will keep the whites from looking as white as the 1.0 gain white...just because it reflects more light back to the user doesn't necessarily say anything about the color shift due to the color of the screen material. I think the race is on to see who can minimize this effect best...enter the BD.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pottscb* /forum/post/13813850
> 
> 
> This has not been my experience, I agree with hrd...a grey screen with high positive gain (~6.0 Silverstar) will not appear to have as bright of whites as a white screen of ~3.0 gain (Hi-Power). The best way to see this is to have two unity gain screens (1.0) next to each other, a grey and a white, and see which one produces the whitest white (the white one, in my experience). Now, move the comparison to an increased gain grey screen (Stuart Greyhawk 1.3 gain) and do the same experiment...the 1.3 gain grey will have brighter colors than the 1.0 gain grey and maybe even the 1.0 gain white, but the grey screen color will keep the whites from looking as white as the 1.0 gain white...just because it reflects more light back to the user doesn't necessarily say anything about the color shift due to the color of the screen material. I think the race is on to see who can minimize this effect best...enter the BD.



I have seen Tryg point out many times that it is the contrast between the dark images and the lighter images on the screen that is what matters. Tryg fields load of concern from forum members that the high gain screens he reviews and loves elevate blacks by pointing out how the overall contrast will not be compromised and how that will make the darks seem plenty dark. My reason in pointing this out in the first post about it is because there was a concern about the darker appearance of the BD 1.4 sample compared to the adjacent material and I felt a conclusion about how well the overall contrast of the BD will make the whites appear cannot be drawn from such a comparison. After a demo at SI, h00kemh0rns reported the whites looked better than they did on the white screen, so hopefully the BD is excellent in this regard, in spite of how a small sample may appear when compared with other screen materials. Now it could well be that a large BD adjacent to a large 1.4 gain white screen is less impressive in terms of whites, but Tryg's point is the viewer won't even notice the whites are lacking when all that he is watching is one screen, whether it is a grey screen or a silver screen or a black screen.


----------



## bud16415




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pottscb* /forum/post/13813850
> 
> 
> This has not been my experience, I agree with hrd...a grey screen with high positive gain (~6.0 Silverstar) will not appear to have as bright of whites as a white screen of ~3.0 gain (Hi-Power). The best way to see this is to have two unity gain screens (1.0) next to each other, a grey and a white, and see which one produces the whitest white (the white one, in my experience). Now, move the comparison to an increased gain grey screen (Stuart Greyhawk 1.3 gain) and do the same experiment...the 1.3 gain grey will have brighter colors than the 1.0 gain grey and maybe even the 1.0 gain white, but the grey screen color will keep the whites from looking as white as the 1.0 gain white...just because it reflects more light back to the user doesn't necessarily say anything about the color shift due to the color of the screen material. I think the race is on to see who can minimize this effect best...enter the BD.



Any gray screen that is a neutral gray shouldn't produce a color shift. When measuring the screens color or better yet doing a spectral reference curve you would get a RGB value of something where all 3 numbers are close or the same RGB = 220,220,220 for example a very light neutral gray. In the case of a spectral curve it would be a very flat line graph thru the RGB part of the spectrum.

All gray screens of equal dispersion to a unity gain 1.0 white are going to have a gain less than 1.0 because the black component of the gray is going to absorb some light. That doesn't mean you wont see white because the white component of the gray is still going to deliver the white but it will be white with brightness turned down. This darker screen can have improvements made to restore gain but the light has to come from someplace and it comes from the side viewing areas. Less dispersion tighter viewing cone. Often the way the cone is tightened raising the gain that is likely to introduce problems in the form of color shift etc.


All bets are off if the screen works in the mode of filtering out light that's not RGB such as has been discussed as possibly this works. Even how you measure gain would be brought into question with such a screen. The common method is to measure gain shooting white light at it and measuring what comes off wouldn't work because the filtering would kill much of the light. I have no idea how you would rate a screen that works under this method.


Below is a experimental screen I made from coal black paper the screen is very small and the foot lamberts is in the range of 500. the screen is so small it exceeded the minimal size the projector could focus to. It shows though that bright white and dark black can so exist under extremely bright ambient light given enough lumens. There is a link in my signature about the experiment if anyone reading is interested in knowing more.


The setup
 


The image under lots of light.


----------



## bud16415




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13814769
> 
> 
> I have seen Tryg point out many times that it is the contrast between the dark images and the lighter images on the screen that is what matters. Tryg fields load of concern from forum members that the high gain screens he reviews and loves elevate blacks by pointing out how the overall contrast will not be compromised and how that will make the darks seem plenty dark. My reason in pointing this out in the first post about it is because there was a concern about the darker appearance of the BD 1.4 sample compared to the adjacent material and I felt a conclusion about how well the overall contrast of the BD will make the whites appear cannot be drawn from such a comparison. After a demo at SI, h00kemh0rns reported the whites looked better than they did on the white screen, so hopefully the BD is excellent in this regard, in spite of how a small sample may appear when compared with other screen materials. Now it could well be that a large BD adjacent to a large 1.4 gain white screen is less impressive in terms of whites, but Tryg's point is the viewer won't even notice the whites are lacking when all that he is watching is one screen, whether it is a grey screen or a silver screen or a black screen.



That is exactly correct. Our eyes can adjust 22 f stops to provide our optic nerves the proper stimulus to feed our brain a constant brightness of image. So in that regard white can actually be many different things. Ambient light robs us in two ways one it dilutes the image on the screen and in another way it closes our eyes iris and changes the image we see.


When we view two or three samples at once we have no idea what the eye has set as the reference for white.


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pottscb* /forum/post/13813850
> 
> 
> This has not been my experience, I agree with hrd...a grey screen with high positive gain (~6.0 Silverstar) will not appear to have as bright of whites as a white screen of ~3.0 gain (Hi-Power).



You quoted the part where I said:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *darinp2* /forum/post/13806695
> 
> 
> If you view both at their peak gains the whites will look whiter on the High Power not because it is white, but because it has more peak gain than the Silverstar from the testing I've done, despite the manufacturers claim of almost twice the gain with the Silverstar.



and then went ahead and used the manufacturer's specs anyway. The Silverstar doesn't have a gain of 6.0. The manufacturer claims that, but it isn't true from my measurements. As I said, the Silverstar peak gain is less than the High Power peak gain. Since the High Power is retro-reflective you can find angles where the Silverstar has more gain than the High Power, but for the peak for both, the High Power had more in my testing.


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pottscb* /forum/post/13813850
> 
> 
> The best way to see this is to have two unity gain screens (1.0) next to each other, a grey and a white, and see which one produces the whitest white (the white one, in my experience).



It is important to know what rated gain means. It is basically for the peak, so the one with the more directional layer (like a gray base with a directional layer to get the gain up) will tend to have more falloff (at least using angular-reflective for each). So, if you look at an angle where the white has a gain of 1.0 and the gray has a gain of .8, of course the whites look whiter with the higher gain.


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pottscb* /forum/post/13813850
> 
> 
> Now, move the comparison to an increased gain grey screen (Stuart Greyhawk 1.3 gain) and do the same experiment...



The Grayhawk RS is about .92 gain (at least from what a Stewart Engineer told me) The old Grayhawk may have been less. Even with the Firehawk that is rated around there, the peak gain is closer to 1.2 from my measurements, but it falls off really fast because of the directional layer. So, if you compare anyplace except the brightest spot for the Firehawk, the gain you see will be lower. In lots of cases it will be down to close to .5 by the corners of the screen (depends on throw ratio, viewing ratio, etc.).


Which would you claim would have the more white whites, the Silverstar, a 1.0 matte white, or a 1.3 gain white (from a high gain viewing position, like in the center)?


--Darin


----------



## Dr_Audio

Although, I'm sure there at least a few users, especially the people ordering the largest sizes, who did not "forget" but think they have enough horse power to light up the BD, but might be dissapointed when they see the results. Even if the BD were exactly 1.4 gain, it would not be enough for some of the sizes people are thinking about IMO.[/quote]


What lumen output would you think would qualify as enough "horsepower"?

I have a Panasonic AE 2000u. But as someone else mentioned, you have to factor in preset modes such as the "color 1" setting I prefer as well as economy mode and bulb life. I hope my pj will be a good match. Any ideas?


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Dr_Audio* /forum/post/13815144
> 
> 
> Although, I'm sure there at least a few users, especially the people ordering the largest sizes, who did not "forget" but think they have enough horse power to light up the BD, but might be dissapointed when they see the results. Even if the BD were exactly 1.4 gain, it would not be enough for some of the sizes people are thinking about IMO.
> 
> 
> What lumen output would you think would qualify as enough "horsepower"?
> 
> I have a Panasonic AE 2000u. But as someone else mentioned, you have to factor in preset modes such as the "color 1" setting I prefer as well as economy mode and bulb life. I hope my pj will be a good match. Any ideas?



Screen size is one of the biggest issues discussed on this forum, what with few projectors being "light cannons". I'm probably going to switch back to a Mitsubishi HC1500, because of its rating of 1600 lumens. I don't mind running it in high bulb and the brightest mode and I like it with brilliant color on. I like a bright image and I think those settings on the HC1500 would give me an image that is plenty bright on a 110" 16X9 BD or on a 113.7" 16X9 image if I get a custom 142" 2.35:1 BD. This is what projectorreviews.com has to say about this projector:


"Sports mode starts out at 1263 lumens, but by cranking up Brilliant Color, to 10, the lumens jump to a dazzling 1824 lumens, making this projector a serious contender with the Epson Cinema 400 and Panasonic PT-AX100U, for those needing lots of lumens. With Brilliant Color set to 10 you no longer have the most natural image, but that is true of the brightest mode of just about every home theater projector."


As far as the Panasonic AE 2000u goes, I think you might find a lot of variation in what it can do in terms of lighting up a good-sized screen if you are willing to maximize the lumens by using shortest throw, high bulb, and dynamic mode or its equivalent.


As far as the 120" screen goes, we don't know whether the person posting is refering to a 16X9 or 2.35:1 aspect ratio or to a measurement of diagonal or width.


----------



## Mike N Ike

I got my 1.4 BD screen sample yesterday and was really excited because from all the talk I really wanted this to be next screen. Alas, it's not to be.


When I 1st viewed it against my HCCV gray screen I thought the BD looked terrible. Dim is an understament. Thought I got the .8 gain but the invoice said 1.4.


After playing with it a while I realized that is indeed angular reflective - and quite extremely so. My PJ is floor mounted - well, it's actually 16" below the screen and if I stand on a chair and watch it from above it looks great. Seemed like the BD is not going to work with a low mount.


So I called and SI and they said, yes, it going to be best if the PJ is about 3' off the floor or higher. Sadly, my current PJ has a fixed 16% vertical offset and my ceilings are 18' so low-mount is the only way I can go.


So I'm really envious of all you ceiling mount folks!


I've been considering a new PJ (with lens offset) so if that happens I' be back!


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mike N Ike* /forum/post/13816646
> 
> 
> I got my 1.4 BD screen sample yesterday and was really excited because from all the talk I really wanted this to be next screen. Alas, it's not to be.
> 
> 
> When I 1st viewed it against my HCCV gray screen I thought the BD looked terrible. Dim is an understament. Thought I got the .8 gain but the invoice said 1.4.
> 
> 
> After playing with it a while I realized that is indeed angular reflective - and quite extremely so. My PJ is floor mounted - well, it's actually 6" below the screen and if I stand on a chair and watch it from above it looks great. Seemed like the BD is not going to work with a low mount.
> 
> 
> So I called and SI and they said, yes, it going to be best if the PJ is about 3' off the floor or higher. Sadly, my current PJ has a fixed 16% vertical offset and my ceilings are 18' so low-mount is the only way I can go.
> 
> 
> So I'm really envious of all you ceiling mount folks!
> 
> 
> I've been considering a new PJ (with lens offset) so if that happens I' be back!



Are you saying that offsets that require the projector to be mounted either above or below the screen do not necessarily mean the projector cannot be used with the BD, that you just have to choose the above option?


Could you try this again, but with the arrows that are on the back of the sample pointing downwards?


----------



## funk74

Hello all,


I have a question about picking the right size screen with the correct projector. How accurate are the screen calculators on either the SI website or projection central's website?


I was thinking about going with a 133" 1.4 gain 2.35:1 screen with the panasonic PT-AE2000U Projector. The calculators appear to say that it is ok, but I have never owned a projector and I am new to this and don't know for sure what I actually need.


One other thing on the projection central's calculator you are not able to pick a 2.35:1 aspect ratio? what is the most relevant comparison measurement then? hight or width?


Thanks.


----------



## Mike N Ike




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13816806
> 
> 
> Are you saying that offsets that require the projector to be mounted either above or below the screen do not necessarily mean the projector cannot be used with the BD, that you just have to choose the above option?



Yes. My PJ does not have adjustable vertical lens offset. It is a fixed offset PJ. It must be mounted either 16%(of the screen height) above or 16%(of the screen height) below the screen. If could mount my pj above the screen (or at least 3' off the floor) I could use the BD. But due to my high ceiling, I must mount the pj below the screen; and in that case the BD image is not watchable.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13816806
> 
> 
> Could you try this again, but with the arrows that are on the back of the sample pointing downwards?



That's one of the 1st things I did. While there does appear to be a very slight difference with arrors up or down, it did not make a _significant_ difference with my low-mounted PJ.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mike N Ike* /forum/post/13816646
> 
> 
> After playing with it a while I realized that is indeed angular reflective - and quite extremely so. My PJ is floor mounted - well, it's actually 16" below the screen and if I stand on a chair and watch it from above it looks great. Seemed like the BD is not going to work with a low mount.
> 
> 
> So I called and SI and they said, yes, it going to be best if the PJ is about 3' off the floor or higher. Sadly, my current PJ has a fixed 16% vertical offset and my ceilings are 18' so low-mount is the only way I can go.



You say your PJ is 16" below the SCREEN, then you say SI told you to put it three feet off the FLOOR, that doesn't tell us much. By putting the PJ at 3 feet off the floor, how much below the screen will the PJ then be? Did SI indicate any other setup requirements? Thanks.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *funk74* /forum/post/13817032
> 
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> 
> I have a question about picking the right size screen with the correct projector. How accurate are the screen calculators on either the SI website or projection central's website?
> 
> 
> I was thinking about going with a 133" 1.4 gain 2.35:1 screen with the panasonic PT-AE2000U Projector. The calculators appear to say that it is ok, but I have never owned a projector and I am new to this and don't know for sure what I actually need.
> 
> 
> One other thing on the projection central's calculator you are not able to pick a 2.35:1 aspect ratio? what is the most relevant comparison measurement then? hight or width?
> 
> 
> Thanks.



Fun there are wiser guys than I on this board so hopefully they will chime in as well. I would recommend speaking with the folks at SI and see what they have to say about the subject. There is a common formula you can use to get a rough (think shaving with a chainsaw) estimate of output but it alludes me at the moment. Does anyone remember the one I'm talking about?


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mike N Ike* /forum/post/13817066
> 
> 
> Yes. My PJ does not have adjustable vertical lens offset. It is a fixed offset PJ. It must be mounted either 16%(of the screen height) above or 16%(of the screen height) below the screen. If could mount my pj above the screen (or at least 3' off the floor) I could use the BD. But due to my high ceiling, I must mount the pj below the screen; and in that case the BD image is not watchable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's one of the 1st things I did. While there does appear to be a very slight difference with arrors up or down, it did not make a _significant_ difference with my low-mounted PJ.



I emailed Shannon to ask about this. One of the questions I asked was if placing the projector in the exact middle of the screen is ideal in terms of gain.


The Mitsubishi HC1500 I mentioned earlier has an offset and no lens shift (a little sacrifice has to be made to be able to buy an awesome 1600-lumen projector for the cost of two bulbs), but I believe it has to be inverted in order to be mounted above the screen, which I do not really want to do, plus the manual says you lose a little brightness when mounting that way.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mike N Ike* /forum/post/13817066
> 
> 
> Yes. My PJ does not have adjustable vertical lens offset. It is a fixed offset PJ. It must be mounted either 16%(of the screen height) above or 16%(of the screen height) below the screen. If could mount my pj above the screen (or at least 3' off the floor) I could use the BD. But due to my high ceiling, I must mount the pj below the screen; and in that case the BD image is not watchable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's one of the 1st things I did. While there does appear to be a very slight difference with arrors up or down, it did not make a _significant_ difference with my low-mounted PJ.



How about buying a ceiling mount that has a large drop?


----------



## Mike N Ike




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13817233
> 
> 
> You say your PJ is 16" below the SCREEN, then you say SI told you to put it three feet off the FLOOR, that doesn't tell us much. By putting the PJ at 3 feet off the floor, how much below the screen will the PJ then be? Did SI indicate any other setup requirements? Thanks.



I see what you're saying. The bottom of my screen is currently 22" off the floor. PJ is roughly 6" off the floor, thus the PJ is roughly 16" below the bottom of the screen.


SI said a couple of things. First that the PJ should be at least 3' off the floor. Then they said it should be no lower than the bottom of the screen. When I said that was not exactly clear they went on to say that "many" screens were 36" off the floor and that is why he said level with the bottom of the screen. I have some doubt about the PQ with the pj level with the bottom of the screen but I'm going to give it a go just out of curiosity. It will be a mess and of course after I raise the pj the picture geometry will be hideous but I should be able to get an idea of the brightness. Likely won't get a chance till next week.







They didn't mention any other issues.


----------



## PeckerHead

I suggest reading the article at Projector Central ( http://www.projectorcentral.com/pana..._projector.htm ). In here it shows the manufacturer states a lumen output of 1500, but their tests show lumen output around 350 with optimal color settings and a max of 900. If you use these numbers in the SI and the Projector Central calculators, you should get a resonable idea if the size is reasonable.


----------



## Mike N Ike




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13818030
> 
> 
> How about buying a ceiling mount that has a large drop?



Room has a cathedral ceiling that runs from 10' to 18' and at the point where the pj has to be the ceiling is about 15'. It could be done and it would be a large drop. Tried to get WAF. Wouldn't even discuss it. Not gonna push it. Already got concessions for dark drapes and other light blocking measures. I know when to quit while I'm ahead.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mike N Ike* /forum/post/13818220
> 
> 
> I see what you're saying. The bottom of my screen is currently 22" off the floor. PJ is roughly 6" off the floor, thus the PJ is roughly 16" below the bottom of the screen.
> 
> 
> SI said a couple of things. First that the PJ should be at least 3' off the floor. Then they said it should be no lower than the bottom of the screen. When I said that was not exactly clear they went on to say that "many" screens were 36" off the floor and that is why he said level with the bottom of the screen. I have some doubt about the PQ with the pj level with the bottom of the screen but I'm going to give it a go just out of curiosity. It will be a mess and of course after I raise the pj the picture geometry will be hideous but I should be able to get an idea of the brightness. Likely won't get a chance till next week.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They didn't mention any other issues.



That really blows if the pj lens has to be at the same height as the top (in ur case bottom) of the screen. I don't know if the BD will work for me anymore







Thanks for the info, that helped a lot.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mike N Ike* /forum/post/13818286
> 
> 
> Room has a cathedral ceiling that runs from 10' to 18' and at the point where the pj has to be the ceiling is about 15'. It could be done and it would be a large drop. Tried to get WAF. Wouldn't even discuss it. Not gonna push it. Already got concessions for dark drapes and other light blocking measures. I know when to quit while I'm ahead.



Take a look at the wall mount by omnimount, that's what I have since I also have a tall ceiling, not as high as yours though. Nice looking too.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13818497
> 
> 
> That really blows if the pj lens has to be at the same height as the top (in ur case bottom) of the screen. I don't know if the BD will work for me anymore
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the info, that helped a lot.



I doubt if that's the case. We'll know more tomorrow if Shannon answers my questions, but I think there are two possibilities. One is the directional nature of the screen (we know its directional because it has arrows on the back indicating which way is up) means the screen was optimized for ceiling mounts, same as the Silverstar and the Firehawk, and mounting above the screen is the best possible location, while mounting below the screen is the worst possible location. Or, the reflective nature of the screen causes the gain to change when the projector is off-center, which means placing the projector even with the horizontal and vertical center of the screen is ideal, while the common ceiling mount, a necessity for DLPs that have offset and no lens shift, is just as bad as mounting below the screen. Hard to believe ceiling mounts could be problematic without SI cautioning on this.


----------



## Mike N Ike




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13818497
> 
> 
> That really blows if the pj lens has to be at the same height as the top (in ur case bottom) of the screen. I don't know if the BD will work for me anymore
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the info, that helped a lot.



I don't think you'll have that problem with a ceiling mount. This is, to one degre or other, a problem with low mounted pj's and angular reflective screens. I was going to get a Firehawk a couple of years ago but saw the same effect with the sample Stewart sent. My Dalite HCCV has an optical coating which mitigates the effect , but I still probably don't get it's full 1.1 gain.


----------



## haarec

Optimal recommended by SMPTE brightness of an image is 16 Foot-Lamberts. To calculate how big the screen CAN be, the formula is:


sq foot of screen = gain x measured lumens / 16


My estimation about true gain of this screen is 0,9 for so called 1,4 and 0,6 for 0,8.

So, if for example Panasonic AE2000 gives about 650 lumens of pretty good image (in corrected normal mode, lamp on normal), we have: 0,9 x 650 / 16 = 36,5 sq ft, which is about 110" 16/9.

If turned to calibrated mode it gives about 450 lumens: 0,9 x 450 / 16 = 25,3 sq ft, which is about 90" 16/9.


However lamps are going to be dimmer in time, so better choice would be a screen smaller then above and lamp set on low at the begining and turn lamp on hi over some time.

If those numbers are correct you can calculate how big the screen can be.


----------



## Lawguy

Try turning the screen upside down with the arrow pointing down.


----------



## cal87

Got my sample yesterday. What I have not figured out is how to attack that thick plastic board to my screen. Any suggestions?


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *panosp* /forum/post/13808638
> 
> 
> They didn't recommend anything specific as (I assume) the samples are small in dimensions. As long as they remain perfectly flat anything will do.



I would probably buy some black posterboard (in the Seattle area Fred Meyers sells it) and tape the material to it by using black duct tape on the front. This would require using part of the material to attach the tape too, but the duct tape allows tensioning it a little bit and doesn't risk having glue behind messing it up. This would be more like tensioning with a real screen.


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *cal87* /forum/post/13820956
> 
> 
> Got my sample yesterday. What I have not figured out is how to attack that thick plastic board to my screen. Any suggestions?



My plan is to get black posterboard (maybe 24"x18" or so) and attach the sample to it by running black duct tape over the part without the screen material. Will probably hang the part of the sample with stickies on the back over the side of the posterboard, so that the sample will lay flat. I may have to put a little bit of tape on the side with the screen material, but probably wouldn't require much. Then I'll try to stand the posterboard up on something (being careful not to scratch any screens I have).


--Darin


----------



## darinp2

Has anybody with this screen or a sample of it noticed a push toward purple compared to white screens? Especially with the .8 material?


A push toward red could be a good thing for digital projectors with UHP lamps, since they tend to be stronger in red. If they have higher CR modes that are weak in red then those could be used with a screen that has a shift toward red to get balanced colors with higher CR (kind of like a color filter on the projector). If the projector is already designed to be balanced for D65 then a push in any direction from that would be somewhat of an issue, even if the projector could be recalibrated, since it could hurt the CR.


--Darin


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *darinp2* /forum/post/13823026
> 
> 
> Has anybody with this screen or a sample of it noticed a push toward purple compared to white screens? Especially with the .8 material?
> 
> 
> A push toward red could be a good thing for digital projectors with UHP lamps, since they tend to be stronger in red. If they have higher CR modes that are weak in red then those could be used with a screen that has a shift toward red to get balanced colors with higher CR (kind of like a color filter on the projector). If the projector is already designed to be balanced for D65 then a push in any direction from that would be somewhat of an issue, even if the projector could be recalibrated, since it could hurt the CR.
> 
> 
> --Darin



A few months ago, while the screen was still in development, Ryan at SI told me the screen had a minor push. I'm pretty sure he said it was to blue.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *funk74* /forum/post/13817032
> 
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> 
> I have a question about picking the right size screen with the correct projector. How accurate are the screen calculators on either the SI website or projection central's website?
> 
> 
> Thanks.



I think the projectioncentral calculator is accurate in regard to screen dimensions and throw distances, but the foot-lamberts ratings are mixed, in that they are based on the projector manufacturer's raw lumens rating, while everyday use will yield different figures for different people, depending on bulb life, bulb variances in manufacture and aging, room conditions, and projector settings. I think the foot-lamberts ratings are great for seeing how they change from one screen size to another and from one zoom ratio/throw distance to another, and from one projector to another, and from one screen gain to another, but that they have to be used a general guide. For example, you put in a particular projector and screen and then try out the calculator at the highest zoom ratio/shortest throw distance and you get 20 foot-lamberts, then you try it out for the lowest zoom ratio/longest throw distance and you get 12 foot-lamberts. It's very useful to see how the brightness on the screen varies for that projector's zoom capabilities. However, you have to keep in mind that in a real-world application, another person might get 18 to 11 and another might get 24 to 14 on day one of projector use, and on day two the first person might get the brighter image because he's decided to switch to high bulb mode or dynamic mode.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *funk74* /forum/post/13817032
> 
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> 
> One other thing on the projection central's calculator you are not able to pick a 2.35:1 aspect ratio? what is the most relevant comparison measurement then? hight or width?
> 
> 
> Thanks.



Someone posted a link to another calculator recently. I'll look for it. I don't know for sure if it does 2.35:1, though, and it has to be downloaded into a spreadsheet.


There's a really easy way to _estimate_ the diagonal size of a 16X9 screen. Double the height and add two percent. So, for example, you want to buy a 133" 2.35:1 Black Diamond screen and you want to know what size 16X9 image you can get for the times you want to use it for HD TV. You find the screen has a height of 52.16" by looking it up on the SI screen calculator. 52.16 times 2 is 104+, 2 percent of 104+ is 2+, add 104+ and 2+ together and you get 106+.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13819114
> 
> 
> I doubt if that's the case. We'll know more tomorrow if Shannon answers my questions, but I think there are two possibilities. One is the directional nature of the screen (we know its directional because it has arrows on the back indicating which way is up) means the screen was optimized for ceiling mounts, same as the Silverstar and the Firehawk, and mounting above the screen is the best possible location, while mounting below the screen is the worst possible location. Or, the reflective nature of the screen causes the gain to change when the projector is off-center, which means placing the projector even with the horizontal and vertical center of the screen is ideal, while the common ceiling mount, a necessity for DLPs that have offset and no lens shift, is just as bad as mounting below the screen. Hard to believe ceiling mounts could be problematic without SI cautioning on this.



I heard back from Ryan, not Shannon, and this is what he had to say:

_The BD screen is angular reflective so it likes overhead projectors. There is no top or bottom to the screen so it can be flipped over. The only time anyone will have an issue is if their projector is on the floor.


You can mount your projector above the screen with no issues at all._


I replied asking if he thought there was an ideal mounting location for the projector, whether above the screen, middle of the screen, or if it did not matter as long as it was not below the screen. I also asked if the gain would vary depending on where the projector was mounted. Have yet to hear back.


That's interesting that Ryan said "There is no top or bottom to the screen so it can be flipped over", in light of forum members posting there are arrows on the back of screens and samples.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *FLBoy* /forum/post/13824879
> 
> 
> Um, no. In fact, as the aspect ratio gets larger, the area shrinks for a given diagonal. Think of the limit: a 133" diagonal screen with an aspect ratio of infinity:1 would be a line segment of 133" having an area of zero.
> 
> 
> To use real-world (Da-Lite) examples, a 133" 16x9 has a viewing area of 116" x 65". The viewing area is thus 7540 sq. in. A 133" 2.35:1 is 122" x 52". Its viewing area is thus 6344 sq. in.



116 squared plus 65 squared gives me 17681. 122 squared plus 52 squared gives me 17588. That's pretty close.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *darinp2* /forum/post/13822994
> 
> 
> I would probably buy some black posterboard (in the Seattle area Fred Meyers sells it) and tape the material to it by using black duct tape on the front. --Darin



I used pressure sensitive double stick foam tape underneath for another sample i had. It allows you to tension it more precisely and doesn't cover the material.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *darinp2* /forum/post/13823026
> 
> 
> Has anybody with this screen or a sample of it noticed a push toward purple compared to white screens? Especially with the .8 material?
> 
> --Darin



Yes! I installed my sample today and noticed the same thing, it's a severe push too I would say. It's amazing no else mentioned this already. Have you noticed the sheen as well? There is no way this material is as sharp (or as H00kem stated "sharper"!!) then a white matte screen! They say they sent me the 1.4 sample, but it is not even close, it was dimmer than my negative gain grey screen at all angles!! This is why I never trust anyones opinion on screens, 99% of the time it's their first or they have no experience in evaluating one. Damn I wish Pioneer would make a bigger Kuro already!!


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13824955
> 
> 
> 116 squared plus 65 squared gives me 17681. 122 squared plus 52 squared gives me 17588. That's pretty close.



You don't "square" the width, that would give you the area of a SQUARE. You multiply the width by height to get the area.


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13825355
> 
> 
> Have you noticed the sheen as well?



Unfortunately, I saw it from few feet away after placing the sample on a chair about halfway to my normal screen. It wasn't as bad as the Silverstar, but the same kind of sheen I've seen on screens that I think have a silver layer in them, like a Mocom 20 gain screen and the Silverstar. Not sure if this one has a silver layer, but just reminds me of that. I saw a sheen with the DNP SuperNova, but not sure if this one is better in that regard since I don't have a sample of the SuperNova.


I need to get things setup so that I can put the sample in the same plane as my normal screen and then look from my normal viewing position. Unfortunately, the sample is small enough that I'm not sure if this will answer it for me. I really saw the sheen yesterday mostly when moving my head a few inches back and forth. This was with a white image from the projector and the screen was slightly tilted left to right since I couldn't get it to stand up straight with what I was using.


For others, I should mention that I see sheen on some screens that others are perfectly fine with (like the Silverstar and some RPTVs I thought looked bad with it), so even if I see it after getting things setup right, that doesn't mean others will all see it. May be a matter of degrees and I don't want people to panic. Those who are sensitive to sheen (or speckling as I believe some call it) should probably keep this in mind though (although I need to test more). Somebody from DNP told me I shouldn't see speckling from normal viewing ratios with the SuperNova, but I did, so maybe many others wouldn't.


--Darin


----------



## Dr_Audio

crap. I hate sheen.


----------



## R Harkness

Another sheen-sensitive geek signing in. Still looks like I'll be going with Carada...


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *FLBoy* /forum/post/13826755
> 
> 
> Yes, it is pretty close. The problem is it has nothing to do with the area of the screen. The area of a rectangle is calculated as area = height x width.



You're right. I've been out of math class for over 35 years. I'll amend my previous post.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *darinp2* /forum/post/13825842
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, I saw it from few feet away after placing the sample on a chair about halfway to my normal screen. It wasn't as bad as the Silverstar, but the same kind of sheen I've seen on screens that I think have a silver layer in them, like a Mocom 20 gain screen and the Silverstar. Not sure if this one has a silver layer, but just reminds me of that. I saw a sheen with the DNP SuperNova, but not sure if this one is better in that regard since I don't have a sample of the SuperNova.
> 
> 
> I need to get things setup so that I can put the sample in the same plane as my normal screen and then look from my normal viewing position. Unfortunately, the sample is small enough that I'm not sure if this will answer it for me. I really saw the sheen yesterday mostly when moving my head a few inches back and forth. This was with a white image from the projector and the screen was slightly tilted left to right since I couldn't get it to stand up straight with what I was using.
> 
> 
> For others, I should mention that I see sheen on some screens that others are perfectly fine with (like the Silverstar and some RPTVs I thought looked bad with it), so even if I see it after getting things setup right, that doesn't mean others will all see it. May be a matter of degrees and I don't want people to panic. Those who are sensitive to sheen (or speckling as I believe some call it) should probably keep this in mind though (although I need to test more). Somebody from DNP told me I shouldn't see speckling from normal viewing ratios with the SuperNova, but I did, so maybe many others wouldn't.
> 
> 
> --Darin



I demoed a 110" Silverstar with an RS1 at a local showroom three times. I found the screen surface too visible for comfort when I sat in the front row 11 feet away, but it was not an issue for me moving just a foot or two back.


----------



## Mikenificent1

I forgot to mention, besides the drawbacks it has EXCELLENT ambient light rejection with my 6 cans all on and some cloudy daylight coming through, the screen was black and immensely better than my already light grey screen when using the green cross hatch pattern on a black background of my RS1.


To the guys who also hate sheen, if you can manage a 1.8 throw ratio, try and get a sample of the NEW DNP's. Last time I talked to someone from there, they said they worked really hard on getting rid of it and hot spotting in the new version. I'm at 1.4 so it's really tough for me, 1.8 would be a 60" screen for me lol. I haven't given up on the BD yet, I'm going to try different positions with my PJ and the sample, but if I can't get rid of the sheen I'm seriously considering getting one of the new 60" Kuro's, I've tried everything for ambient light (Dalite HCCV, DNP Supernova, Severtson High Contrast Grey, samples of Firehawk SST, GreyHawk G3, Dalite HiPower, Severtson Grey Vision 1.3, and now BD 1.4 (everything except for already known sheen/hot spot offenders lol, such as silverstar, planar x-screen, Firehawk, Dynaclear and chromavue, etc.)


Notice how sharp, 3D, and contrasty these images look even with some ambient light (yes a lot smaller, but I may have to live with a 60" from 10' away):
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...1#post11849241


----------



## mrlittlejeans

I commented on the "sheen" and what looked like some serious blue push a few pages back. It was quite obvious looking at dp13's pictures. The screen looks like my rptv screen.


----------



## noah katz

"116 squared plus 65 squared gives me 17681. 122 squared plus 52 squared gives me 17588. That's pretty close."


The square root of those is 133, the starting assumption.


----------



## mcleo19

So, does anyone who owns the BD happy with it? Any buyers' remorse?


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mcleo19* /forum/post/13835799
> 
> 
> So, does anyone who owns the BD happy with it? Any buyers' remorse?



Good question! +1


----------



## haarec

I agree.


----------



## DP13




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mcleo19* /forum/post/13835799
> 
> 
> So, does anyone who owns the BD happy with it? Any buyers' remorse?



-Very happy here!!!

-None here. It works well in my environment. Ambient light/no ambient light makes no difference. You truly can enjoy watching anything with ambient light and even better with no ambient light. Picture is great regardless. My say is if you can afford it, go for it. If you can't, wait till you see it firsthand before making a decision. I didn't care throwing that much money unto a screen I'd never seen but believed the hype. I wanted a screen that would indeed look like my LCD when turned off and that worked well with ambient light. So far so good and I don't regret it.

-However, I am interested in other BD owners. How is it working for you all??? Are you all enjoying it like I am? Curious.


----------



## darinp2

I took a look at the 1.4 sample a little more last night. I got a piece of black foamboard (I was thinking it was posterboard, but I think this is thicker and stronger than posterboard) and taped the sample to it.


From my normal viewing ratio (about 1.1x the screen width) I was surprised at how much I saw the speckling effect. However, this was at basically the brightest spot and if I moved just a little off angle I didn't see it. I also found that if I looked intently with the High Power screen and a white image I think I could see a little bit of the same effect. Not nearly as pronounced though. I'll try the Silverstar sample later, but if the speckling issue is just for one little spot with the BD I could see most people not even noticing or being bothered by it with that material.


As far as the colorshift I did some measurements off the High Power, the BD 1.4 gain and an older sample of the Carada Grey that I had. I thought the Carada Gray had a push toward blue, but based on this it had more of a push toward red than the High Power. It has probably gotten a little bit of sun reflecting to it in the room I had it in over the last year or two, so maybe that shifted it some (I've heard sunlight tends to shift screens toward yellow, which is why some screens in the past were built to start out on the blue side). Based on previous measurements I think the High Power shifts a little bit toward blue.


Anyway, here is what I got from Colorfacts for xy and RGB percentages for each screen:


High Power: (.3080, .3245) : 97, 100, 105

BD 1.4: (.3051, .3053) : 104, 97, 120

Carada Gray: (.3178, .3290) : 105, 99, 98


Just from looking at them I thought the BD .8 gain material had more of a push toward purple than the 1.4 gain material, but I didn't measure the .8 gain material.


--Darin


----------



## haarec




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DP13* /forum/post/13838280
> 
> 
> It works well in my environment



Please tell us more about your setup - how big is screen, what gain, which projector, which mode, calibrated to D65 or not, lamp on hi or on low, how far from the screen, lens shifted or straight ahead, you know - stuff like that


----------



## DP13




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *haarec* /forum/post/13838878
> 
> 
> Please tell us more about your setup - how big is screen, what gain, which projector, which mode, calibrated to D65 or not, lamp on hi or on low, how far from the screen, lens shifted or straight ahead, you know - stuff like that



Haarec, I've posted that info already and posted some mediocre pictures. In summary:

-110" 1.4 BD

-Mitsubishi HD4000U in economy mode on low

-About 18' from screen straight ahead...no lens shift

-Calibrated to different setting depending on how much ambient light at the time


If I change the settings to Hi mode and high brightness, the picture looks even better. I'll do that when my lamp gets dimmer.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DP13* /forum/post/13838280
> 
> 
> -Very happy here!!!
> 
> -None here. It works well in my environment. Ambient light/no ambient light makes no difference. You truly can enjoy watching anything with ambient light and even better with no ambient light. Picture is great regardless. My say is if you can afford it, go for it. If you can't, wait till you see it firsthand before making a decision. I didn't care throwing that much money unto a screen I'd never seen but believed the hype. I wanted a screen that would indeed look like my LCD when turned off and that worked well with ambient light. So far so good and I don't regret it.
> 
> -However, I am interested in other BD owners. How is it working for you all??? Are you all enjoying it like I am? Curious.



Thanks DP13! That's exactly what we're looking for. Positive or negative, it's good to hear from the people working with the BD in their setup already.


Thanks again!


----------



## Scrimpin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13827122
> 
> 
> To the guys who also hate sheen, if you can manage a 1.8 throw ratio, try and get a sample of the NEW DNP's. Last time I talked to someone from there, they said they worked really hard on getting rid of it and hot spotting in the new version. I'm at 1.4 so it's really tough for me, 1.8 would be a 60" screen for me lol.



How do the DNP's compare price-wise to the BD? Also, I'm not sure what you are referring to with the throw ratio. Is that the trow ratio distance required to eliminate sheen?


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Scrimpin* /forum/post/13843076
> 
> 
> How do the DNP's compare price-wise to the BD? Also, I'm not sure what you are referring to with the throw ratio. Is that the trow ratio distance required to eliminate sheen?



I'm not sure about the prices for the latest fixed version, but I know the old 92" Supernova MSRP (about 2 years ago, might be due to the now week dollar) was a little cheaper than the current 92" BD MSRP. The throw ratio is the ratio of the distance from the lense to the screen versus the width of the screen. So for example if the lens is 10' feet away from a 80" wide screen (which is 92" diagonal), the throw ratio is 1.5. To make it a throw ratio of 1.8, the lens would have to be 12' away. The longer throw ratio of the DNP is what's required to prevent hot spotting and a more uniform picture.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *darinp2* /forum/post/13838516
> 
> 
> From my normal viewing ratio (about 1.1x the screen width) I was surprised at how much I saw the speckling effect. However, this was at basically the brightest spot and if I moved just a little off angle I didn't see it.
> 
> --Darin



That would be warning signs of hot spotting, if you move your head and it disappears, you probably can't see it because the sample is too small; on a full size screen the sheen would have just shifted to the side, but still on the screen. Plus dead center is suppose to be the best seat in the house, not the worse.


----------



## Scrimpin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13845224
> 
> 
> I'm not sure about the prices for the latest fixed version, but I know the old 92" Supernova MSRP (about 2 years ago, might be due to the now week dollar) was a little cheaper than the current 92" BD MSRP. The throw ratio is the ratio of the distance from the lense to the screen versus the width of the screen. So for example if the lens is 10' feet away from a 80" wide screen (which is 92" diagonal), the throw ratio is 1.5. To make it a throw ratio of 1.8, the lens would have to be 12' away. The longer throw ratio of the DNP is what's required to prevent hot spotting and a more uniform picture.



Thanks. My throw 1.85 so it may be worth looking into. Plus the fact there is a DNP dealer locally is a big plus.


----------



## haarec




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DP13* /forum/post/13839176
> 
> 
> Haarec, I've posted that info already and posted some mediocre pictures. In summary:
> 
> -110" 1.4 BD
> 
> -Mitsubishi HD4000U in economy mode on low
> 
> -About 18' from screen straight ahead...no lens shift
> 
> -Calibrated to different setting depending on how much ambient light at the time
> 
> 
> If I change the settings to Hi mode and high brightness, the picture looks even better. I'll do that when my lamp gets dimmer.




Indeed, I've missed it somewhere. I asked about modes and a calibration because of obvious differences in lumen output. Your projector can generate 500 - 1400 lumens. How much ligth do we REALY need to lighten this screen?


----------



## Phil Smith




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *avdesignshouston* /forum/post/13779435
> 
> 
> Not to steer the subject away again but here is a rear projection setup I did at my store with a Vutec 92" and Mits HC4900 (throw distance about 10'). The room the projector is in must be dark. As you can tell, the light doesn't seem to bother the screen too much on the outside.
> 
> Don't slam the iPhone pic either. I know I need quit using it but it is so convenient.



That looks pretty good! What model Vutec RP screen is that? How much does it hot spot/color shift, and how is off-axis viewing?


----------



## doseofrealta




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *darinp2* /forum/post/13838516
> 
> 
> I took a look at the 1.4 sample a little more last night. I got a piece of black foamboard (I was thinking it was posterboard, but I think this is thicker and stronger than posterboard) and taped the sample to it.
> 
> 
> From my normal viewing ratio (about 1.1x the screen width) I was surprised at how much I saw the speckling effect. However, this was at basically the brightest spot and if I moved just a little off angle I didn't see it. I also found that if I looked intently with the High Power screen and a white image I think I could see a little bit of the same effect. Not nearly as pronounced though. I'll try the Silverstar sample later, but if the speckling issue is just for one little spot with the BD I could see most people not even noticing or being bothered by it with that material.
> 
> 
> As far as the colorshift I did some measurements off the High Power, the BD 1.4 gain and an older sample of the Carada Grey that I had. I thought the Carada Gray had a push toward blue, but based on this it had more of a push toward red than the High Power. It has probably gotten a little bit of sun reflecting to it in the room I had it in over the last year or two, so maybe that shifted it some (I've heard sunlight tends to shift screens toward yellow, which is why some screens in the past were built to start out on the blue side). Based on previous measurements I think the High Power shifts a little bit toward blue.
> 
> 
> Anyway, here is what I got from Colorfacts for xy and RGB percentages for each screen:
> 
> 
> High Power: (.3080, .3245) : 97, 100, 105
> 
> BD 1.4: (.3051, .3053) : 104, 97, 120
> 
> Carada Gray: (.3178, .3290) : 105, 99, 98
> 
> 
> Just from looking at them I thought the BD .8 gain material had more of a push toward purple than the 1.4 gain material, but I didn't measure the .8 gain material.
> 
> 
> --Darin



Any more numbers to share Darin? Don't be shy. So far it seems the highly hyped BD is a purple screen with sparklies and hotspotting. Is there anything else?


----------



## Scrimpin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *doseofrealta* /forum/post/13855646
> 
> 
> Any more numbers to share Darin? Don't be shy. So far it seems the highly hyped BD is a purple screen with sparklies and hotspotting. Is there anything else?



You appear to take some measure of glee from the negative BD comments. Any particular reason why? Care to share? Don't be shy.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Scrimpin* /forum/post/13862559
> 
> 
> You appear to take some measure of glee from the negative BD comments. Any particular reason why? Care to share? Don't be shy.



Every screen has compromises.


----------



## doseofrealta




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Scrimpin* /forum/post/13862559
> 
> 
> You appear to take some measure of glee from the negative BD comments. Any particular reason why? Care to share? Don't be shy.



Because I'm working on a black _titanium_ screen so I'm trying to stealthly undermine my competition.










I'm actually very disappointed as I desperately wanted this screen to be all that it was hyped to be. But I hate sparklies and hot spotting. The purple push may be manageable with calibration (depending on how severely its pushing I suppose).


Now don't you be shy...feel free to say you're sorry. That or develop a thicker skin if you plan to buy expensive toys and then inevitably have someone on this rather large forum disagree with your purchasing decision.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *doseofrealta* /forum/post/13863108
> 
> 
> Because I'm working on a black _titanium_ screen so I'm trying to stealthly undermine my competition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm actually very disappointed as I desperately wanted this screen to be all that it was hyped to be. But I hate sparklies and hot spotting. The purple push may be manageable with calibration (depending on how severely its pushing I suppose).



When will the BT be available?


Seriously though, I'm going to start a sparklies/hot spot haters thread, I want to know what screen they are using.


----------



## bud16415




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13864202
> 
> 
> When will the BT be available?
> 
> 
> Seriously though, I'm going to start a sparklies/hot spot haters thread, I want to know what screen they are using.



If you hate hot spots and you hate sparklies get one of the light cannons, get a dark low gain neutral density gray screen with a good 160 degree viewing cone to provide about 20 foot lamberts of reflected image after the screen attenuates what it will. Get a light controlled room with dark ceiling and walls and then add back in the desired directional ambient light you require at the seating end of the room. You will have the darkest of perceived and real blacks the desired ambient will allow, and the image will appear and the screen will disappear. The depth you see in the image will be the depth of field the director of the movie wanted you to see. There will be shots you will be tempted to dive into the screen it will look so open aired.


Trying to get that same image in a brightly lit, white walled, floor to ceiling windowed room. Is a very tall order for a screen to do. This screen might go a long way to producing a good image under some adverse conditions given the right match up with projector and the ambient being directed a certain way.


Just like its undisputed a CRT projector in a totally lights out room is going to produce the darkest of black levels. It’s also understood some people need some amount of light in the room. One good method of fighting ambient light is more lumens from the projector. But those lumens wont help you with blacks. They can help you with perceived blacks and they can help you overpower a neutral gray screen, to provide you the brightness needed to perceive whites.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bud16415* /forum/post/13865171
> 
> 
> If you hate hot spots and you hate sparklies get one of the light cannons, get a dark low gain neutral density gray screen with a good 160 degree viewing cone to provide about 20 foot lamberts of reflected image after the screen attenuates what it will. Get a light controlled room with dark ceiling and walls and then add back in the desired directional ambient light you require at the seating end of the room. You will have the darkest of perceived and real blacks the desired ambient will allow, and the image will appear and the screen will disappear. The depth you see in the image will be the depth of field the director of the movie wanted you to see. There will be shots you will be tempted to dive into the screen it will look so open aired.



I have a very dark room (all walls and ceiling painted a very dark blue "quasi black"), and controlled lighting (3 cans in the back of the room with 1.5" 35 watt bulbs recessed 4" into the housing). The problem is finding a high lumen 16:9 1080P pj thats a high quality DLP with a throw of 1.4 and under $8k!! I would have loved one of the new Infocus IN83 or even a 777 but the throws are just too damn long and I wouldn't want a lens throw converter (too expesive anyway).


----------



## mcleo19

Hmmmm...the silence on the BD from those who own it is almost deafening (with the exception of DP13). Like many others who have followed this thread, I really had high expectations for this screen. Looks like it will be a Carada BW for me after all...


----------



## DP13




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bud16415* /forum/post/13865171
> 
> 
> the image will appear and the screen will disappear.
> 
> 
> Trying to get that same image in a brightly lit, white walled, floor to ceiling windowed room. Is a very tall order for a screen to do. This screen might go a long way to producing a good image under some adverse conditions given the right match up with projector and the ambient being directed a certain way.



Wow. I was just downstairs watching TV and came up stairs to check my e-mail. I had not jumped on this forum in a while and saw this particular comment. It is funny because daily I'm more impressed with the screen and after 3 hours of watching TV, I noticed that the screen does go away, border and all. Literally "the image will appear and the screen will disappear". I know exactly what you mean Bud16415.

Also, I've yet to see a hot spott and my projector is on at least 5hrs non-stop daily. Once in a full moon you may have sparklies but nothing major. That I base on what my sister said...I've personally have not seen them. If I do I'll be the first to comment on them.


----------



## DP13




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mcleo19* /forum/post/13869399
> 
> 
> Hmmmm...the silence on the BD from those who own it is almost deafening (with the exception of DP13). Like many others who have followed this thread, I really had high expectations for this screen. Looks like it will be a Carada BW for me after all...



How many actual BD owners are there? I know Hookem and someone else. Can we get feedback from you all? I would like to see how the BD is working with your setups. I'm like everyone....anxious to find out if you all are pleased with it as I am with mine. Well, hope to hear from you all!


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DP13* /forum/post/13870769
> 
> 
> How many actual BD owners are there? I know Hookem and someone else. Can we get feedback from you all? I would like to see how the BD is working with your setups. I'm like everyone....anxious to find out if you all are pleased with it as I am with mine. Well, hope to hear from you all!



DP13, thanks again for the constant feedback on the BD. It's always nice to hear from end users! Didn't hookem mention that he was still building his theater room? That would have killed me to already have the screen and not be able to put it up yet!!!


----------



## Scrimpin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *doseofrealta* /forum/post/13863108
> 
> 
> Because I'm working on a black _titanium_ screen so I'm trying to stealthly undermine my competition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm actually very disappointed as I desperately wanted this screen to be all that it was hyped to be. But I hate sparklies and hot spotting. The purple push may be manageable with calibration (depending on how severely its pushing I suppose).
> 
> 
> Now don't you be shy...feel free to say you're sorry. That or develop a thicker skin if you plan to buy expensive toys and then inevitably have someone on this rather large forum disagree with your purchasing decision.



I'm not an owner but like you, a potential owner. I am also very dissappointed that the BD has not received more positive comments, but I still have hope it may meet my needs. No need for me to be thick skinned, I'm not an owner yet. I simply didn't perceive your post as being very sincere. Darin has been providing some excellent feedback and I hope will continue to do so, along with other owners. I come to this forum for information, and disagreement is certainly a part of that. But disagreement is one thing, jeering others is another. If I misinterpreted your "tone" then you have my apology. If not, I trust Darin has yours.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DP13* /forum/post/13870769
> 
> 
> How many actual BD owners are there? I know Hookem and someone else. Can we get feedback from you all? I would like to see how the BD is working with your setups. I'm like everyone....anxious to find out if you all are pleased with it as I am with mine. Well, hope to hear from you all!



Yes, thanks DP13 for your replies and for the feedback you've provided.


Interesting how others have dropped off, as listed below. There may be perfectly logical reasons in each case, but in absence of those, it remains somewhat curious. Please correct me, if I'm mistaken on any of the info below:


h00kemh0rns - has not posted since 4/23 3:20pm. h00kemh0rns was hoping to get the screen/projector viewing by the weekend (4/26 & 4/27). We have not heard anything back since.


tommy def - has not posted since 5/6 6:42pm. tommy def was going to provide pictures the next day (5/7).


avdesignshouston - has not posted since 5/2 9:53am. I was hoping for more pictures, and a couple of folks have posted questions to avdesignhouston since then.


CTO - has posted just once on 4/23 9:29am. He's probably very busy and he did mention that he would not be able to be on the forum on a daily basis, but it has been over three weeks and several issues have been raised.


Obviously, folks can come and go as they wish and some are just plain busy. I just found it curious that the folks dropping off are the ones who may be in a position to provide more feedback. While I appreciate the feedback on the samples that folks have been receiving, I agree with DP13 that it would be great to get feedback from owners of the screen (should we be just a bit more patient?) Anyways, regarding the folks listed above, I appreciate the feedback you've already provided, and I look forward to any/all of you dropping by the forum to give us some feedback (pictures would be even better!)


----------



## golfnz34me

Maybe the screen is so good that they're watching movies instead of posting here.


Mike


----------



## darinp2

As somebody mentioned, no screen is perfect. I can only go by the small samples I have right now, but even with the stuff I mentioned I think quite a few people would probably like this screen. I went to a Magnolia Hi-Fi in a Best Buy store yesterday hoping that they would have gotten a full size BD in so I could see that, but they didn't have one. I asked a guy who worked there and he didn't see it in the system for the next couple of weeks. They do have a sign that they sell Screen Innovation screens, but nothing about the BD. I would still like to see a full size one.


--Darin


----------



## Mikenificent1




darinp2;13874389 I went to a Magnolia Hi-Fi in a Best Buy store yesterday hoping that they would have gotten a full size BD in so I could see that said:


> SI told me a while ago that Magnolia's should have the BD in June. We'll see...


----------



## mcleo19

Hey thezaks,


What you have outlined below is exactly what has me a bit concerned. I would also add, though it was just an evaluation of some samples, pansop's observations along with his home theater friends. With all the pre-release excitement, you would figure the early adopters would enthusiastically post after having it set up to tell us how great it is. I would still want to get this screen, but I need a strong justification before spending 2.5 times as much as other screens, and I don't know how much longer I can hold off







.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks* /forum/post/13874044
> 
> 
> Yes, thanks DP13 for your replies and for the feedback you've provided.
> 
> 
> Interesting how others have dropped off, as listed below. There may be perfectly logical reasons in each case, but in absence of those, it remains somewhat curious. Please correct me, if I'm mistaken on any of the info below:
> 
> 
> h00kemh0rns - has not posted since 4/23 3:20pm. h00kemh0rns was hoping to get the screen/projector viewing by the weekend (4/26 & 4/27). We have not heard anything back since.
> 
> 
> tommy def - has not posted since 5/6 6:42pm. tommy def was going to provide pictures the next day (5/7).
> 
> 
> avdesignshouston - has not posted since 5/2 9:53am. I was hoping for more pictures, and a couple of folks have posted questions to avdesignhouston since then.
> 
> 
> CTO - has posted just once on 4/23 9:29am. He's probably very busy and he did mention that he would not be able to be on the forum on a daily basis, but it has been over three weeks and several issues have been raised.
> 
> 
> Obviously, folks can come and go as they wish and some are just plain busy. I just found it curious that the folks dropping off are the ones who may be in a position to provide more feedback. While I appreciate the feedback on the samples that folks have been receiving, I agree with DP13 that it would be great to get feedback from owners of the screen (should we be just a bit more patient?) Anyways, regarding the folks listed above, I appreciate the feedback you've already provided, and I look forward to any/all of you dropping by the forum to give us some feedback (pictures would be even better!)


----------



## tommy def

Sorry I will post some better pics once I get a new camera this weekend. I'm still over all very impressed with the screen and projector and just so you guys know this is not the only screen I have seen.


----------



## Scrimpin

Thanks for the pics TommyDef. When looking at your setup with the lights on (all white walls) and then the lights off pics, I have no reservations whatsoever about the BD ability to control light scatter. Frankly, I'm amazed how dark your room is. Is the pic a 1.85 aspect or some other because I can't see any black bars either.


BTW, looks good the way you have tucked the screen into the alcove.


----------



## tommy def




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Scrimpin* /forum/post/13885436
> 
> 
> Thanks for the pics TommyDef. When looking at your setup with the lights on (all white walls) and then the lights off pics, I have no reservations whatsoever about the BD ability to control light scatter. Frankly, I'm amazed how dark your room is. Is the pic a 1.85 aspect or some other because I can't see any black bars either.
> 
> 
> BTW, looks good the way you have tucked the screen into the alcove.



Star wars is 2.35:1 I believe, the bars are there but with the lights off you can't see them.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tommy def* /forum/post/13885557
> 
> 
> Star wars is 2.35:1 I believe, the bars are there but with the lights off you can't see them.



Hi Tommy,


Any chance you can put a pic or two with some ambient light in the room?


Thanks again, and I have to agree...that is a slick little set-up with the alcove.


Andrew


----------



## BigDallas

Thanks DP13 & Tommy def for your feedback. You keep me cautiously optimistic.


Maybe the reason there are so few posts is due to the very very few # of screens shipping? I ordered mine >3 weeks ago. This Monday they said it would be mid June due to production problems. Since I work in the high tech field, I understand new technology comes with many wrinkles at first. That's why I'm seldom an early adopter. So it is OK for me to wait for a quality product.

I also wonder if the few who do have them may or may not have any defects that SI doesn't want to go public and asked them to keep quiet. At this price, I'm sure they would eventually replace a problem, but seem unable to do that this month anyway.


I wonder why we haven't seen any real editor reviews on the web / magazine?

But if people are like me, I haven't searched for any since I found this forum.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BigDallas* /forum/post/13887662
> 
> 
> Thanks DP13 & Tommy def for your feedback. You keep me cautiously optimistic.
> 
> 
> Maybe the reason there are so few posts is due to the very very few # of screens shipping? I ordered mine >3 weeks ago. This Monday they said it would be mid June due to production problems. Since I work in the high tech field, I understand new technology comes with many wrinkles at first. That's why I'm seldom an early adopter. So it is OK for me to wait for a quality product.
> 
> I also wonder if the few who do have them may or may not have any defects that SI doesn't want to go public and asked them to keep quiet. At this price, I'm sure they would eventually replace a problem, but seem unable to do that this month anyway.
> 
> 
> I wonder why we haven't seen any real editor reviews on the web / magazine?
> 
> But if people are like me, I haven't searched for any since I found this forum.



Hi BigDallas,


I am, admittedly, a bit obsessive about this screen. I have been keeping an eye out for any professional reviews in the usual places (AVS, Projector Reviews, Projector Central, Electronic House, Home Theater Mag, Ultimate AV Mag, Audioholics, cine4home, etc.) but haven't seen anything other than a quick blurb or press release about the product...yet.


I would assume (and we all know what happens when you assume!) they may be holding off with professional reviews until they iron out their production problems. Again, this is simply a guess.


Andrew


----------



## skydiver1

I was in SI today b/c someone recommended me to check out a new screen from them. I called and they allowed me to come in and show me a demo. They had the JVC projector. I was very impressed. I saw it with yellow lamps on and florescent lights on it as well. I also like the dark room demo. Their white ceiling and walls went dark. It also looks very nice on the wall. It was a CR100 .8 gain. I was very impressed and am placing my order this week. I will be getting a TR92 .8 gain for my house with a JVC projector. I have windows on the side of my room and like to leave the lights on when I watch TV. I can't wait to get it!


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *skydiver1* /forum/post/13903633
> 
> 
> I was in SI today b/c someone recommended me to check out a new screen from them. I called and they allowed me to come in and show me a demo. They had the JVC projector. I was very impressed. I saw it with yellow lamps on and florescent lights on it as well. I also like the dark room demo. Their white ceiling and walls went dark. It also looks very nice on the wall. It was a CR100 .8 gain. I was very impressed and am placing my order this week. I will be getting a TR92 .8 gain for my house with a JVC projector. I have windows on the side of my room and like to leave the lights on when I watch TV. I can't wait to get it!



Congratulations skydiver, you must be absolutely thrilled! Let us know how everything works out once you get it home and be sure to show off your sweet set-up!!


----------



## batborsen

Hi! It would be great if someone could post some daylight pics of the screen during a movie! Many screens out there performs faboulus with ordinary lamps

that are on, but daylight is another thing!


I have a grey 1.2 gain screen that performs extremely well with lamplights, but SUCKS with daylight, both sunny and cloudy days!


Thanks!


----------



## glennQNYC

Image & Sound FX in Old Bridge, NJ (732-607-1064 / [email protected] ) just had his 80" Black Diamond demo screen ship yesterday. His goal is to have it up for an event he is participating in on June 8. Although Phil has two dedicated theaters, the BD setup will be in his showroom, and will have to overcome the opposing all-glass exterior wall.


glennQ


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *glennQNYC* /forum/post/13909373
> 
> 
> Image & Sound FX in Old Bridge, NJ (732-607-1064 / [email protected] ) just had his 80" Black Diamond demo screen ship yesterday. His goal is to have it up for an event he is participating in on June 8. Although Phil has two dedicated theaters, the BD setup will be in his showroom, and will have to overcome the opposing all-glass exterior wall.
> 
> 
> glennQ



Glenn thanks for the news! I just e-mailed them about show details and am going to try and make it out there.


Thanks again!

Andrew


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *batborsen* /forum/post/13908230
> 
> 
> I have a grey 1.2 gain screen that performs extremely well with lamplights, but SUCKS with daylight, both sunny and cloudy days!



Care to say which one?


----------



## mcleo19

Alas, I pulled the trigger on a 110" 1.4 BD. Should be here in 4 to 6 weeks.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mcleo19* /forum/post/13916838
> 
> 
> Alas, I pulled the trigger on a 110" 1.4 BD. Should be here in 4 to 6 weeks.



Very cool! I'd be killing myself with that wait time though 


I'll be making my way to a dealer in early June who will be stocking it. If I remember I'll pack the camera and try and get some pictures of it in action as well as the set-up for everybody to see.


----------



## funk74

mcleo,


where did you end up ordering the screen from? did you get it direct from SI or another distributor?


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *glennQNYC* /forum/post/13909373
> 
> 
> Image & Sound FX in Old Bridge, NJ (732-607-1064 / [email protected] ) just had his 80" Black Diamond demo screen ship yesterday. His goal is to have it up for an event he is participating in on June 8. Although Phil has two dedicated theaters, the BD setup will be in his showroom, and will have to overcome the opposing all-glass exterior wall.
> 
> 
> glennQ



Is 80" the diagonal size?


----------



## mcleo19

I ordered from projectorzone.com. SI doesnt allow them to advertise the prices anymore on their website, so you will need to call to get it ordered.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *funk74* /forum/post/13935119
> 
> 
> mcleo,
> 
> 
> where did you end up ordering the screen from? did you get it direct from SI or another distributor?


----------



## sauroneru

Audio Concepts in Houston has a 2.35:1 BD on display with an Epson Pro Cinema 810 720p projector. I don't know much about front projection, but it looked very good. It was in a batcave, but had 75W halogen track lights. The BD handled the bulbs 4 feet away fantastically - you had to shine them directly on the screen to wash out the image at all. The screen did wash out much easier when a bulb next to the projector at the back of the room was pointed at the screen. Their screen was supposed to be a 1.4 gain, but again white paper showed a much brighter image. However, I didn't have someone else hold it while I stepped back a few feet and made sure I was looking at the screen from a 0° angle. I called SI and they said they'd look into it, since their 1.4 screens are definitely brighter than paper. I saw no hotspotting or sparklies, but I'm also not extremely picky about the picture, I just don't want any significant artifacts. I would say it looks very similar to a direct-view LCD screen as far as its ambient light rejection and off-angle viewing. Way better than a rear projection set.


Note about Audio Concepts: I hate them. They were ignorant and rude. I had to convince them that there were 2 gains of BD, then they had to look at the receipt to find out for sure they had the 1.4. They had no idea how many lumens the projector put out, what mode it was running in, and acted like those were the dumbest questions they've ever been asked. They didn't know how big the screen was (maybe 7' wide was their estimate), and gave me a lecture about how diagonal sizes don't mean anything since we're not using 4:3 screens anymore (I just wanted to get an estimate of the 16:9 image they were projecting on their 2.35:1 screen). When I held up a piece of copy paper and saw it was quite a bit brighter than the screen, another salesman came by and told me that of course it looks brighter since it's a different material and "people with training" at the factory measured the screen and they know what they're doing. Sadly, I'll probably go back with my wife once more since they're the only place in town with one, but I obviously will not contribute any money to their hatred of clean-cut 30 year olds in scrubs (I guess my demographic is ruining the world or something).


----------



## tommy def




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/13885593
> 
> 
> Hi Tommy,
> 
> 
> Any chance you can put a pic or two with some ambient light in the room?
> 
> 
> Thanks again, and I have to agree...that is a slick little set-up with the alcove.
> 
> 
> Andrew



This is with full lights on.


----------



## do not freeze




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tommy def* /forum/post/13959282
> 
> 
> This is with full lights on.



impressive


----------



## haarec

This blue tint of what seems to be originaly white on the image - is it a matter of the screen? Could you place a white paper on a corner and take a picture then?


----------



## batborsen

And perhaps some pics in a comletely dark enviroment?!


----------



## do not freeze




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *haarec* /forum/post/13960486
> 
> 
> This blue tint of what seems to be originaly white on the image - is it a matter of the screen? Could you place a white paper on a corner and take a picture then?



I saw a blue push too. But there's so many variables, like the projector's calibration, what the original feed looks like and the digital camera. We can't really tell from these pictures, we'll have to ask the owners of the BD.


----------



## send

Several people have been asking about Black Diamond screen reviews.


FYI .: There are two Black Diamond screen reviews coming out this month in Sound & Vision and Playback Magazines.


More to come including an AVS review shortly


We appreciate all the support and excitement!


Ryan Gustafson

.: SI Screens :.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *send* /forum/post/13963021
> 
> 
> Several people have been asking about Black Diamond screen reviews.
> 
> 
> FYI .: There are two Black Diamond screen reviews coming out this month in Sound & Vision and Playback Magazines.
> 
> 
> More to come including an AVS review shortly
> 
> 
> We appreciate all the support and excitement!
> 
> 
> Ryan Gustafson
> 
> .: SI Screens :.



Hi Ryan, can you tell us if AV Science will be a dealer for your screens soon?


----------



## haarec




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *do not freeze* /forum/post/13962912
> 
> 
> I saw a blue push too. But there's so many variables, like the projector's calibration, what the original feed looks like and the digital camera. We can't really tell from these pictures, we'll have to ask the owners of the BD.



Yes, of course. This surely is a projector calibration matter. Having normal (400 lumes for D65) projector, we need (or even have to) use dynamic mode with obvious blue push because of amount of light we absolutely have to have for this screen, didn´t pay attention for a color balans.


My point is to get know how much light we need for a bright calibrated image. Black level is of course important but how about a white level.


----------



## mcleo19

Very nice...I am starting to feel much better about my purchase already! Can't wait for it to arrive.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tommy def* /forum/post/13959282
> 
> 
> This is with full lights on.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *sauroneru* /forum/post/13955866
> 
> 
> Note about Audio Concepts: I hate them.



This may be the single greatest post I've seen online. Sauroneru, good luck hunting the screen man. Your ordeals with your dealer remind me of every AV store in Manhattan.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tommy def* /forum/post/13959282
> 
> 
> This is with full lights on.



Tommy, you're awesome man! Thanks so much for the pics, the screen looks great. I can hardly wait until august when the release the retractable model...that's when I'm pulling the trigger.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *send* /forum/post/13963021
> 
> 
> Several people have been asking about Black Diamond screen reviews.
> 
> 
> FYI .: There are two Black Diamond screen reviews coming out this month in Sound & Vision and Playback Magazines.
> 
> 
> More to come including an AVS review shortly
> 
> 
> We appreciate all the support and excitement!
> 
> 
> Ryan Gustafson
> 
> .: SI Screens :.



Hi Ryan,


Thanks for the heads up about the screen reviews! I'll be searching out copies of those mags to get a glimpse of what they have to say. Glad to stopped by and hopefully we'll see you around more.


Thanks again,

Andrew


----------



## pottscb




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *sauroneru* /forum/post/13955866
> 
> 
> Audio Concepts in Houston has a 2.35:1 BD on display with an Epson Pro Cinema 810 720p projector. I don't know much about front projection, but it looked very good. It was in a batcave, but had 75W halogen track lights. The BD handled the bulbs 4 feet away fantastically - you had to shine them directly on the screen to wash out the image at all. The screen did wash out much easier when a bulb next to the projector at the back of the room was pointed at the screen. Their screen was supposed to be a 1.4 gain, but again white paper showed a much brighter image. However, I didn't have someone else hold it while I stepped back a few feet and made sure I was looking at the screen from a 0° angle. I called SI and they said they'd look into it, since their 1.4 screens are definitely brighter than paper. I saw no hotspotting or sparklies, but I'm also not extremely picky about the picture, I just don't want any significant artifacts. I would say it looks very similar to a direct-view LCD screen as far as its ambient light rejection and off-angle viewing. Way better than a rear projection set.
> 
> 
> Note about Audio Concepts: I hate them. They were ignorant and rude. I had to convince them that there were 2 gains of BD, then they had to look at the receipt to find out for sure they had the 1.4. They had no idea how many lumens the projector put out, what mode it was running in, and acted like those were the dumbest questions they've ever been asked. They didn't know how big the screen was (maybe 7' wide was their estimate), and gave me a lecture about how diagonal sizes don't mean anything since we're not using 4:3 screens anymore (I just wanted to get an estimate of the 16:9 image they were projecting on their 2.35:1 screen). When I held up a piece of copy paper and saw it was quite a bit brighter than the screen, another salesman came by and told me that of course it looks brighter since it's a different material and "people with training" at the factory measured the screen and they know what they're doing. Sadly, I'll probably go back with my wife once more since they're the only place in town with one, but I obviously will not contribute any money to their hatred of clean-cut 30 year olds in scrubs (I guess my demographic is ruining the world or something).



Drive on up to Austin and view it at the SI plant with an RS1...we'll leave the light on for ya!


----------



## Xyst

I picked up the Sound & Vision at the book store today and flipped through to the "Review" of the Black Diamond. Don't waist your time. It's a 25 word blip under the new products section written by a moron.







I guess will have to wait for AVS' words of wisdom.


----------



## Laserfan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/13986607
> 
> 
> It's a 25 word blip under the new products section written by a moron.



And you're one of those "charming New Yorkers" we keep hearing about!










You DO realize these "new products" blurbs are usually written by Marketing Communications reps in the products' firms, yes? Oh well, not to worry, Texans have thick skins!


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Laserfan* /forum/post/13989018
> 
> 
> And you're one of those "charming New Yorkers" we keep hearing about!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You DO realize these "new products" blurbs are usually written by Marketing Communications reps in the products' firms, yes? Oh well, not to worry, Texans have thick skins!



Lol, what can I say? 4 years of living here has made me a little bitter!







No I didn't realize that, but I was disappointed. When I hear the term "review" I tend to think of something other than a blurb, so I has hoping for more. If you have a chance to glance at it next time at you're book store, you might agree though...


----------



## Nedtsc

I viewed the sample as compared to HP and sony's chroma vue. It's certainly brighter than sony's but quite similar in PQ.


----------



## Laserfan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/13989544
> 
> 
> If you have a chance to glance at it next time at you're book store, you might agree though...



I had/have the mag right here and looked it-up when I saw your post--didn't see the word "review" used anywhere. Having subscribed to first Stereo Review (1960s?) then Video now S&V clearly these New Products announcements are just that--mfrs submit info/pics to the mag and hope they get published. I dunno how S&V filters these every month; I'll bet they get dozens if not hundreds of submittals to sift thru and choose among.


Sure, then they "punch them up" to make 'em fit the theme-of-the-month or whatever. I'd assume the cutesy "I'm getting excited..." was NOT in SI's original submission...!


----------



## pottscb




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tommy def* /forum/post/13959282
> 
> 
> This is with full lights on.



In one of the pictures you can see the camera's flash reflecting in a picutre frame below the screen, this no doubt hammered the contrast and what you were seeing was, no doubt, much better than the picture tells. Maybe you could take one with no flash or well to the side?


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Laserfan* /forum/post/13994349
> 
> 
> I had/have the mag right here and looked it-up when I saw your post--didn't see the word "review" used anywhere.



I'm guessing that Xyst was referring to this post:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *send* /forum/post/13963021
> 
> 
> Several people have been asking about Black Diamond screen reviews.
> 
> 
> FYI .: *There are two Black Diamond screen reviews coming out this month in Sound & Vision and Playback Magazines.*
> 
> 
> More to come including an AVS review shortly
> 
> 
> We appreciate all the support and excitement!
> 
> 
> Ryan Gustafson
> 
> .: SI Screens :.



and then getting the S&V magazine. Not sure if that was supposed to be the review or if there is still a review coming (like in the next month's issue).


--Darin


----------



## Laserfan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *darinp2* /forum/post/13997310
> 
> 
> I'm guessing that Xyst was referring to this post...and then getting the S&V magazine.



Ah, I didn't make that connection. If true, I'm sorry Xyst for getting on your case! As a "review" that certainly did suck!


----------



## tommy def




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pottscb* /forum/post/13994387
> 
> 
> In one of the pictures you can see the camera's flash reflecting in a picture frame below the screen, this no doubt hammered the contrast and what you were seeing was, no doubt, much better than the picture tells. Maybe you could take one with no flash or well to the side?



the pictures were taken with no flash. the reflection could only be the projector or high hats, those are the only two light sources in the room.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Laserfan* /forum/post/13997604
> 
> 
> Ah, I didn't make that connection. If true, I'm sorry Xyst for getting on your case! As a "review" that certainly did suck!



Yeah, that's what I was referring to with "Review". And no worries, I at least learned something new out of the heckling...I had no idea the product write ups were done by the manufacturers.


----------



## BigDallas

I just installed my 1.4 gain BD yesterday. I didn't take any pictures because the frame was too small and had a few ripples near the bottom of the screen. Si's fault on my custom size order, but they fixed it in one day. I should have some night & daytime pictures Friday after the new frame is installed.


Initial impressions:

- My wife was very skeptical but really likes the daytime picture, professional quality, and thinks it was worth the mega bucks we spent. What a relief.

- Daytime view, blinds open looks pretty good with 2000 lumen's @ 110" 16:9. I am happy with the improvement over normal white screen I had. I never tried a gray one. Maybe I should paint a cardboard paper gray and try.

- Screen is not a miracle. It can handle significant amounts of light, but not my 40' x 6' wall of windows (80% blocking solar screens) with blinds open. With white walls, light reflections are giving off disperse light. SI suggests the BD handles point light sources better. Still want a 5000+ lumen's for image to pop off the screen.

- If I close my fairly translucent blinds, the daytime picture looks great.

- Screen appears black (nice). Doesn't look like 1.4 gain. Looks like 1/2 to 1/3 that.

- Image looks like same brightness day or night. I didn't have to adjust projector. Strange because white screen was way too bright at night (my pupils were open).

- Contrast definitely better at night.

- SI says the screen is angular reflective. Kind of like a mirror only with some dispersion for acceptable viewing angle. That would explain the metal backing. They suggest projector ceiling mount to screen and bounce light and same angle to your eye level. My projector is ~16ft back. I raised projector height to get closer to their' ideal, but it didn't seem to make much difference. Maybe I will play with a lower screen height, but I like the image 6 to 11' high.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BigDallas* /forum/post/14015062
> 
> 
> I just installed my 1.4 gain BD yesterday. I didn't take any pictures because the frame was too small and had a few ripples near the bottom of the screen. Si's fault on my custom size order, but they fixed it in one day. I should have some night & daytime pictures Friday after the new frame is installed.
> 
> 
> Initial impressions:
> 
> - My wife was very skeptical but really likes the daytime picture, professional quality, and thinks it was worth the mega bucks we spent. What a relief.
> 
> - Daytime view, blinds open looks pretty good with 2000 lumen's @ 110" 16:9. I am happy with the improvement over normal white screen I had. I never tried a gray one. Maybe I should paint a cardboard paper gray and try.
> 
> - Screen is not a miracle. It can handle significant amounts of light, but not my 40' x 6' wall of windows (80% blocking solar screens) with blinds open. With white walls, light reflections are giving off disperse light. SI suggests the BD handles point light sources better. Still want a 5000+ lumen's for image to pop off the screen.
> 
> - If I close my fairly translucent blinds, the daytime picture looks great.
> 
> - Screen appears black (nice). Doesn't look like 1.4 gain. Looks like 1/2 to 1/3 that.
> 
> - Image looks like same brightness day or night. I didn't have to adjust projector. Strange because white screen was way too bright at night (my pupils were open).
> 
> - Contrast definitely better at night.
> 
> - SI says the screen is angular reflective. Kind of like a mirror only with some dispersion for acceptable viewing angle. That would explain the metal backing. They suggest projector ceiling mount to screen and bounce light and same angle to your eye level. My projector is ~16ft back. I raised projector height to get closer to their' ideal, but it didn't seem to make much difference. Maybe I will play with a lower screen height, but I like the image 6 to 11' high.



BigDallas,


Great write up! Thanks for the feedback and I can't wait to see the pictures. Would you mind taking one or two of your room to show your set-up /lighting conditions? It would be good to see what you're working with. I'd say there are a lot of jealous people here...







And yet you still got the WAF approval? Now that says something about the screen right there!!


I'm glad to hear that SI was able to correct your screen so fast. It sounds like they have a very good level of service. Thanks again,


Andrew


----------



## Spindizzy

Any comments how the BD rates against a Stewart Firehawk? Both have around the same gain and are supposed to fight ambient light quite well.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Spindizzy* /forum/post/14019505
> 
> 
> Any comments how the BD rates against a Stewart Firehawk? Both have around the same gain and are supposed to fight ambient light quite well.



It looks like majorloser has laid eyes on both here .


You may want to give him a shout and see what he has to say about the two. If you can't find him here I think he is active at Audioholics as well.


----------



## BigDallas

Posting many pictures. Besides the color shift, they looked close to my visual perception.


My screen is inset 2 ft into the 11' wide wall. I took these photos with same camera settings (variable shutter & ISO to mimic your eye adjustment). Cameras can screw up color and get grainy in low light. I was mainly trying to capture contrast. My yellow blinds also reflect a lot of yellow. Three different Spider-man 3 (BluRay) scenes showing bright, high contrast, and dark images in many different lighting conditions and sources. All my night shots are with compact fluorescent bulbs which have a lot of dispersion (I like to save power). This is really tough on this screen. It also didn't do so well with side lighting but depends on the angle (mine was bad). I tried some lights that are low to the ground (sorry no photos) and they didn't impact the picture much at all. My recommendation: use cans lights that reflect off the floor. Keep the screen height high (if you can put the projector way back) so incoming window light will reflect up, not in your vision.


FYI, A couple photos I added white paper to compare contrast.


Bottom line on BUD 1.4:

- No hotfooting from many angles, standing or sitting on floor (my projector 16' back helps)

- Picture looks awesome in total dark, but very good in lighted areas

- Bright images = look great daytime, shades closed or open (assume tinted or solar shades)

- High Contrast images = shades closed looked great daytime. Shades open good.

- Dark image = shades closed looked good, shades open was tolerable / OK.

- I'm happy with the results.



FYI, I am thinking of improving my setup for daytime view.

- Adding black felt to the 2' screen inset (top & sides) to remove reflected light

- Tinting a few North facing doors way in back (causing visible edge on screen)

- Moving the 1300 lumen side light closer to the screen (high angle) for night viewing.

- I could replace the top can lights (florescent) with low wattage spot lights. This could really improve night view a lot.

- Buy 5000 lumen projector when they break the $5K barrier.

- Anyone have any other ideas?


----------



## BigDallas

no lights


----------



## BigDallas

Massive back lighting from other 2 open rooms


----------



## BigDallas

1 side light photo + 3 top light. Still night.


----------



## BigDallas

full light conditions


----------



## BigDallas

daytime. Shades closed.


----------



## BigDallas

I meant BD, not BUD. hot spotting (not hotfooting).


I also should have mentioned, notice the low light conditions on the wall are yellow, but white on the screen. Pretty interesting.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BigDallas* /forum/post/14030715
> 
> 
> Posting many pictures. Besides the color shift, they looked close to my visual perception.
> 
> 
> My screen is inset 2 ft into the 11' wide wall. I took these photos with same camera settings (variable shutter & ISO to mimic your eye adjustment). Cameras can screw up color and get grainy in low light. I was mainly trying to capture contrast. My yellow blinds also reflect a lot of yellow. Three different Spider-man 3 (BluRay) scenes showing bright, high contrast, and dark images in many different lighting conditions and sources. All my night shots are with compact fluorescent bulbs which have a lot of dispersion (I like to save power). This is really tough on this screen. It also didn't do so well with side lighting but depends on the angle (mine was bad). I tried some lights that are low to the ground (sorry no photos) and they didn't impact the picture much at all. My recommendation: use cans lights that reflect off the floor. Keep the screen height high (if you can put the projector way back) so incoming window light will reflect up, not in your vision.
> 
> 
> FYI, A couple photos I added white paper to compare contrast.
> 
> 
> Bottom line on BUD 1.4:
> 
> - No hotfooting from many angles, standing or sitting on floor (my projector 16' back helps)
> 
> - Picture looks awesome in total dark, but very good in lighted areas
> 
> - Bright images = look great daytime, shades closed or open (assume tinted or solar shades)
> 
> - High Contrast images = shades closed looked great daytime. Shades open good.
> 
> - Dark image = shades closed looked good, shades open was tolerable / OK.
> 
> - I'm happy with the results.
> 
> 
> 
> FYI, I am thinking of improving my setup for daytime view.
> 
> - Adding black felt to the 2' screen inset (top & sides) to remove reflected light
> 
> - Tinting a few North facing doors way in back (causing visible edge on screen)
> 
> - Moving the 1300 lumen side light closer to the screen (high angle) for night viewing.
> 
> - I could replace the top can lights (florescent) with low wattage spot lights. This could really improve night view a lot.
> 
> - Buy 5000 lumen projector when they break the $5K barrier.
> 
> - Anyone have any other ideas?



Wow!!







Huge post man!







Way to come through with every possible shot and a great write-up to. It certainly sounds and looks like you're enjoying your setup and you do have a pretty sweet one at that.


Since your fluorescents are behind your seating area I suppose it makes sense that is a trouble lighting situation to over come. The ambient light is coming from the same direction as the projector so it would be nearly impossible to differentiate between wanted/un-wanted light.


What type of projector are you using currently?


Thanks again BigDallas, that is an amazing post!!!!!


----------



## haarec




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BigDallas* /forum/post/14030723
> 
> 
> no lights



It seems that even PT-AX200U does not handle this screen. 5000 lumens? yea, this sounds reasonable, but having such a light power do you think we still need a special screen material or maybe a grey wall would be good enough. How do you estimate a real gain of this so called "1.4 gain"?


Thank you for the pics. Great post!


----------



## BigDallas

As haarec said, I am using a PT-AX200U @ 2000 lumens.


It is hard to say what the gain of the screen is during daylight. Night time it is lower than my ~1.1 white screen. But I don't have any equipment to measure it and haven't yet calibrated the picture (Video Essentials) to BD. It is also hard to tell at night because there is so little BD light scatter, so the entire room is generally darker.


I didn't try a grey wall or screen. Given the amount of light I have, I didn't bother. Sorry can't help on that one.


----------



## mcleo19

Yes, very great review BigDallas...it has heightened my excitement for the arrival of my BD 110er. In fact, I just found out is shipped last week, much sooner than expected, and will arrive here Wednesday. I just finished painting the new media room so it's perfect timing.


----------



## pottscb

BigDallas,

You did a great job showing this screen in worst case scenario (dark bridge scene) vs. almost best case scenario (Manhat...er, Metropolis, daytime scene). For the most part, the black bars on 2.35 were invisible (except for the bridge scene), was this truly how it appeared? That's pretty great from a projector with average black levels (though bright whites drive the contrast in the day scenes very nicely)


I'm ready for 3K+ lumen pjs to fall into normal man's range as well, what's taking so long?


----------



## BigDallas

Pottscb,


Yes the pictures were really close to what my eyes saw for contrast. My eyes never saw any graininess or the slight wall color skews at low light levels like the camera did. I would say this projector is fairly bright, but cheap (720p, poorer focus at longer distance). I plan to replace it in a few years. I don't really worry about masking on this screen. That's why I got an oddball size. It allows the biggest 16:9 possible (top to bottom limited) for daytime or HUD programming. Then when I watch 2.35:1 (night time movies), I adjust the zoom to increase image size to the limit of the sides.


----------



## pottscb

I'm sure someone already posted this but Playback Magazine just posted a comparison on the BD vs. the dnp Supernova and it looks like they used pics from the Houston installer on this thread!









http://magazine.playbackmag.net/playback/200806web/ 


You'll have to search for it as its a webpage that the address doesn't change as you navigate through...start by going to current issue and search the table of contents.


----------



## TJ Morgan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pottscb* /forum/post/14051928
> 
> 
> I'm sure someone already posted this but Playback Magazine just posted a comparison on the BD vs. the dnp Supernova and it looks like they used pics from the Houston installer on this thread!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://magazine.playbackmag.net/playback/200806web/
> 
> 
> You'll have to search for it as its a webpage that the address doesn't change as you navigate through...start by going to current issue and search the table of contents.



I really can't beleive they used that image that I posted (it was under _avdesignshouston_ at the time. I was asked to change my user name). I have since been back to that install and am still very impressed with the BD. The off axis viewing is not particularly great under high light environments but that is to be expected.


I apologize for not getting back with some of you who have PM'd me or asked questions through the forum. I really have not spent a ton of time at that particular install and would not have some of the specific answers you all have asked. We have also been absolutely swamped and I just don't have the time to post the specifics some have requested.


We have begun the buildout of a $250K theater here in town that will use a Sim2 C3X1080. Although light will not really be much of an issue (except for the fact that the customer has 4 kids and may want the lights at higher than normal levels) I plan on using a .8 BD IF SI can get me one in a 120". Currently, their largest 16x9 screen is a 113" I beleive.


Here is the rendering of the room we are building:









[/IMG]


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *TJ Morgan* /forum/post/14053971
> 
> 
> I really can't beleive they used that image that I posted (it was under _avdesignshouston_ at the time. I was asked to change my user name). I have since been back to that install and am still very impressed with the BD. The off axis viewing is not particularly great under high light environments but that is to be expected.
> 
> 
> I apologize for not getting back with some of you who have PM'd me or asked questions through the forum. I really have not spent a ton of time at that particular install and would not have some of the specific answers you all have asked. We have also been absolutely swamped and I just don't have the time to post the specifics some have requested.
> 
> 
> We have begun the buildout of a $250K theater here in town that will use a Sim2 C3X1080. Although light will not really be much of an issue (except for the fact that the customer has 4 kids and may want the lights at higher than normal levels) I plan on using a .8 BD IF SI can get me one in a 120". Currently, their largest 16x9 screen is a 113" I beleive.
> 
> 
> Here is the rendering of the room we are building:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/IMG]




The last time I spoke with SI about larger BDs, their plan was to concentrate on bringing the motorized version to market at the end of August and to push off plans for large seamed screens until January. Their interest in making seamed screens was originally for the commercial market, partly due to concerns that the image quality might be compromised by the seam in a way that would not be acceptable for home theater, but would be acceptable for commercial applications. I think they just did not see much of a market for larger BD screens for home theater, although they were aware there was some demand from home theater owners who had asked them. This was in late April that I talked to them, and maybe they have changed their plans by now. If you can get them to speed up their plans and make a seamed screen now, that would be very nice. I'd consider a 144 16X9 BD if the seam were a non-issue, which would give me a nice 125.5 wide scoped image.


Have you considered a 2.35:1 screen? If you installed one in that format, it would be nearly 11 feet wide and would do about a 113.7 diagonal 16x9 image.


----------



## thezaks

My dealer spoke to SI today, and they told him that they are having issues with the 1.4 gain BD screens. They told him that the 1.4's will not be available until 2009. No problem getting the .8 gain BD's though.


Has anyone else heard about this?


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks* /forum/post/14056909
> 
> 
> My dealer spoke to SI today, and they told him that they are having issues with the 1.4 gain BD screens. They told him that the 1.4's will not be available until 2009. No problem getting the .8 gain BD's though.
> 
> 
> Has anyone else heard about this?



I haven't heard anything, but that doesn't mean it's not true. I just saw a 1.4 over the weekend and the dealer didn't mention any delays. You may want to give SI a call directly to ask the question though. They are very helpful and I've spoken with them a couple times now.


----------



## h00kemh0rns

It's been awhile since I've posted and this thread has taken off. I've been out of pocket as my installer had to deal with some family issues before he could even get to my install. I've only had it available for the last week or so.


Just finished up a major hurdle with this media room. It's been 6 mos in the making (planning/buying) and over the last two weekends finally finished up a good majority of what I wanted to get done. Now granted there are some things that I still need to buy and/or touch up but for the most part it's very close to done.


Anyways, there are quite a few who have PM'd me to get my opinion of the BD. I'll summarize and say that it's simply *amazing*.


The system still needs to be ISF calibrated (tech coming in a couple weeks after a good running of all components.) As far as set up here is what I have:

*Hardware*

Onkyo 875 AV Receiver

Monster Clean Power 5100 HTII

Sony PS3

Scientific Atlantic HD-DVR

Panasonic PT-AE2000U

Screen Innovations Black Diamond .8 92" Screen

StudioTech U22T Cabinet

*Speakers*

RF-63 Floorstanders (x2)

RC-64 Center

RS-62 Surrounds (x4)

RT-10d Subwoofer

*Misc*

Harmony 1000

Lutron IR Lighting Control

*More to come*

IR Blaster/RF extender for Harmony

Ipod add on for Onkyo

IR2BT for PS3 (will allow for full control of all 51 commands of the PS3 on the Harmony)

Seating

Acoustic Panels

New Sconce lighting

Soffit

Replace entry doors.

Paint small attic door.

And whatever else my mind comes up with.


So without futher ado...


***Pics taken with an older Canon G2 point and shoot camera (4 MP; shot in Auto at f2.0 with NO FLASH.) Not the best quality but hopefully good enough. ***


Here is the layout of the media room. Not an ideal room to deal with but it will do. You might wonder why I would even want/need a BD with a dedicated space but after seeing how it can handle any lighting and light dispersion it was worth it to me.



























Eye Candy:


























































Different Light Levels:

Lights Full On









Lights Dimmed Half Way









Lights Off










***Note: I've been sent two samples (2'x2') of Firehawk G3 and Supernova One so I can do a head to head comparison. No ETA for pics but prelim, as I already have the firehawk sample, is that BD is much better in handling ambient light and contrast is better IMHO. I'll leave it up to the videophiles to pick apart the three screens.***


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks* /forum/post/14056909
> 
> 
> My dealer spoke to SI today, and they told him that they are having issues with the 1.4 gain BD screens. They told him that the 1.4's will not be available until 2009. No problem getting the .8 gain BD's though.
> 
> 
> Has anyone else heard about this?




I spoke to SI this morning, and they confirmed that they are not taking any more orders for 1.4 gain BD's. They plan on doing more R&D on the 1.4's, and will hopefully have 1.4's available sometime in 2009.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks* /forum/post/14061033
> 
> 
> I spoke to SI this morning, and they confirmed that they are not taking any more orders for 1.4 gain BD's. They plan on doing more R&D on the 1.4's, and will hopefully have 1.4's available sometime in 2009.



They should come out with a unity screen then, for those who do not want to wait until 2009 and do not want a screen with a negative gain.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks* /forum/post/14061033
> 
> 
> I spoke to SI this morning, and they confirmed that they are not taking any more orders for 1.4 gain BD's. They plan on doing more R&D on the 1.4's, and will hopefully have 1.4's available sometime in 2009.



Did they give a reason? I would expect not, but figure I'd ask anyway. This is a huge let down for those of us who have been waiting since the initial hype almost a year ago.


I had the opportunity to see an 80" 1.4 gain on Sunday and have made up my mind that the Black Diamond is the route I'm going (most likely in a 100" retractable model when it is available) so this is very disheartening. IMHO I didn't see anything wrong with the screen and I was doing a side by side with a Carada High Contrast at the time.


It would be nice if one of the SI Reps could chime in with some reasoning behind that decision. I realize that it won't change the fact, but it would help potential customers take the news.


----------



## Tympani

If you recall a month or so back (from around Post #560) as the first few of these were showing up, there was a fair bit of unhappy talk about the BD high-gain screen's sheen, hotspotting, dimness and overall disappointing picture. Folks were asking about buyer's remorse, and wondering whether this was all another over-hyped flash in the pan, whether to go the DNP Supernova route, etc. That kind of talk can really kill a new product., especially on a critical forum like this.


We know SI is monitoring this thread closely, as evidenced by a few carefully placed comments. There's a lot of stiff competition out there for our hard-earned dollars, and while they have a potentially market-changing product, there's a lot at stake. Yes, it would appear they've placed themselves under tremendous pressure and released the product a bit too early. But I commend them for now taking the time to pull back and get it right, as opposed to keeping the un-perfected product on the market then coming out with a "Mark 2" version 6 months later. I would only hope that those who bought the 1.4 screen would be offered an exchange when the new screen is released !


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Tympani* /forum/post/14064677
> 
> 
> If you recall a month or so back (from around Post #560) as the first few of these were showing up, there was a fair bit of unhappy talk about the BD high-gain screen's sheen, hotspotting, dimness and overall disappointing picture. Folks were asking about buyer's remorse, and wondering whether this was all another over-hyped flash in the pan, whether to go the DNP Supernova route, etc. That kind of talk can really kill a new product., especially on a critical forum like this.
> 
> 
> We know SI is monitoring this thread closely, as evidenced by a few carefully placed comments. There's a lot of stiff competition out there for our hard-earned dollars, and while they have a potentially market-changing product, there's a lot at stake. Yes, it would appear they've placed themselves under tremendous pressure and released the product a bit too early. But I commend them for now taking the time to pull back and get it right, as opposed to keeping the un-perfected product on the market then coming out with a "Mark 2" version 6 months later. I would only hope that those who bought the 1.4 screen would be offered an exchange when the new screen is released !



I'd buy a unity gain BD, like I mentioned before. I'd also buy a .8 if SI allowed customers to trade it in for a similar sized 1.4 when the 1.4 is available and it could be done at a very reasonable cost.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14065047
> 
> 
> I'd buy a unit gain BD, like I mentioned before. I'd also buy a .8 if SI allowed customers to trade it in for a similar sized 1.4 when the 1.4 is available and it could be done at a very reasonable cost.



Agreed, if they offered a trade up program I would be more inclined to give the .8 a shot. It would have to be a pretty solid deal though as I would not spend anywhere near that kind of money on a screen twice. If we're talking about a $100 shipping/restocking fee I'm in, but even a 50% discount wouldn't be worth it. I doubt this would be reasonable from a business sense though.


Tympani: I agree with you that I am glad to see a company take responsibility for their work. Pulling it back and correcting the problem is certainly better than letting a faulty product loose, but it is the 2009 date that is a kick in the teeth. For a product that has been hyped so hard (mainly by us!) it is disappointing to be teased with it only to watch the launch get pushed again.


As a vent, timing is certainly everything in the business world, and personally the summer time frame would have been perfect for me, and others with CEDIA coming in early fall. A January or February release would mean that I would most likely not be able to start my install until the summer '09 which is a huge set back. Is this a selfish way of thinking? Absolutely!!










SI: Godspeed, and good luck!


----------



## Xyst

h00kemh0rns: That is a sick set-up man!! Congratulations on the new theater, and thank you!!! for setting up some picks of the install. You are a lucky fellow and clearly befriended by all










How do you like the Panny proj. in the set-up? I've heard mixed results about it, but have heard it is extremely bright. I had the pleasure of seeing a Hitachi 4900 on Sunday post up to a 80" 1.4 BD and a Carada High Contrast 106". On the side by side, the BD blew the Carada away! Whites, blacks, ambiant light rejection were a no contest victory in my opinion. I believe the Carada was a .9 gain and I was a bit surprised that the blacks "seemed" deeper on the BD 1.4.


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/14065395
> 
> 
> h00kemh0rns: That is a sick set-up man!! Congratulations on the new theater, and thank you!!! for setting up some picks of the install. You are a lucky fellow and clearly befriended by all
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How do you like the Panny proj. in the set-up? I've heard mixed results about it, but have heard it is extremely bright. I had the pleasure of seeing a Hitachi 4900 on Sunday post up to a 80" 1.4 BD and a Carada High Contrast 106". On the side by side, the BD blew the Carada away! Whites, blacks, ambiant light rejection were a no contest victory in my opinion. I believe the Carada was a .9 gain and I was a bit surprised that the blacks "seemed" deeper on the BD 1.4.



Thank you! This entire setup was done with a serious budget in mind. It took me 6 or more months just in research and figuring a top 2 or 3 in each piece. Then another few months in finding the right price on each of the pieces before I pulled the trigger. There were alot of nice finds especially some EPP deals my employer set up with some manufacturers. All in all, including install, everything will be well under 10k (closer to 8k.) This will include the Aspen seating I found at a local Furniture Market.


Anyways, the Panny straight out of the box with zero tweaking is good and probably fine for most. However, I'm the firm believer in getting displays (albeit tv or now projector) calibrated. As you can see from the pics it gives off a great picture...but I guarantee my before and after will be night and day.


All in all...I think I have the most frugal setup (read most bang for the buck...not cheapest) and have an amazing mini theater. When I'm done with the ISF calibration I have no doubts that the BD/Panny will pop off the screen. I'm sure there will always be those that will nit pick this but the end result is I'm extremely happy with the BD and the picture quality the Panny can give off.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/14063726
> 
> 
> I had the opportunity to see an 80" 1.4 gain on Sunday and have made up my mind that the Black Diamond is the route I'm going (most likely in a 100" retractable model when it is available) so this is very disheartening.



I suppose it's possible the August date for the motorized BD might not happen now. Hopefully, it will, but SI once told me the seam issue would be put off until January so they could concentrate on bringing the motorized BD to market, so now I have to question if the motorized BD will be put off so that their engineering department can concentrate on getting the 1.4 version back to market.


----------



## DP13




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/14063726
> 
> 
> Did they give a reason? I would expect not, but figure I'd ask anyway. This is a huge let down for those of us who have been waiting since the initial hype almost a year ago.
> 
> 
> I had the opportunity to see an 80" 1.4 gain on Sunday and have made up my mind that the Black Diamond is the route I'm going (most likely in a 100" retractable model when it is available) so this is very disheartening. IMHO I didn't see anything wrong with the screen and I was doing a side by side with a Carada High Contrast at the time.
> 
> 
> It would be nice if one of the SI Reps could chime in with some reasoning behind that decision. I realize that it won't change the fact, but it would help potential customers take the news.



Hey all, I have not logged on to this forum in a long time. It has taken me a while to catch up (BTW Hookem.....nice install!!!). I am still enjoying my 110" BD but did get a chance to get with Ryan with SI. Some of you noticed and mentioned the vertical lines on some of the pictures including my pictures and inquired about them. To this day they really don't bother me unless I'm watching a movie with lots of whites...and even then they are not that bad. I did pay good money for the screen so I asked Ryan what was the deal with that. He stated he would get back with me (as it is a problem they are dealing with) and he would be glad to fix it. I'm sure that's why the 1.4 BD is not being shipped anymore and lucky for us SI has offered to fix the issue as soon as they can. If its until 2009 so be it for me....the screen is awesome already and I'm sure it will only get better without the lines.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DP13* /forum/post/14065912
> 
> 
> Hey all, I have not logged on to this forum in a long time. It has taken me a while to catch up (BTW Hookem.....nice install!!!). I am still enjoying my 110" BD but did get a chance to get with Ryan with SI. Some of you noticed and mentioned the vertical lines on some of the pictures including my pictures and inquired about them. To this day they really don't bother me unless I'm watching a movie with lots of whites...and even then they are not that bad. I did pay good money for the screen so I asked Ryan what was the deal with that. He stated he would get back with me (as it is a problem they are dealing with) and he would be glad to fix it. I'm sure that's why the 1.4 BD is not being shipped anymore and lucky for us SI has offered to fix the issue as soon as they can. If its until 2009 so be it for me....the screen is awesome already and I'm sure it will only get better without the lines.



Thanks for the report, DP13. I figured the vertical lines were the reason. Someone thought the lines might have happened because the screen was rolled up during shipping. Do you know if that's true?


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14066550
> 
> 
> Thanks for the report, DP13. I figured the vertical lines were the reason. Someone thought the lines might have happened because the screen was rolled up during shipping. Do you know if that's true?



Since mine was rolled as well I'm curious why the 1.4 would have these lines but mine (.8) wouldn't. Maybe it's the stretching process when putting the screen into the frame?? Could someone point me to a photo of what you're referring to?


Either way, SI has alot riding on the success of the BD and knowing Ryan/Aaron they want to deliver a perfect product. It's good to see them being proactive by pulling back the reigns on any issues now along with replacing orders which have been affected.


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DP13* /forum/post/14065912
> 
> 
> Hey all, I have not logged on to this forum in a long time. It has taken me a while to catch up (BTW Hookem.....nice install!!!).



Thank you...it was a long long time to see everything in boxes for weeks without enjoying any of it. Now I just need some seats rather than the hoopty fold away chairs


----------



## Josh Z




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/14058659
> 
> 
> Eye Candy:



The letterbox bars are pretty visible in these shots from Cars. Do you find that to be the case when viewing by eye?


----------



## ericcsong

was wondering who has the best price? can anyone PM me a good source? thanks!


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ericcsong* /forum/post/14067324
> 
> 
> was wondering who has the best price? can anyone PM me a good source? thanks!



I sent you a PM.


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Josh Z* /forum/post/14067231
> 
> 
> The letterbox bars are pretty visible in these shots from Cars. Do you find that to be the case when viewing by eye?



Not as much as evident by the picture. They are there with full on lights (as what this picture is) but you have to be looking for them. They aren't obvious in full lighting when viewing live...and as the lights go to my favorite dimmed position you never see them. I assume the camera had some effect on it.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/14066783
> 
> 
> Since mine was rolled as well I'm curious why the 1.4 would have these lines but mine (.8) wouldn't. Maybe it's the stretching process when putting the screen into the frame?? Could someone point me to a photo of what you're referring to?
> 
> 
> Either way, SI has alot riding on the success of the BD and knowing Ryan/Aaron they want to deliver a perfect product. It's good to see them being proactive by pulling back the reigns on any issues now along with replacing orders which have been affected.



Post 437 in this thread has a pic of the vertical lines. There is some discussion of it in the next several posts.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...6#post13770496


----------



## mcleo19

Well, my 1.4 BD just arrived yesterday afternoon, but haven't opened up the roll. Well, here is to hoping that I got a good one!


----------



## Josh Z

Tabitha from SI told me that they are no longer sending out samples of the screen material. Instead, from now on they're directing everyone to their regional dealers to see if showroom demos are available nearby.


From a sales perspective, I'm sure that makes sense. But from the perspective of an interested buyer who'd like to test the material in their own room and with their own projector (ideally compared to the screen they're replacing), it's pretty disappointing.


----------



## DP13




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14066550
> 
> 
> Someone thought the lines might have happened because the screen was rolled up during shipping. Do you know if that's true?



I can't say that is true or not. I doubt it though.


----------



## glennQNYC




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14066550
> 
> 
> Someone thought the lines might have happened because the screen was rolled up during shipping. Do you know if that's true?



I can verify the above is *not true*. I spent some time with Ryan and Shannon from SI Screens this week (really cool people BTW...), and got the story direct from the source.


glennQ


----------



## mcleo19




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *glennQNYC* /forum/post/14084883
> 
> 
> I can verify the above is *not true*. I spent some time with Ryan and Shannon from SI Screens this week (really cool people BTW...), and got the story direct from the source.
> 
> 
> glennQ



What is the story? I just set mine up tonight and I do see the vertical lines with scenes with bright background colors.


----------



## Xyst

Okay, so as a quick recap of what we've learned over the past few pages... of this thread


- Those people who've gotten the screens have, for the most part, been very pleased with the Black Diamond.


- The 1.4 Gain screen is on _backorder_, so-to-speak. There is a vertical line issue that SI is trying to correct. A new delivery date of 2009 has been tossed around, but I don't think this has been confirmed. It's safe safe to say that SI knows about it, is actively working on it, but don't have an exact date when they are going to be able to fix it. The 0.8 gain screen does not exhibit these problems and is readily available.


- The retractable model screen was originally on track for an August 30th launch, but that has been called into question. No word from SI, but there has been speculation that they won't ship the retractable until the 1.4 gain has been fixed. This may or may not be true.

[*Edit:* the retractable is supposed to debut at CEDIA 2008 in September...Thanks glenn!!]


- TommyDef, DP13, and h00kemhorns make us sick.







They have sweet set-ups with the Black Diamond already!!!


- TJ Morgan has had to pleasure of doing an istall with the Black Diamond, it went so well that Playback Magazine STOLE his pictures of the install for their magazine. Is that flattery or annoyance?


Did I miss anything?


----------



## glennQNYC

A retractable BD will debut at CEDIA (beginning of September), when SI Screens releases their all new Reference motorized series.


glennQ


----------



## glennQNYC




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mcleo19* /forum/post/14086431
> 
> 
> What is the story? I just set mine up tonight and I do see the vertical lines with scenes with bright background colors.



Have you contacted SI Screens? They'll stand behind their product, and make sure you get a screen thats 100%.


glennQ


----------



## mcleo19




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *glennQNYC* /forum/post/14087975
> 
> 
> Have you contacted SI Screens? They'll stand behind their product, and make sure you get a screen thats 100%.
> 
> 
> glennQ



Yes, I plan to during business hours. Just wanted to see if I can get a preview of that the issue is.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *glennQNYC* /forum/post/14087943
> 
> 
> A retractable BD will debut at CEDIA (beginning of September), when SI Screens releases their all new Reference motorized series.
> 
> 
> glennQ



Thanks for the heads up Glenn!


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/14087416
> 
> 
> h00kemhorns make us sick.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They have sweet set-ups with the Black Diamond already!!!



Thank you for the compliment...even though the room isn't done I know what you mean b/c I'm enjoying this BD every day...even though it's a crappy camera pic...you get the idea


----------



## pottscb




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Josh Z* /forum/post/14067231
> 
> 
> The letterbox bars are pretty visible in these shots from Cars. Do you find that to be the case when viewing by eye?



No offense Hook'em, but these letterbox bars are due to the Panasonic AE2000 pj used to show the image, not the screen. The RS1 that SI has in their demo room show no such bars...


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *glennQNYC* /forum/post/14084883
> 
> 
> I can verify the above is *not true*. I spent some time with Ryan and Shannon from SI Screens this week (really cool people BTW...), and got the story direct from the source.
> 
> 
> glennQ



Did you get a chance to view both the .8 and the 1.4 and compare the two?


----------



## pottscb

*"Xyst-

- TJ Morgan has had to pleasure of doing an istall with the Black Diamond, it went so well that Playback Magazine STOLE his pictures of the install for their magazine. Is that flattery or annoyance?"*


No joke, TJMorgan, you should contact Playback's editor here:

http://www.playbackmag.net/ 

David Birch-Jones

Playback Editorial Office

4544 South Lamar Blvd

Building #G-300

Austin, TX 78745

512.892.8682


...and demand they run a feature on your install, they thought it was good enough to post pics on their page without consent and uncredited, why not get the full story... and I bet your business would skyrocket.


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pottscb* /forum/post/14092573
> 
> 
> No offense Hook'em, but these letterbox bars are due to the Panasonic AE2000 pj used to show the image, not the screen. The RS1 that SI has in their demo room show no such bars...



I was referring to movies, which are in anything other than 4:3/16:9 format, and the subsequent letter boxes shown on the BD are not as noticeable when viewing live.


----------



## TJ Morgan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pottscb* /forum/post/14092661
> 
> 
> *
> 
> 
> ...and demand they run a feature on your install, they thought it was good enough to post pics on their page without consent and uncredited, why not get the full story... and I bet your business would skyrocket.
> *


*


We have contacted the editor and SI and at the very least they are going to credit us in the next issue. I'm not sure if our business would skyrocket from an article in a online magazine but I'm sure it wouldn't hurt!*


----------



## speciman




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Josh Z* /forum/post/14069837
> 
> 
> Tabitha from SI told me that they are no longer sending out samples of the screen material. Instead, from now on they're directing everyone to their regional dealers to see if showroom demos are available nearby.
> 
> 
> From a sales perspective, I'm sure that makes sense. But from the perspective of an interested buyer who'd like to test the material in their own room and with their own projector (ideally compared to the screen they're replacing), it's pretty disappointing.



From my own experience, Josh's comment about testing it in your own room rings true. I have a multi-use room with indirect sunlight and a Sony VPL-VW60 and I found that the 1.4 BD image to have good blacks but rather a weak image during afternoon viewing. I compared it to a Da-lite Hi Power and even though there was some crushing of the blacks the image was much more watchable, there was a lot more pop to the image and less strain on the eyes. If I had a pj with twice the lumens, I'm sure the BD image would have been fine perhaps better than the Hi Power. So eventhough I waited months for the BD screen material to become available, I regretfully







had to turn to the Hi Power screen because it provided a better image for my particular pj and lighting conditions. However, I'm glad that the new BD screen has worked out for some other people.


----------



## haarec

Could you tell how big is the screen that you use with VW60 and how big was Black Diamond? Maybe some more info about distance to the projector, mode, etc?


----------



## hrd

I called SI yesterday afternoon and had a nice conversation with Ryan. Here's the latest:


Motorized screens

-----------------


When the upcoming Reference series of motorized screens is available, customers will be able to order 2.35:1 format Black Diamond screens up to 142 diagonal and 16X9 format Black Diamond screens up to 113 diagonal, the largest sizes that the maximum seamless height allows. A motorized screen will likely cost 1/3 to 1/2 more than the equivalent-sized fixed frame screen. Ryan is hoping for 1/3 more.

http://www.siscreens.com/si/products.php 


Curved screens

---------------


SI plans to come out with a Reference series of curved screens in September. The curve will have a 30-foot radius. The curved screens will cost considerably more than the fixed screens.


I'm sure watching anamorphic movies on a 142 diagonal 2.35:1 curved screen, which is nearly 11 feet wide, would be quite an immersive experience.










Larger screens

--------------


I asked about larger Black Diamond screens with seams for home theater use. Ryan said they are not going to ever be available. I asked if this meant they had already experimented enough with seams to determine that the appearance would be unacceptable for home theater use and he said yes. I asked what they would do if a customer wanted to order a 150 16X9 diagonal Black Diamond for home theater use, if they would turn the customer down, and he said yes.


Larger screens may still be available someday, though. Economies of scale and booming business may well mean that someday the maximum seamless height will be greater than 55.69.


.8 vs 1.4 gain screens

---------------------


Sales seem to be going very well just with the .8 gain and Ryan personally prefers the .8 gain over the 1.4 gain, saying it can have blacker blacks, so I am going to give the .8 gain strong consideration. I just need a demo of a .8 gain Black Diamond somewhere first.


I called the regional rep for New England and am trying to get a demo. Ryan said he is considering sending large samples to the reps. I once visited the area rep for Epson and Vutec to demo the Epson 1080 UB Pro Cinema just after it was released and the Silverstar screen they had paired with it, and noticed they had a sample lying around of a larger than usual size, maybe three feet wide. The screen used for the demo was 60 diagonal, which to me is almost like a large sample as opposed to a real home theater projection screen. Ideally, I'd like the demo screen to be at least 92 diagonal and ideally 110 diagonal, but I'll take anything.


----------



## Josh Z




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14110130
> 
> 
> I called the regional rep for New England and am trying to get a demo. Ryan said he is considering sending large samples to the reps.



Let me know what you find out. I'm also in the Boston area.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Josh Z* /forum/post/14110940
> 
> 
> Let me know what you find out. I'm also in the Boston area.



Will do. Have you seen the RS1/Silverstar at New England Home Theater in Littleton? It's worth a trip. They're open on Saturdays.


----------



## funk74

It's unfortunate to here this about the 1.4 gain BD screen. I was hoping to get one in a few months when my HT is built out.


HRD, Did Ryan give you any idea of when it would be available again?


Maybe I'll do a DIY screen in the mean time.


Anyone out there doing a 2.35:1 setup with a JVC-RS2? What are your thougts on it?


thanks


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *funk74* /forum/post/14111662
> 
> 
> It's unfortunate to here this about the 1.4 gain BD screen. I was hoping to get one in a few months when my HT is built out.
> 
> 
> HRD, Did Ryan give you any idea of when it would be available again?
> 
> 
> Maybe I'll do a DIY screen in the mean time.
> 
> 
> Anyone out there doing a 2.35:1 setup with a JVC-RS2? What are your thougts on it?
> 
> 
> thanks



I'm in the same boat as you funk. I was really looking forward to a 1.4 retractable at the end of summer. I guess I'm back in the waiting game though until they work out the "kinks".


I saw the 1.4 at a local dealer and thought that was about right for me. I did a direct comparison with a 0.9 Carada Gray screen and I much preferred the 1.4 BD.


I'm curious where a negative gain screen would be useful? (Can ya tell I'm still new at this?







)


----------



## davidahn

This post was from a few days ago, but I just read it:



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/14065357
> 
> 
> Agreed, if they offered a trade up program I would be more inclined to give the .8 a shot. It would have to be a pretty solid deal though as I would not spend anywhere near that kind of money on a screen twice. If we're talking about a $100 shipping/restocking fee I'm in, but even a 50% discount wouldn't be worth it. I doubt this would be reasonable from a business sense though.



I too would be inclined to order the .8 now if they would let us trade up when the 1.4 ships again. To avoid abuse, they could make the following guidelines:


1. Side-by-side comparison encouraged at a local dealer to make sure they want the tradeoffs with the 1.4 gain; though it would only be fair to cut the dealer in on a little fee for this.

2. A nominal fee to pay for the material, say $100-250, since they already made profit on the .8 screen, plus S&H.

3. Return of the old screen to SI at customer's expense to avoid resales cannibalizing sales of new 0.8 and 1.4 screens.

4. If the customer ends up NOT wanting the 1.4 gain, they can return it, but pay a restocking fee since it can no longer be sold as new. This isn't as crucial for SI to do, as any returns can go out to other trade-ups, and the goodwill from NOT charging a restocking fee will be tremendous, as the S&H round trip plus the upgrade fee would already be a few hundred dollars.


What do you guys think? (Including SI?)


David


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *funk74* /forum/post/14111662
> 
> 
> It's unfortunate to here this about the 1.4 gain BD screen. I was hoping to get one in a few months when my HT is built out.
> 
> 
> HRD, Did Ryan give you any idea of when it would be available again?
> 
> 
> Maybe I'll do a DIY screen in the mean time.
> 
> 
> Anyone out there doing a 2.35:1 setup with a JVC-RS2? What are your thougts on it?
> 
> 
> thanks



Ryan said 2009, just like the other posts here said. My impression is sales of the .8 are so good that SI would rather concentrate on bringing the Reference series of motorized screens and the Reference series of curved screens out.


I saw an RS2 on a 11-foot wide High Power and it looked great. How wide were you thinking of going? I'd be concerned about getting enough brightness with a large screen if you are going to use the RS2.


----------



## speciman




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *haarec* /forum/post/14104292
> 
> 
> Could you tell how big is the screen that you use with VW60 and how big was Black Diamond? Maybe some more info about distance to the projector, mode, etc?



I was comparing the SI screen sample (~2x3 ft) against a smaller Da-lite screen sample (8x11") that were up against an off-white wall. The SI screen sample consisted of a BD vs a ~1.0 white screen sample. The smaller Da-lite sample was overlaying the 1.0 white screen sample. PJ to wall distance was 15ft. Lamp was set to high, iris to auto1 and picture mode to dynamic. I have attached a couple of images. Pics were taken at about 3PM with a window covered with sheer blinds on either side of the screen on the north wall and a row of three windows with sheer blinds within 10 ft on the east wall to the right of the screen samples. A large glass sliding door is adjacent to the windows on the east wall about 17 ft from the screen samples. There is no direct sunlight on the screen wall, just a lot of indirect lighting. The camera images are pretty close to what I saw.


----------



## haarec

Thank you. This is helpfull! Could you make some pics with only a white image instead colorfull? This could help to estimate a real gain of those two versions of Black Diamond and help to choose a right size, considering a light amount we can obtain from a projector. Perhaps some more pics with total black instead of white and also some in dark condition could show a white level in addition to the black level we can see on your pics.


Great comparison!


----------



## funk74




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14113088
> 
> 
> Ryan said 2009, just like the other posts here said. My impression is sales of the .8 are so good that SI would rather concentrate on bringing the Reference series of motorized screens and the Reference series of curved screens out.
> 
> 
> I saw an RS2 on a 11-foot wide Higth Power and it looked great. How wide were you thinking of going? I'd be concerned about getting enough brightness with a large screen if you are going to use the RS2.



Too bad they are putting off the 1.4, I would think there would be more people that want one, judging from this board.


Well I was thinking about putting in the 133" 2.35:1 BD with the 1.4 gain. Also using a JVC RS2 projector with a anamorphic lens (type TBD). My media room will about 20x21 ft when finished. There are a couple of windows on one wall, but I can easily place blackout curtains on them.


The reason I'd prefer the 1.4 is just due to the size of the screen I want and all of the screen calculators I have used seem to indicate that 0.8 gain won't be enough to get an adequate ft-Lamberts with this setup.


I went to austin and saw the 0.8 gain, which looked great, but I know there will be times that I won't have all of the lights off like watching sports and I just believe the higher gain screen will look better.


I wish this would have worked out but it is what it is...


Unless anyone else has any other suggestions.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *funk74* /forum/post/14118583
> 
> 
> Too bad they are putting off the 1.4, I would think there would be more people that want one, judging from this board.
> 
> 
> Well I was thinking about putting in the 133" 2.35:1 BD with the 1.4 gain. Also using a JVC RS2 projector with a anamorphic lens (type TBD). My media room will about 20x21 ft when finished. There are a couple of windows on one wall, but I can easily place blackout curtains on them.
> 
> 
> The reason I'd prefer the 1.4 is just due to the size of the screen I want and all of the screen calculators I have used seem to indicate that 0.8 gain won't be enough to get an adequate ft-Lamberts with this setup.
> 
> 
> I went to austin and saw the 0.8 gain, which looked great, but I know there will be times that I won't have all of the lights off like watching sports and I just believe the higher gain screen will look better.
> 
> 
> I wish this would have worked out but it is what it is...
> 
> 
> Unless anyone else has any other suggestions.



There could be more potential customers wanting the 1.4 than the .8, but it seems there are enough wanting the .8 to keep SI busy making BD screens.


If your budget can swing the RS2, a lens, and a 133" BD, your best bet might be to buy a BD and a High Power both and use whatever looks better for the viewing material and viewing conditions at the time. You can get a High Power in a size that matches the size of the BD easily enough and you could go with a Model C pulldown if you wanted to save money or an electric if you wanted the convenience of that.


I know someone with three 11-foot wide fixed frame cinemascope screens, a High Power, a Firehawk, and a Studiotek.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14118951
> 
> 
> There could be more potential customers wanting the 1.4 than the .8, but it seems there are enough wanting the .8 to keep SI busy making BD screens.
> 
> 
> If your budget can swing the RS2, a lens, and a 133" BD, your best bet might be to buy a BD and a High Power both and use whatever looks better for the viewing material and viewing conditions at the time. You can get a High Power in a size that matches the size of the BD easily enough and you could go with a Model C pulldown if you wanted to save money or an electric if you wanted the convenience of that.
> 
> 
> I know someone with three 11-foot wide fixed frame cinemascope screens, a High Power, a Firehawk, and a Studiotek.



Not to knock your suggestion hrd, and I know there are some die hards out there that use multiple screens, but I think the vast majority of users are more interested in having a general purpose screen.


I demoed the BD 1.4 side by side with a Carada 0.9 gray screen of the same size and to me the BD won hands down. I assume there would be a similar reaction to the 0.8 vs. the 1.4 BD side by side for a lot of people. I was fortunate to see the screen in both full light (glass store front) and a dedicated theater. I thought for the ambient light situation the 1.4 was much more useful.


I have often thought about just using a Sony Dyna clear screen as a stop gap (since they can be had for song) until the 1.4 becomes available again. But it may not be worth the hassle and again we get into the multiple screen conundrum.


Just my 2 cents.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/14120021
> 
> 
> 
> I demoed the BD 1.4 side by side with a Carada 0.9 gray screen of the same size and to me the BD won hands down.



Under the controlled lighting conditions (dedicated home theater), how did the

the BD win hands down? In what way?


Thanks.


----------



## IanK

I had planned on getting the 1.4 gain BD once the motorized version came out, but now that it looks like the 1.4 wont be available for a while (if ever), I am thinking about the feasiblity of using the 0.8 in my set up. I think i may have the lumens (i have an Infocus 7205), but I dont recall whether anyone of the posters who have seen the BD in person, has commented on how the light rejection properties of the 0.8 compare to the 1.4.


any info on this?


thanks

Ian


----------



## speciman




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *haarec* /forum/post/14114384
> 
> 
> Thank you. This is helpfull! Could you make some pics with only a white image instead colorfull? This could help to estimate a real gain of those two versions of Black Diamond and help to choose a right size, considering a light amount we can obtain from a projector. Perhaps some more pics with total black instead of white and also some in dark condition could show a white level in addition to the black level we can see on your pics.
> 
> 
> Great comparison!



Sorry, I had already returned the screen samples to my dealer.


----------



## haarec

Too bad. Thanks anyway.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *IanK* /forum/post/14124114
> 
> 
> I had planned on getting the 1.4 gain BD once the motorized version came out, but now that it looks like the 1.4 wont be available for a while (if ever), I am thinking about the feasiblity of using the 0.8 in my set up. I think i may have the lumens (i have an Infocus 7205), but I dont recall whether anyone of the posters who have seen the BD in person, has commented on how the light rejection properties of the 0.8 compare to the 1.4.
> 
> 
> any info on this?
> 
> 
> thanks
> 
> Ian



Perhaps someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't a negative gain screen be better at ambient light rejection compared to a positive gain screen?


----------



## noah katz

Depends.


If the lower gain is from more tint, it will lower whites as much as blacks.


If it's from more directionality, it could go either way depending on where the light is coming from.


I don't know how the BD works, so it may be none of the above


----------



## h00kemh0rns

I'd be willing to do a head to head compare for everyone. Right now I have the firehawk sample and Vutec sent me every one of their samples (even though I just asked for one.) Only problem with Vutec's is that they are 8"x11"...not really the best size. I'd like to get a 1.4 sample of BD to do a head to head. Not sure if SI would be willing to do that now that there is an issue/delay...anyone out there have a sample?


My set up is pretty simple. Light controlled (4 sconce lights with dual 100 watt bulbs) 14x16 room, Panasonic PT-AEw000U projector 15' from screen, and the .8 Black Diamond. The projector is uncalibrated (less than 15 hrs on it) but that should be a moot point as the image projected will be used on all samples. For the photo's I'll be using a fellow photographers (used to be in the racket) setup of a Canon 40D and a wide angle 2.8F lens. This will allow me to take much better photo's than that crapCanon p&s that I had since the beginning of time.










Hoping to make this as fruitful for those thinking about buying the .8 rather than the 1.4 since there is a delay. So I'm asking everyone here what are all the conditions you would like to see?


----------



## haarec

My point is to compare plain white page (gain 1.0) with screen material to get know what is a white level (real gain) that can be obtained on BD screens - and - if we can have a pop effect with not expensive LCD/LCOS projector on it. So my "wish" is:


1. light spot 100" diagonal (16/9, 87" wide) or similar.

2. within a light spot: samples and a white page.

3. PJ set on normal mode (AE2000 gives about 800 lumens in this mode)

4. white color projected

5. black color projected

6. each (white and black) in three conditions: with no light at all, dimmed light and full light

7. pics showing a black frame too


A result of this research could be even better if you have a grayscale gradient - from white to black in a few steps. This could show how a screen material handles a greys in diferent light conditions with PJ gamma about 2.3.

I hope this is not too much


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *haarec* /forum/post/14136649
> 
> 
> My point is to compare plain white page (gain 1.0) with screen material to get know what is a white level (real gain) that can be obtained on BD screens - and - if we can have a pop effect with not expensive LCD/LCOS projector on it. So my "wish" is:
> 
> 
> 1. light spot 100" diagonal (16/9, 87" wide) or similar.
> 
> 2. within a light spot: samples and a white page.
> 
> 3. PJ set on normal mode (AE2000 gives about 800 lumens in this mode)
> 
> 4. white color projected
> 
> 5. black color projected
> 
> 6. each (white and black) in three conditions: with no light at all, dimmed light and full light
> 
> 7. pics showing a black frame too
> 
> 
> A result of this research could be even better if you have a grayscale gradient - from white to black in a few steps. This could show how a screen material handles a greys in diferent light conditions with PJ gamma about 2.3.
> 
> I hope this is not too much



Either I've had too much sun and beer or I'm and idiot. Either way can you dumb this down?










I'm thinking pick a move/scene (or a few) and I'll compare each screen material under different lighting conditions. I'll also set the projector to whatever preset conditions needed.


----------



## haarec

It would be 6 pics. All samples that are worth something at once - three shots with white color projected, three shots with black color projected - in different light conditions it makes total 6 pics. That is all.


----------



## pottscb




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *speciman* /forum/post/14104192
> 
> 
> From my own experience, Josh's comment about testing it in your own room rings true. I have a multi-use room with indirect sunlight and a Sony VPL-VW60 and I found that the 1.4 BD image to have good blacks but rather a weak image during afternoon viewing. I compared it to a Da-lite Hi Power and even though there was some crushing of the blacks the image was much more watchable, there was a lot more pop to the image and less strain on the eyes. If I had a pj with twice the lumens, I'm sure the BD image would have been fine perhaps better than the Hi Power. So eventhough I waited months for the BD screen material to become available, I regretfully
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> had to turn to the Hi Power screen because it provided a better image for my particular pj and lighting conditions. However, I'm glad that the new BD screen has worked out for some other people.



I've had the same experience, high contrast pjs are almost worthless in a bright environment as its the brightness that drives the perceived contrast...the average 300:1; 3000 lumen boardroom pj will smoke almost any home theater pj (10K:1 and 1000 lumen) with lights on.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/14137978
> 
> 
> Either I've had too much sun and beer or I'm and idiot. Either way can you dumb this down?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm thinking pick a move/scene (or a few) and I'll compare each screen material under different lighting conditions. I'll also set the projector to whatever preset conditions needed.



I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm always excited for a little head to head action. Perhaps you could use some scenes from 8-mile, then the content matches the battle







.


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/14162037
> 
> 
> I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm always excited for a little head to head action. Perhaps you could use some scenes from 8-mile, then the content matches the battle
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .



Waiting on a free weekend for my friends camera (he's a wedding photog.) The following weekend might be the first chance I get. However, in the mean time...anyone still have a 1.4 BD sample they'd like to see in the head to head? Might help in making a decision to buy a .8 rather than waiting on SI to re-release next year.


----------



## batborsen

Where the heck does one buy a 0.8gain of these, if one lives outside the US!

It cannot be found anywhere on the net for sale?!


Just because there was a problem with the 1.4, shouldn`t stop the 0.8 from

have beeing shipped on April 18th! One would think??


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *batborsen* /forum/post/14163583
> 
> 
> Where the heck does one buy a 0.8gain of these, if one lives outside the US!
> 
> It cannot be found anywhere on the net for sale?!
> 
> 
> Just because there was a problem with the 1.4, shouldn`t stop the 0.8 from
> 
> have beeing shipped on April 18th! One would think??



ProjectorZone sells the BD. I don't know if they will fill orders that require shipping a screen outside the US or Canada. You'll have to ask them.

http://www.projectorzone.com/ 


Hopefully, AV Science will carry them soon.


You can also buy directly from SI if they will ship to you.


----------



## batborsen

Okidoki! thanks for the info!


Wonder what pricerange the curved bd will be


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *batborsen* /forum/post/14164923
> 
> 
> Okidoki! thanks for the info!
> 
> 
> Wonder what pricerange the curved bd will be



I know that SI is selling direct as well. If AVS decides not to be a dealer, you could contact them and see if they can point you in the right direction.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *batborsen* /forum/post/14164923
> 
> 
> Okidoki! thanks for the info!
> 
> 
> Wonder what pricerange the curved bd will be



hrd mentioned in post 717 that motorized screens would be about 1/3rd more than fixed, so I say that curved will be as least as much.


----------



## Xyst

Hi hookem,


Any chance to do a side by side yet? Just wondering if you've seen them next to each other, I know you've been trying to finagle a better phptographer for the post (no offense intended!)


----------



## Sniper2075

I was wondering if anyone with a 2.35:1 Black Diamond can comment on if you need side masking or not when projecting non 2.35:1. I know different projectors may work better than others but I was just wondering. I have a panasonic AX-200 if anyone happens to have the black diamond with this projector.


I'm waiting for the electric roll down black diamond but don't know if they will be offering it in a model with drop down side masking like some other companies do. If they don't and I deceide I want side masking is there any easy way to do it with a roll down screen?


Thanks


----------



## Fish111

nice


----------



## Master843




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Sniper2075* /forum/post/14299047
> 
> 
> I was wondering if anyone with a 2.35:1 Black Diamond can comment on if you need side masking or not when projecting non 2.35:1. I know different projectors may work better than others but I was just wondering. I have a panasonic AX-200 if anyone happens to have the black diamond with this projector.
> 
> 
> I'm waiting for the electric roll down black diamond but don't know if they will be offering it in a model with drop down side masking like some other companies do. If they don't and I deceide I want side masking is there any easy way to do it with a roll down screen?
> 
> 
> Thanks



While I don't have a 2.35:1 Black Diamond, I do have the 16:9 .8 gain version with a Mits HC1500. When nothing is projecting on the screen (or when there are black bars), it looks just like a TV that has been turned off. To me at least, it seems to be good enough to not need side masking.


I know it has been said many times but this thing really works wonders with lots of ambient light. I have a lot of light in my room (comes from directly behind the projector and hits the screen directly) and during the day it used to be impossible to watch with the projector but now it is perfectly viewable. While it is still a bit better at night with the room dark, the difference is maginal.


The only real down side is that you need a projector with a high light output for this screen. While I can get a viewable picture with this projector, it still feels a bit dim, especially next to my LCD. But considering how now I can also watch during the day, for me at least it is a good tradeoff.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Master843* /forum/post/14326560
> 
> 
> The only real down side is that you need a projector with a high light output for this screen. While I can get a viewable picture with this projector, it still feels a bit dim, especially next to my LCD. But considering how now I can also watch during the day, for me at least it is a good tradeoff.



How does it look in sports mode?


----------



## Master843

It looks ok in the other modes but I find (at least with this projector, Mits HC1500) I have to keep it in high brightness mode, otherwise it looks too dim. Has anyone else with this screen run into this issue? I am reading that this projector outputs 1600 lumens, is that really true?


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Master843* /forum/post/14327518
> 
> 
> It looks ok in the other modes but I find (at least with this projector, Mits HC1500) I have to keep it in high brightness mode, otherwise it looks too dim. Has anyone else with this screen run into this issue? I am reading that this projector outputs 1600 lumens, is that really true?



When I had an HC1500, I ran it in high brightness and sports mode all the time because I like bright and I have white walls and a white ceiling. It loooked very nice.


Read Art's review. He always evaluates projectors in different modes and pays attention to the lumens at each.

http://www.projectorreviews.com/mitsubishi/hc1500/


----------



## Master843

On it's own, it definately looks decent. I guess it is just when doing a head to head comparison against my tv that it looks dim. At night it looks brighter than during the day, which I assume is due to less ambient light.


Overall, I am happy. I guess I just had my expectations too high initially (was expecting almost a miracle product after all that advertisement), but it is still a really good product. I've only had it for 1 day so far so I am still testing it, and any issues are relatively minor compared to the benefits.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Master843* /forum/post/14328126
> 
> 
> On it's own, it definately looks decent. I guess it is just when doing a head to head comparison against my tv that it looks dim. At night it looks brighter than during the day, which I assume is due to less ambient light.
> 
> 
> Overall, I am happy. I guess I just had my expectations too high initially (was expecting almost a miracle product after all that advertisement), but it is still a really good product. I've only had it for 1 day so far so I am still testing it, and any issues are relatively minor compared to the benefits.



Thanks for the review Master. Any chance you would show off a couple pictures of the installation? I'd love to see the room you working with, and I'm happy to hear you're enjoying the screen.


Andrew


----------



## Master843

I tried taking one with my phone but the camera on that thing is awful so the picture doesn't look correct at all. I'll have to see about borrowing a better one from a friend so it might be a few days.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Master843* /forum/post/14333289
> 
> 
> I tried taking one with my phone but the camera on that thing is awful so the picture doesn't look correct at all. I'll have to see about borrowing a better one from a friend so it might be a few days.



Great, thanks Master!


----------



## whichPJ

Has anyone heard anything about how SI is dealing with the vertical line issues on already purchased 1.3 BD screens?


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *whichPJ* /forum/post/14391469
> 
> 
> Has anyone heard anything about how SI is dealing with the vertical line issues on already purchased 1.3 BD screens?



I personally have not. If you're an owner, you should give them SI a call directly if you have questions though. They have been extremely helpful to everyone who has dealt with them so far.


----------



## plissken99

Hello, couple questions, sorry if they have been answered but 26 pages is insane lol. Has anyone seen a larger sized BD screen, and can comment on the seem? These things sound really amazing, but I'd want a 120" or 133" in 16x9. I just wonder how obtrusive the seem is.


Also what is the average street price for the 113" 16x9 fixed screen? Are there any issues that have been discovered after long term usage yet?


----------



## Sniper2075

Just wanted to ask here if anyone knows how heavy the Black Diamond fixed screens are. I'm thinking about getting a 105" or so diagonal 2.35:1 screen. I'm going to also have a plasma in the room for everyday TV etc and was wondering if I could move the screen when not in use if its not too heavy. I just really don't want to wait for the motorized version to come out, also I'm kinda worried about waves. I'm all set with everything but a screen. I do have a portable pull up screen but its a 80" 16:9


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Sniper2075* /forum/post/14404744
> 
> 
> Just wanted to ask here if anyone knows how heavy the Black Diamond fixed screens are. I'm thinking about getting a 105" or so diagonal 2.35:1 screen. I'm going to also have a plasma in the room for everyday TV etc and was wondering if I could move the screen when not in use if its not too heavy. I just really don't want to wait for the motorized version to come out, also I'm kinda worried about waves. I'm all set with everything but a screen. I do have a portable pull up screen but its a 80" 16:9



The screen calculator on the SI website gives 46 pounds as the weight for a 105" diagonal 2.35:1 screen. You may as well get the 106", because the 105" would be considered a custom size and take longer to manufacture and you'd have to pay the price of the 106", anyway.

http://www.siscreens.com/calculator/fixed1.php?ratio=2 


SI just put up news on their website saying the motorized screen will be out by CEDIA:

http://www.siscreens.com/news/


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *plissken99* /forum/post/14404644
> 
> 
> Hello, couple questions, sorry if they have been answered but 26 pages is insane lol. Has anyone seen a larger sized BD screen, and can comment on the seem? These things sound really amazing, but I'd want a 120" or 133" in 16x9. I just wonder how obtrusive the seem is.
> 
> 
> Also what is the average street price for the 113" 16x9 fixed screen? Are there any issues that have been discovered after long term usage yet?



There are no seams and SI says it will not ever make this screen for home theater use with a seam. That makes the maximum viewing size 55.39" high for a 16X9 screen and 55.69" high for a 2.35:1 screen, which means the largest possible 16X9 screen is about 113". 113.7" if SI would make a 16X9 screen out of the 2.35:1 material. I once went from a 120" image to a 110" image and found it just as satisfying...after I moved closer.


----------



## plissken99

Ah their website always says "largest size possible witout seems. I assumed they made larger sizes.


----------



## Sniper2075




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14405246
> 
> 
> The screen calculator on the SI website gives 46 pounds as the weight for a 105" diagonal 2.35:1 screen. You may as well get the 106", because the 105" would be considered a custom size and take longer to manufacture and you'd have to pay the price of the 106", anyway.
> 
> http://www.siscreens.com/calculator/fixed1.php?ratio=2
> 
> 
> SI just put up news on their website saying the motorized screen will be out by CEDIA:
> 
> http://www.siscreens.com/news/



Thanks for the help, I was on there website but must of missed that part. I guess I will try and wait for the motorized screen, 45 lbs isn't very much but with the size it would be kinda hard to move myself. Also, yes I would get the 106" if thats a standard size. I was just going with my own rough calculation from projecting the image on a wall and finding something I liked that fit the room.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *plissken99* /forum/post/14404644
> 
> 
> Hello, couple questions, sorry if they have been answered but 26 pages is insane lol. Has anyone seen a larger sized BD screen, and can comment on the seem? These things sound really amazing, but I'd want a 120" or 133" in 16x9. I just wonder how obtrusive the seem is.
> 
> 
> Also what is the average street price for the 113" 16x9 fixed screen? Are there any issues that have been discovered after long term usage yet?



Call ProjectorZone. They carry this line. AV Science is supposed to be carrying it eventually.


----------



## penguin killer

I'm looking for a 110" Black Diamond. Do they make them? Where can I find one? Is the vertical line issue still an issue?


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *penguin killer* /forum/post/14441924
> 
> 
> I'm looking for a 110" Black Diamond. Do they make them? Where can I find one? Is the vertical line issue still an issue?



Yes, in fixed frame format, with motorized planned for the end of the year.


ProjectorZone.


As far as I know, vertical lines are not an issue with the .8 gain screen and were an issue only with the 1.4 gain screen. The 1.4 gain screen was put on hold until next year, after being sold for a short time, due to issues like this.


----------



## whiskey > work




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14446416
> 
> 
> Yes, in fixed frame format, with motorized planned for the end of the year.
> 
> 
> ProjectorZone.
> 
> 
> As far as I know, vertical lines are not an issue with the .8 gain screen and were an issue only with the 1.4 gain screen. The 1.4 gain screen was put on hold until next year, after being sold for a short time, due to issues like this.



what is the cost on the fixed version? Like 2g's?


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *whiskey > work* /forum/post/14447146
> 
> 
> what is the cost on the fixed version? Like 2g's?



Give ProjectorZone a call. I have not been in contact with them for several months.


----------



## pottscb

Hey guys,

I was just at A&B TV here in Austin and they said they'll be carrying the BD and should have one in next week that they will display with an Epson 1080UB, which is fantastic as this is the setup I was considering (though I might need a higher gain as I'm throwing 20ft. from a ceiling mount). I'll post again after I've seen it.


----------



## batborsen

Perhaps we could kick some life into this thread with some night and day screenshots









It would be wonderful with some pics from different angels 0 degrees right infront, up to 10,20,30,45 from the side to se how much the picture darkens to halv gain wich is 45 degrees!


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pottscb* /forum/post/14467860
> 
> 
> Hey guys,
> 
> I was just at A&B TV here in Austin and they said they'll be carrying the BD and should have one in next week that they will display with an Epson 1080UB, which is fantastic as this is the setup I was considering (though I might need a higher gain as I'm throwing 20ft. from a ceiling mount). I'll post again after I've seen it.



What screen size are you considering? The 1080UB has plenty of lumens if you are willing to use them, so 20 feet might work out well and will certainly give you the possiblity of higher contrast. Hopefully, the store will let you cycle through the different modes to see their projector in the high bulb mode.


Ceiling mount is good. SI recommends a ceiling mount as the ideal mount for the Black Diamond.


----------



## pottscb




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14469037
> 
> 
> What screen size are you considering? The 1080UB has plenty of lumens if you are willing to use them, so 20 feet might work out well and will certainly give you the possiblity of higher contrast. Hopefully, the store will let you cycle through the different modes to see their projector in the high bulb mode.
> 
> 
> Ceiling mount is good. SI recommends a ceiling mount as the ideal mount for the Black Diamond.



Yeah, the only problem is that their display pjs are all ~12 ft from the screens which will give me a false sense of how bright it will be...the only saving grace would be if they displayed it on ~110-120" screen at 12 ft. as this would be pretty similar brightness as my 100" at 18-20ft (give or take).


----------



## penguin killer

So I had the opportunity today to look at a 92" Black Diamond (.8 gain model) hooked up to a very poorly calibrated Optoma HD80. The picture from this projector was not good, but the Black Diamond definitely delivers as advertised in terms of its performance in rooms filled with light.


We started with the lights off and then turned a bunch of the lights on in the show room, some of which were right in front of the screen, and you could hardly see any degradation in the picture with the lights on.


I've also been looking at a Stewart Firehawk G3 and we spent some time with one of them that was hooked up to a JVC DLA-HD1. This projector was properly set up and with the lights off the picture was phenomonal. If you add a little bit of light the picture is still very watchable. However, once you have all the lights on, the picture definitely disappears.


I think the only remaining factor left is whether or not the Black Diamond will work for me with my JVC DLA-HD1 with a throw distance of 15ft and seats at 14 feet. The SI website says this scenario would be too dim, but after talking to someone at SI, we have learned that they think the wizard on their site is incorrectly reporting this (it shows green, but then also says *too dim in the text). We have an inquiry in to their engineering team to get confirmation on whether or not this scenario would produce a good picture. I already know they have one set up in their showroom, but I don't know distances and screen size, and my sales rep has seen a similar set up in his store when the Screen Innovations folks demo'd the Black Diamond, so he's fairly confident it'll work. If the news comes back all good, I'm fairly certain this is the screen I'll be going with.


I'd be interested in hearing any opinions on why I should remain with the Stewart Firehawk. Are there some things that the Firehawk would do better?


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *penguin killer* /forum/post/14473678
> 
> 
> So I had the opportunity today to look at a 92" Black Diamond (.8 gain model) hooked up to a very poorly calibrated Optoma HD80. The picture from this projector was not good, but the Black Diamond definitely delivers as advertised in terms of its performance in rooms filled with light.
> 
> 
> We started with the lights off and then turned a bunch of the lights on in the show room, some of which were right in front of the screen, and you could hardly see any degradation in the picture with the lights on.
> 
> 
> I've also been looking at a Stewart Firehawk G3 and we spent some time with one of them that was hooked up to a JVC DLA-HD1. This projector was properly set up and with the lights off the picture was phenomonal. If you add a little bit of light the picture is still very watchable. However, once you have all the lights on, the picture definitely disappears.
> 
> 
> I think the only remaining factor left is whether or not the Black Diamond will work for me with my JVC DLA-HD1 with a throw distance of 15ft and seats at 14 feet. The SI website says this scenario would be too dim, but after talking to someone at SI, we have learned that they think the wizard on their site is incorrectly reporting this (it shows green, but then also says *too dim in the text). We have an inquiry in to their engineering team to get confirmation on whether or not this scenario would produce a good picture. I already know they have one set up in their showroom, but I don't know distances and screen size, and my sales rep has seen a similar set up in his store when the Screen Innovations folks demo'd the Black Diamond, so he's fairly confident it'll work. If the news comes back all good, I'm fairly certain this is the screen I'll be going with.
> 
> 
> I'd be interested in hearing any opinions on why I should remain with the Stewart Firehawk. Are there some things that the Firehawk would do better?



Here's a review of the Firehawk:

http://www.projectorcentral.com/stewart_screens.htm 


There's lots of info on the Firehawk in the main Stewart thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...1&highlight=fh


----------



## Mike W




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *penguin killer* /forum/post/14473678
> 
> 
> So I had the opportunity today to look at a 92" Black Diamond
> 
> 
> I've also been looking at a Stewart Firehawk G3 and we spent some time with one of them that was hooked up to a JVC DLA-HD1.



p. k.


Did you see the screens at Magnolia? If so, which branch? I haven't been in there for a while, but I know the Roosevelt store has had the HD-1 on display for a long time, and last time I was in they had some other SI screen in a different showroom. If not Magnolia, could you let me know where you saw it? Thanks.


Mike W.


----------



## penguin killer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mike W* /forum/post/14482402
> 
> 
> p. k.
> 
> 
> Did you see the screens at Magnolia? If so, which branch? I haven't been in there for a while, but I know the Roosevelt store has had the HD-1 on display for a long time, and last time I was in they had some other SI screen in a different showroom. If not Magnolia, could you let me know where you saw it? Thanks.
> 
> 
> Mike W.




It was at the Roosevelt branch. They have it hooked up to a terrible Optoma HD80. I think I'm going to try to get them to move it into the room with the JVC to see what I think.


----------



## Mike W




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *penguin killer* /forum/post/14489043
> 
> 
> It was at the Roosevelt branch. They have it hooked up to a terrible Optoma HD80. I think I'm going to try to get them to move it into the room with the JVC to see what I think.



Thanks for the info. It will be interesting to see whether they'll do that. If so, we'll await your feedback.


You'd think that the Optoma, with all those lumens, would benefit from the BD on blacks and shadow detail yet still project an image with some pop. Not so, huh?


Mike W.


----------



## metachronos

Are there any other major companies that make a black screen?


----------



## Dawn Gordon

The Supernova. It's not black but it's a similar idea. Also more expensive than the Black Diamond.

www.supernovascreen.com


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Dawn Gordon* /forum/post/14510937
> 
> 
> The Supernova. It's not black but it's a similar idea. Also more expensive than the Black Diamond.
> 
> www.supernovascreen.com



I remember researching these early on and they were very expensive. Also there were a lot of mixed reviews as to whether the claims made by the company were actaully met. There is a very old post about it with some screen shots on AVS somewhere...you'll have to check the archives though.


----------



## Xyst

Has anyone heard if the retractable model is shipping yet?


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/14593265
> 
> 
> Has anyone heard if the retractable model is shipping yet?



I spoke with someone at SI a few weeks ago and found out the timetable for the reference motorized. The reference motorized will be introduced and displayed at CEDIA and will begin shipping in October. However, it will not be available with the Black Diamond fabric until the end of the year. I know, not what you wanted to hear.


----------



## penguin killer

Anyone at CEDIA want to ask SI about the 1.4 Black Diamond. I was tossed a rumor that they will start shipping in October, but I haven't seen any announcements from SI so far.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *penguin killer* /forum/post/14596436
> 
> 
> Anyone at CEDIA want to ask SI about the 1.4 Black Diamond. I was tossed a rumor that they will start shipping in October, but I haven't seen any announcements from SI so far.



That would be nice. I was thinking recently that as long as I had to wait until the end of the year for the motorized to come out, maybe I should wait for the 1.4. I just called SI and could not get any update because most of them are at CEDIA. They will be back in the office on Tuesday.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14598438
> 
> 
> That would be nice. I was thinking recently that as long as I had to wait until the end of the year for the motorized to come out, maybe I should wait for the 1.4. I just called SI and could not get any update because most of them are at CEDIA. They will be back in the office on Tuesday.



That's not bad logic, but at this point I've been waiting for over a year now. I'm not sure if it's loyalty or stupidity. I was crushed when they pulled the 1.4 and I'd hate to settle for a 0.8 gain. If they can hit the 1.4 retractable for the end of the year as well then I'm still in.


The new JVC HD750 isn't supposed to be out until november so I'm gonna have to wait anyway for the projectors to get to dealers. If we're talking a couple of weeks, fine.


If not I may just get a stop gap screen until the 1.4 makes it to market, Carada, HP, something on the lower price scale. I'd rather be enjoying any system than waiting on perfection at this point.


----------



## noah katz

"If not I may just get a stop gap screen until the 1.4 makes it to market, Carada, HP, something on the lower price scale."


I'd just get a bedsheet to tide you over.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/14600005
> 
> 
> That's not bad logic, but at this point I've been waiting for over a year now. I'm not sure if it's loyalty or stupidity. I was crushed when they pulled the 1.4 and I'd hate to settle for a 0.8 gain. If they can hit the 1.4 retractable for the end of the year as well then I'm still in.
> 
> 
> The new JVC HD750 isn't supposed to be out until november so I'm gonna have to wait anyway for the projectors to get to dealers. If we're talking a couple of weeks, fine.
> 
> 
> If not I may just get a stop gap screen until the 1.4 makes it to market, Carada, HP, something on the lower price scale. I'd rather be enjoying any system than waiting on perfection at this point.



I like what I've been reading about the JVC, too, and may get one. I'm just not sure if the image on a 113" BD with 800 lumens will be bright enough for my tastes with the BD. Especially if it's not the 1.4 gain. I might be better off getting the Silverstar or the High Power and darkening the walls and ceiling. At least I have no problem with running the JVC in high bulb mode. However, if I get the screen in 2.35:1 format, in order to use the zoom method, I will not be able to mount the JVC at max zoom. meaning it will not be as bright as it could be, and when I open the zoom from the mid-zoom mounting position to fit the extra width of a scoped movie, that will diffuse the brightness even more. In other words, the JVC might be bright enough for me for 113" 16X9, but not for 11-foot wide 2.35:1.


Have you been in contact with Sensorium? I got the name from SI and called. The dealer has a Black Diamond screen up in his home in Manhattan. I suppose there's a chance I will be in Manhattan in early November, in which case I will try to check it out.


----------



## jsharpe




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *penguin killer* /forum/post/14596436
> 
> 
> Anyone at CEDIA want to ask SI about the 1.4 Black Diamond. I was tossed a rumor that they will start shipping in October, but I haven't seen any announcements from SI so far.



I asked today and they indicated it would probably be after the first of the year. The reason they gave for the delay was production yields rather than any inherent problem with the screen at that gain.


Their masked versions of both the flat and curved BD will also be available during the first half of next year with the flat available first. The masking will be the "in from the sides" variety rather than the "roll down on the sides" kind. It also has some features that will make it extremely convenient to adjust and control.


They're still working our pricing for the curved version but right now they are thinking about a fixed amount over the flat version of the same size. While still not what I would consider "cheap" the numbers they are thinking about sounded very substantially less than premium Stewart asks for CineCurve


----------



## penguin killer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14600395
> 
> 
> I like what I've been reading about the JVC, too, and may get one. I'm just not sure if the image on a 113" BD with 800 lumens will be bright enough for my tastes with the BD. Especially if it's not the 1.4 gain. I might be better off getting the Silverstar or the High Power and darkening the walls and ceiling. At least I have no problem with running the JVC in high bulb mode. However, if I get the screen in 2.35:1 format, in order to use the zoom method, I will not be able to mount the JVC at max zoom. meaning it will not be as bright as it could be, and when I open the zoom from the mid-zoom mounting position to fit the extra width of a scoped movie, that will diffuse the brightness even more. In other words, the JVC might be bright enough for me for 113" 16X9, but not for 11-foot wide 2.35:1.
> 
> 
> Have you been in contact with Sensorium? I got the name from SI and called. The dealer has a Black Diamond screen up in his home in Manhattan. I suppose there's a chance I will be in Manhattan in early November, in which case I will try to check it out.




I think 113" with the .8 screen and the JVC is going to be too dim. I've been told by SI that I should stay at or below 100".


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *penguin killer* /forum/post/14601954
> 
> 
> I think 113" with the .8 screen and the JVC is going to be too dim. I've been told by SI that I should stay at or below 100".



But that was with the RS1, wasn't it? The new RS20 is brighter, 800 lumens. But since I want a screen that will last decades, and someone posted today that SI may have the 1.4 out early next year, which might end up being around the same time as the motorized BD release, I am going to drop the .8 from consideration. An 800-lumens RS20 with a 1.4 gain BD screen, run in high bulb mode, should be okay. Another possibility is the newest version of the Epson UB. That one has 1600 lumens.


----------



## jsharpe




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14602735
> 
> 
> ... Another possibility is the newest version of the Epson UB. That one has 1600 lumens.



I have to admit, until this show I was pretty much a closet anti-LCD snob. But both the Mitsubishi and the Epson high dynamic range units have changed my view.


I do agree with another poster that for those willing to spend the $$, the combination of a JVC and BD would be a really sweet ticket. However since my screen size would be on the largish size and I prefer a bit more punch, personally I would wait for the 1.4, even with the new brighter 800 lumens (which b.t.w. the SI folks say is conservative and when using their web based screen tools we should enter 1000 lumens for the new JVC projectors because internally they "correct" for the inflated claims of other manufacturers).


As much as I'm trying to convince myself that I can't live without upgrading to the BD/JVC combo, I can't help but think about whats headed in our direction over the next 2-3 years in terms things like of non-bulb illumination. I expect it will take a couple of generations to get the brightness up and the full capabilities realized. So basically I'm beginning to agree with a few posters that an interim solution might make more sense.

The combination of say the Epson UB with a BD would be a killer combination and the money saved would make a big dent in the cost of a Panamorph.


Finally I'm torn on whether to wait for (and spend the money on) the masking BD. Although I'm one of those people who appreciate the geekfactor of orchestrated moving parts in a HT, combining how well the BD does for reducing the need for masking with how incredibly dark the sidebars were in the Epson demo (even with a white screen!) I'm finding it hard to justify either the expense or the wait.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14600395
> 
> 
> I like what I've been reading about the JVC, too, and may get one. I'm just not sure if the image on a 113" BD with 800 lumens will be bright enough for my tastes with the BD. Especially if it's not the 1.4 gain. I might be better off getting the Silverstar or the High Power and darkening the walls and ceiling. At least I have no problem with running the JVC in high bulb mode. However, if I get the screen in 2.35:1 format, in order to use the zoom method, I will not be able to mount the JVC at max zoom. meaning it will not be as bright as it could be, and when I open the zoom from the mid-zoom mounting position to fit the extra width of a scoped movie, that will diffuse the brightness even more. In other words, the JVC might be bright enough for me for 113" 16X9, but not for 11-foot wide 2.35:1.
> 
> 
> Have you been in contact with Sensorium? I got the name from SI and called. The dealer has a Black Diamond screen up in his home in Manhattan. I suppose there's a chance I will be in Manhattan in early November, in which case I will try to check it out.



I'm looking at a 92" screen and have similiar concerns about the 0.8 gain BD, even with the new JVC. I calculate that with a 1.4 gain screen and the new JVC I could theoretically expect around 45 lumens with a new bulb and 22 lumens by replacement. That gives me plenty of room dial back the brightness to a comfortable level (I tend to prefer a really bright image), and also allow me to place the projector a little further away from the screen to improve contrast. With the 0.8 gain model, I'd see 26 ft/lms new and 13 ft/lms by the bulbs end of life...to me, even on the smaller screen that's cutting it close to what I like.


With a 119" 16x9 screen (the standard option on the SI calculator at the moment) I come up with 15.02 ft/lms brightness (assuming 800 lumens and a 0.8 gain screen). That seems pretty dim to me, especially considering that's with a new bulb. Factor in a half life on that and you'll be looking at closer to 7.6 ft/lms by the end of your JVC's bulb. Using the 1.4 gain screen I come up with 26.6 ft/lms with a new bulb and 13.3 ft/lms by the end for the JVC HD750. That's a little bit more reasonable, but you'll have to decide what you think is bright enough, especially if your dealing with ambient light.


If you end up going the Epson 7500 route though remember that those 1600 lumens are only when you're pushing it very hard, inaccurate colors, etc. The JVC's historically have been able to hit their rated lumens with a much more accurate picture, according to the reviewers at least. I believe I remember ProjectorCentral saying the Epson 1080UB could put around 400 lumens of calibrated light, or close to 1600 of uncalibrated light. So assuming (1600 lumens) you don't care about accuracy over the life of the bulb that would give you a range of 30.4 ft/lms - 15.2 ft/lms with the 0.8 gain BD and 53 ft/lms - 26.6 ft/lms with the 1.4 gain model. Again, these are all calculated numbers with a lot of assumtions on a 119" screen, so take them with a few grains of salt.


Just for kicks I ran the numbers on a smaller 80" screen, assuming the 0.8 gain model and the estimated 800 lumens of the new JVC HD750 I came up with an estimated range of 34 ft/lms - 17 ft/lms over the life of the bulb. That to me seems like a reasonable working range, but factor in ambient light and you could still use a little more brightness by the end of the bulb I think...that's my personal take.


I have not contacted the Manhattan dealer you mentioned, but I did go over to NJ during the summer and see an 80" 1.4 gain BD at Image & Sound FX. I had the opportunity to see the screen in use in full daylight and a dedicated theater (lights on and off), and thankfully got to see a side by side with a 0.9 gain Carada high contrast gray screen as well. I much preferred the BD over the Carada. They were using a Mits 4500 or 5000, I don't remember which one, to demo the screen.


I hope that helps somebody.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/14600308
> 
> 
> "If not I may just get a stop gap screen until the 1.4 makes it to market, Carada, HP, something on the lower price scale."
> 
> 
> I'd just get a bedsheet to tide you over.



It may come down to that noah!


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14602735
> 
> 
> But that was with the RS1, wasn't it? The new RS20 is brighter, 800 lumens. But since I want a screen that will last decades, and someone posted today that SI may have the 1.4 out early next year, which might end up being around the same time as the motorized BD release, I am going to drop the .8 from consideration. An 800-lumens RS20 with a 1.4 gain BD screen, run in high bulb mode, should be okay. Another possibility is the newest version of the Epson UB. That one has 1600 lumens.



Even in blaster mode, I thought I remember that the RS1 could push close to 750 lumens. Not that much different than the new HD750. The big difference here is that the RS2 was rated at 600, so you're getting a 33% increase in lumens with the 750 while maintaining the contrast.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/14605046
> 
> 
> Even in blaster mode, I thought I remember that the RS1 could push close to 750 lumens. Not that much different than the new HD750. The big difference here is that the RS2 was rated at 600, so you're getting a 33% increase in lumens with the 750 while maintaining the contrast.



I think we may find the changes JVC made to the RS20 light path are going to produce a noticeably brighter pic than what the RS2 could do. Someone who was at CEDIA commented a JVC rep said they have not even finished with development of the RS20 yet, so it could get even better.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14606988
> 
> 
> I think we may find the changes JVC made to the RS20 light path are going to produce a noticeably brighter pic than what the RS2 could do. Someone who was at CEDIA commented a JVC rep said they have not even finished with development of the RS20 yet, so it could get even better.



That would certainly be welcome! I'm wondering though how much they can improve between now and the time they roll it out though. These could simply be software changes, but I'll take what ever they decide to give us!


----------



## mlang46




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *penguin killer* /forum/post/14596436
> 
> 
> Anyone at CEDIA want to ask SI about the 1.4 Black Diamond. I was tossed a rumor that they will start shipping in October, but I haven't seen any announcements from SI so far.



I saw the black diamond at Cedia and was very impressed. the 1.4 gain screen is supposed to be out first quarter next year


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mlang46* /forum/post/14608003
> 
> 
> I saw the black diamond at Cedia and was very impressed. the 1.4 gain screen is supposed to be out first quarter next year



That's good to hear, though a bit funny. If I recall it was originally supposed to be out 1st quarter last year. I would naturally assume they're not talking January but rather the March time frame.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/14605016
> 
> 
> -With a 119" 16x9 screen (the standard option on the SI calculator at the moment) I come up with 15.02 ft/lms brightness (assuming 800 lumens and a 0.8 gain screen). That seems pretty dim to me, especially considering that's with a new bulb. Factor in a half life on that and you'll be looking at closer to 7.6 ft/lms by the end of your JVC's bulb. Using the 1.4 gain screen I come up with 26.6 ft/lms with a new bulb and 13.3 ft/lms by the end for the JVC HD750. That's a little bit more reasonable, but you'll have to decide what you think is bright enough, especially if your dealing with ambient light.



It's 113.7" at the most. You can't get larger than a 113.7" 16x9 image with a Black Diamond. And the word on the RS20 thread is the punchy image that so amazed show-goers was at the low bulb setting. If you added another 100 lumens for the high bulb setting - hopefully it's a lot more - and ran for 113.7", you would get better numbers.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/14605016
> 
> 
> If you end up going the Epson 7500 route though remember that those 1600 lumens are only when you're pushing it very hard, inaccurate colors, etc. The JVC's historically have been able to hit their rated lumens with a much more accurate picture, according to the reviewers at least. I believe I remember ProjectorCentral saying the Epson 1080UB could put around 400 lumens of calibrated light, or close to 1600 of uncalibrated light. So assuming (1600 lumens) you don't care about accuracy over the life of the bulb that would give you a range of 30.4 ft/lms - 15.2 ft/lms with the 0.8 gain BD and 53 ft/lms - 26.6 ft/lms with the 1.4 gain model. Again, these are all calculated numbers with a lot of assumtions on a 119" screen, so take them with a few grains of salt.



The brightness of vivid mode is mainly due to the projector being in high bulb. Someone local bought a 1080UB from AV Science and had it calibrated by Jason. I tried switching the calibrated mode to high bulb and it was much brighter...without the color push. It was probably a little less bright than the vivid mode, but probably still way brighter than the RS1. That said, I'm concerned about dust blobs and QC issues, so would not consider Epson at the 5K price they're talking because I don't think the discount price on the RS20 will be much more than that, maybe a grand at most, and I keep reading better and better things about the RS20. Epson is claiming great contrast, but with a DI. They're also still planning to pull the same nonsense of forcing us to pay extra for the bundled ceiling mount a lot of us don't want, and for an extra bulb and third year of warranty that will be of no use if the projector is out the door in a year and a half and replaced with an LED-based projector.


----------



## mlang46




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *penguin killer* /forum/post/14596436
> 
> 
> Anyone at CEDIA want to ask SI about the 1.4 Black Diamond. I was tossed a rumor that they will start shipping in October, but I haven't seen any announcements from SI so far.



They told me first quarter


----------



## glennQNYC

I'm eagerly awaiting a Reference Series motorized BD. SI expects to be able to deliver them near the new year.


----------



## send

We apologized for the lag in responses. We appreciate everyone's enthusiasm about the Black Diamond screen technology.


Further development of the Black Diamond 1.4 gain is going well. As things progress we will be informing the public of the new launch date. We will keep you posted.


Best Regards,


Ryan


----------



## IanK




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *send* /forum/post/14694150
> 
> 
> We apologized for the lag in responses. We appreciate everyone's enthusiasm about the Black Diamond screen technology.
> 
> 
> Further development of the Black Diamond 1.4 gain is going well. As things progress we will be informing the public of the new launch date. We will keep you posted.
> 
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> 
> Ryan



Thanks for the update Ryan

Can you also tell us what is the current anticipated launch data of the motorized 0.8 gain screen?


thanks

Ian


----------



## steevo123

i recently checked out the .8 gain screen at their official NYC dealer. They had it paired with an RS1 I believe.


In my opinion - it produced a watchable, if somewhat flat and lacking in contrast, black level, and punch - image with ambient light on. It basically produced the same undistinguished image in a completely dark room. No mean feat making that projector look that bad.


It seems a bit of a novelty act. Nowhere near reference home theater. And for the price i would expect alot more.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *steevo123* /forum/post/14754823
> 
> 
> i recently checked out the .8 gain screen at their official NYC dealer. They had it paired with an RS1 I believe.
> 
> 
> In my opinion - it produced a watchable, if somewhat flat and lacking in contrast, black level, and punch - image with ambient light on. It basically produced the same undistinguished image in a completely dark room. No mean feat making that projector look that bad.
> 
> 
> It seems a bit of a novelty act. Nowhere near reference home theater. And for the price i would expect alot more.



Where was this demo?


----------



## steevo123

the nyc dealer linked from their webiste


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *steevo123* /forum/post/14757341
> 
> 
> the nyc dealer linked from their webiste



Thanks. That's a surprise because SI gave me the name of that dealer as well as a dealer on Long Island and I called and talked to the guy and he said the screen was better than the Stewarts and was what he was using in his home.


Maybe a .8 screen just requires a light cannon to be watchable.


----------



## pottscb




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14612762
> 
> 
> The brightness of vivid mode is mainly due to the projector being in high bulb. Someone local bought a 1080UB from AV Science and had it calibrated by Jason. I tried switching the calibrated mode to high bulb and it was much brighter...without the color push. It was probably a little less bright than the vivid mode, but probably still way brighter than the RS1. That said, I'm concerned about dust blobs and QC issues, so would not consider Epson at the 5K price they're talking because I don't think the discount price on the RS20 will be much more than that, maybe a grand at most, and I keep reading better and better things about the RS20. Epson is claiming great contrast, but with a DI. They're also still planning to pull the same nonsense of forcing us to pay extra for the bundled ceiling mount a lot of us don't want, and for an extra bulb and third year of warranty that will be of no use if the projector is out the door in a year and a half and replaced with an LED-based projector.



hrd,

Look at the Epson 6500 instead of 7500...its basically the "Home" version not the "Pro" version, it has almost identical stats but without ISF presets, mount, bulb, and extra warranty (which can be purchased from Epson for $249)...it should be significantly cheaper and the one I'm watching. If it turns out too expensive will pick up a used 1080UB when they reach sub$2K.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pottscb* /forum/post/14760403
> 
> 
> hrd,
> 
> Look at the Epson 6500 instead of 7500...its basically the "Home" version not the "Pro" version, it has almost identical stats but without ISF presets, mount, bulb, and extra warranty (which can be purchased from Epson for $249)...it should be significantly cheaper and the one I'm watching. If it turns out too expensive will pick up a used 1080UB when they reach sub$2K.



Isn't the 6500 white? I'm not interested in a white projecter. I'm currently on the pre-order list for the RS20, because it's looking like it will give a more satisfying image than any other 1080p home theater projector, even the 40 to 50 thousand dollar ones, and if I can have the best image available for home theater at any price (I'm not including commercial projectors here that require a dedicated room







), or at least the best image available _when it comes to what I like in an image_, for just a few thousand dollars more than an Epson, why not.


So, where does that leave the BD? Well, the RS20 is brighter than the RS1 and RS2, but not a light cannon, and it really requires a bat cave to get the most from, so I plan to create a bat cave, which makes the BD much less of a necessity. SI told me the BD would still look better in a bat cave than with white walls and the dealer in NYC told me the light scatter effect on his walls were reduced with the BD but not eliminated, so it's looking like a bat cave is still the way to go to really get the most satisfying image out of a projector. The .8 gain BD is out, since I want a large screen, and the 113", while also being smaller than what I _really_ want, may be too large for the RS20. The 1.4 is a possibility, but that in the motorized version might not be availabe for six months or more and then the price is going to be a factor. SI told me the motorized version would be considerably more expensive than the fixed frame version, and I'm not going to pay $3500 (that's if I can get a good discount, too) for a screen that's going to give me only a 113' image when I can buy a 151" High Power for about two thousand dollars less than that, even less if I don't go with the expensive fixed frame Cinema Contour. Bottom line is I like a bright, punchy plasma-like image, and if the 1.4 BD cannot do that at 113" with the RS20, then it is out and I will get either a High Power or a Silverstar, probably a High Power. I'd like to demo a 1.4 BD, but that hasn't been possible yet. Nice thing about the High Power is I can get something for not even $500 and save thousands over a BD or Silverstar, which seems more important now that my projector dollars are going up to over five thousand. I didn't plan to ever spend a lot of money on a bulb-based projector up until hearing about the RS20. It's nice that bat cave conditions open up the possibilities to so many different screen types, including the excellent high-gain ones.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pottscb* /forum/post/14760403
> 
> 
> hrd,
> 
> Look at the Epson 6500 instead of 7500...its basically the "Home" version not the "Pro" version, it has almost identical stats but without ISF presets, mount, bulb, and extra warranty (which can be purchased from Epson for $249)...it should be significantly cheaper and the one I'm watching. If it turns out too expensive will pick up a used 1080UB when they reach sub$2K.



Another thing to add is that the contrast possibilites are so great with the RS20 that I don't even know if the BD would give better blacks than a high gain screen would.


----------



## IanK

Anybody notice that SI has moved the ship date for the motorized screens back yet again. Now showing 12/1/08 on their website. It really is getting frustrating - I am sure I am not the only person who held off completing their HT waiting for a BD screen. This has now gone on more than a year...


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *IanK* /forum/post/14809763
> 
> 
> Anybody notice that SI has moved the ship date for the motorized screens back yet again. Now showing 12/1/08 on their website. It really is getting frustrating - I am sure I am not the only person who held off completing their HT waiting for a BD screen. This has now gone on more than a year...



You are correct. I got tired of waiting. I went ahead and ordered my projector though haven't made a decision on the screen yet. I'm working with AVS to determine what will work the best.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/14813630
> 
> 
> You are correct. I got tired of waiting. I went ahead and ordered my projector though haven't made a decision on the screen yet. I'm working with AVS to determine what will work the best.



Now that I'm planning on buying an RS20, I'd like a lot of gain so that I can come close to maximizing the contrast by using a long throw. I'm leaning towards a moderate-sized Silverstar, maybe a 92". Perhaps a 151" High Power down the road when I have more space.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14814410
> 
> 
> Now that I'm planning on buying an RS20, I'd like a lot of gain so that I can come close to maximizing the contrast by using a long throw. I'm leaning towards a moderate-sized Silverstar, maybe a 92". Perhaps a 151" High Power down the road when I have more space.



I was thinking about the same thing hrd, great minds huh?! We're still working through the design of the room so am not locked down to a mterial or brand yet, but I've been trying to find as much about the silverstar as I can get my hands on. I'd love to go the HighPower route, but with a ceiling installation like I'm looking at I don't think it will do any good.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/14829146
> 
> 
> I was thinking about the same thing hrd, great minds huh?! We're still working through the design of the room so am not locked down to a mterial or brand yet, but I've been trying to find as much about the silverstar as I can get my hands on. I'd love to go the HighPower route, but with a ceiling installation like I'm looking at I don't think it will do any good.



If you ever get up to Boston, you can catch an awesome demo of an RS1 on a 110" Silverstar. You will want one afterwards.


----------



## IanK




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14829510
> 
> 
> If you ever get up to Boston, you can catch an awesome demo of an RS1 on a 110" Silverstar. You will want one afterwards.



where is it in Boston. I would like to see it.

thanks


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *IanK* /forum/post/14846222
> 
> 
> where is it in Boston. I would like to see it.
> 
> thanks


 http://www.newenglandhometheater.net/ 


Nice thing about the place is the projector is on all the time in a dedicated dark room while the owners and customers are elsewhere discussing stereo components and flat screen TVs, meaning you should be able to get the room to yourself at some point to play with the remote and go through the stations. It's the opposite of the type of place where some salesman has to turn an expensive Runco on when a customer asks and sits nearby trying to sell it. New England Home Theater has FIOS, so head for the HD stations. They're right off of 495 and open on Saturdays.


----------



## pottscb




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14761748
> 
> 
> Another thing to add is that the contrast possibilites are so great with the RS20 that I don't even know if the BD would give better blacks than a high gain screen would.



Everyone likes their own flavor...I'm just a normal guy in search of a budget pj for a multipurpose room with tons of restrictions (long throw, light walls/windows, etc)...wanna "will me" your RS1 when you upgrade?


----------



## noah katz

"Another thing to add is that the contrast possibilites are so great with the RS20 that I don't even know if the BD would give better blacks than a high gain screen would."


That doesn't protect it from degraded CR due to scattered room light.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/14853134
> 
> 
> "Another thing to add is that the contrast possibilites are so great with the RS20 that I don't even know if the BD would give better blacks than a high gain screen would."
> 
> 
> That doesn't protect it from degraded CR due to scattered room light.



Right, but an SI dealer who has a BD up told me the screen does not prevent all light scatter. It improves the situation, but does not eliminate it.


----------



## IanK




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14847793
> 
> http://www.newenglandhometheater.net/
> 
> 
> Nice thing about the place is the projector is on all the time in a dedicated dark room while the owners and customers are elsewhere discussing stereo components and flat screen TVs, meaning you should be able to get the room to yourself at some point to play with the remote and go through the stations. It's the opposite of the type of place where some salesman has to turn an expensive Runco on when a customer asks and sits nearby trying to sell it. New England Home Theater has FIOS, so head for the HD stations. They're right off of 495 and open on Saturdays.



thanks, i will check it out


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14829510
> 
> 
> If you ever get up to Boston, you can catch an awesome demo of an RS1 on a 110" Silverstar. You will want one afterwards.



hrd,


Did you notice any of the "sparklies" that are mentioned about the SS? I haven't been able to pick them out on any other type of screen that I've seen so far, so I'm assuming they're unique to the SS or very high gain screens.


----------



## Jim HTPC




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14829510
> 
> 
> If you ever get up to Boston, you can catch an awesome demo of an RS1 on a 110" Silverstar. You will want one afterwards.



Not everyone is impressed with the Silver Star. The sparklies are very annoying. Colors and darker scenes are nice. But Sparklies in the bright scenes can be a deal breaker.


----------



## Jim HTPC




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/14854725
> 
> 
> hrd,
> 
> 
> Did you notice any of the "sparklies" that are mentioned about the SS? I haven't been able to pick them out on any other type of screen that I've seen so far, so I'm assuming they're unique to the SS or very high gain screens.



View a movie like Iron Man on Blu-ray. When he is flying through the clouds during the day you will see sparklies. Some can overlook it. Others can't.


----------



## noah katz

"Right, but an SI dealer who has a BD up told me the screen does not prevent all light scatter. It improves the situation, but does not eliminate it."


Perhaps I misunderstood you; it sounded like you were saying the RS20 somehow didn't need the BD's help.


The only time that would be true is in a completely light controlled and absorptive (black) room.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/14856071
> 
> 
> "Right, but an SI dealer who has a BD up told me the screen does not prevent all light scatter. It improves the situation, but does not eliminate it."
> 
> 
> Perhaps I misunderstood you; it sounded like you were saying the RS20 somehow didn't need the BD's help.
> 
> 
> The only time that would be true is in a completely light controlled and absorptive (black) room.



As far as whether the RS20 would benefit from the BD in ways above and beyond what a convential white, grey, or silver screen could give _in a bat cave_, I don't know. I haven't demoed an RS20 yet and I haven't demoed a BD, either. What I want to accomplish is to get both the excellent blacks I have seen with an RS1 on a Silverstar and with an RS2 on a High Power _together_ with the 3D effect GregR and Alan talked about with their RS2 gamma tweaks. I'm sure I will need a bat cave for that and plan to create the right room conditions. At one time, I wanted to get a BD to give me a half-decent image in a room with white walls and a white ceiling, but now that I've decided to get an RS20, I want a no-compromise image. I mentioned earlier how SI told me the BD would still look better in a bat cave than in a room with ambient light issues and how an SI dealer told me the BD does not totally remove light scatter from the screen to the walls and ceiling, so no-compromise means no ambient light issues.


I am still open to the possibility of the BD giving better blacks than some other screens in a bat cave and not just in a problematic room, but I expect the 3D effect will be easy enough to get with the gamma tweaks and the blacks and overall contrast will look awesome enough on a high gain screen that I would not be able to improve on contrast in any way by using a BD in place of a high gain screen in my soon-to-be bat cave. Plus, I like bright and punchy images and might not be able to get that with an RS20/BD without going to a very small screen.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/14854725
> 
> 
> hrd,
> 
> 
> Did you notice any of the "sparklies" that are mentioned about the SS? I haven't been able to pick them out on any other type of screen that I've seen so far, so I'm assuming they're unique to the SS or very high gain screens.



It didn't bother me much. Maybe it is because the Silverstar seems to have a bit of a 3D look to it and maybe that causes the over-the-top whites that the Silverstar can do to appear to sparkle. The only issue I had with the Silverstar was that I could see the screen surface if I sat close enough. I can see the screen surface of the High Power, too, if I sit close enough. It just depends on seating distance, visual acuity, and how bright the image is. It was more anoying with the Silverstar than with the High Power, probably due to the 3Dish look of the screen surface and how bright it can make the whites. If you put up samples of the two screens next to each other, you would notice the difference in 3D effect.


You definitely should get a look at a Silverstar with one of the JVCs, so you can determine if the amazing blacks and contrast it can give with the JVCs is worth the issues it has. Other issues are: the screen comes pre-assembled, which some may like, but which makes the larger ones harder to handle, it comes only in a fixed frame format, it costs a lot more than a High Power, and getting the most uniform image requires a ceiling mount.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14857221
> 
> 
> It didn't bother me much. Maybe it is because the Silverstar seems to have a bit of a 3D look to it and maybe that causes the over-the-top whites that the Silverstar can do to appear to sparkle. The only issue I had with the Silverstar was that I could see the screen surface if I sat close enough. I can see the screen surface of the High Power, too, if I sit close enough. It just depends on seating distance, visual acuity, and how bright the image is. It was more anoying with the Silverstar than with the High Power, probably due to the 3Dish look of the screen surface and how bright it can make the whites. If you put up samples of the two screens next to each other, you would notice the difference in 3D effect.
> 
> 
> You definitely should get a look at a Silverstar with one of the JVCs, so you can determine if the amazing blacks and contrast it can give with the JVCs is worth the issues it has. Other issues are: the screen comes pre-assembled, which some may like, but which makes the larger ones harder to handle, it comes only in a fixed frame format, it costs a lot more than a High Power, and getting the most uniform image requires a ceiling mount.



Well I didn't realize it was fixed frame only. That rules it out as my install requires a retractable model. Darn! I'm still curious about seeing it though just for the sake of comparison. I guess I'm back to the drawing boards with this one.


----------



## R Harkness

While I was demoing the Pioneer Kuro Projector today (re-badged JVC RS2) my dealer friend told me he just installed a Mistubishi projector (5500? or something?) along with a Black Diamond .8 gain 100" screen.


He was raving about the image quality. Says the screen brought out a "pop" and dimensionality he's rarely seen from ANY projector, let alone a fairly cheap one. Says it was almost like 3D.


Only downside is he says he could see the screen texture sometimes - "sparklies" sort of thing. That would be a problem for me as I really dislike any screen texture. And since I want to go with a very big image - up to 124" wide - the .8 gain screen would be "out" and the higher gain BD would likely have even more screen texture.


Still, I'd love to see one of those screens in action.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/14880093
> 
> 
> While I was demoing the Pioneer Kuro Projector today (re-badged JVC RS2) my dealer friend told me he just installed a Mistubishi projector (5500? or something?) along with a Black Diamond .8 gain 100" screen.
> 
> 
> He was raving about the image quality. Says the screen brought out a "pop" and dimensionality he's rarely seen from ANY projector, let alone a fairly cheap one. Says it was almost like 3D.
> 
> 
> Only downside is he says he could see the screen texture sometimes - "sparklies" sort of thing. That would be a problem for me as I really dislike any screen texture. And since I want to go with a very big image - up to 124" wide - the .8 gain screen would be "out" and the higher gain BD would likely have even more screen texture.
> 
> 
> Still, I'd love to see one of those screens in action.



Howdy Rich,


I've actually seen that exact set up (Mits with a BD). The BD I saw was the 1.4 though and I didn't see any sparklies at all. I demoed the set-up for a couple hours in full daylight, indoor ambient lighting, and a completely light controlled theater...no sparklies in any situation. The material I was watching was Kung Foo Hustle along with HD feeds from Direct TV (Basketball, NASCAR, various movies/music concerts, etc.) Neither I nor my two friends who accompanied me saw anything like that on the BD...then again we may be insensitive.


As far as seeing the texture of the screen, it wasn't something I noticed. I did a side by side against a 0.95 gain Grey Carada screen and the BD was noticeably better. I was watching it on an 80" screen from various distances, including walking right up to the screen. Within reason I never saw the texture of the screen when watching anything.


I hope this helps!


----------



## R Harkness

Thanks Xyst.


Does the company give out samples for us consumers to check at home?


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/14881823
> 
> 
> Thanks Xyst.
> 
> 
> Does the company give out samples for us consumers to check at home?



They have had samples available in the past. Don't know what the current policy is and if it would be only the .8 gain. They wanted something like $22 or $25 for a sample when samples were first available, which they said was to cover shipping and because it was an expensive material.


----------



## R Harkness

Much obliged hrd.


I just re-read this thread. Interesting stuff. I tend to doubt the BD will give me the gain I want for a big screen though.

*Xyst,*


Are you interested in the BD screen because you will be having some ambient light or have light room decor?


My scenario is that I'll have total light control and dark decor with good light rejection around the screen. I will be using a Carada Masquerade system (and my own side masking for a variable screen size set up) and had presumed I'd use the Carada Brilliant White material (spec'd at 1.4 gain, although some measure it closer to 1.1 or 1.2). Some recent experience demoing the Pioneer Kuro projector (re-badged JVC RS2) and a very bright Epson projector has me thinking I might want more lumens than I originally thought, so the Da Lite High Power screen is back on my radar. If I can deal with the "viewing cone" of the HP screen it could be a killer combination with the new JVC HD750(RS20), allowing maximum contrast using the projector's adjustable aperture. And as far as black levels, it seems from reports that the projector's aperture has a very wide range so that one could dial it down for very deep black levels if wished, even on a very high gain screen (assuming full light control).


My head is spinning. At some point I have to get off this merry-go-round....


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/14882361
> 
> 
> Much obliged hrd.
> 
> 
> I just re-read this thread. Interesting stuff. I tend to doubt the BD will give me the gain I want for a big screen though.
> 
> *Xyst,*
> 
> 
> Are you interested in the BD screen because you will be having some ambient light or have light room decor?
> 
> 
> My scenario is that I'll have total light control and dark decor with good light rejection around the screen. I will be using a Carada Masquerade system (and my own side masking for a variable screen size set up) and had presumed I'd use the Carada Brilliant White material (spec'd at 1.4 gain, although some measure it closer to 1.1 or 1.2). Some recent experience demoing the Pioneer Kuro projector (re-badged JVC RS2) and a very bright Epson projector has me thinking I might want more lumens than I originally thought, so the Da Lite High Power screen is back on my radar. If I can deal with the "viewing cone" of the HP screen it could be a killer combination with the new JVC HD750(RS20), allowing maximum contrast using the projector's adjustable aperture. And as far as black levels, it seems from reports that the projector's aperture has a very wide range so that one could dial it down for very deep black levels if wished, even on a very high gain screen (assuming full light control).
> 
> 
> My head is spinning. At some point I have to get off this merry-go-round....



I would love to demo that Mitsubishi and BD.


I have heard nice things about Toronto, but did not realize it is projector demo heaven.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14882739
> 
> 
> I would love to demo that Mitsubishi and BD.
> 
> 
> I have heard nice things about Toronto, but did not realize it is projector demo heaven.



Oh yeah, it's a film loving, tech loving city. There have always been tons of high-end audio shops, many of which have now become, of course, more focused on AV and Home Theater. Most projectors of note end up at a store somewhere in Toronto.


----------



## Josh Z




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14882070
> 
> 
> They have had samples available in the past. Don't know what the current policy is and if it would be only the .8 gain.



I called them a few months ago and was told that they are no longer sending out fabric samples. Instead, they directed me to the sales rep for my region to ask about finding a local retailer to demo a full screen. I left him a couple messages but he never bothered to call me back.


----------



## noah katz

Rich,


If you're going to have an optimum room setup, I think you'd benefit more from the higher brightness than the BD, unless your viewers wear a lot of white.


What Epson pj did you see? How was the color that went along with the brightness?


If it was so good, why isn't it on your shortlist?


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/14886405
> 
> 
> Rich,
> 
> 
> If you're going to have an optimum room setup, I think you'd benefit more from the higher brightness than the BD, unless your viewers wear a lot of white.
> 
> 
> What Epson pj did you see? How was the color that went along with the brightness?
> 
> 
> If it was so good, why isn't it on your shortlist?



I understand it was the Epson PowerLite Pro Cinema 1080 UB.

The new Epson model due out by December (75,000:1 contrast) sounds even more compelling.


One reason the Epson falls short of the new JVC RS20 on my list is that the Epson had only manual lens controls. Since I plan on a variable image size set up (closer to constant area), it is a very big benefit to have remote-control of all the lens functions, as with the new JVC.


I'm betting the new Mitsubishi 7000 projector will offer similar performance to the Epson, but it's not as bright as the JVC and also has a smaller zoom ratio.


The new Panasonic AE3000 sounds terrific and has powered lens controls. Hopefully I'll get a chance to see it in action. But I'm quite willing to pay more for the JVC if the JVC does provide better performance - as most think it _should_ given it's native contrast. I also very much like the adjustable iris on the new JVC for even greater adjustment of black levels/contrast.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/14882361
> 
> 
> Much obliged hrd.
> 
> 
> I just re-read this thread. Interesting stuff. I tend to doubt the BD will give me the gain I want for a big screen though.
> 
> *Xyst,*
> 
> 
> Are you interested in the BD screen because you will be having some ambient light or have light room decor?
> 
> 
> My scenario is that I'll have total light control and dark decor with good light rejection around the screen. I will be using a Carada Masquerade system (and my own side masking for a variable screen size set up) and had presumed I'd use the Carada Brilliant White material (spec'd at 1.4 gain, although some measure it closer to 1.1 or 1.2). Some recent experience demoing the Pioneer Kuro projector (re-badged JVC RS2) and a very bright Epson projector has me thinking I might want more lumens than I originally thought, so the Da Lite High Power screen is back on my radar. If I can deal with the "viewing cone" of the HP screen it could be a killer combination with the new JVC HD750(RS20), allowing maximum contrast using the projector's adjustable aperture. And as far as black levels, it seems from reports that the projector's aperture has a very wide range so that one could dial it down for very deep black levels if wished, even on a very high gain screen (assuming full light control).
> 
> 
> My head is spinning. At some point I have to get off this merry-go-round....



Howdy Rich,


I originally wanted the BD because I am building the best theater I can, under the worlds worst conditions. White walls and ceiling, ambient light, mirrors on one of the side walls, huge window behind the projector (with blinds at least, though even those are white!). I figured anything I could get that would help the situation, I needed.


I ended up pulling the trigger on the RS20 so that's a good thing. I've been working with Matt here at AVS to come up with a screen for the install. Still have made a final decision on that either. If the 1.4 gain retractable BD were available, I'd pull the trigger on it with no questions asked, it was that good when I saw the fixed frame model. I don't think I'm going to wait on it though. I may as well enjoy what I have and get the benefit of it and not worry about the rest.


----------



## R Harkness

Xyst,


Ah, that makes sense. Sounds like very challenging decor. I'm going for really good light control and dark, non-reflective surfaces. Plus I don't watch with the lights on, so the BD screen is more a curiosity for me.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/14880093
> 
> 
> While I was demoing the Pioneer Kuro Projector today (re-badged JVC RS2) my dealer friend told me he just installed a Mistubishi projector (5500? or something?) along with a Black Diamond .8 gain 100" screen.
> 
> 
> He was raving about the image quality. Says the screen brought out a "pop" and dimensionality he's rarely seen from ANY projector, let alone a fairly cheap one. Says it was almost like 3D.
> 
> 
> Only downside is he says he could see the screen texture sometimes - "sparklies" sort of thing. That would be a problem for me as I really dislike any screen texture. And since I want to go with a very big image - up to 124" wide - the .8 gain screen would be "out" and the higher gain BD would likely have even more screen texture.
> 
> 
> Still, I'd love to see one of those screens in action.



This dealer does not have a Black Diamond screen set up that you could take a look at?


----------



## R Harkness

He set it up for his brother's place. I don't know that I should impose and ask to see it.


Rich


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/14889620
> 
> 
> He set it up for his brother's place. I don't know that I should impose and ask to see it.
> 
> 
> Rich



He wants to sell you one, doesn't he?







I hope someone gets one near here, because I don't want to have to drive to NY to see one. I plan to try out my RS20 on Silverstars, High Powers, and Black Diamonds to see which screen will be the best match.


----------



## noah katz

"One reason the Epson falls short of the new JVC RS20 on my list is that the Epson had only manual lens controls. Since I plan on a variable image size set up (closer to constant area),"


Darn! That's just what I want to do; I can just squeeze in 65x130.


----------



## R Harkness

There's always the Panasonic or Mitsubishi which both have the power lens controls.


If you are thinking variable image size or constant area, would you use 4 way masking too? If so, I have ideas on that, which I'm implementing.


----------



## noah katz

I want to go CA; full width for 2.35 and full height for 16:9. I wasn't going to bother w/masking, the bars don't really bother me, and it's so darned expensive.


I don't think the Mits will be bright enough.


My biggest reasons for upgrading are for more brightness and powered lens.


----------



## Xyst

So let me post the question then, what is the competition to the BD right now?


High Power, Silverstar, Firehawk...anything else?


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/14937282
> 
> 
> So let me post the question then, what is the competition to the BD right now?
> 
> 
> High Power, Silverstar, Firehawk...anything else?



Personally, I would not get anything but a high gain screen if I did not get a BD. I like them too much. I do plan on reading reviews of the new Joe Kane screens, though.


I found out late yesterday that Ryan and Shannon were demoing a 92" BD at a two-day industry show at a hotel only six miles from here and I could have seen the demo if I had known about it in time, but there was no announcement here, or at the SI website, and they didn't even tell me about it when I called SI Wednesday to ask about possible demos in the area. Frustrating. A dealer bought the 92" and told me today I might be able to demo it if the customer is okay with that.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14937548
> 
> 
> Personally, I would not get anything but a high gain screen if I did not get a BD. I like them too much. I do plan on reading reviews of the new Joe Kane screens, though.
> 
> 
> I found out late yesterday that Ryan and Shannon were demoing a 92" BD at a two-day industry show at a hotel only six miles from here and I could have seen the demo if I had known about it in time, but there was no announcement here, or at the SI website, and they didn't even tell me about it when I called SI Wednesday to ask about possible demos in the area. Frustrating. A dealer bought the 92" and told me today I might be able to demo it if the customer is okay with that.



I can empathize with your frustration on that. I went through a hassle trying to find projector Dealers who actually had demo's. It turns out it didn't matter since almost no one did I bought blind any way.


It looks like the Joe Kane screens will be a lower gain, at least from what I can tell from the press release. Though I do wonder if they'll actually be any different than the standard Stewart screens with a stamp on them?


Other than the HP, are there any high(er) gain screens available in a retractable model worth looking at?


----------



## dssbuys

A 91" 16:9. 92" was just a hair too big for where it needs to go so went w/91".


I currently have a Sony Dynaclear and I am really interested to see how the two compare. Biggest gripes w/the Dynaclear are that is a pullup, so I am looking forward to a truly flat screen (the Sony's edges curl a bit). I am also hoping to get a *little* wider viewing angle.


I have a Sony VPL-AW15 which will be projecting from about 10' back (the minimum distance to project a 91" screen).


A question for current BD owners... when I watch particularly bright scenes and they pan left-right (or vice versa) I really noticed a difference in the screen gain (caused by my increased viewing angle to the right/left edges of the screen). Does anyone see that type of effect w/the BD? My hope is the gain drop off is less severe and the viewing angle increases.


----------



## bcinman24

FYI,


I have this screen in a fixed-mount version and there are vertical lines that run across it when lighter images appear on the screen (almost like hot spotting); it was replaced once and the replacement has the same issue. I have photos if you would like to see them I can email. If this problem can be resolved I would really rate the screen high; I am being told it was a manufacturing issue and there are several layers to the screen. I am getting a bit worried since I have not heard back from Ryan in several weeks. I am using a Panasonic PT-AE3000U in a light controlled environment. When I have the projector turned of and external ambient light on you can see the lines on the black screen.


Cheers


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bcinman24* /forum/post/14979622
> 
> 
> FYI,
> 
> 
> I have this screen in a fixed-mount version and there are vertical lines that run across it when lighter images appear on the screen (almost like hot spotting); it was replaced once and the replacement has the same issue. I have photos if you would like to see them I can email. If this problem can be resolved I would really rate the screen high; I am being told it was a manufacturing issue and there are several layers to the screen. I am getting a bit worried since I have not heard back from Ryan in several weeks. I am using a Panasonic PT-AE3000U in a light controlled environment. When I have the projector turned of and external ambient light on you can see the lines on the black screen.
> 
> 
> Cheers



Let me guesss, you have a 1.4 gain screen? I believe your issue is the only reason the manufacturing of the 1.4 gain screen was put on hold for a while and only the .8 gain screen is currently available. I know Ryan was out of town some last week for a two-day show in MA...maybe he lost track of you. Any chance the .8 gain version would work better for you? You have a bright projector. You might get considerably better contrast with the .8 gain. Maybe you could have the next swap out be with a .8 gain screen?


----------



## bcinman24

I actually ordered the .8 gain. I do not think Ryan has bad intentions. What stinks is that I saw this screen at Cedia and then purchased it for a customer demo on my dime; my boss said it would be okay to expense it. Now we have spent the money and cannot demo it and it has put me in an awkward position with my boss. Worst case scenario I could use it at home but the image problem drives me nuts; considering the cost of the screen I feel sick to my stomach thinking about it.


----------



## dssbuys

Sounds like a manufacturing defect and it should be a clear case for getting a refund. Have you tried to ask someone for a refund?


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bcinman24* /forum/post/14979772
> 
> 
> I actually ordered the .8 gain. I do not think Ryan has bad intentions. What stinks is that I saw this screen at Cedia and then purchased it for a customer demo on my dime; my boss said it would be okay to expense it. Now we have spent the money and cannot demo it and it has put me in an awkward position with my boss. Worst case scenario I could use it at home but the image problem drives me nuts; considering the cost of the screen I feel sick to my stomach thinking about it.



I think none of us here knew that issue could be spotted with the .8 gain. Do you think it shows up more because you have a bright projector? I mean, it's easier to see screen surface and screen artifacts when the image is lit up more due to a bright projector, a high gain screen, or both together. What I'm really trying to find out is whether my fondness for bright, plasma-like images would work against me with the BD and give me more issues with screen surface and artifacts showing and I'm concerned these lines might show up on all the BD screens but be overlooked by owners who watch dark movies at low lumens. If you watched a dark movie at low lumens, would you still notice the lines in white areas of the screen?


----------



## bcinman24




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14979926
> 
> 
> I think none of us here knew that issue could be spotted with the .8 gain. Do you think it shows up more because you have a bright projector? I mean, it's easier to see screen surface and screen artifacts when the image is lit up more due to a bright projector, a high gain screen, or both together. What I'm really trying to find out is whether my fondness for bright, plasma-like images would work against me with the BD and give me more issues with screen surface and artifacts showing and I'm concerned these lines might show up on all the BD screens but be overlooked by owners who watch dark movies at low lumens. If you watched a dark movie at low lumens, would you still notice the lines in white areas of the screen?



I have a 106" screen with the projector mounted 20' away; so I have actually decreased my brightness quite a bit. The effect is less dramatic when I have the projector in a cinema setting; panning shots exacerbate the issue. SI actually suggest I go to a very high lumen projector but that is cost prohibitive and I do not think would solve the problem. One of the design considerations of this screen was to have it work with some ambient light in the room. When the projector is off and some ambient light is on you can see the vertical lines. The first screen had the lines as well but they diminished greatly when I viewed off-axis. The second screen had less problems with viewing head-on and pronounced lines off-axis; somewhat of a polarizing sunglass effect. The screen is perfectly flat; the bungee system works quite well. Go to siscreens.com/gallery and look at the Ryan's room photo; you can see the lines on his screen as well with the side ambient lighting.


----------



## bcinman24




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dssbuys* /forum/post/14979848
> 
> 
> Sounds like a manufacturing defect and it should be a clear case for getting a refund. Have you tried to ask someone for a refund?



Hi,


I have not requested a refund at this point in time and thought I could help SI troubleshoot the issues.


----------



## tommy def




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bcinman24* /forum/post/14979622
> 
> 
> FYI,
> 
> 
> I have this screen in a fixed-mount version and there are vertical lines that run across it when lighter images appear on the screen (almost like hot spotting); it was replaced once and the replacement has the same issue. I have photos if you would like to see them I can email. If this problem can be resolved I would really rate the screen high; I am being told it was a manufacturing issue and there are several layers to the screen. I am getting a bit worried since I have not heard back from Ryan in several weeks. I am using a Panasonic PT-AE3000U in a light controlled environment. When I have the projector turned of and external ambient light on you can see the lines on the black screen.
> 
> 
> Cheers



I went through three screens before I got a good one. I know how frustrating it can be, but in the end it worked out and I got a great screen with no lines. If you have not heard back from Ryan in weeks do not give up, call him and ask to try a new screen. Good luck.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tommy def* /forum/post/14983299
> 
> 
> I went through three screens before I got a good one. I know how frustrating it can be, but in the end it worked out and I got a great screen with no lines. If you have not heard back from Ryan in weeks do not give up, call him and ask to try a new screen. Good luck.



Do you have the .8 or the 1.4 gain?


----------



## bcinman24




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tommy def* /forum/post/14983299
> 
> 
> I went through three screens before I got a good one. I know how frustrating it can be, but in the end it worked out and I got a great screen with no lines. If you have not heard back from Ryan in weeks do not give up, call him and ask to try a new screen. Good luck.



Thanks; makes me feel better they finally got you sorted out.


----------



## bcinman24




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14983726
> 
> 
> Do you have the .8 or the 1.4 gain?



.8 gain


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bcinman24* /forum/post/14986075
> 
> 
> .8 gain



Yeah, I know, because you mentioned it. I was actually asking tommy def, although from reading his older posts, it looks like his was a 1.4 gain.


What I would like to know is if these lines develop over time, so that SI could send three screens to tommy def thinking they were all perfect and weeks later it became obvious to the owner that they were not, or are they all like that from the start and SI is figuring it won't show up much in use, or is it a defect that happens because the screen is rolled up during shipment and would not happen if the screen were sent assembled the way the Silverstar is sent. Anyone have any comments?


----------



## bcinman24




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14986838
> 
> 
> Yeah, I know, because you mentioned it. I was actually asking tommy def, although from reading his older posts, it looks like his was a 1.4 gain.
> 
> 
> What I would like to know is if these lines develop over time, so that SI could send three screens to tommy def thinking they were all perfect and weeks later it became obvious to the owner that they were not, or are they all like that from the start and SI is figuring it won't show up much in use, or is it a defect that happens because the screen is rolled up during shipment and would not happen if the screen were sent assembled the way the Silverstar is sent. Anyone have any comments?



The lines were visible right off the bat; I was also thinking it could be to the rolling that occurs during shipping.


----------



## pottscb

I just saw a .8 gain 100" BD in A&B TV in Austin TX and it was much less impressive than the positive gain 1.4 I saw at SI. I viewed with a Sony VW-60 (newer bulb) vs. a Sony VW-40 (older bulb) projecting onto a 100" Stewart white (not sure if 1.0 or 1.3) and with florescent lights directly hitting each the BD was only slightly better, but still unwatchable. With only directional track lighting on in the room, pointing away from the screen, the Stewart was much brighter, more punch, etc. The same was true with no lights on at all...the BD just didn't blow my hair back nearly as much as the Stewart (which is much more expensive, but many cheaper and comparable white screens can be found for a few hundred dollars). I've still yet to see a Hi-Power, its my last one to demo before I buy.


Anyway, long story short, please find a place to view this screen before you purchase it.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pottscb* /forum/post/14995676
> 
> 
> I just saw a .8 gain 100" BD in A&B TV in Austin TX and it was much less impressive than the positive gain 1.4 I saw at SI. I viewed with a Sony VW-60 (newer bulb) vs. a Sony VW-40 (older bulb) projecting onto a 100" Stewart white (not sure if 1.0 or 1.3) and with florescent lights directly hitting each the BD was only slightly better, but still unwatchable. With only directional track lighting on in the room, pointing away from the screen, the Stewart was much brighter, more punch, etc. The same was true with no lights on at all...the BD just didn't blow my hair back nearly as much as the Stewart (which is much more expensive, but many cheaper and comparable white screens can be found for a few hundred dollars). I've still yet to see a Hi-Power, its my last one to demo before I buy.
> 
> 
> Anyway, long story short, please find a place to view this screen before you purchase it.



The Stewarts are not always much more expensive. There are Stewart screens that cost 5k because they come out of the ceiling and there are Stewart screens with expensive masking that I believe are way more than that, but the average no-nonsense fixed frame Stewart screen is probably no more expensive than a BD and possibly less. In fact, I know someone who bought two 11-foot wide Stewart 2.35:1 screens and I think they were only about $2500 each. The MSRP for an 11-foot wide 2.35:1 BD would be the MSRP for the 160", and that is $3799.


I was at a Tweeter over the weekend to look for a going-out-of-business bargain on a flat panel and later went into the projection room and took a look at their latest offering. They had replaced the Ruby that was in there the last time I was there with a Sony VW60. I thought it was plenty bright and this was on a 114" diagonal screen. Actually, this was the first time I had seen a decent image on a chain store screen. None of the Tweeters or Best Buys around here had ever had a decent image before. I thought the image looked a bit out of focus at times, maybe a convergence problem, and could have been more dynamic and could have had better whites, but still the best image by far of any chain store demo. It even looked decent with the scones on and the light coming in from the two doors in back.


The 114" screen was the largest screen I had ever seen at a showroom or chain store, but it just seemed too small for me (I have had images on my wall as large as 128" before). This has got me leaning towards the Da-Lite High Power now. The BD tops out at 113", the Silverstar tops out at a not all that much larger 120.5", unless you're willing to have a seam, but the unseamed HP tops out at 151". Also, the whites looking a bit dull and grey on the 114" screen got me wanting the true whites the white fabric in the High Power can do. The best thing is the street price on the big 151" Cinema Contour is about a thousand dollars less than the best deals on the largest BD and the largest Silverstar. The 151" Da-Lite Perm-Wall I could get for under 1k.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/14937681
> 
> 
> I can empathize with your frustration on that. I went through a hassle trying to find projector Dealers who actually had demo's. It turns out it didn't matter since almost no one did I bought blind any way.
> 
> 
> It looks like the Joe Kane screens will be a lower gain, at least from what I can tell from the press release. Though I do wonder if they'll actually be any different than the standard Stewart screens with a stamp on them?
> 
> 
> Other than the HP, are there any high(er) gain screens available in a retractable model worth looking at?



From what I have heard, the Joe Kane screens will never be high gain. I suppose it is possible the 1.0 gain will be the highest.


The only other high gain screen I have heard about is the silver Prismasonic, but it does not appear to be available in other than fixed frame or fabric only. It has been discussed in the 2.35:1 forum


I just noticed you started this thread exactly one year ago November 1st. I'll bet you never thought you'd still be at this stage a year later.


----------



## tommy def




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14983726
> 
> 
> do you have the .8 or the 1.4 gain?



.8 now


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14996620
> 
> 
> From what I have heard, the Joe Kane screens will never be high gain. I suppose it is possible the 1.0 gain will be the highest.
> 
> 
> The only other high gain screen I have heard about is the silver Prismasonic, but it does not appear to be available in other than fixed frame or fabric only. It has been discussed in the 2.35:1 forum
> 
> 
> I just noticed you started this thread exactly one year ago November 1st. I'll bet you never thought you'd still be at this stage a year later.



Touche` hrd! No kidding, back then I thought they would be releasing the screen in a couple months and all would be right with the world.







Nor dd I think this thread would see 72K pairs of eyes and carry on for so long. I'm glad this thread has been so interesting to so many people!!!


I've been talking to AVS about my situation and so far they think I can get away with a 1.1 to 1.3 gain screen in my room. This puts my in Firehawk category which may not be a bad thing. I've heard good things about it.


I'm still wondering how bad a regular white screen will fair in a not perfect room with white ceilings and walls and if the stress is worth it. If I can't make up my mind before the RS20 ships then I'm going to get a 1.1 gain Cinewhite Elite screen for a while and then play with samples. That will give me something to enjoy and plenty of time to contemplate if there is anything better in the wild.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/15007547
> 
> 
> Touche` hrd! No kidding, back then I thought they would be releasing the screen in a couple months and all would be right with the world.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nor dd I think this thread would see 72K pairs of eyes and carry on for so long. I'm glad this thread has been so interesting to so many people!!!
> 
> 
> I've been talking to AVS about my situation and so far they think I can get away with a 1.1 to 1.3 gain screen in my room. This puts my in Firehawk category which may not be a bad thing. I've heard good things about it.
> 
> 
> I'm still wondering how bad a regular white screen will fair in a not perfect room with white ceilings and walls and if the stress is worth it. If I can't make up my mind before the RS20 ships then I'm going to get a 1.1 gain Cinewhite Elite screen for a while and then play with samples. That will give me something to enjoy and plenty of time to contemplate if there is anything better in the wild.



A ceiling mount is recommended for the Firehawk. Were you planning on that?


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/15007686
> 
> 
> A ceiling mount is recommended for the Firehawk. Were you planning on that?



As a matter of fact I am! It's the reason I can't consider a HP for my set-up.


----------



## noah katz

"It's the reason I can't consider a HP for my set-up."


Have you read up enough on HP? It's not a foregone conclusion.


----------



## bcinman24




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tommy def* /forum/post/14983299
> 
> 
> I went through three screens before I got a good one. I know how frustrating it can be, but in the end it worked out and I got a great screen with no lines. If you have not heard back from Ryan in weeks do not give up, call him and ask to try a new screen. Good luck.



All,


I received the 3rd screen today and it looks great!! It was packed the same way so I do not think it was a shipping induced problem due to the way it was rolled.


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/15018815
> 
> 
> "It's the reason I can't consider a HP for my set-up."
> 
> 
> Have you read up enough on HP? It's not a foregone conclusion.



Thanks Noah, but my understanding of the screen and the screen calculator that FL Boy put together for everyone is that the HP won't provide any real benefit. At best I might see a gain of 1.5 but those are just estimates (the distance in height between eyelevel and projector are too great). With that in mind I believe I'm limited in what I can use as a screen in my room and still have positive gain.


My initial hope was that a 1.4 gain BD would work perfectly, and I still believe it will. But, until a motorized version is released I"m left waiting so that leaves only the Firehawk, or an Elite/Da-light/etc. white screen that will yield positive gain in a tensioned retractable model. If I'm wrong, I'm all ears!


Thanks!

Andrew


----------



## R Harkness

Apparently a local AV store has installed on BD screen (with a Mitsubishi projector) and

is bringing in another bigger BD screen for their Pioneer Kuro room (re-badged JVC RS2).

So I'll be able to see the Black Diamond in action!


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/15021807
> 
> 
> Thanks Noad, but my understanding of the screen and the screen calculator that FL Boy put together for everyone is that the HP won't provide any real benefit. At best I might see a gain of 1.5 but those are just estimates (the distance in height between eyelevel and projector are too great). With that in mind I believe I'm limited in what I can use as a screen in my room and still have positive gain.
> 
> 
> My initial hope was that a 1.4 gain BD would work perfectly, and I still believe it will. But, until a motorized version is released I"m left waiting so that leaves only the Firehawk, or an Elite/Da-light/etc. white screen that will yield positive gain in a tensioned retractable model. If I'm wrong, I'm all ears!
> 
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Andrew



Personally, I would get a High Power before a Firehawk. I think you would notice a difference in punch between a 1.5 gain white screen and a 1.25 gain non-white screen. Plus, you still have the option of getting more from the High Power gain down the road by changing the angles around. And the cost is always in favor of the High Power.


From the Stewart PDF at the link below: "FireHawk G3 1080p has a gain of 1.25, with a usable viewing cone of 28 degrees on either side."

http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/cor...fhg3_kr_pr.pdf


----------



## noah katz

And even if you got no more gain, there are the HP's other advantages of off-axis light rejection, brightness uniformity, not showing waves, and low cost.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/15024436
> 
> 
> And even if you got no more gain, there are the HP's other advantages of off-axis light rejection, brightness uniformity, not showing waves, and low cost.



True...but once you have given up the main advantage of the HP - the high gain - and especially if in a ceiling mounted position you aren't going to get much over a neutral gain screen (as is the case with my friend's HP set up), you then have to also weigh the HP's negatives vs a neutral/low gain screen.


A neutral gain, or modest gain screen like the Carada BW, will offer much more consistent viewing angles. Also, if you are mounting a projector at an angle such that you aren't getting much gain from the HP, that in all likelihood means the projector is up higher toward the ceiling (or the floor in some cases) in which case you have the HP putting a more powerful-than-average reflection back at the light source and hence lighting up the ceiling more than other screens would (making for more light contamination etc). All of which is evident in my friend's ceiling mounted HP set up.


As for the oft stated characteristics of the HP screen, such as brightness uniformity, lack of obvious screen texture, those are pluses mentioned insofar as the HP is a high gain screen. In other words: most high gain screens have issues with brightness uniformity/screen texture. The HP offer high brightness without those issues.


But once you've abandoned the gain advantage of the HP then those issues are no longer a plus in the favor of the HP, since brightness uniformity/lack of screen texture is relatively common and easy to find in non-gain screens.


The HP is incredible when you can use it to it's strengths. But it really seems to me that once you aren't taking advantage of the HP's high gain, there really isn't a lot of rational left to own one. You mostly just burden yourself with it's directional viewing cone characteristics for little "gain."


----------



## R Harkness

On the topic of the thread:

*Today I got to see a Black Diamond screen in action.*


It was about a 94" diag screen in the projector room of a local AV shop (Kromer Radio in Toronto). The room has fairly light walls and ceiling color and really benefits from a screen like the Black Diamond. The projector was a Mitsubishi HC6000. I don't know if the projector had been calibrated for the screen or not, so I just got from general impressions and tried to examine the screen characteristics as best I could with lights on and lights fully off.


First: whoa is that screen REALLY black when nothing is projected on it. Very strange, yet very cool looking too!


Impressions: This was the .8 gain screen and, however the Mitsubishi projector was configured, it wasn't putting out enough light. It was a bit dim on this screen, whereas it had been plenty bright on the previous white screen they'd had in weeks past.

So you do need horsepower to light up this screen, especially if you are thinking of a big screen (remember this was a fairly small screen and it still looked somewhat dim).


BUT...while the ultimate brightness was compromised that didn't make for a lifeless image, as may be implied by the word "dim." No, the contrast was fantastic, often spectacular, particularly in "mixed" images where you have significant dark areas mixed with bright areas. The dark areas were incredibly dark. Not pitch black, but like a very good plasma viewed with the lights off. It was a huge difference from the white screen (I'd tested out this projector there before) in that room where the image was bright, but quite washed out with high/contaminated black levels from the reflections off the cream colored walls/ceiling.


The image was astoundingly sharp too, no doubt due to the Mits which is known for it's sharpness. The image was actually sharper at 94" diagonal than the same HD material I'd just been viewing on the 60" diag Pioneer Kuro plasma outside the room!


Intrascene contrast was fabulous - super vivid and colors looked generally vibrant, especially reds and blues set against dark backgrounds in images. (One portion of the material I watched was Hot Fuzz in HD, the night scenes looked great!). The contrast and richness made actor's faces have great density, detail and sculptural dimensionality.

A few of the images were among the most impressive I've seen from a front projector/screen combo.


Negatives:


Again, not bright enough in this set up. HD scenes of skiers on snow covered mountains had the snow looking a bit more like a dull blue, rather than vibrant white.


Screen texture: Yes I spotted it here and there. It did have something of the "silk screen effect" seen on Rear Projection TVs. Sometimes I had to look for it, other times it made itself known, overlaying someone's face, or on bright scenes. But I have to say that, unlike my experience with many RPTVs that exhibited the granular screen structure, this artifact tended to disappear more often on the BD screen. Sometimes I couldn't see it even if I tried.


Biggest negative probably by far for me: Hot Spotting/Uneven screen illumination.

It wasn't long before I really noticed that, unless I was right on axis with the screen/projector, the screen exhibited very noticeable illumination differences along the length of the screen. In other words, if I started moving off-axis toward the screen left, the portion of the screen near me remained bright but the further side of the screen started to visibly darken. The first time I noticed it was viewing just off-axis and

with an HD show that had two people standing side by side. I noticed that the person on the right seemed dimmer, harder to make out the details, than the person on the right. Once I moved back into the middle both people became equally bright and detailed.


The uneven illumination was very obvious especially with more uniform, lighter scenes in which moving to the left or right of the screen darkened the opposite side. Once I noticed it I found it hard to miss over most image content. (I could notice the darkening, I'm estimating, starting from about 15 degrees off axis, more noticeable at 20 and quite obvious at 30 and beyond).


Now, this is one of those issues that I think most people just wouldn't notice on their own. Because most image content has varying bright areas around the screen and if you'd just accept the darkened portion/hot-spotting as part of the image. It's only really when you are aware it's actually being caused by the screen itself, and move back to the center watching the darker area lighten up, that you realise the issue.


That said, I DID find that the tendency of the screen to hotspot this way compromised the image quality off-axis...to my eyes significantly. But, again, I think most people unaware of what was going on, sitting off axis, would just accept the image and wouldn't realise any portion of it should be looking brighter or better.


Well...that's the gist I got from watching it for about one hour today.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/15026623
> 
> 
> As for the oft stated characteristics of the HP screen, such as brightness uniformity, lack of obvious screen texture, those are pluses mentioned insofar as the HP is a high gain screen. In other words: most high gain screens have issues with brightness uniformity/screen texture. The HP offer high brightness without those issues.
> 
> 
> But once you've abandoned the gain advantage of the HP then those issues are no longer a plus in the favor of the HP, since brightness uniformity/lack of screen texture is relatively common and easy to find in non-gain screens.



Right, but Xyst was questioning the value of a High Power that would give him 1.5 gain versus a Firehawk, and the Firehawk has been reported to have issues with screen texture by some and Stewart claims the usable viewing cone is only 28 degrees. If Xyst wants a completely neutral screen, figuring 1.5 gain just doesn't make it worthwhile to go with a High Power, he can do better than a Firehawk.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/15021807
> 
> 
> Thanks Noad, but my understanding of the screen and the screen calculator that FL Boy put together for everyone is that the HP won't provide any real benefit. At best I might see a gain of 1.5 but those are just estimates (the distance in height between eyelevel and projector are too great). With that in mind I believe I'm limited in what I can use as a screen in my room and still have positive gain.
> 
> 
> My initial hope was that a 1.4 gain BD would work perfectly, and I still believe it will. But, until a motorized version is released I"m left waiting so that leaves only the Firehawk, or an Elite/Da-light/etc. white screen that will yield positive gain in a tensioned retractable model. If I'm wrong, I'm all ears!
> 
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Andrew



Read this for comments on the Firehawk:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...postcount=2830 


where Chris Dallas says: "One other thing I'd like to add, all 3 screens used were Firehawks from 1.0-1.25 gain and as I shifted to the sides the picture dimmed in all 3 projectors. On my HP DA-LITE watching it from the sides is MUCH brighter than watching any of the 3 screens present there & my screen is 165" diagonal."


----------



## dssbuys

I set it up a couple hours ago. I have a 91" 16:9 .8 gain.


I am using a Sony VPL-AW15 mounted about 10' away with about about 800 hours on the lamp. My previous screen was the Sony Dynaclear that came w/the projector.


The Dynaclear is another "Black" screen that is good a rejecting ambient light.


First, the build quality on the BD is excellent, no visible vertical or horizontal lines with video on or off like some folks have mentioned. I would also have to say that BD is better at rejecting ambient light than the Dynaclear.


Some of the nits I had against the Dynaclear:


Since is was a pullup, the edges curled, causing severe gain drops on the edges (for a screen with a fairly restrictive viewing cone)


Vertical line, at the bottom of the screen (probably from the rolling up/down).


Neither of these are present with the BD... the screen lays perfectly flat and the screen material looks consistent across the image.


Very impressed so far, will write up more in a bit.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/15026782
> 
> 
> No, the contrast was fantastic, often spectacular, particularly in "mixed" images where you have significant dark areas mixed with bright areas. The dark areas were incredibly dark. Not pitch black, but like a very good plasma viewed with the lights off. It was a huge difference from the white screen (I'd tested out this projector there before) in that room where the image was bright, but quite washed out with high/contaminated black levels from the reflections off the cream colored walls/ceiling.
> 
> 
> Intrascene contrast was fabulous - super vivid and colors looked generally vibrant, especially reds and blues set against dark backgrounds in images. (One portion of the material I watched was Hot Fuzz in HD, the night scenes looked great!). The contrast and richness made actor's faces have great density, detail and sculptural dimensionality.
> 
> A few of the images were among the most impressive I've seen from a front projector/screen combo.



If the Black Diamond and the High Power had no negatives, would you choose the contrast of the Black Diamond over the plasma-like punch of the High Power?


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/15026782
> 
> 
> HD scenes of skiers on snow covered mountains had the snow looking a bit more like a dull blue, rather than vibrant white.



The Black Diamond has a blue push.


----------



## wse

For me the JVC RS2 and StewartFilmScreen FireHawkG3 128" 2:35 is really cool. We watch movies mostly at night and the image pops off the screen


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/15028470
> 
> 
> The Black Diamond has a blue push.



Is it just my limited understanding of this, or shouldn't you be able to compensate for this when you calibrate the projector? I would think it's harder to do on some projectors, but one something like the RS20 with full calibration capabilities, or with the use of an external video processor, shouldn't you be able to compensate for the blue push and move it back towards white?


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/15027510
> 
> 
> If Xyst wants a completely neutral screen, figuring 1.5 gain just doesn't make it worthwhile to go with a High Power, he can do better than a Firehawk.



So are you saying since I won't get the true benefit of the HP it's not worth it? Not to pester, but did you mean to say I could do better WITH the Firehawk? Clearly I'm a bit confused










The way I see it is this, for a ceiling mounted projector installation, if you can drop the projector far enough your fine. In my case I'll have approx. 40" between my eyes and the center of the projector Lens (I'm guessing)...this is on a 92" screen so we're talking nearly the entire height of the screen here. To me it always seemed like I didn't have the set-up for the HP, so I have worked under the assumption I shouldn't use it in my room.


The Firehawk seems to have modest gain (at least above 1.0) but has issues with "sparklies" and some hotspotting, and all of the downsides that come with using a gray screen (flatter whites generally).


A standard neutral gain white, such as the Elite Cinewhite (1.1 gain) which doesn't exhibit the negatives of either the HP for the Firehawk, but may not perfrom as well in a non-ideal setting (read a room painted like a sanitarium).


It sounds like the HP may not provide any substantial benefit, the Firehawk is an almost but not quite solution, and white...well it's still white but it's got great viewing angles. Does that pretty much sum it up?


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/15028463
> 
> 
> If the Black Diamond and the High Power had no negatives, would you choose the contrast of the Black Diamond over the plasma-like punch of the High Power?



Funny thing is that when I saw the BD screen I thought it was like experiencing the flip side of the High Power. Both look amazing and both are stand outs in opposite ways: the High Power produces bright areas with particular realism, the BD screen plunges black levels down producing an amazing realism in that way. Both have a "plasma-like" vibe to me because of the contrast and solidity of the image, but for the two different reasons mentioned.


I get the feeling that a high brightness projector on the BD screen could look amazing just as a projector with high contrast/good black levels would look amazing on the HP screen.


For me, both the BD and HP have viewing angle issues so that's a wash. The HP screen has the major advantage of allowing for much bigger screen sizes by making the most of the lumen output of a projector, whereas it looks to me like the .8 gain of the BD screen will make a number of projectors struggle to look bright enough, especially in low lamp mode.


But if you really want the best possible image with some lights on, the BD pulls way ahead (I have the high power at the moment and I found the BD trounces it in ambient light conditions).


Cheers,


----------



## Xyst

Rich, it seems from your sensitivity to light drop off, you're a fan of the neutral gain screen. Any favorites on that front?


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/14937681
> 
> 
> It looks like the Joe Kane screens will be a lower gain, at least from what I can tell from the press release. Though I do wonder if they'll actually be any different than the standard Stewart screens with a stamp on them?



The new JKP screens aren't even made by Stewart! So yeah it will not be a "stewart screen with a stamp on it". Read about the screen before commenting on it.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14996620
> 
> 
> From what I have heard, the Joe Kane screens will never be high gain. I suppose it is possible the 1.0 gain will be the highest.



Of course NOT! That's like saying, I heard Chrysler is coming out with a new "green" car but they won't offer a hemi option with it!


The whole point of the Affinity screen is to get the PUREST, SHARPEST, UNIFORM, highest resolution picture possible, and with greater contrast too. That is not possible with ANY gain on any screen. According to JKP it's even better than a matte screen which until now is the best you could do. I can't wait to see it. I've been saying this for a long time, it's about time JKP wised up, the Studiotek 1.3 is/was terrible IMO.


It will come in two gains, 1.0 and .9, still much brighter than a "1.4" BD (if you've seen the BD you will know it's no where close to actually being 1.4 gain). The BD and Affinity are two completely different animals. The Affinity is for people who want THE best picture quality possible and are willing to tailor to it (I.E. bat cave, dark walls, not too big of a screen or have a PJ with enough lumens to fill it, etc.), the black diamond is for people with a compromised viewing environment (ambient light, white walls, etc.) and aren't willing to change it and are willing to give up picture quality for "watchability" in ambient light.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/15033674
> 
> 
> Of course NOT! That's like saying, I heard Chrysler is coming out with a new "green" car but they won't offer a hemi option with it!
> 
> 
> The whole point of the Affinity screen is to get the PUREST, SHARPEST, UNIFORM, highest resolution picture possible, and with greater contrast too. That is not possible with ANY gain on any screen. According to JKP it's even better than a matte screen which until now is the best you could do. I can't wait to see it. I've been saying this for a long time, it's about time JKP wised up, the Studiotek 1.3 is/was terrible IMO.




Hmmm...it's possible you may be disappointed if you are expecting big things from the new JK screen material. Samples have already been tested by the Thomas J. Norton and Scott Wilkinson of Ultimate AV magazine.


From the test report (the new JK screen samples vs StudioTek 130 screen):

*"In the upper left corner, the Studiotek 130 exhibited a peak-white level of 18.7fL while the Matte White was 15.3fL and the HD Progressive was 14.5fL. This translates to a fall-off of 20% from center to corner on the Studiotek, 16% on the Matte White, and less than 13% on the HD Progressive, making it the most uniform of the three."*


While those are good results for the JK material, "_glenned_" of this forum, who has measured plenty of screens, reported better results for the Carada Brilliant White material (only %7 drop off to the corners) and even better for the Da Lite High Power screen (virtually perfect brightness uniformity corner to corner).


Ultimate AV continues:

*"Next, we examined the pixel-phase test (alternating rows of one pixel on/one pixel off) on the Digital Video Essentials: HD Basics Blu-ray disc. We could see no appreciable difference in detail resolution between the three materials,"*


So, be careful about getting too enthusiastic about a screen material you haven't seen. (Unless you have seen it of course - in which case I'd be curious what your test results are and if they differed from Ultimate AV).


And if you think the StudioTek 130 was "terrible" I'm not sure how you will garner much more enthusiasm for the JK screen materials, of which the Matte White barely outperforms it for uniformity, underperforms it in terms of brightness/gain, and is no better for resolution.



Cheers,


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/15033587
> 
> 
> The new JKP screens aren't even made by Stewart! So yeah it will not be a "stewart screen with a stamp on it". Read about the screen before commenting on it.



Thanks for the polite suggestion. I suppose I misinterpreted what I had read here . Can you provide a more accurate URL or some additional information to correct those of us who are ignorant about this subject?


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/15034669
> 
> 
> Hmmm...it's possible you may be disappointed if you are expecting big things from the new JK screen material. Samples have already been tested by the Thomas J. Norton and Scott Wilkinson of Ultimate AV magazine.
> 
> 
> From the test report (the new JK screen samples vs StudioTek 130 screen):
> 
> *"In the upper left corner, the Studiotek 130 exhibited a peak-white level of 18.7fL while the Matte White was 15.3fL and the HD Progressive was 14.5fL. This translates to a fall-off of 20% from center to corner on the Studiotek, 16% on the Matte White, and less than 13% on the HD Progressive, making it the most uniform of the three."*
> 
> 
> While those are good results for the JK material, "_glenned_" of this forum, who has measured plenty of screens, reported better results for the Carada Brilliant White material (only %7 drop off to the corners) and even better for the Da Lite High Power screen (virtually perfect brightness uniformity corner to corner).
> 
> 
> _*IF he measured perfect uniformity on a high power!!, he CLEARLY does not know what he is doing and you're naive for believing him. This coming from someone who says they saw the HP and noticed brightness drop off axis! What do you think uniformity is??
> 
> 
> EVEN Dalite gives the HP a 30 degree half gain value, matte white 60! A SCREEN with ANY GAIN will never have better uniformity than a matte screen, and as can be seen in the UAV test, the Affinity is even better than that. So no, I'm not dissapointed with those measurements by UAV.*_
> 
> Ultimate AV continues:
> 
> *"Next, we examined the pixel-phase test (alternating rows of one pixel on/one pixel off) on the Digital Video Essentials: HD Basics Blu-ray disc. We could see no appreciable difference in detail resolution between the three materials,"*
> 
> 
> So, be careful about getting too enthusiastic about a screen material you haven't seen. (Unless you have seen it of course - in which case I'd be curious what your test results are and if they differed from Ultimate AV).
> 
> Cheers,



See my comments also above inside your quotes in red.


Be careful commenting about something you are not familiar with. A pixel phase test is not optimum for the ultimate in resolution. Its just alternating LINES. What about vertically along each line? You need to take it all the way to the pixel or even sub pixel level. If you consider shimmer or sparklies part of the original source material and it's ok to be there, then you can say "there is no difference". (All of which are on any screen with gain, and even slightly on a matte screen) But you would be the last person that should be talking about accurate high resolution displays. You conveniently left out the part of UAV's evaluation that said:

"Also, we could see some "sparklies" on the Studiotek and Matte White, but not on the HD Progressive material." THAT'S higher resolution and a much cleaner picture as well as more uniform!



You think the HP or carada is as sharp as it gets? Put a peice of fine matte white paper up against the screen with a white blank projecting at 1080P, and you will clearly see the pixels are sharper, more defined, and have no shimmer on the paper (unless of course your vision is poor), but not on the HP or BW. THAT'S high resolution.


It would have also be interesting if they did ANSI contrast measurements since the Affinity is suppose to increase it even though it is white, but UAV did not.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/15037016
> 
> 
> Thanks for the polite suggestion. I suppose I misinterpreted what I had read here . Can you provide a more accurate URL or some additional information to correct those of us who are ignorant about this subject?



Ohh, I see where you were confused. Those are older screens that Joe Kane helped Stewart design a long time ago and further refined last year.


The new ones are mentioned here and are made by Dalite:

http://www.dalite.com/press_releases/index.php?ID=16 


There is a thread already dedicated to these screens on this forum for further info, sorry for also side tracking THIS thread which is about the Black Diamond...


----------



## R Harkness

Mikenificent1,


Before you go calling me "naive" in screaming red capital letters, perhaps you might back up and re-read what was actually being measured in the UAV test.


It was screen _uniformity_. Not screen _directivity_ or off-axis gain characteristics. When you shout:

_"This coming from someone who says they saw the HP and noticed brightness drop off axis! What do you think uniformity is??

EVEN Dalite gives the HP a 30 degree half gain value, matte white 60! "_


You seem to be confusing screen uniformity with screen directivity. Screen uniformity has to do with testing for a _uniform_ image and brightness across the full screen - as many screens have had a tendency to be brighter in one area, typically in the center with fall off to the sides or corners, even from on axis. That is _different_ from testing the off-axis gain characteristics of the full screen. The HP screen is well known to have excellent screen _uniformity_ (uniform brightness across the screen) but poor off-axis viewing angles insofar as the gain drops off precipitously. Different things!


Look again at the UAV description of the test The UAV test, where they moved about the samples within a full field white screen, from middle to corner - i.e checking for uniform brightness from an on-axis position, checking for drop offs toward screen edges, hot-spotting etc. THAT's what they were measuring, not the drop in gain off axis as you were talking about.

http://ultimateavmag.com/videoprojec...00/index2.html 


So no, I'm not naive, nor is glenned who has measured plenty of screens and who measured excellent uniformity for the Carada and virtually perfect uniformity for the HP screen.


Have you measured those screens yourself for on axis uniformity?


As far as the resolution of the JK screens, I guess we'll see when more people get to test them. As of now I don't see any objective measurements

showing their superiority. I _would like_ the JK screens to produce a perceptibly better image. I'll consider one if that's the case. But I'm not going to go on someone else's hype who hasn't seen or measured them.


Cheers,


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/15039249
> 
> 
> Mikenificent1,
> 
> 
> Before you go calling me "naive" in screaming red capital letters, perhaps you might back up and re-read what was actually being measured in the UAV test.
> 
> 
> It was screen _uniformity_. Not screen _directivity_ or off-axis gain characteristics. When you shout:
> 
> _"This coming from someone who says they saw the HP and noticed brightness drop off axis! What do you think uniformity is??
> 
> EVEN Dalite gives the HP a 30 degree half gain value, matte white 60! "_
> 
> 
> You seem to be confusing screen uniformity with screen directivity. Screen uniformity has to do with testing for a _uniform_ image and brightness across the full screen - as many screens have had a tendency to be brighter in one area, typically in the center with fall off to the sides or corners. That is _different_ from testing the off-axis gain characteristics of the full screen. The HP screen is well known to have excellent screen _uniformity_ (uniform brightness across the screen) but poor off-axis performance. Different things!



First off, I only wrote in red because you would have never noticed my text inside your writting if I had not, hence why it was in red and qhy my writting below it was not.


Seconlly, There is NO confusion, a screen's directivity directly correlates to its image uniformity. You clearly do not know the physics of front projection screens.


Here's the definition of *uniformity* from a projection screen manufacturer (Draper): "The screen's performance when viewed from various points off the projection axis (both horizontally and vertically), and when the brightness of the center of the image is compared to the corners"

http://www.draperinc.com/Screen_Page...efinitions.htm 


Here's another quote from from Dalite (the manufacturer of the High Power):

"is it technically possible for the projection screem to have a perfectly uniform coating? Certainly. Does such uniformity quarantee an equally uniform display? Certainly not. *The most uniform screen on the market is the front projection Matte White*. Theoretically, a Matte White surface is "a perfect diffuser." That is, the observed brightness of such a screen does not change with viewing angle. Thus the eye sees as much brightness at the center of the screen as it does at the corners, from *any viewing angle*.

http://www.dalite.com/education/angl...ils&issueid=35 


And another from Dalite:

"*So, if you care about uniformity in your image, the one thing you don't want your screen to have is a high gain*. If you select a screen with no gain, which is to say, a matte white surface whose gain is "unity", pointing a light meter at any section of it will give you exactly the same reading as may be taken from any other." http://www.dalite.com/education/angl...ils&issueid=63 


Despite its pedestrian reputation, despite its apparent lack of glamor, despite even the degree to which it is generally taken for granted, the fact remains that *no front projection screen surface is closer to true "state-of-the-art" than Matte White* or Da-Mat. Its perfect uniformity and unrestricted viewing angles make it today the unequivocal choice for the best front screen of the next century.

http://www.dalite.com/education/angl...ails&issueid=3 


Last but not least from Merian webster: "naive: deficient in worldly wisdom or informed judgment"


JUST KIDDING with the last one lol.


----------



## Xyst

Has anyone compared the HCCV to anything as another choice in the gray screen world? Thoughts or impressions...?


----------



## yuweimichael




moooog said:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/13373549
> 
> 
> I like the idea of being able to watch in the daytime and would surely use it for that. But I also have white walls and a white ceiling, which could make this screen the best possible screen for me for watching at night.
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> 
> 
> Same situation for me hrd - white walls and white ceiling and I am not willing to paint them black, so even with perfect light control I can't use your typical "Theater" calibrations for iris, gamma, or contrast. I've been clicking on SI's website for what seems like a year - I'll likely buy one sight unseen. I also have 6 45" wood blind windows in my home theater room, and as far as I know SI is the first company making a electric motorized screen (that utilizes this kind of technology), which is a must for me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SI does not have black diamond on any Roller Screen. They can not do it yet. It only comes with FIXED screen.
Click to expand...


----------



## hrd




yuweimichael said:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *moooog* /forum/post/13373984
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SI does not have black diamond on any Roller Screen. They can not do it yet. It only comes with FIXED screen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We know, they are working on the motorized version and it is supposed to be available by the end of August 2008.
Click to expand...


----------



## yuweimichael




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Scrimpin* /forum/post/13843076
> 
> 
> How do the DNP's compare price-wise to the BD? Also, I'm not sure what you are referring to with the throw ratio. Is that the trow ratio distance required to eliminate sheen?



You wont be satisfy with DNP i think. I had Supernova 20-20 screen. Look the picture.


----------



## send

SI Update:


Thanks again for all the excitement about Black Diamond.


NEW GAIN: We are currently looking at a Q1 release for the 1.4 gain Black Diamond. Demand for the 1.4 gain is high for home theater based on the current projector lumen limitations. We have found that most customers are not setting up their projectors correctly with the .8 gain therefore resulting in a "dull" image. The 1.4 gain will minimized this issue and will look good with the projector set up right out of the box.


CURVE Black Diamond: To address the more narrow viewing angle we are releasing our new CURVE Reference series products next week. Black Diamond will have a 30' radius option that will increase the viewing angle significantly. There will be a CURVE Black Diamond lifestyle video on the website shortly.


Motorized: Black Diamond motorized development is moving along smoothly. The launch date is TBD. We will keep everyone posted as things progress.


Ryan


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *send* /forum/post/15126728
> 
> 
> SI Update:
> 
> 
> Thanks again for all the excitement about Black Diamond.
> 
> 
> NEW GAIN: We are currently looking at a Q1 release for the 1.4 gain Black Diamond. Demand for the 1.4 gain is high for home theater based on the current projector lumen limitations. We have found that most customers are not setting up their projectors correctly with the .8 gain therefore resulting in a "dull" image. The 1.4 gain will minimized this issue and will look good with the projector set up right out of the box.
> 
> 
> CURVE Black Diamond: To address the more narrow viewing angle we are releasing our new CURVE Reference series products next week. Black Diamond will have a 30' radius option that will increase the viewing angle significantly. There will be a CURVE Black Diamond lifestyle video on the website shortly.
> 
> 
> Motorized: Black Diamond motorized development is moving along smoothly. The launch date is TBD. We will keep everyone posted as things progress.
> 
> 
> Ryan



Thanks for the update Ryan!


----------



## pottscb

Not to be contrary, but has anyone ever AB'd this Black Diamond against a Stewart Firehawk. I saw one in Magnolia a few weeks ago and it was darn impressive with some directional ambient light and a low lumen pj (mitsu 6500). I saw the BD a few weeks before that and was only marginally impressed, granted, it was probably a .8 gain and not a perfectly fair comparison. I've seen that the Firehawks can be found on Videogon for sometimes less than the BD and I just wondered if I was the only one that thought they were extremely similar (gray, 1.3-1.4, ambient light screens)


----------



## hrd

I finally saw a BD today. I went there not expecting much, knowing the projector was a dated 1000-lumens Mitsubishi LCD with a fading bulb and the screen was the .8 gain. The dealer forewarned me it was too dim and said he wanted to wait to show off the screen until he got a better projector in, but after weeks went by with no better projector coming in, I said show me what you have now and I'll bring my bright, new RS20 in when it arrives in a few weeks for a better test, and I got an invite.


The image was too dim to be a good test. Turning up the brightness on the projector helped, but the plain white Draper electric screen they had for A/B purposes always looked better just because it was brighter. I love bright. The room had bright white walls, fortunately. That was very important, because I could see the walls were showing some of the light from the image, not anywhere as intensely as with the white screen, but still plenty enough to keep the image from being as immersive as I would have liked. It was a smaller image, 92", which did not help with the immersion factor. I did not get the impression the BD would solve my problem with white walls and white ceiling. If it did not in the dealer's room when the dealer had such a dim image, it would not in my room with a much brighter projector and a 1.4 gain BD. Now, maybe the light that scatters from the screen onto the walls does not reflect back onto the BD thanks to the BD's light-rejecting qualities - I am not sure of that because the image was too dim to really evaluate if the walls were affecting the contrast - but it was clear to me from the demo that I needed to treat my environment more than I needed a light-rejecting screen. I could tell from the demo that even if the BD did indeed reject light from the side walls and an RS20 with one could have fantastic contrast and no wash-out at all, the lit-up walls would still distract too much from the theater experience that an RS20 is capable of giving. Those of you who have white walls and yet still want an awesome image should just buy a large flat panel and sit closer. If you really want the size, enough to be willing to accept a less than stellar image, then get at least 120" diagonal. Trading an awesome 65" plasma image that works in ambient light for a 92" screen image that is compromised because you do not have a theater-friendly environment is just not worth it.


I may bring the RS20 over to the dealer's just to see what the .8 BD can do with an RS20, but a bright image is so important to me that I will probably go with a Silverstar or a High Power, both of which will run me less money, and will try to turn the room into a bat cave. The BD may be a good choice for those who have a weak room and absolutely cannot control it, due to landlord, wife, etc., but I have some flexibility there, and since the RS20 is capable of the best possible blacks, it's worth the effort. The BD may also be good for those who have bat caves and want to reduce the light scatter on the walls to create a more immersive environment. Making a better bat cave can also help with that problem.


----------



## larrychief

hrd...just curious...your description of the demo sounded remarkably familiar to me, then I noticed you live in Boston. Was the shop "Sounds Good?" I got a demo there a couple of weeks ago, and might make an additional comment or 3... 


Larry


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *larrychief* /forum/post/15290961
> 
> 
> hrd...just curious...your description of the demo sounded remarkably familiar to me, then I noticed you live in Boston. Was the shop "Sounds Good?" I got a demo there a couple of weeks ago, and might make an additional comment or 3...
> 
> 
> Larry



Yes, it was. The dealer said he was very impressed by the screen in the nearby show in October, so he does believe in it.


----------



## larrychief

Interesting coincidence on the demo, since I was in town Dec 1-4 for a meeting, and just for kicks located Sounds Good and got a short demo of the BD 0.8 screen. We did the test shown on the SI Screens web site, and observed the effects of reflections on walls and ceiling caused by light from the white screen used to compare to the BD. It basically seemed to me that the reflections essentially disappeared when the BD screen was fully exposed. I think a BD gain 1.4 screen with a projector with a 1600 lumen output might be a great combo...

Larry


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *larrychief* /forum/post/15306951
> 
> 
> Interesting coincidence on the demo, since I was in town Dec 1-4 for a meeting, and just for kicks located Sounds Good and got a short demo of the BD 0.8 screen. We did the test shown on the SI Screens web site, and observed the effects of reflections on walls and ceiling caused by light from the white screen used to compare to the BD. It basically seemed to me that the reflections essentially disappeared when the BD screen was fully exposed. I think a BD gain 1.4 screen with a projector with a 1600 lumen output might be a great combo...
> 
> Larry



I found the white walls were darker with the BD, but still illuminated enough by the light from the image to detract from the theater-like setting most of us would like to achieve. I'm sure the brighter 1.4 gain BD and a bright 1600-lumens projector would create even more of an issue with the walls. This is a very bad shade of bright white at this place. The small screen and small room it was in probably made things worse, because it made it easier to be distracted by what went on outside the screen.


It's still possible to enjoy front projection with white walls and ambient light, with the BD or with a different screen. I've certainly done it. It's just that it's better to have dark walls for the theater-like sensation and the BD does not provide that for me.


----------



## Drexler




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/15307166
> 
> 
> I found the white walls were darker with the BD, but still illuminated enough by the light from the image to detract from the theater-like setting most of us would like to achieve. I'm sure the brighter 1.4 gain BD and a bright 1600-lumens projector would create even more of an issue with the walls.



Actually, since the 1.4 has a higher gain it's more directional, i.e. has a narrower viewing cone. This means that it will reflect less light to the side walls and ceiling compared to a 0.8 gain screen and should be better with the wall issue.


Even so, I don't believe it's possible to find a screen that doesn't light up white walls so you don't see them. No matter how much gain, the wall behind the projector will still be faced with full brightness and reflect this back to the wall with the screen. The same goes for sofas, people etc in front of the screen. No screen in the world can change this, it's just physics.


However, the main purpose of screens like BD is not to make walls invisible, but to create better black level and contrast on the screen by having less washout.


You're certainly right about the importance of dark walls. The projection room is the most important part in your setup, more so than the projector or screen. Screens can help a bit in a bad room, but bring compromises and can never obtain the same picture quaility as a white screen in a good room.


----------



## R Harkness

I think it's unrealistic to go looking for a screen that wouldn't light up adjacent walls at all, _especially_ if we are talking about light colored walls. As Drexler points out, while directionality is used in these screens to combat room effects, the BW is really about getting good contrast _on the screen_ in challenging rooms or lighted conditions.


And it does that amazingly well, I found. As I mentioned before, I auditioned the BW in a local store's projector room that had always been a disaster for their projectors: it was a very small room with very light (almost white) walls, ceiling. All projectors have looked seriously washed out in that room and the room lit up like a torch when a projector turned on and the light bounced off all that bright surroundings.


It was just a totally different experience with the BW. It maintained fantastic contrast in that room and the room did not light up nearly as much, so there was a nice combination of the screen holding excellent punchy contrast and the room itself being less distracting. But of course it's not like the room disappeared. I wouldn't expect that.


Really, as I wrote before, the main issue I had with the BW was it's pretty severe viewing cone and hot-spotting. It had much the same issue as the Stewart Firehawk in terms of off-axis viewing but even more so. In other words, as I moved to the right of the screen, the right side of the screen would remain bright but the other side of the screen would visibly darken, hence poor screen uniformity off axis.


Did you notice this or look for it hrd?


(The 1.4 gain BW should be intriguing, although if the lower gain version had the uniformity issues I saw I can only imagine it being exacerbated in a higher gain version).


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/15309646
> 
> 
> I think it's unrealistic to go looking for a screen that wouldn't light up adjacent walls at all, _especially_ if we are talking about light colored walls. As Drexler points out, while directionality is used in these screens to combat room effects, the BW is really about getting good contrast _on the screen_ in challenging rooms or lighted conditions.
> 
> 
> And it does that amazingly well, I found. As I mentioned before, I auditioned the BW in a local store's projector room that had always been a disaster for their projectors: it was a very small room with very light (almost white) walls, ceiling. All projectors have looked seriously washed out in that room and the room lit up like a torch when a projector turned on and the light bounced off all that bright surroundings.
> 
> 
> It was just a totally different experience with the BW. It maintained fantastic contrast in that room and the room did not light up nearly as much, so there was a nice combination of the screen holding excellent punchy contrast and the room itself being less distracting. But of course it's not like the room disappeared. I wouldn't expect that.
> 
> 
> Really, as I wrote before, the main issue I had with the BW was it's pretty severe viewing cone and hot-spotting. It had much the same issue as the Stewart Firehawk in terms of off-axis viewing but even more so. In other words, as I moved to the right of the screen, the right side of the screen would remain bright but the other side of the screen would visibly darken, hence poor screen uniformity off axis.
> 
> 
> Did you notice this or look for it hrd?
> 
> 
> (The 1.4 gain BW should be intriguing, although if the lower gain version had the uniformity issues I saw I can only imagine it being exacerbated in a higher gain version).



The demo was in a small meeting room with a big conference table in the middle that took up most of the space. I sat on the table and did not move around.


The entire screen was too dark, anyway, due to the dim projector. There might not have been enough brightness anywhere to show the issues you mentioned.


----------



## desiplaya172

Hey im new to this fourm and am new to the whole HT market. I bought a Sony VPL-VW60 projector. It has 1000 ANSI lumens and a 35000:1 contrast ratio. I was wondering if I can get peoples opinons on if I should get the Black Diamond screen or the Firehawk g3 screen. The room im puttin this in is a dedicated ht room with no natural light just controlled dimmer lighting. I was thinkin about doing betweena 110"~116" diag screen (16:9). Let me know what you consider to be the best option for the projector at hand. Thanks!


----------



## JX2006




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *desiplaya172* /forum/post/15326931
> 
> 
> Hey im new to this fourm and am new to the whole HT market. I bought a Sony VPL-VW60 projector. It has 1000 ANSI lumens and a 35000:1 contrast ratio. I was wondering if I can get peoples opinons on if I should get the Black Diamond screen or the Firehawk g3 screen. The room im puttin this in is a dedicated ht room with no natural light just controlled dimmer lighting. I was thinkin about doing betweena 110"~116" diag screen (16:9). Let me know what you consider to be the best option for the projector at hand. Thanks!



What color are your walls, ceiling, floor and are you planning on watching with some ambient light on or will it always be completely dark. Also are you more interested in a bright image or contrast.


----------



## desiplaya172




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *JX2006* /forum/post/15330041
> 
> 
> What color are your walls, ceiling, floor and are you planning on watching with some ambient light on or will it always be completely dark. Also are you more interested in a bright image or contrast.



The walls are going to be a dark royal blue. The ceiling will proablbly be a dark orange or greay color. The floor still havent decieded on. There might be a little light from the side wall lights when im watching a movie. Im more of a person who is into their richer black color. The problem is for the bd i have only 1000 lumens with the sony projector. When I did the calculations on their website it said the BD would be too dim. So im wondering if it will allow me to produce the best whites and blacks but at the same time proper color? Also what is the biggest size they make the BD in? Does the firehawk help produce a richer black?


----------



## JX2006




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *desiplaya172* /forum/post/15330839
> 
> 
> The walls are going to be a dark royal blue. The ceiling will proablbly be a dark orange or greay color. The floor still havent decieded on. There might be a little light from the side wall lights when im watching a movie. Im more of a person who is into their richer black color. The problem is for the bd i have only 1000 lumens with the sony projector. When I did the calculations on their website it said the BD would be too dim. So im wondering if it will allow me to produce the best whites and blacks but at the same time proper color? Also what is the biggest size they make the BD in? Does the firehawk help produce a richer black?



Yes, the Firehawk, as with any grey or darker screen material, will help produce better blacks, at the expense of some brightness and possibly color.


You might also want to look at Carada's screens. Audioholics reviewed their grey screen as being comparable to the Firehawk but at a much cheaper price, if cost is an issue. You might want to also consider a masking system, such as the Carada Masquerade, which will help with the image quality.


Your projector drops to about 525 lumens when properly calibrated and a grey screen will drop the light output even more, but is the proper type of screen to get if you want the darkest blacks.


If you are worried about it being to dim, there are a couple of things to consider. The smaller the screen the brighter the image will be on it.


Also, how your theatre room is set up will have a big impact on dark colors and brightness.


Here is a great thread I suggest reading through fully that deals with that subject:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=757920


----------



## tommy def




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *desiplaya172* /forum/post/15326931
> 
> 
> Hey im new to this fourm and am new to the whole HT market. I bought a Sony VPL-VW60 projector. It has 1000 ANSI lumens and a 35000:1 contrast ratio. I was wondering if I can get peoples opinons on if I should get the Black Diamond screen or the Firehawk g3 screen. The room im puttin this in is a dedicated ht room with no natural light just controlled dimmer lighting. I was thinkin about doing betweena 110"~116" diag screen (16:9). Let me know what you consider to be the best option for the projector at hand. Thanks!



I have the same projector with 1000hr's on it and a 92" BD .8 and I think it's still bright enough. I also had the 1.4 when it first came out, but had to send it back it had major vertical steaks in it. My .8 still has streaks but not as bad I've been living with it for the past few months but I too am considering a Stewart GH or FH. I just can't get a solid answer if the GH or FH screens have streaks in them too. I heard that alot of gray screens have streaks in them. Another thing, the BD has a really bad viewing cone so if your not going to be siting dead center I would stay away or consider their curved option, it's suppose to help. Don't get me wrong when I first got the screen I must admit I was blown away it dose have it's quality's. It definitely dose what they advertise, I have light colored walls and I can watch a football game with full lights on and it still looks good. so that strength alone might weight out it's flaws for some people. I just don't like watching a movie when everything looks great and then you see a sun set and their are those lines. Anyway good luck and if you can try to demo it.


----------



## desiplaya172




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tommy def* /forum/post/15333821
> 
> 
> I have the same projector with 1000hr's on it and a 92" BD .8 and I think it's still bright enough. I also had the 1.4 when it first came out, but had to send it back it had major vertical steaks in it. My .8 still has streaks but not as bad I've been living with it for the past few months but I too am considering a Stewart GH or FH. I just can't get a solid answer if the GH or FH screens have streaks in them too. I heard that alot of gray screens have streaks in them. Another thing, the BD has a really bad viewing cone so if your not going to be siting dead center I would stay away or consider their curved option, it's suppose to help. Don't get me wrong when I first got the screen I must admit I was blown away it dose have it's quality's. It definitely dose what they advertise, I have light colored walls and I can watch a football game with full lights on and it still looks good. so that strength alone might weight out it's flaws for some people. I just don't like watching a movie when everything looks great and then you see a sun set and their are those lines. Anyway good luck and if you can try to demo it.



Do you have any natural light comming into the room? Whats the diff between the .8 and the 1.4? I really am new to the projector market.


----------



## JX2006




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *desiplaya172* /forum/post/15334532
> 
> 
> Whats the diff between the .8 and the 1.4?



The higher the gain (in this case the 1.4) the brighter the image will be, at the expense of contrast ratio as well as possibly a smaller sweet spot (the more you view the image from the center the less bright it is and less picture quality) and hotspotting. Both of those last two problems can be avoided depending on your equipment and how the room is set-up.


----------



## golfnz34me

Well, I don't know what hot "spoting" is, and I really don't want to know anything about your "Sweat Spot". 


But one thing you said above is inaccurate; a higher gain screen will have a higher contrast ratio than a lower gain one, due to better rejection of ambient light.


----------



## JX2006




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *golfnz34me* /forum/post/15337155
> 
> 
> But one thing you said above is inaccurate; a higher gain screen will have a higher contrast ratio than a lower gain one, due to better rejection of ambient light.



What I meant by the negative effect on contrast is that he said he wants the best blacks, and has a dedicated theater room with control of ambient light. So if he has a higher gain, and therefore a brighter image, it will have a negative effect on that.


----------



## noah katz

"What I meant by the negative effect on contrast is that he said he wants the best blacks, and has a dedicated theater room with control of ambient light. So if he has a higher gain, and therefore a brighter image, it will have a negative effect on that."


Blacks and CR are related but not the same.


Higher gain increases whites and blacks equally, meaning same CR.


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *golfnz34me* /forum/post/15337155
> 
> 
> But one thing you said above is inaccurate; a higher gain screen will have a higher contrast ratio than a lower gain one, due to better rejection of ambient light.



This gets a little bit complicated, but it depends on why a screen is higher or lower gain, where the light is coming from, etc. A high gain screen with focused directionality only will tend to kill off-axis ambient light, so helps ANSI CR retention in a light colored room as well and CR retention in general when there are lights on that are off-axis (low gain for that light to a viewer). But gray also helps retain ANSI CR by having reflections off walls get reduced at least twice while the projected light was only reduced once. So, a gray screen with .8 gain may have better overall intra-image CR across various images than a 1.0 gain matte white screen. Or a gray version of the High Power (which doesn't really exist although the Graywolf has similar effects plus annoying texture) could do better than the current High Power for CR in general.


And then there are other complications like screens which kill light from particular angles, like discussed here.


--Darin


----------



## Snausy

Hi everyone, I need a little advice from the masses.


I currently have a Focupix HC grey .9gain screen for my Mits HC1500.


At first I had it in a completely black room with black fabric on the walls and ceiling. Even the grey screen looked fantastic. Now I've moved it into the livingroom that has light brown walls and white ceiling and the grey screen works pretty well there too.


Now I have just ordered a new 6500ub and need a screen to go with it. It is a very bright projector but it also has an insane contrast ratio(75,000:1 dynamic) so the guy at htdepot talked me into a new 1.3gain matte white screen because he doesn't think I need the HC grey anymore.


If I was staying in a completely light controlled environment I'd be happy and stay with it. However there is quite a bit of ambient light in this livingroom and I'm worried that the 1.3 matte white will wash out quicker than the HC grey would.


Eventually, I will be going back to a pure black room but for now it's a brown walls, white ceiling, ambient light environment. The 6500ub is very bright and can handle a HC grey pretty well.


Bottom line, if you were me would you just get another HC grey screen or would you keep the 1.3 matte white screen and deal with the washout until I can get in a better room. I will be moving in four months.


For a very bright projector with amazing contrast ratio, which is the better option? I know for a blacked out room the matte white is better, and for the ambient light room the grey is better...but if you were me what would you do?


Keep the 1.3 matte white or get .9 HC grey? This is driving me crazy and it would be good to get a couple answers before they ship my matte white screen tomorrow.


Thanks in advance!


----------



## larrychief

Snausy:


I wonder if you shouldn't go for the best solution for your end room...4 months in the present situation is not really a long time. Seems like a 75K:1 contrast ratio should be pretty good even if the environment is not totally light-controlled, using a 1.3 gain screen, and this is the one that would be the best for your final room with good light control. On the other hand, the grey screen at 0.9 gain should also be pretty darn nice with a good bright projector. I just saw a Sony (looked like my VW60) on a Stewart Firehawk grey screen at a Magnolia Home Theater; the room was sorta dark, but I wasn't totally impressed by the zing in the picture...however, I'm sure a new Epson would be a lot better with the high-brightness lamp...


Larry


----------



## Snausy

I tend to agree Larry. The more I think about it, the more I think I was right in ordering the 1.3 white in the first place. Thanks for the input.


I mean how much difference is there really between .9 and 1.3 anyway?


----------



## thehifidoc

The HiFi Doc says: The new Black Diamond screen form SI is only available in a fixed version right now. It looks absolutely fabulous and is recommended for most situations unless your viewing angle for the outside seats is more than 45 degrees off angle. At this point you will experience light loss. They are working on a drop down screen but it is not ready yet. It is very difficult to do what this screen does in a non-rigid screen. They have gotten past that, allowing it to be shipped in a tube. It must be assembled quickly after it arrives however to eliminate laddering. In Short though, this Screen is amazing. It works well in environments that have moderate ambient light levels. Paired up with a Runco 900 it allows daytime TV viewing with the windows open. Of course it is better at night. I used one at a recent trade show. I was the only guy in the convention with a large projected image that had color saturation even with a $1400.00 Mitsubishi Projector. The other cool factor: this thing is soooo Black that you do not need masking to handle other aspect ratios. So order it for your 2.35:1 width and enjoy a Runco with Autoscope.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/15286090
> 
> 
> I finally saw a BD today. I went there not expecting much, knowing the projector was a dated 1000-lumens Mitsubishi LCD with a fading bulb and the screen was the .8 gain. The dealer forewarned me it was too dim and said he wanted to wait to show off the screen until he got a better projector in, but after weeks went by with no better projector coming in, I said show me what you have now and I'll bring my bright, new RS20 in when it arrives in a few weeks for a better test, and I got an invite.
> 
> 
> The image was too dim to be a good test. Turning up the brightness on the projector helped, but the plain white Draper electric screen they had for A/B purposes always looked better just because it was brighter. I love bright. The room had bright white walls, fortunately. That was very important, because I could see the walls were showing some of the light from the image, not anywhere as intensely as with the white screen, but still plenty enough to keep the image from being as immersive as I would have liked. It was a smaller image, 92", which did not help with the immersion factor. I did not get the impression the BD would solve my problem with white walls and white ceiling. If it did not in the dealer's room when the dealer had such a dim image, it would not in my room with a much brighter projector and a 1.4 gain BD. Now, maybe the light that scatters from the screen onto the walls does not reflect back onto the BD thanks to the BD's light-rejecting qualities - I am not sure of that because the image was too dim to really evaluate if the walls were affecting the contrast - but it was clear to me from the demo that I needed to treat my environment more than I needed a light-rejecting screen. I could tell from the demo that even if the BD did indeed reject light from the side walls and an RS20 with one could have fantastic contrast and no wash-out at all, the lit-up walls would still distract too much from the theater experience that an RS20 is capable of giving. Those of you who have white walls and yet still want an awesome image should just buy a large flat panel and sit closer. If you really want the size, enough to be willing to accept a less than stellar image, then get at least 120" diagonal. Trading an awesome 65" plasma image that works in ambient light for a 92" screen image that is compromised because you do not have a theater-friendly environment is just not worth it.
> 
> 
> I may bring the RS20 over to the dealer's just to see what the .8 BD can do with an RS20, but a bright image is so important to me that I will probably go with a Silverstar or a High Power, both of which will run me less money, and will try to turn the room into a bat cave. The BD may be a good choice for those who have a weak room and absolutely cannot control it, due to landlord, wife, etc., but I have some flexibility there, and since the RS20 is capable of the best possible blacks, it's worth the effort. The BD may also be good for those who have bat caves and want to reduce the light scatter on the walls to create a more immersive environment. Making a better bat cave can also help with that problem.



I brought my new RS20 to the same demo room today. Had it in high bulb with the iris open all the way, just 12 hours on the bulb. The image was still too dim and this on only a 92" diagonal screen. I can't recommend the .8 gain version of the BD to anyone who does not have a _light cannon_. I do not think a 1600-lumens projector would cut it, certainly not for a larger screen such as a 110". Business projectors with 3000-5000 lumens minimum. I'd still like to see the RS20 on a 1.4 gain BD, but even with my lack of aptitude and experience with DIY, I could probably turn the theater room into a bat cave before the 1.4 is out.


The sales rep left the room and I spent most of the time today just watching the white electric that was on the same wall and could be made to come down in front of the BD. The RS20 looks great even on a white screen in a room with white walls. The sales rep said it "looked amaaazing".


----------



## mookie b

Does anyone have this screen in home yet?


----------



## mookie b

Does anyone have this screen in home yet?


----------



## mookie b

I asked for pricing from the manufacturere since I sure as hell can't find one of these at Best Buy like SIS website states. They responded (this is for a 2.40:1 screen")

.........................................................


The retail price for a Cinema Reference Fixed Black Diamond 106 (CRF106BD) is $2899.00 and the price for a Cinema Reference Fixed 110 Black Diamond (CRF110BD) is $3099.00.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mookie b* /forum/post/15532894
> 
> 
> I asked for pricing from the manufacturere since I sure as hell can't find one of these at Best Buy like SIS website states. They responded (this is for a 2.40:1 screen")
> 
> .........................................................
> 
> 
> The retail price for a Cinema Reference Fixed Black Diamond 106 (CRF106BD) is $2899.00 and the price for a Cinema Reference Fixed 110 Black Diamond (CRF110BD) is $3099.00.



If you browse through the entire thread, you will find mention of an online retailer that sells the screen. I believe AV Science, the forum sponsors, can get it for you now as well.


----------



## glennQNYC




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/15534976
> 
> 
> If you browse through the entire thread, you will find mention of an online retailer that sells the [BD] screen. I believe AV Science, the forum sponsors, can get it for you now as well.



SI Screens doesn't authorize internet/mail order sale of any of their Reference-Series product, including the Black Diamond. A call to SI Screens (512-832-6939) can help you find a legitimate channel.


glennQ


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *glennQNYC* /forum/post/15535041
> 
> 
> SI Screens doesn't authorize internet/mail order sale of any of their Reference-Series product, including the Black Diamond. A call to SI Screens (512-832-6939) can help you find a legitimate channel.
> 
> 
> glennQ



The sources I mentioned are legitimate channels. If SI is not happy with a dealer's not sticking to MSRP prices, it is SI's prerogative to cease doing business with that dealer if they wish to.


----------



## glennQNYC




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/15535429
> 
> 
> The sources I mentioned are legitimate channels. If SI is not happy with a dealer's not sticking to MSRP prices, it is SI's prerogative to cease doing business with that dealer if they wish to.



Reference Series (including BD) SI screens are NOT authorized to be sold through the Internet, or over the phone. A simple call to SI would prove to anyone interested what ligitimate channels are available to them.


glennQ


----------



## yelnatsch517




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13805271
> 
> 
> Remember our good ol' friend ROY-G-BIV? So just from a color standpoint (not wavelength), then it would filter out orange, yellow, and violet, half of the colors of the spectrum. That's a generalization, but just goes to show that it's not just RGB.
> 
> Your second assumption is severely flawed. One similar analogy would be, "because the subwoofer is not full range (it can't play to 20Khz), it won't have good bass". Clearly not the case. Sunlight is a broadband source of light, where as inddor light is comprised of a narrower band of light, which therefore would be easier to filter than sunlight. So it IS possible that the BD is not very effective at rejecting sunlight, yet excellent at rejecting indoor light. Remember also, unless you have a skylight, sunlight will be reflecting horizontally through windows, where as most lights are on the ceiling refelcting vertically on the screen, which could aslo be one of the screens strengths (i.e. it's more directional in the vertical plane, remember the samples had to be oriented up or down), which would be another reason why it would reject indoor light more effectively.
> 
> 
> No one is claiming magic, ovbiosuly the better the setup, the better the results.





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/13800663
> 
> 
> Color temperature and wavelength are NOT the same.



Really? Please tell me the difference. I'd really like to know.

Please do keep in mind almost all light consist of a combination of wavelengths if you decide to reply so don't bother replying if it's something along the lines of "temperature is a distribution of wavelengths not a single wavelength" aka coherent vs noncoherent light.


Sorry, but I just couldn't not respond to this. Some people on this forum should really learn the basics before getting into a debate on a technical subject. Can anyone tell me what in crappers is "color standpoint (not wavelength)?"


The bottom line is that it is physically not possible to passively "filter" out certain colors just because they come from different sources. That is like trying to create a passive low pass filter that actively turns on and off depending on the input source. The only thing that is possible is to filter out certain polarizations of light, ie. directional wavelengths of light which is how how polarization works.


----------



## edan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *glennQNYC* /forum/post/15538336
> 
> 
> Reference Series (including BD) SI screens are NOT authorized to be sold through the Internet, or over the phone. A simple call to SI would prove to anyone interested what ligitimate channels are available to them.



Or, you could troll through this thread and see Projectorzone and Dell mentioned as online dealers. You can't find Black Diamond at either one online, and at least one link @ Projectorzone in the thread just takes you to their home page.


I'm probably going to call AVS soon to talk about screens, and somehow I bet they will not have BD either. BD looks really cool, but I really need a retractable screen and probably the 1.4 gain, and I need to finish my project soon


----------



## JX2006

Projector Central put up their review of the Black Diamond II screen:

http://www.projectorcentral.com/si_b...een_review.htm


----------



## R Harkness

Thanks for the link. It shows exactly what I described in earlier posts concerning my observations of the Black Diamond screen: A limited viewing cone and very noticeable non-uniformity as you move away from the central axis. I'd said I was disturbed by how the far side of the screen darkened very noticeably when I moved off axis. Notice this in the 3 comparison photos in that review. The image on the left side of the screen - the side of the screen closer to the camera as the camera moves to one side - remains brighter than the opposite side (right side) of the image which plunges into much greater dimness - like someone is putting ND filters on the far half of the screen. Even the bright red car on the right side of the image almost disappears.


I couldn't deal with that, personally. Otherwise in terms of keeping contrast with ambient light or a room with light decor, from on axis, the screen is very impressive.


----------



## tommy def




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/15828361
> 
> 
> Thanks for the link. It shows exactly what I described in earlier posts concerning my observations of the Black Diamond screen: A limited viewing cone and very noticeable non-uniformity as you move away from the central axis. I'd said I was disturbed by how the far side of the screen darkened very noticeably when I moved off axis. Notice this in the 3 comparison photos in that review. The image on the left side of the screen - the side of the screen closer to the camera as the camera moves to one side - remains brighter than the opposite side (right side) of the image which plunges into much greater dimness - like someone is putting ND filters on the far half of the screen. Even the bright red car on the right side of the image almost disappears.
> 
> 
> I couldn't deal with that, personally. Otherwise in terms of keeping contrast with ambient light or a room with light decor, from on axis, the screen is very impressive.



What's up guy's just wondering if any of you have compared the Black Diamond to a Firehawk. I own a BD now and I'm happy with the ambient light rejection and black level but can't stand the trade off. The screen has a sheen, which I can deal with but I can't take the non uniformity,the hot spot, and also the screen has some vertical lines in it that you can make out in bright scenes. If any of you have seen both screens and can give me any input that would be great, How they compare in brightness, uniformity, black level, just over all picture quality. I was also considering getting a white screen because I have good light control and I'm painting my room very dark soon. But I mostly watch 2.35:1 movies with the projector and I'm afraid that the bars are going to be a distraction on a white screen, What do you guy's think.


----------



## send

FYI


Thank you all at AVS for your interest and support with the new Black Diamond screen technology. Everyone's excitement and enthusiasm has pushed SI to take the Black Diamond's optics to the next level.


SI is happy to announce that Black Diamond II is now shipping. Black Diamond II has taken the optical technology to the next level by increasing contrast, color accuracy, and uniformity.


Black Diamond II will be shipping in both 1.4 and .8 gains.


Kind Regards,


Ryan


----------



## fanbrain

I have a defective Silverstar and now I'm back to square one, wondering if I should scrap it and get a 1.4 BDII to use in my ambient light situation. Panasonic PT-AE3000 is my projector. Screen is a 2:35 138" Diagonal (110" 16:9). Projector is at 14'. Viewing distance is 14'. Maybe I'll give them a call later today.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *send* /forum/post/15840034
> 
> 
> FYI
> 
> 
> Thank you all at AVS for your interest and support with the new Black Diamond screen technology. Everyone's excitement and enthusiasm has pushed SI to take the Black Diamond's optics to the next level.
> 
> 
> SI is happy to announce that Black Diamond II is now shipping. Black Diamond II has taken the optical technology to the next level by increasing contrast, color accuracy, and uniformity.
> 
> 
> Black Diamond II will be shipping in both 1.4 and .8 gains.
> 
> 
> Kind Regards,
> 
> 
> Ryan



Anybody know what the difference is between Black Diamond and Black Diamond II?


----------



## glennQNYC




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/15843841
> 
> 
> Anybody know what the difference is between Black Diamond and Black Diamond II?



According to Ryan's post, increased contrast, color accuracy, and uniformity.


glennQ


----------



## Mike N Ike




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *send* /forum/post/15840034
> 
> 
> FYI
> 
> 
> Thank you all at AVS for your interest and support with the new Black Diamond screen technology. Everyone's excitement and enthusiasm has pushed SI to take the Black Diamond's optics to the next level.
> 
> 
> SI is happy to announce that Black Diamond II is now shipping. Black Diamond II has taken the optical technology to the next level by increasing contrast, color accuracy, and uniformity.
> 
> 
> Black Diamond II will be shipping in both 1.4 and .8 gains.
> 
> 
> Kind Regards,
> 
> 
> Ryan




Will the specs for the BD 1.4 be posted on the SI website?

I'm only seeing them for the .8 right now.


Thanks


----------



## Dbuudo07

Is it possible to use 9 113" 16:9 black diamond screens to create a 24' wide screen? After living with pioneer elite plasmas, I just can't go back to ok blacks, even if the screen is huge.


----------



## RooRwOrks

Have you thought about what would happen to your image on a 24' screen as you move away from the center Dbuudo07? I am not sure if you read this review or not, but this was on the .8 gain version. I can only imagine on the higher gain 1.4 version you get even more dropoff.

http://www.projectorcentral.com/si_b...een_review.htm


----------



## Dbuudo07




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *RooRwOrks* /forum/post/15872285
> 
> 
> Have you thought about what would happen to your image on a 24' screen as you move away from the center Dbuudo07? I am not sure if you read this review or not, but this was on the .8 gain version. I can only imagine on the higher gain 1.4 version you get even more dropoff.
> 
> http://www.projectorcentral.com/si_b...een_review.htm



Thanks for the review. Very interesting.


The seating will be 24' feet wide with the first row heads at 25' away and the furthest heads being 50' away. I think that will fit into the 44 degree viewing angle. If you or anyone doesn't, please tell me. My crude measurements seem to show the front row just inside of the 22 degree limit. Thanks for the help.


And if anyone knows about using 9 113" 16:9 screens to make the 24' screen, please give your input.


----------



## dynasty36d

HC6100 with this screen in .8 gain... good or bad idea? i have light colored walls and ceiling and its killing my black level and not to mention a cheap focupix fixed frame matte white screen atm. Also keep in mind that the price of this means about nothing because i will be paying WELL below 1k with my Emp Discount. Thanks.


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Dbuudo07* /forum/post/15872665
> 
> 
> The seating will be 24' feet wide with the first row heads at 25' away and the furthest heads being 50' away. I think that will fit into the 44 degree viewing angle. If you or anyone doesn't, please tell me. My crude measurements seem to show the front row just inside of the 22 degree limit. Thanks for the help.
> 
> 
> And if anyone knows about using 9 113" 16:9 screens to make the 24' screen, please give your input.



I don't know about the multiple screens idea, but as far as the 22 degrees or 44 degrees, I wouldn't consider that magic. With somebody sitting to one side I would expect their side of the screen to be quite a bit brighter than the other side of the screen, if this is like the screens they sent samples out for.


If you have a 24' wide screen and 24' wide seating, then a person sitting on the right side for instance should have a spot on their side of the screen getting maximum gain (a straight shot from the projector to the screen and right to them at peak angle). I am assuming that this screen is angular reflective for this. If the projector is say 50' back then by my calculations the spot on the left side of the screen will have a relevant angle that is 103.5 degrees from the plane of the screen, going clockwise on my diagram. I got that from the inverse tangent of 50/12 being 76.5 and 180 - 76.5 being 103.5. A person whose eyes were at the right side of the screen sitting 24' back would have an angle of about 45 degrees in the same way. So, an angle of about 58.5 degrees (from 103.5 - 45) as far as what determines the gain to that spot. If a person was a little in it wouldn't be so bad of course and putting the projector further away would improve those angles, but the above didn't even include any vertical offset.


I don't know what the gain of this screen is at 58 degrees or so off horizontally, but figure it has probably dropped a lot by that much of an angle. I think the above illustrates one of the problems with angular-reflective screens with a high gain layer. The fact that the angle the matters is basically the one created if the light was bouncing off a mirror. So, in the above case the 103.5 was the relevant angle, where with a retro-reflective screen the relevant angle would have been the 76.5 (since it is the line going back to the projector that matters, not the one bouncing away). Then 76.5 minus 45 is 31.5. Of course, retro-reflective brings its own issues (like needing the projector to be close enough vertically to get enough benefit).


--Darin


----------



## Dbuudo07




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *darinp2* /forum/post/15896838
> 
> 
> I don't know about the multiple screens idea, but as far as the 22 degrees or 44 degrees, I wouldn't consider that magic. With somebody sitting to one side I would expect their side of the screen to be quite a bit brighter than the other side of the screen, if this is like the screens they sent samples out for.
> 
> 
> If you have a 24' wide screen and 24' wide seating, then a person sitting on the right side for instance should have a spot on their side of the screen getting maximum gain (a straight shot from the projector to the screen and right to them at peak angle). I am assuming that this screen is angular reflective for this. If the projector is say 50' back then by my calculations the spot on the left side of the screen will have a relevant angle that is 103.5 degrees from the plane of the screen, going clockwise on my diagram. I got that from the inverse tangent of 50/12 being 76.5 and 180 - 76.5 being 103.5. A person whose eyes were at the right side of the screen sitting 24' back would have an angle of about 45 degrees in the same way. So, an angle of about 58.5 degrees (from 103.5 - 45) as far as what determines the gain to that spot. If a person was a little in it wouldn't be so bad of course and putting the projector further away would improve those angles, but the above didn't even include any vertical offset.
> 
> 
> I don't know what the gain of this screen is at 58 degrees or so off horizontally, but figure it has probably dropped a lot by that much of an angle. I think the above illustrates one of the problems with angular-reflective screens with a high gain layer. The fact that the angle the matters is basically the one created if the light was bouncing off a mirror. So, in the above case the 103.5 was the relevant angle, where with a retro-reflective screen the relevant angle would have been the 76.5 (since it is the line going back to the projector that matters, not the one bouncing away). Then 76.5 minus 45 is 31.5. Of course, retro-reflective brings its own issues (like needing the projector to be close enough vertically to get enough benefit).
> 
> 
> --Darin



Thanks for the reply. I decided against the black diamond. Going with a 38' wide TORUS screen.


----------



## dssbuys

I called SI today and am thinking about upgrading the 91" 16:9 .8 gain screen I purchased last November w/their new 1.4 gain screen.


Would anyone be interested in a perfectly good 91" screen (no frame, I am keeping the existing frame). The frame can be purchased from SI though.


This seems like it would be a little too niche to try and sell on ebay or Craigslist.


Please PM me if you are interested.


----------



## tommy def

I changed my old BD.8 for the new 1.4 and I must say overall it is a much better screen. No more vertical lines it seems they solved that problem







. I will also add that I think the material is lighter, it almost looks silver now and it's not because I went from the .8 to 1.4. my first screen from them was the original 1.4 and I do not remember it being this light.


----------



## dssbuys




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tommy def* /forum/post/15986719
> 
> 
> I changed my old BD.8 for the new 1.4 and I must say overall it is a much better screen. No more vertical lines it seems they solved that problem
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I will also add that I think the material is lighter, it almost looks silver now and it's not because I went from the .8 to 1.4. my first screen from them was the original 1.4 and I do not remember it being this light.



I have to say, my .8 does not have any lines (I would have had it replaced or asked for my money back if it did)... it is a great screen.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tommy def* /forum/post/15986719
> 
> 
> I changed my old BD.8 for the new 1.4 and I must say overall it is a much better screen. No more vertical lines it seems they solved that problem
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I will also add that I think the material is lighter, it almost looks silver now and it's not because I went from the .8 to 1.4. my first screen from them was the original 1.4 and I do not remember it being this light.



Great news! I've been waiting to find out how the 1.4 performs. Is there any other detail you can add about the improvement? For example:


- how are the viewing angles?

- how does it perform with room lights and/or sunlight?

- is it still casting a blue or purple hue on white material?


Thanks,Dave


----------



## tommy def




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks* /forum/post/16002268
> 
> 
> Great news! I've been waiting to find out how the 1.4 performs. Is there any other detail you can add about the improvement? For example:
> 
> 
> - how are the viewing angles?
> 
> - how does it perform with room lights and/or sunlight?
> 
> - is it still casting a blue or purple hue on white material?
> 
> 
> Thanks,Dave



All the BD's have the same viewing angles, that was confirmed by

SI when I purchased the screen. I feel the new screen almost performs as well as the older screen with ambient light. The difference could also be because I went from a .8 to a 1.4. when I start to turn my lights up the new screen washes out a Little faster. Not really a big deal, so when I'm watching sports and stuff instead of having my lights on 3/4 I put them on 1/2. With the lights off I get pretty much the same black level but a brighter and more uniform picture. I can see an improvement in color with the screen being a grayish silver apposed to a black purple. On a white image there is no hint of purple. Over all I am very satisfied.


----------



## smetaxas

How would the new 1.4 screen work as a masking screen (16x9 to 2.35)? Is the material still dark enough to frame the picture?


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tommy def* /forum/post/16006384
> 
> 
> All the BD's have the same viewing angles, that was confirmed by
> 
> SI when I purchased the screen. I feel the new screen almost performs as well as the older screen with ambient light. The difference could also be because I went from a .8 to a 1.4. when I start to turn my lights up the new screen washes out a Little faster. Not really a big deal, so when I'm watching sports and stuff instead of having my lights on 3/4 I put them on 1/2. With the lights off I get pretty much the same black level but a brighter and more uniform picture. I can see an improvement in color with the screen being a grayish silver apposed to a black purple. On a white image there is no hint of purple. Over all I am very satisfied.



I'm a little confused, regarding the ambient light performance of the new screen vs the old screen?? I believe your old screen was .8 and the new one is 1.4 - I would think that the 1.4 would be brighter and would be able to handle the ambient light better....


----------



## tommy def




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks* /forum/post/16057542
> 
> 
> I'm a little confused, regarding the ambient light performance of the new screen vs the old screen?? I believe your old screen was .8 and the new one is 1.4 - I would think that the 1.4 would be brighter and would be able to handle the ambient light better....



Thats what I thought, but it's not the case. Listen on well lit programs like baseball games, beach scene etc., the picture does look as good as the older screen and brighter. But when you watch darker material like Bill maher, Batman, etc., the screen washes out faster then the older one when you introduce ambient light into the room. I still have samples of the old screen material and when I put it up against the new screen you can see what I'm talking about. Maybe it has something to do with the older screen being much darker so thats why the the blacks stay better, I'm just guessing.


----------



## send

Thanks again for everyone's excitement. Black Diamond II is now shipping. You are correct, all issues from v1 have been resolved and many improvements have been made. The Black Diamond II video is now live. www.siscreens.com 


Enjoy,


Ryan


----------



## Warbie

Is it possible to get samples of the Black Diamond 2?


----------



## Dawn Gordon

Ryan,


When will you be shipping the Black Diamond retractable 1.4 version?


----------



## doseofrealta




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Dawn Gordon* /forum/post/16091659
> 
> 
> Ryan,
> 
> 
> When will you be shipping the Black Diamond retractable 1.4 version?



Probably never. Just like the first Black Diamond.


----------



## send




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Dawn Gordon* /forum/post/16091659
> 
> 
> Ryan,
> 
> 
> When will you be shipping the Black Diamond retractable 1.4 version?



Black Diamond Motorized development is progressing nicely. We are not yet releasing a date but the goal is to showcase something this year.


Ryan


----------



## send

You bet. email [email protected]


----------



## smetaxas

Is this screen still a good cantidate for a non masking 2.35 setup? Is the new screen dark enough to not need any masking at 16/9?


----------



## FLBoy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *smetaxas* /forum/post/16228494
> 
> 
> Is this screen still a good cantidate for a non masking 2.35 setup? Is the new screen dark enough to not need any masking at 16/9?



If you have a bat cave, the black columns should be the same brightness as on any other 1.4 gain screen. How dark really depends on the native contrast of your PJ. Whether that's dark enough for you, depends on how critical you are about this issue. (It won't be as black as black velvet with any digital PJ I know of.)


----------



## smetaxas

Thanks for your reply. The original buzz about this screen was that you no longer needed a masking system because the screen was dark enough to mask the edges. Is this no longer true with the lighter screen material?


----------



## send




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *smetaxas* /forum/post/16236435
> 
> 
> Thanks for your reply. The original buzz about this screen was that you no longer needed a masking system because the screen was dark enough to mask the edges. Is this no longer true with the lighter screen material?



For dark rooms customers are usually purchasing the .8 gain to eliminate the need for masking. The Black Diamond 1.4 is not as dark but is still significantly better than our standard materials for masking.


Another benefit is that the projector light scatter is reduced significantly therefore eliminating traditional washout.


Watch the dark room shot in our video. You will see the blue walls go dark as we roll up the standard screen.


Best Regards,


Ryan


----------



## dynasty36d

Received my BD 1.4 sample in the mail. Wow this will definitely be the next screen i purchase and probably the last. It BLOWS my current .8 gain grey screen out of the water and is as bright as my 1.4 gain screen but with MUCH better blacks and the blacks dont get washed out what-so-ever during bright scenes with my white ceiling and light tan walls. On a side note it barely casts any light back onto the walls and ceilings but the light it does cast is a very dim purplish tint which is not distracting at all. I'm definitely a fan!


----------



## Schlotkins

How is the off axis fall off @ 30 degrees?


Thanks

Chris


----------



## send




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Schlotkins* /forum/post/16330900
> 
> 
> How is the off axis fall off @ 30 degrees?
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Chris



Here are the specs. http://www.siscreens.com/pdf/Black%2...te%20paper.pdf 


Best Regards,


Ryan


----------



## noah katz

Ryan,


Do you have measurements for the 1.4?


----------



## send

You bet http://www.siscreens.com/screens/ts-...diamond1.4.php 


You will notice an improvement in color accuracy.


Ryan


----------



## Mike N Ike




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dynasty36d* /forum/post/16323466
> 
> 
> ... but the light it does cast is a very dim purplish tint which is not distracting at all





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *send* /forum/post/16489259
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> You will notice an improvement in color accuracy.
> 
> Ryan



Ryan,


I am concerned about this tint that dynasty refers to. I had a sample of the original BD I and saw that purple in the actual screen image - I think I would have needed an ISF calibration to clean it up.


Any thoughts?


Thanks,

Mike


----------



## noah katz

Thanks, Ryan.


Any plans for taller screens?


I need around 64 or 65".


----------



## Scrimpin

Any owners/reviews on the new 1.4 gain screen yet? There was a lot of excitement about this screen on the original release but things sure seem to have cooled off.


----------



## h00kemh0rns

I'm a v1 owner of the .8 Black Diamond not to mention probably one of the earliest adopters to boot. I absolutely LOVE this screen (shooting the Panny ae2000u) and was curious (no I haven't searched) what the difference is with v2.


----------



## Scrimpin

Your room looks fairly wide. Are the outer seats withing the "22 degree half-gain angle" and how do you find the off-axis performance of the screen in the outside chairs compared to the inner? My theater is only 12 ft wide but all seating would be within 22 degrees. I looked at the pics of ProjectorCentrals review and the off-axis looked ok but I wouldn't mind hearing your actual experience. Right now I am still using my old Sony HS20 so want the 1.4 gain. My biggest reason for considering is to control light scatter to my light ceiling. How close is your screen to your ceiling and does the BD do a good job of controlling scatter?


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Scrimpin* /forum/post/16547754
> 
> 
> Your room looks fairly wide.



Room dimensions are 15'2" (Wide) X 16 (Long) (to the front columns/speakers or 19' including the wall indention where the screen hangs.)



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Scrimpin* /forum/post/16547754
> 
> 
> Are the outer seats withing the "22 degree half-gain angle" and how do you find the off-axis performance of the screen in the outside chairs compared to the inner?



Purely guessing but I would assume I'm within the cone b/c I don't see any off axis change. I just went upstairs and flipped to DiscoveryHD. I didn't see the diminish of PQ on the edges until I placed my back up against the wall.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Scrimpin* /forum/post/16547754
> 
> 
> My biggest reason for considering is to control light scatter to my light ceiling. How close is your screen to your ceiling and does the BD do a good job of controlling scatter?



Watch their video inregards to light scatter...it does as advertised. My screen is 6" (3" from frame to ceiling and 3" of frame) to the ceiling. Now granted there is still some scatter but it's negligable IMHO.


----------



## Scrimpin

Thanks, that really helps. My room is the same length but narrower so I s/b fine. Just out of curiousity in the two pics you provided why are the black bars quite apparent in the Cars pic but barely discernable in the Rambo pic?


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Scrimpin* /forum/post/16548211
> 
> 
> Just out of curiousity in the two pics you provided why are the black bars quite apparent in the Cars pic but barely discernable in the Rambo pic?



Difference between lights full on and lights dimmed for the movie.


----------



## msmCutter

Do you have any off axis pictures hookemhorns?


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/16548673
> 
> 
> Do you have any off axis pictures hookemhorns?



Just took some. Keep in mind these were taken with a P&S camera with no flash as is. Lights were off in the room so you will see some noise but should get an idea.



Back row seating off axis (~14' away)










Off axis standing about 5' from screen










Back row seating off axis (~14' away)










Off axis standing about 5' from screen


----------



## Scrimpin

There are no straight on pics to compare the off-axis change but your off-axis pics certainly look bright enough for me. Interestingly I do notice a big difference in color in the animation pics but not in the regular movie pics so I'm guessing it could be partially due to camera.


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Scrimpin* /forum/post/16550689
> 
> 
> There are no straight on pics to compare the off-axis change but your off-axis pics certainly look bright enough for me. Interestingly I do notice a big difference in color in the animation pics but not in the regular movie pics so I'm guessing it could be partially due to camera.



The quality (colors, noise) can be attributed to the crappy P&S camera I had readily available. I was showing the off axis viewing showing that even at


----------



## Scrimpin

I think I'm sold. I've been struggling with whether to splurge on a screen or a new projector (Epson 6500UB or Panasonic AE3000) but have concluded that since projector prices continue to fall but screen prices remain relatively constant I would be better off buying the screen first. I realize I would get a bigger "bang" initially with the projector upgrade but I'm trying to let logic prevail (for a change







)


Thanks again for your help.


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *send* /forum/post/16489259
> 
> 
> You bet http://www.siscreens.com/screens/ts-...diamond1.4.php
> 
> 
> You will notice an improvement in color accuracy.
> 
> 
> Ryan



Ryan,


Would love to see a side:side spec comparison of BDI vs. BDII. Even a video, similiar to the one that was done with the std white screen to BDI would be good too. These would be good to see for those crazy enough to upgrade from BDI.


----------



## send

h00kemh0rns - Feel free to come out and visit anytime.


The primary difference is the consistency. The contrast and color accuracy were improved also.


We are producing a new BDII video to illustrate the wide viewing angle. The comparison video will demonstrate the contrast benefits when compared to other screens. Video 3 will show the "black masking" benefits for 2.40.


Ryan


----------



## send

Tommy,


We added a basic video of the new 1.4 gain screen on our site. See the "Seeing Is Believing" Video. http://www.siscreens.com/screens/si_...eens_video.php


----------



## Scrimpin

Folks, I just received a 100 inch BDII 1.4 and got it all set up over the weekend. I am planning on doing a split screen comparison against my basic DIY (Behr white primer) screen this week and will post results. For now, here are my observations:


First, it is worth stating that I am using a 3+ year old Sony HS-10 (720p) with approx 1000 hours on the bulb. I typically only have gotten 1,500-1,800 on prior bulbs, so my brightness is set higher than normal.

*Set up.*

- Great packaging. Warnings galore about being careful not to crease the screen. This carton would really have to be abused to incur damage in transit. The screen seems like a very thin plastic material, silver on the back, dark grey on the front. There is bubble wrap and a thin foam wrapping on the front of screen and a protective film. It comes rolled around a cardboard cylinder which could be used to make a small bass trap if one were ambitious.







Kudos to SI here.


PS: the gloves are a really nice touch but how about including 2 sets of gloves as there should be 2 persons setting this up.


- The instructions were not as complete as they could be, but nevertheless we completed the task in about one hour. Once completed, the screen is taut and looks great. We also watched the on-line demo's but you have to watch the curved screen demo to see how to work with the BD material (how and when to peel back the protective layers etc.)

*So what were my intitial impressions???*


1. Ok, my wife doesn't see any difference, except when lights are turned up. My 19 year old son does, and he uses the theater more than anyone, mostly with the PS3.


2. I see a better contrast and better detail, however it certainly did not jump out at me as being "







". I would guess it is a bit brighter than my DIY but not as much as I expected for a 1.4 gain. I'm guessing the gain is closer to 1.0-1.2. However, something I found very odd was that while watching a movie (Gran Torino) I was playing with brightness and found that I could turn the brightness down considerably without noticing the picture getting too much darker. Very strange indeed.


3. The picture with the lights up is where I really perceived improvement. The picture held its depth right up to a level where I could comfortably read. Only when I maxed out the lights (6 - 100 watt halogens and 200 watts of rope lighting in a 12'x18' room) did any wash out occur.


4. There is a slight sheen to the screen which I noticed on occassion, mostly with the white ice surface on the high-def hockey game. My son commented on sparklies (a term he has never heard before as he does not follow home theatre forums etc.) I did not see any myself.


5. I found the picture brightness to be as good at the sides of my room as in the center. I am in a 45 degree cone. If there is a difference it was not very noticeable.


6. Now, my only disappointment. Light scatter. This is likely my biggest reason for going with the BDII. My observations are that the light scatter is reduced, but not by a whole lot IMO. I do notice that the scatter is more of a purple color which I suppose is better. I was not expecting complete elimination as my screen borders right up against two oak columns (containing my equipment and speakers) but I was hoping for at least 50% improvement and I don't think it accomplished that. I still have light scatter 6 feet down my side wals and ceiling which dissapoints.










I can't think of much else to comment on right now especially as viewing time and material has been limited to one movie and a hockey game.


Stay tuned for Part 2 - BDII vs the basic DIY.


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Scrimpin* /forum/post/16654009
> 
> 
> However, something I found very odd was that while watching a movie (Gran Torino) I was playing with brightness and found that I could turn the brightness down considerably without noticing the picture getting too much darker. Very strange indeed.



If you mean the Brightness control in the projector then that is the black level control. If you were watching a bright enough scene then that shouldn't have made much difference. Since the Contrast control is for the white level you should probably see a fair amount of difference if you change that with a bright enough scene. Our vision is kind of logarithmic though, so if you reduce the light level to half it likely won't look like it changed that much.


--Darin


----------



## Westys

Yeah im really interested in this can you tell me more?


----------



## Scrimpin

Sorry folks, I did my comparison last night and took pics but am still trying to figure out how to post them. I will likely re-take pics tonight as last night's did not turn out very good. However, with a side-by-side comparison, here are some of my visual observations.


1. My wife still doesn't think there is much difference. The key here being "much" (as in that much money for that much change I think). There are scenes where she likes the DIY better, others the BDII wins. Overall the prize goes to the BD but not by knockout.


2. The BD is certainly brighter than my DIY, but IMO not by a factor of a 1 gain (white Behr primer) to a 1.4 gain. Perhaps my DIY is higher than 1 gain, but my guess is that the BD is lower.


3. Blacks look better at times on my DIY and other times on the BDII.


4. The BD seems to have a large hot spot in the center of my screen (24-30 inch diameter) that I did not really notice before. It really becomes apparent when compared to my DIY see side-by-side as it is non-existent on the DIY. The brightness in the middle of the screen is considerably higher than the edges, not so with my DIY. This concerns me.


5. Comparing light scatter on each half of the room there is obviously more scatter on the side with my DIY, but I would not consider it to be a significant difference. The ceiling scatter (taupe ceiling) on the BD side is a green hue (which my wife thinks is neat....I would prefer there was none at all







)


6. The color on the BD certainly is richer, which could be due to the brighter appearance. However, blacks are blacker on my basic DIY. Considering my HS-10 doesn't have great black level to start with this is disappointing.


7. Although my DIY fared better than expected with lights turned up, the BD kicked its butt. Although the visability of the picture on my DIY was better than I expected, the deepness and richness of the picture wasn't even close. The BD can be watched in a well lit environment whereas the DIY cannot.

*Scorecard:*

In general, the BD is an improvement. At times it makes my DIY seem drab. Other times the difference doesn't seem very noticeable. However, I have concerns with this screen.


1. What is with the hot spotting? I do not recall reading anything about this in these threads. I am not talking about "a little" here, I am talking major difference in light uniformity, and my projector is not really very bright. I wondered if my old bulb could be the culprit but the DIY isn't displaying anything close to what the BD does. Could the screen be defective?? Any suggestions would help as this really concerns me. (*SI reps please feel free to help out if you can think of anything*)


2. Black levels are not what I hoped they would be. I expected improvement and it seems like I took a step backwards from a basic white DIY. How can this be?? I'm no expert, so please pipe in with any help or comments.


Overall, the BD falls short of expectations to the point of me wondering if I have a bad screen or am doing something wrong (what I have no idea). The BD delivers as promised in full light conditions but fails in black level and light scatter. Yes, the picture is better, but with my hot spot concerns I am really on the fence here.


Finally, could someone PM me on how to upload photos so I can give demo's of my comparison.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Scrimpin* /forum/post/16661005
> 
> 
> 1. What is with the hot spotting? I do not recall reading anything about this in these threads. I am not talking about "a little" here, I am talking major difference in light uniformity, and my projector is not really very bright.



The hot-spotting of the Black Diamond screens have certainly been a source of conversation. I commented on the issue in this thread after I saw a Black Diamond screen in action. It had probably the highest amount of hot-spotting, non-uniformity I've personally seen in a screen. If I moved out of the middle viewing cone, one side of the screen became obviously darker.


Projector Central's review pointed this out as well. You can see it in their pictures of the screen:

http://www.projectorcentral.com/si_b...een_review.htm 


Unfortunately there is no free lunch with screens. You can't "have it all." If you aren't able to do good light control for a neutral gain white screen, then other high gain, gray or "black screen" solutions are going to help in one way but introduce compromises in other ways. As you have just experienced.


(This is why I'm taking the approach of combating light pollution in my room, rather than relying on a special-type screen to do it).


That's not to say the Black Diamond screens can't be an excellent solution for some people. Depends on what type of issues one is willing to accept in a screen, and what is the most important problem you are trying to solve.


----------



## noah katz

"I wondered if my old bulb could be the culprit "


No.


Screens don't change CR, so don't expect better blacks and whites.


Re hotspotting, how far from the screen are the pj and seats? Larger angles (short thrwow and close seating) exacerbate hotspotting.


----------



## Scrimpin

The projector lens is about 11 feet from the screen. Seating is about 10-12 feet. I am not finding much difference in brightness between middle to side of the room, just that there is a big shiny hot spot smack dab in the center. When watching material it is masked fairly well, but when there is a blank screen it is significant. My pics will show this when I get them posted.


I plan on upgrading my projector (likely 6500UB) and fortunately can place it as far as 18-19 feet from the screen which will help alleviate both hot spotting and light scatter to some degree. Don't mean to sound too negative, but the hot spotting was more prominent than I expected. However, when watching material I really don't notice it unless I consciously look for it.


PS. Can someone please point me to instructions etc. for posting pics. Thanks.


----------



## Scrimpin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/16662380
> 
> 
> If I moved out of the middle viewing cone, one side of the screen became obviously darker.



Oddly I haven't noticed that being a problem but my room is only 12 feet wide so seating is withing the 45 degree cone.


----------



## bryanemerson

I am going to to a comparison to the g3 Firehawk today, as our local Best Buy has both screens in their demo room.


----------



## msmCutter

i can't wait to hear what you think!


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bryanemerson* /forum/post/16669480
> 
> 
> I am going to to a comparison to the g3 Firehawk today, as our local Best Buy has both screens in their demo room.



Is this store in the northeast, by any chance?


----------



## scottyb




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Scrimpin* /forum/post/16663004
> 
> 
> PS. Can someone please point me to instructions etc. for posting pics. Thanks.



You need to host the photos somewher, ie photobucket.

Then when you do a post there is an icon of a picture with a little mountain in it.

You click on that and upload the place where the pic is being hosted.

Once you do it it's easy but getting there is another story.


Hope this helps,

Scott


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/16662380
> 
> 
> The hot-spotting of the Black Diamond screens have certainly been a source of conversation. I commented on the issue in this thread after I saw a Black Diamond screen in action. It had probably the highest amount of hot-spotting, non-uniformity I've personally seen in a screen. If I moved out of the middle viewing cone, one side of the screen became obviously darker.
> 
> 
> Projector Central's review pointed this out as well. You can see it in their pictures of the screen:
> 
> http://www.projectorcentral.com/si_b...een_review.htm
> 
> 
> Unfortunately there is no free lunch with screens. You can't "have it all." If you aren't able to do good light control for a neutral gain white screen, then other high gain, gray or "black screen" solutions are going to help in one way but introduce compromises in other ways. As you have just experienced.
> 
> 
> (This is why I'm taking the approach of combating light pollution in my room, rather than relying on a special-type screen to do it).
> 
> 
> That's not to say the Black Diamond screens can't be an excellent solution for some people. Depends on what type of issues one is willing to accept in a screen, and what is the most important problem you are trying to solve.



What you are saying is NOT hot spotting. As quoted from the PC article you linked to it specifically says that the photos were in reference to narrow viewing angle:
_"*Narrow viewing angle*. Screens have what is called a Half-Gain Angle. That is the viewing angle at which the screen reflects half as much light as the viewer would see when sitting directly in front of it. On a typical low gain screen, this could be as wide as 60 or 70 degrees. On ambient light rejection screens, it is typically much narrower. On the Black Diamond II, we measured a half-gain angle of 22 degrees. This gives you a 44-degree window in which your audience can sit for optimum image brightness and clarity. Sitting outside of that, the image will appear less than half as bright as it does sitting dead center. You've seen this effect on rear-projection TVs. They look bright when viewed head on, and they dim rapidly as you move off axis."_
Hot spotting is where you get a reflection of the projectors lens in the center of the screen. This is sometimes apparent with high gain screens. I have never seen this either in the demo'ing @ the SI office (which was the 1.4 gain; Ryan correct me if I'm wrong) or with my current .8 screen.


It's not to say it won't happen but I'm guessing with a good projector calibration and placement it will be less noticeable on a high gain screen.







> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Scrimpin* /forum/post/16663004
> 
> 
> PS. Can someone please point me to instructions etc. for posting pics. Thanks.



Scrimpin you can get a free Flickr account and upload pics there. Then you can link to those photos within a message here. I would love to see the hotspotting you're referring to. I would also contact SI and Ryan to show him what you're seeing and your set up. As far as I was aware hot spotting was never an issue.


----------



## h00kemh0rns

Scrimpin


Alternatively you can also just use the attachment option (paper clip) in a new message.


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/16671230
> 
> 
> What you are saying is NOT hot spotting.



With an angular-reflective flat screen I would say that they are the same, or at least have the same cause. The narrow viewing angle where the gain is much higher than outside that causes a viewer to get brighter images at a point on the screen that would basically be at the same spot that a mirror in place of the screen would show the lens of the projector. If they are sitting to the right then what I would say is a hot-spot would happen on the right side of the screen, on the left it would be on the left, and in the center it would be in the center (at least horizontally). That is, if the projector is in the center. If the projector is offset horizontally it can change the position of a hot-spot.


The narrow viewing angle does not have the same effect with high gain retro-reflective screens because of the way the angles work out.


Also, things like the half gain angle apply to each point on the screen, so a person can be within the "viewing window" for part of the screen, but not for another. In other words, non-uniform gain to that viewer. Which is what a hot-spot basically is, non-uniform gain that means one part of the screen is hotter (higher gain) than another, but usually reserved for a big enough difference.


EDIT: Just to be clear, a screen with a high gain layer and a dark layer that results in a lower gain rating is still high gain as far as these angle calculations for things like hotspotting are concerned. So, even though the screens my be 1.4 gain and 0.8 gain in the end, the way that is achieved is likely to give the same amount of hotspotting and half gain angles as much higher gain angular-reflective white screens. This applies to the Stewart Firehawk even though the ending gain rating is about the same as the Stewart StudioTek 130.


--Darin


----------



## R Harkness

Darin beat me to it.


Yes it is a form of hot-spotting; essentially non-uniformity, one area of the screen being brighter than another, depending on viewer/projector position.


Which is distinguished from something like the Da Lite High Power screen. Being retro-reflective it does not hotspot like the BD, but dims (for all intents and purposes) uniformly over the whole screen as you move off axis.


----------



## Scrimpin

I have some pics ready. I want to start off by thanking Ryan and Blake at SI who are working with me to get things set up correctly, so perhaps consider this as an example of how not to set up your theatre (at least with a good screen).


I started off with my projector at 13 feet back which is about the closest possible for a 100 inch screen. For my previous 96" screen it gave me a bit of zoom if needed but mostly I was going for max brightness out of mt Sony HS-10 Cineza whose bulbs degrade fairly quickly from my experience (I'm on my third bulb, ave life = 1500 hrs). As suggested by Ryan/Blake and others here, this was part of the problem so I was able to move the projector back so the lens is in the 16-17 foot distance from screen. We are still working things out but here are the results so far. Note: my projector has never been calibrated and I found out during my tests that my son had it on Dynamic for his PS3 gaming after which I changed to Cinema and did a quick set up by eye only. One other thing to note. For the 13 foot pics the projector is ceiling mounted (upside down) with lens at roughly top of screen. For the 16 foot the projector is shelf mounted (upright) with lens roughly at screen center.


The pictures are as follows: BDII on the left, DIY on right)


1. Blank screens from 13 feet:


2. DVD blue screen from 13 ft:


3. Blue screen from 16 feet


Although hotspotting is less at 16 feet, it is still very significant so obviously there is more work to do to get things righted. You will also notice the lower light scatter from the BD vs the DIY from these pics. With the DIY (Behr white primer) the hotspotting is negligable at either distance.


----------



## Scrimpin

Here are a few more pics.


----------



## msmCutter

Wow - that really shows the difference in application. The DIY is CLEARLY better in the dark and the BDII is OBVIOUSLY better in the light. Not that the BDII looks bad to me with the lights off in a more complex scene, it just isn't as good. I would understand this choice completely if someone has an application in which they had a non-light controlled room.


What are the details of your DIY? It would help us know what we're comparing










Thanks for posting those pictures!


----------



## eclou

not sure I can justify paying >$2k for a screen that is not 100x better than a coat of primer


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/16675481
> 
> 
> I would understand this choice completely if someone has an application in which they had a non-light controlled room.



From all the posts I've read in this thread and all the info I've learned about the BD, my impressions are that the BD is bought for two reasons. One is to allow the user to watch in ambient light with less of a washed-out image. The other is to give improved performance at late-night movie time when the lights are off by its reduction of light scatter onto the walls and ceiling. Usually, the prospective buyer wants both of those benefits. scrimpin has discovered he is getting mainly one of the advertised benefits and not the other:

_6. Now, my only disappointment. Light scatter. This is likely my biggest reason for going with the BDII. My observations are that the light scatter is reduced, but not by a whole lot IMO. I do notice that the scatter is more of a purple color which I suppose is better. I was not expecting complete elimination as my screen borders right up against two oak columns (containing my equipment and speakers) but I was hoping for at least 50% improvement and I don't think it accomplished that. I still have light scatter 6 feet down my side wals and ceiling which dissapoints._


----------



## Scrimpin

that is correct hrd. however I also purchased for use with ambient lighting, for two reasons. First, when I watch HD sports I don't like to be in a batcave environment because I am usually doing work or something else at the same time. Second, when I have special event parties (superbowl etc.) I like to bring my screen and projector up to my main floor where it is more comfortable for 20-30 people (you can imagine how hot a batcave becomes if you try fitting even 15 people in it)


as far as the pic quality, like I said there was no calibration. I would still say the BD looks better 80% of the time. lights up it isn't even a comparison. it is a much cleaner picture the majority of the time. when I upgrade to a 1080p projector I am guessing the difference will be even greater as the surface flaws from my DIY become more discernable.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/16675766
> 
> 
> From all the posts I've read in this thread and all the info I've learned about the BD, my impressions are that the BD is bought for two reasons. One is to allow the user to watch in ambient light with less of a washed-out image. The other is to give improved performance at late-night movie time when the lights are off by its reduction of light scatter onto the walls and ceiling. Usually, the prospective buyer wants both of those benefits. scrimpin has discovered he is getting mainly one of the advertised benefits and not the other:
> 
> _6. Now, my only disappointment. Light scatter. This is likely my biggest reason for going with the BDII. My observations are that the light scatter is reduced, but not by a whole lot IMO. I do notice that the scatter is more of a purple color which I suppose is better. I was not expecting complete elimination as my screen borders right up against two oak columns (containing my equipment and speakers) but I was hoping for at least 50% improvement and I don't think it accomplished that. I still have light scatter 6 feet down my side wals and ceiling which dissapoints._


----------



## noah katz

Does the hotspotting look as bad in person as it does in the photos?


----------



## Scrimpin

No it doesn't, especially the 16 foot distance. For me it was visible but not like in the picture. The hotspotting from 16 feet is much less than from 13 feet but the pictures do not seem to show that. I noticed while taking the photos how they seemed to exagerate (or else my eyes are getting real bad)


----------



## Scrimpin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/16675481
> 
> 
> The DIY is CLEARLY better in the dark and the BDII is OBVIOUSLY better in the light. Not that the BDII looks bad to me with the lights off in a more complex scene, it just isn't as good.



Actually the BD is genereally much better in the lights down situation also. The pic I put up was a bad choice as it was at 13 feet and before I changed the video settings back to Cinema.


----------



## msmCutter

Would you flip the video setting based on ambient light conditions? Or would you expect to set it and forget it?


----------



## R Harkness

In one of the photos where you can see some of the ceiling and side walls, you can see how the BD screen visibly reduces light scatter on the ceiling/walls vs the DIY screen.


----------



## Scrimpin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/16678489
> 
> 
> Would you flip the video setting based on ambient light conditions? Or would you expect to set it and forget it?



What I was trying to say was that the video setting were at roughly where I had them before for the DIY as opposed to optimizing them for the BD. When I later adjusted the settings to optimize the BD it made the DIY have a grey-green push. Because the screens are so different the only fair way to compare IMO would be to use 2 screens and projectors side by side so you could optimize each.


----------



## msmCutter

OIC, thanks for clearing that up!


Do you think you could compare pictures of the same projector optimized on each screen?


----------



## Scrimpin

Is anyone here using their BD (preferably the .8 gain) with an Epson 6500UB? I figure it has plenty enough brightness but wouldn't mind hearing some actual impressions.


----------



## send

AVS enthusiast...


Here is the NEW Black Diamond II Projector Central Review. http://www.projectorcentral.com/SI_b...een_review.htm 


Here is the latest Black Diamond Screen training video.
http://www.siscreens.com/videos/ 


We hope you enjoy,


Ryan Gustafson


----------



## Dawn Gordon

When will the BD 1.4 be available in a motorized version?


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *send* /forum/post/16740605
> 
> 
> AVS enthusiast...
> 
> 
> Here is the NEW Black Diamond II Projector Central Review. http://www.projectorcentral.com/SI_b...een_review.htm
> 
> 
> Here is the latest Black Diamond Screen training video.
> http://www.siscreens.com/videos/
> 
> 
> We hope you enjoy,
> 
> 
> Ryan Gustafson




Hi Ryan,


Unfortunately, there are not any BD's anywhere in the Phoenix area, including Scottsdale. Makes it fairly difficult to make a decision. The new video does help, however, assuming there won't be any BD's in the Phoenix area in the near future, here's what I would like to see:


1) On the website, it would be nice on "each" of the videos if there was a description for that video, detailing:

a. whether we're seeing a .8 or a 1.4 BD in the video

b. projector being used

c. the lamp level setting for that projector in that video

d. camera distance from screen


2) From a potential buyer's prospective, especially not being able to see one in person, it would be nice to have a video that showed the following:


a. Several angles (15, 25, 35, 45, 60, 75 degree half angles, and straight on, for example) on both the left and right side of the screen.

b. different distances from the screen, with the different angles mentioned in item a.

c. different lighting conditions, from dark to very bright, showing both items a. and b.

d. different lamp level settings for the projector, showing items a. and b. and c.

e. all of the above with a .8 BD screen, a 1.4 BD screen, and perhaps a white and/or grey non-BD screen.


Basically, I want the camera to simulate what I would do, if I could see a BD in person. I would walk around the room, with different lighting situations and with different lamp settings to see what works and what doesn't work with the screen. I think it's important to show the limitations, in addition to the benefits, to a prospective buyer.



Thanks, Dave


----------



## send




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks* /forum/post/16746451
> 
> 
> Hi Ryan,
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, there are not any BD's anywhere in the Phoenix area, including Scottsdale. Makes it fairly difficult to make a decision. The new video does help, however, assuming there won't be any BD's in the Phoenix area in the near future, here's what I would like to see:
> 
> 
> 1) On the website, it would be nice on "each" of the videos if there was a description for that video, detailing:
> 
> a. whether we're seeing a .8 or a 1.4 BD in the video
> 
> b. projector being used
> 
> c. the lamp level setting for that projector in that video
> 
> d. camera distance from screen
> 
> 
> 2) From a potential buyer's prospective, especially not being able to see one in person, it would be nice to have a video that showed the following:
> 
> 
> a. Several angles (15, 25, 35, 45, 60, 75 degree half angles, and straight on, for example) on both the left and right side of the screen.
> 
> b. different distances from the screen, with the different angles mentioned in item a.
> 
> c. different lighting conditions, from dark to very bright, showing both items a. and b.
> 
> d. different lamp level settings for the projector, showing items a. and b. and c.
> 
> e. all of the above with a .8 BD screen, a 1.4 BD screen, and perhaps a white and/or grey non-BD screen.
> 
> 
> Basically, I want the camera to simulate what I would do, if I could see a BD in person. I would walk around the room, with different lighting situations and with different lamp settings to see what works and what doesn't work with the screen. I think it's important to show the limitations, in addition to the benefits, to a prospective buyer.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, Dave



You might have a good idea...


We should attached a camera to a robot and let you drive it around the room from the web


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *send* /forum/post/16747120
> 
> 
> You might have a good idea...
> 
> 
> We should attached a camera to a robot and let you drive it around the room from the web




Although you're joking, that would actually be very cool. I don't expect anything like that, just a video that captures more of what a buyer might want to see.


Anyways, not sure if you'll give serious consideration to any of this or if it's important to you. I forgot to add letter "e", under item 1 of my previous post, requesting the screen size as another piece of information that would be nice to have in the description.


Thanks in advance for (hopefully) considering these ideas, Dave


----------



## send




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks* /forum/post/16747286
> 
> 
> Although you're joking, that would actually be very cool. I don't expect anything like that, just a video that captures more of what a buyer might want to see.
> 
> 
> Anyways, not sure if you'll give serious consideration to any of this or if it's important to you. I forgot to add letter "e", under item 1 of my previous post, requesting the screen size as another piece of information that would be nice to have in the description.
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance for (hopefully) considering these ideas, Dave



Was not joking, you sparked a good concept!


----------



## abjorn

I will make a test with the above mentioned screens i 3 weeks time, there will be before and after pictures. I will use 2 different projectors, a used Mitsubishi HD1000U, and a new Epson TW-5000.


----------



## Bujee1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *abjorn* /forum/post/16806998
> 
> 
> I will make a test with the above mentioned screens i 3 weeks time, there will be before and after pictures. I will use 2 different projectors, a used Mitsubishi HD1000U, and a new Epson TW-5000.



I have a Ae3000 in a room with light walls and 90% light control during the day. Has anyone used the AE3000 with this screen? Should I give this a try and give up on masking?


----------



## howdydoody

Is there a chance that the screen size will be increased in the near future? I would like a 16x9 123" diagonal.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *abjorn* /forum/post/16806998
> 
> 
> I will make a test with the above mentioned screens i 3 weeks time, there will be before and after pictures. I will use 2 different projectors, a used Mitsubishi HD1000U, and a new Epson TW-5000.



Looking forward to your results, as it has now been 3 weeks.


-Dave


----------



## abjorn

Sorry for the delay with this test, but i am still working in Cayman Islands. And my new screen has arrived from Siscreens (but in my house in Denmark). It will be at least another 3 weeks before im back home in Denmark. It should be a law that when you buy new equipment for your home theater you also get 1 or 2 weeks paid vacation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!I want to unpack and install this screen now (Arrrghhhhhhhhhhhh).


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *abjorn* /forum/post/16942870
> 
> 
> Sorry for the delay with this test, but i am still working in Cayman Islands. And my new screen has arrived from Siscreens (but in my house in Denmark). It will be at least another 3 weeks before im back home in Denmark. It should be a law that when you buy new equipment for your home theater you also get 1 or 2 weeks paid vacation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!I want to unpack and install this screen now (Arrrghhhhhhhhhhhh).



LOL! I can definitely appreciate that, and I definitely agree! Look forward to your results in 3 weeks or so.


----------



## wxnz79

How well does the BD1.4 and 0.8 perform in shorter throw situations? Due to layout issues I am restricted to a 1.65x throw distance for a 100" screen. Is there any set minimum's for the throw to avoid issues?


----------



## abjorn

I have uploaded a simple video to youtube after i installed the screen yesterday afternoon. I have also taken some pictures of the unboxing and assembly of the screen, it took me about 45 min to assemble and install. What impress me the most is how little light that is reflected back from screen and in to the room during night time viewing. But for daytime viewing i need a projector with some more horsepower than my old 2006 Mitsubishi HD1000U, the video was shot with projector on low mode with a lot of sunshine puring in to the room. I will upload new pictures as soon as my new projector is installed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UET0fynTKPY 

http://www.mypicx.com/08162009/Black...inch_1_4_Gain/ 

http://www.mypicx.com/08162009/Black...ch_1_4_Gain_2/


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *abjorn* /forum/post/17010906
> 
> 
> I have uploaded a simple video to youtube after i installed the screen yesterday afternoon. I have also taken some pictures of the unboxing and assembly of the screen, it took me about 45 min to assemble and install. What impress me the most is how little light that is reflected back from screen and in to the room during night time viewing. But for daytime viewing i need a projector with some more horsepower than my old 2006 Mitsubishi HD1000U, the video was shot with projector on low mode with a lot of sunshine puring in to the room. I will upload new pictures as soon as my new projector is installed.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UET0fynTKPY
> 
> http://www.mypicx.com/08162009/Black...inch_1_4_Gain/
> 
> http://www.mypicx.com/08162009/Black...ch_1_4_Gain_2/



Thanks for the pictures and video. Looking forward to the pictures with the new projector. I did have a couple of questions:


1) How far is your projector from the screen?

2) Is the projector close to the ceiling? I didn't know if the BD requires the projector to be at a certain height with the screen.

3) How would you rate the daytime viewing (1-10) ?

4) Which new projector will you be installing?


Thanks, Dave


----------



## eclou

I just ordered a curved 138" 2:35:1 BD II 1.4 gain screen for my theater. Should be here in about another week


----------



## andrewturk1970

Hi there,


Im glad to see that there is a thread for the BDII on the board. I have been considering either the firehawk or the BD for my multi purpose room (billiards and theatre)


The guy who is selling the screens (he sells both actually - Si and Stewart) says that the BD is a much better screen and I wont be disappointed. I DO have ambient light as its a multi purpose room as mentioned, but its totally 100% controllable.


ANYWAYS... my question is this. He recommends a 110" BD - reference 1.4 gain. I wanted to get a 120" really, but he said that with my JVC RS-10, i will get a MUCH better and brighter picture with the 110".


Going to the 120" (he said) would be an inferior picture and the 110 would give a brighter picture with more POP?


Can Anyone with BD experience comment on this? I dont mind going down to the 110" if necessary i guess. btw, my projector will be 14f from the screen. Seating distance is 11ft.


thanks very much for your assistance.


----------



## noah katz

I think he's exaggerating.


120" has 20% more area than 110", but two factors mitigate against that much perceievd brightness loss - our eyes respond logarithmically, and as you increasae the zoom on the JVC, it's brightness increases.


But just zoom the JVC that amount and see for yourself.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrewturk1970* /forum/post/17125695
> 
> 
> Hi there,
> 
> 
> Im glad to see that there is a thread for the BDII on the board. I have been considering either the firehawk or the BD for my multi purpose room (billiards and theatre)
> 
> 
> The guy who is selling the screens (he sells both actually - Si and Stewart) says that the BD is a much better screen and I wont be disappointed. I DO have ambient light as its a multi purpose room as mentioned, but its totally 100% controllable.
> 
> 
> ANYWAYS... my question is this. He recommends a 110" BD - reference 1.4 gain. I wanted to get a 120" really, but he said that with my JVC RS-10, i will get a MUCH better and brighter picture with the 110".
> 
> 
> Going to the 120" (he said) would be an inferior picture and the 110 would give a brighter picture with more POP?
> 
> 
> Can Anyone with BD experience comment on this? I dont mind going down to the 110" if necessary i guess. btw, my projector will be 4f from the screen.
> 
> 
> thanks very much for your assistance.



I wouldn't buy anything without seeing a demo of it first. I have not seen a BDII 1.4, but I did try out my RS20 on a BDI .8 back in January and it was way too dim a combination. Too dim even though the RS20 was brand new with just a few hours on the bulb and the BD screen was only 92" diagonal. The sales rep noticed this and later commented how "amazing" the RS20 looked on the white screen behind the electric BD that they used for A/Bing.


I just noticed you said you have only 4 feet of throw distance. Is that a misprint? You can't get a decent image size at 4 feet with the RS10. Angular reftective screens are not a good match with short throw, anyway.


----------



## andrewturk1970

hey there,


yes it was a mistake, i fixed the message to read 14ft throw distance.

thanks for the heads up.


I hope others will send me their comments also, so i can make the best decision... if I am unsure, i guess i can always go back to my original choice of a Firehawk.


Andrew


----------



## wxnz79

Andrew - Were you looking at the Firehawk G3 or the SST? I see your ratio is 1.75x screen width. A few people have commented on hotspot issues at shorter range for both the G3 and the BD II 1.4. I'd be really interested to hear what you go for and how it performs at that distance, as I am currently looking at almost the exact same setup with about 1.7x ratio.


Making a decision on a screen is certainly not as easy as what you would first expect!


----------



## andrewturk1970

Its a G3 i was considering...


----------



## FLBoy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrewturk1970* /forum/post/17131737
> 
> 
> Its a G3 i was considering...



Stewart's web site states that the minimum throw for the FH G3 is 1.6 x image width. With a 120" G3 at 14' you'd be right on the hairy edge of hot spotting. IIRC, the base of the BD II 1.4 is even darker than that of the FH G3, and the rated gain is 0.15 higher, so it would require an even larger minimum throw.


I think if I were you, I'd go with a 120" low-gain white screen. Then I'd play pool with the lights on and watch movies with the lights off. Just my two cents.


----------



## nola 07

Andrew,


I faced the same choice between the BD 1.4 and the FH G3. My room is terrible--wall of west-facing windows with non-blackout shades, light walls and ceiling. Inherited a white screen with the house and the picture was unwatchable in daylight hours with a 1000 lumen projector.


I ordered samples of BD 1.4, BD .8 and FH G3 and put them on the wall. The BD .8 was sweet for contrast, but not bright enough compared to the other two so I quickly eliminated it. Side by side, I found that both the FH and the BD 1.4 did a nice job holding contrast and black levels, but the decider for me was that the BD 1.4 was brighter, and the viewing cone was a little wider. So I sprung for it. The prices on both were comparable.


I paired the 96" screen with an Epson 6100 at a throw of 15 feet, and I've been very pleased. I can watch a good image in the late afternoon (worst part of day for my setup), with all the lights on, etc. And it's dynamite with the lights off.


----------



## pheroy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *send* /forum/post/16128790
> 
> 
> Black Diamond Motorized development is progressing nicely. We are not yet releasing a date but the goal is to showcase something this year.
> 
> 
> Ryan



Any update on this, Ryan?


I was able to demo the BD II at my local BB/Magnolia, and I really want one badly, but I have to have a retractable version.


----------



## wxnz79




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pheroy* /forum/post/17143316
> 
> 
> Any update on this, Ryan?
> 
> 
> I was able to demo the BD II at my local BB/Magnolia, and I really want one badly, but I have to have a retractable version.



Good point. Anyone going to CEDIA want to ask them if they have a timeframe for the motorized BD yet?


----------



## Maestro J

I don't know if this has been posted yet but a glowing review of the BDII: http://hometheaterreview.com/si-scre...reen-reviewed/


----------



## eclou




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Maestro J* /forum/post/17166154
> 
> 
> I don't know if this has been posted yet but a glowing review of the BDII: http://hometheaterreview.com/si-scre...reen-reviewed/



wow, that was an impressive impression. I cannot wait for mine to arrive!


----------



## rdjam

Just got back from CEDIA and have a few subjective observations, in case nothing has been posted elsewhere.


Was able to see the BD II in a few different part of the show, including SI's booth, Anthem's demo, and the JVC stand.


SI had the .8 in their demo, looked like between 105 and 130 inches (I should have asked! Sorry!) they were shooting about 1600 lumens at it. It looked fantastic, of course, and I was very impressed. Couldn't fault anything at all. I moved all around the screen and sat on the floor even, the fall-off was much less than I expected, and I found it to not be a relevant issue for the seating and viewing angles in my home.


SI also had the 1.4 on display on a side wall, but they were not using it with any display. There was a definite difference in black level apparent in that position, it didn't look as black as the .8 but more like what I'd expect from a grey screen.


Over at JVC, they were running their 990 inside on a similarly Big .8 BD II - it looked fantastic. Outside their stand they were running a 1.4 with 16x9 ratio, from either a 550 or above projector. There was a lot of light around and the screen looked very nice despite this. I had to go very close to the screen and look very hard at areas of white sky before I was able to deliberately detect any high-gain sparklies, but they were not distracting at all even when I looked for them.


However, over at the Anthem booth, I got a bit of a rude awakening. They were running their new PJ, which I believe was about 900 lumens, maybe a bit less given the throw distance. They were shooting at a 113" BD II 1.4 screen, at 2.40 ratio or so.


There was a LOT of sparklies in this demo, from the higher gain screen, especially in the white areas of the electric guitar in one of the clips they were showing. I don't know if maybe the particular throw and screen size caused the pixels to interact badly with the material, perhaps, but it made me reconsider my previous decision to go with the 1.4 for my new 142 inch screen. It was very distracting and I found my eyes locking onto these multicolored sparkles in the big white areas, instead of following the video that was being shown.


The Anthem demo also had a few mini spotlights mounted 18 inches or so in front of the screen and pointing down the front, which caused serious whiteout. At first I thought this was reflections from the screen material's face, but I realized it wasn't. The light rejection is noticeable different from the .8 material.


So I am now reworking my calculations to pair my upcoming RS 550 DILA with the .8 version of the BD II, instead of the 1.4


It's not a done deal, by any means, as I will be testing some samples of both in my living room in the next couple of weeks, but the Anthem booth was enlightening enough to give me serious pause. After I left Anthem, I went back to the 1.4 screen outside the JVC booth to look again fir these sparklies. It was MUCH less noticeable there, so I am not totally sure why the big difference at Anthem.


Hope you don't mind the unscientific nature of the feedback, and take it for what it is.


I am definitely going with one of the BD II's for my new screen, but at this point I may have a little more due diligence to do...


----------



## Dawn Gordon




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wxnz79* /forum/post/17158228
> 
> 
> Good point. Anyone going to CEDIA want to ask them if they have a timeframe for the motorized BD yet?



The folks at the SI CEDIA booth indicated that the motorized BD was going to to take up to another year.


----------



## R Harkness

rdjam,


Nice report. Thanks.


This isn't directed necessarily at the Black Diamond screens but at the issue of sparkly screen structure in general.


I find it a somewhat vexing issue because it's somewhat like DLP rainbows - how conscious I am of the phenomena tends to shift.


For instance, I can be watching the Stewart Firehawk screen and not notice any sparkly coating. I can think "Hey, this IS a nice smooth screen coating, no big deal."


Then, wham, I see it on an image and start seeing it some more.


Likewise the first time I saw the Graywolf screen (gray screen with, I believe, 1.5 gain) I found it the most unwatchable screen surface I've ever encountered. I was watching some bright demo material and it looked like someone had dropped sand, or dirty water over the whole screen. I thought I could never watch ANYTHING on that screen.


Yet my buddy has the Graywolf screen and an older Panasonic projector. I go over there all the time to watch content, especially as we are making our way through the Star Trek original series on HD DVD. I enjoy myself and often don't notice issues with the screen. Although sometimes it will jump out at me.


So it's really tough to predict whether one of these issues will tend to fade away or get more annoying once you have the product.


Ah well...that's what experience is for...


----------



## glennQNYC




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rdjam* /forum/post/17168795
> 
> 
> SI also had the 1.4 on display on a side wall, but they were not using it with any display.



The BDII on the side wall also featured their curved frame that is an option on any or their Reference Series fixed screens. Many people didn't notice the curve since SI's curved screens sit VERY tightly against the wall.


----------



## parinshah

I posted question on another thread....but since its an SI BD2 question, I thought I may get some hits here.


This is my room...I have attached 2 pics (hopefully they pop up on this blog) a screen pic and a back wall pic (has 6' tall windows from one end to the other end, facing east). Will the BD2 work in this room for daytime football watching without blinds if I use the Epson 6500 proj? I will be doing a lot more night watching, but just want to know if this screen with the epson can be a bit more versatile....or if i will need to get a electric screen and an LCD instead...thanks!
Attachment 152662 

Attachment 152661


----------



## send

CEDIA Feedback

http://blogs.hgtvpro.com/hgtvpro/bob...p_Top5-diamond


----------



## jek88




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rdjam* /forum/post/17168795
> 
> 
> 
> Over at JVC, they were running their 990 inside on a similarly Big .8 BD II - it looked fantastic. Outside their stand they were running a 1.4 with 16x9 ratio, from either a 550 or above projector. There was a lot of light around and the screen looked very nice despite this. I had to go very close to the screen and look very hard at areas of white sky before I was able to deliberately detect any high-gain sparklies, but they were not distracting at all even when I looked for them.



rdjam,

Do you have anymore info on the 990 setup i.e. what size screen? aspect ratio? was the room daylight bright or dim? I was looking at doing this combo for my living room so I figured I'd ask.


----------



## rdjam




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jek88* /forum/post/17202822
> 
> 
> rdjam,
> 
> Do you have anymore info on the 990 setup i.e. what size screen? aspect ratio? was the room daylight bright or dim? I was looking at doing this combo for my living room so I figured I'd ask.



They were running at 2.35 ratio in a totally dark room. It looked simply stunning. Amazing contrast. I didnt ask the screen size, but someone posted it somewhere here yesterday, I think.


Sorry, I should have been taking much better notes, but was enjoying myself too much!


----------



## jek88

thanks


----------



## BigBob77

Hey, I just checked out a SI Black Diamond Screen at Bestbuy Magnolia (of course) for the first time here in Novi, MI. It was paired with a JVC DILA 350 (they finally start to sell JVC projectors) and i have to say I was thoroughly impressed!!! We demoed Nightmare Before Christmas BD and Cars BD and the Stewart Firehawk they had up before could not hang with this screen!!! I sat from all angles and turned on some moderate light in the room and it looked like a giant LCD TV. Forgot to ask what the gain was, but Studiotek 130 or this screen... i'm really wondering now. Price was the usual craziness ($2500 for a fixes 92"), but still very tempting for a boutique item...


----------



## Chrisx510

I was at Best Buy also and they we're trying to sell me on a black diamond. They had a optoma projector on demo.


How does the black diamond compare to a Stewart Studiotek 130? Has anyone done any comparisons?


----------



## scottyb

The Black Diamond is more about fighting ambiant light.

The 130 may be better or equal in a completly dark room.


Scott


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Chrisx510* /forum/post/17298912
> 
> 
> I was at Best Buy also and they we're trying to sell me on a black diamond. They had a optoma projector on demo.
> 
> 
> How does the black diamond compare to a Stewart Studiotek 130? Has anyone done any comparisons?



The Black Diamond and Stewart Studiotek screens are completely different types of screens. If you are looking at one screen it's unlikely you are looking at the other.


The Black Diamond is made to perform well in ambient light.


The Stewart is designed to be used in rooms WITHOUT ambient light and generally dark decor.


Of course you can use a Black Diamond screen in a room without ambient light or with dark decor and great light control. With the appropriate size/light level from your projector you could get excellent contrast. At the same time there are compromises in everything, and the Black Diamond screens due to their optical coating to boost gain will suffer in terms of uniformity - hotspotting, especially off axis, and visible screen coating ("sparklies" as some call them).


The Stewart ST-130 will wash out much more easily if you have any ambient light. But it will also put out an (overall) brighter, more uniform image, more free of screen artifacts.


----------



## Chrisx510

Thanks guys..I don't really have a problem with ambient light.. During the day the black out curtains pretty much block out light coming into the room. I watch 90% movies so I like the room dark. I was just curious if the black diamond would give me better picture then a studiotek 130 in the dark.


----------



## Josh Z




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Chrisx510* /forum/post/17299187
> 
> 
> Thanks guys..I don't really have a problem with ambient light.. During the day the black out curtains pretty much block out light coming into the room.



Ambient light is about more than blocking out the windows. If you have light-colored walls, they will reflect light from your projector and wash out the image on your screen.


----------



## noah katz

"The 130 may be better or equal in a completly dark room."


"The Stewart ST-130 will wash out much more easily if you have any ambient light."


"If you have light-colored walls, they will reflect light from your projector and wash out the image on your screen."


Highlighting these to point out that the BD will also excel at maintaining intraimage CR in a room with reflective surfaces, even w/zero ambient light.


----------



## Chrisx510

You guys can look at my theater setup..Click the link in my signature. Let me know if you guys think a BD screen would be somethin you recommend for this room.


----------



## Amagiri

Following Bigbob77's lead, I went to Best Buy in Fairfax, VA and saw that they too have a BD screen with JVC projector. The 92" screen appeared to be a 1st generation BD - not a BD II. It was listed as .8 for gain.


That being said, all I can say was: impressive. I have been looking around for a front projection system for a while and I never expected what a dramatic difference the screen can make. I don't have the room to have a dedicated "bat cave". My solution has to fit in with, and be functional with, the rest of my family in the shared family/media room. I also want a solution that allows me to have the boys over for beer and football, where we arn't tripping in the dark while one or the other heads off to the restroom. Basically a social space, where we can both watch the screen and socialize. That means that there will be ambient light.


Almost all the screens I looked at would look great in the dark and then totally begin to wash out as soon as some light was introduced. The only exception to this rule was the Firehawk. But the BD that I saw was in another class for ambient light rejection. This thing looked like a plasma - with enough ambient light that I could read a book - even with my old dimming eyes. The viewing angle was OK, but colour and brilliance did drop off as you moved off axis about 30 degrees. My room is narrow, so it should not be a major issue for me. This was the first credible solution where I thought that I could have a front projection system that would probably meet 80% of my TV watching habits - in addition to 100% of my movie needs.


So for all those who have a similar light challenge to mine, I would recommend taking a trip to your local Best Buy and see if they have a BD on demo.


The price still make me hesitate. Best Buy was not in the mood to haggle, so I will have to look around for other dealers - or maybe Black Friday. If anyone has a good lead, please PM.


Cheers,

Rob


----------



## Mike N Ike

Yes, you should definately check with other dealers. When I was considereing the BD II I found dealers that were giving a substantial discount off MSRP.


Mike


----------



## eclou

I will finally have time to set-up my 138" BDII curved screen this weekend. Will post pics asap.


----------



## eclou

I have my screen up but have not removed the protective plastic yet - still some touch up painting to be done in the room. That being said, it is really bright and viewable even with the lights fully on in the room - maybe not quite like a Kuro but certainly better than my old rear projection Toshiba


----------



## send

In-case you missed CEDIA here are the videos of the Black Diamond presentation and demos. http://www.screeninnovations.com/videos/ 


Best,


Ryan


----------



## wxnz79

Thanks Ryan. Any further updates on the motorized version yet?


----------



## mjg100




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Chrisx510* /forum/post/17305417
> 
> 
> You guys can look at my theater setup..Click the link in my signature. Let me know if you guys think a BD screen would be somethin you recommend for this room.



The answer is yes but why. With your light colored walls the BD would help, but it would be a lot cheaper to just paint your walls, doors and trim darker colors. Do this and you will probably get a better image than you would from the BD in your room as is. The BD screen is perfect for rooms that are not made to be dedicated rooms. Not saying that a BD will not work in a bat cave, but it is over kill. With a dedicated room you can optimize the conditions and a BD is not needed.


----------



## rdjam




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wxnz79* /forum/post/17358147
> 
> 
> Thanks Ryan. Any further updates on the motorized version yet?



I was asking about that at the show, and afterwards also.


I have been assured that the motorized version will NOT show up this year, and that it may not be ready for Q1 of 2010 either.


The motorized version would have suited my room better, but I have gone ahead and ordered the flat one.


----------



## pheroy

I'm drooling over the BD, but I gotta say I'm a little puzzled over the fact that there's no retractable version, unless the screen material is just difficult to roll up. It seems like this screen is tailor made for the non-dedicated room, the "living room HT". How many people want a permanent, fixed screen in a room like that? There's no way I can consider a fixed screen in my LR HT. I currently have a manual pull down Firehawk G3, which was the best option when I bought 2 years ago, and would still be today in the absence of a retractable BD. I have to think that a lot of folks would fit this scenario.


----------



## pheroy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Chrisx510* /forum/post/17299187
> 
> 
> Thanks guys..I don't really have a problem with ambient light.. During the day the black out curtains pretty much block out light coming into the room. I watch 90% movies so I like the room dark. I was just curious if the black diamond would give me better picture then a studiotek 130 in the dark.



Chris, took a look at your thread about the HT - first of all, congrats on a great setup in a small space and not being denied your dream. My recommendation would be to upgrade the speakers way before doing the screen. The Boston's are pretty good I'm sure for a small speaker but they don't seem to me like something that would truly complement a 126" screen. You mentioned a 5.1 speaker setup on your list of upgrades, and you put a lot of effort into sound proofing and isolating your room from the common wall, so put that to use! For the price of a BD - heck for a good bit less - you could do a very good 5.1 speaker system.


----------



## Dave Gillies




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mike N Ike* /forum/post/17320079
> 
> 
> Yes, you should definately check with other dealers. When I was considereing the BD II I found dealers that were giving a substantial discount off MSRP.
> 
> 
> Mike



Are you able to tell me the name of some of the dealers that offer a substantial discount on the Black Diamond II 1.4 screen?


----------



## Mike N Ike

It seems to me me that Si is one of those maufacturers that would like to have all there dealers selling at MSRP so I don't think it's wise to post those dealers selling at a discount. And it looks like the dealers are in some way region specific so the ones in my area may not apply to your sales area.


That said, I was able to find a local authorized dealer near me that quoted me about 25% off MSRP for a BDII, 1.4 gain.


The Si website lists their dealers by state/city - I'd suggest you make a few calls. Oh, there are quite a few Magnolia Best Buys listed - I don't think they discount - I didn't even bother to call them.


Good Luck!


Mike


----------



## Wood Pile

Last month I emailed Si via their website contact us page to see if a BDII 1.4 motorized screen was available or in the works. Here's the only reply I got, "This is an auto response to let you know that we have successfully received your email sent through our email form. Thanks!" Very disappointing.


I too would like to see a BDII 1.4 in a motorized screen. With its ambient light tolerance and wide half angle it would have been great for my family room. Because the room pulls double duty as a family room the seats are setup around the edges of the room (not in rows in the middle of the room) and the room isn't blacked out. The screen drops in front of a fireplace (fixed isn't possible).


If the motorized screen ever comes out I'll consider it. For the time being I'm left wondering why Si would leave a big hole in its product lineup.


----------



## noah katz

"For the time being I'm left wondering why Si would leave a big hole in its product lineup."


I believe they've been trying but are having technical problems; durability of the coating with flexure is my guess.


----------



## Dawn Gordon

I'm thinking that there is a problem with the roll up design. From what I remember, they did come out with a motorized version of the BD1 last year, but they had difficulties with creases or lines in the material, and had to stop production.


It may be that they will never come out with a motorized version of the current material. A shame, since a roll-up is the perfect application for such a screen.


----------



## glennQNYC




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Dawn Gordon* /forum/post/17399213
> 
> 
> I'm thinking that there is a problem with the roll up design. From what I remember, they did come out with a motorized version of the BD1 last year, but they had difficulties with creases or lines in the material, and had to stop production.
> 
> 
> It may be that they will never come out with a motorized version of the current material. A shame, since a roll-up is the perfect application for such a screen.



So pessimistic Dawn!









SI said they were coming out with a motorized BD when I was in Atlanta.


----------



## eclou

I got some screen shots from MI2 here to show the lack of washout from the BDII screen. First pic is all the light on, following pic is all the lights off. There is almost no reflected light from the screen as well. My setup is a fresh HD750 fed by an OPPO BD-83 and using ZOOM method for scope picture. Throw distance is 16'.


----------



## Leffe67

Thanks for posting your pics. I haven't seen anyone post pics in this thread for a while. I'm planning on picking up a BD II 1.4 gain 113" 16:9 screen to go with a new Epson 8500 UB and have been looking for as much info as I can get.


It's tough to tell how bright the rest of the room is in your "lit" pictures. Can you read with the lights on?


It looks like you have a nice setup!


----------



## abjorn

Hi Eclou


I can´t see your screenshots. Can you please upload again, I have the BD 1,4 II 110" and i have to buy a new projector. I want to buy either the JVC HD750 or Epson 8500, does the JVC have the Lumens for daytime viewing.


Abjorn


----------



## eclou

the room is lights on full on a Graphix Eye. There are 8 low voltage recessed cans with 50w bulbs. The room is more than bright enough to read. Even with the windows open mid day, the screen does not really wash out. The only thing that will wash it out is flash from a camera.


The lamp is on normal mode, not high BTW. The calculated FL is somewhere between 18-20.


----------



## Dave Gillies

Hello


I currently own a Firehawk G3 106" 16:9 screen. I have the 2.35 bug and want to upgrade to a 132" 2.35 screen. This size screen will give me the same 106" 16:9 size viewing so I am happy to do the upgrade.


I am very happy with the image quality and ambient light rejection of the Firehawk G3. I have white walls and ceilings and its performance is very good. Since I am looking at an upgrade I am very curious if the Black Diamond 1.4 actually out performs the Firehawk G3. Any comments?


Sound and Vision had a review of about 6 screens which included the Firehawk G3 and Black Diamond 1.4. Their conclusion was "For a typical home theater, the Stewart FireHawk G3 is probably the most practical pick among these screens."


----------



## eclou

One of my main considerations in choosing the BD was not having to pay for additional masking. The screen and projector produces such dark blacks that I don't see any need for masking. My pictures above are "zoomed" and not with an anamorphic lense. The black bar spillover is not visible in either dark or light ambient lighting conditions.


----------



## Leffe67

Eclou,


Congratulations on a beautiful setup. I took a peek at your theater build thread and it looks great. Thanks for posting your pics. It looks like your room is just a bit wider than your screen, what are your thoughts on viewing angle? In your room, is there any noticeable difference between sitting in the middle of the room vs. the side?


Thanks,

Leffe67


----------



## Dave Gillies




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *eclou* /forum/post/17405047
> 
> 
> One of my main considerations in choosing the BD was not having to pay for additional masking. The screen and projector produces such dark blacks that I don't see any need for masking. My pictures above are "zoomed" and not with an anamorphic lense. The black bar spillover is not visible in either dark or light ambient lighting conditions.



Hi Eclou


Your pictures with lights on and lights off look amazing as both situations look pretty close in picture quality.


Is there any chance you can post some pictures with 16:9 and 4:3 material to show how black the pillar boxes are on the screen?










One of my considerations as well with the BD II is if the pillar boxes are dark enough so that masking is not require on the sides of the screen for 16:9 and 4:3 material.


----------



## eclou




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Leffe67* /forum/post/17409356
> 
> 
> Eclou,
> 
> 
> Congratulations on a beautiful setup. I took a peek at your theater build thread and it looks great. Thanks for posting your pics. It looks like your room is just a bit wider than your screen, what are your thoughts on viewing angle? In your room, is there any noticeable difference between sitting in the middle of the room vs. the side?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Leffe67



Thanks for the comments. The viewing angle is something I really like - I calculated all the angles based on seating distances of ~ 12' and 15' for the 2 rows and they all fell around the THX recommendations listed here. It really gives me that "movie theater" feel.


I found no real noticeable differences in the PQ from the center and side sitting positions in the room. My outboard viewing positions though are not very close to the sides - the couch is only 78" inches wide.


I ordered the curved option not only in anticipation of using an anamorphic lense but also to add some flair. I have to say I am so happy with zooming so far that I don't think I will spring for a lense.


----------



## andrewturk1970

Hi All, Just got my 142" 1.35 BDII and put it up today!


YAY!


However, one side is nice and flush with the wall top and bottom, but the right side is ok at the top, but the bottom is 3/4 " of the wall...


frame seems slightly bent....


when i push it in towards the wall, the other side comes up. sounds like either the wall is crooked or the frame.


anyone have this issue before????


----------



## eclou




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Dave Gillies* /forum/post/17409596
> 
> 
> Hi Eclou
> 
> 
> Your pictures with lights on and lights off look amazing as both situations look pretty close in picture quality.
> 
> 
> Is there any chance you can post some pictures with 16:9 and 4:3 material to show how black the pillar boxes are on the screen?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One of my considerations as well with the BD II is if the pillar boxes are dark enough so that masking is not require on the sides of the screen for 16:9 and 4:3 material.



I was planning on doing that this weekend. I just got it up this past week and have been playing only 2:35 aspect films to enjoy the cinemascope experience. I ran a couple of 1:85 films in the zoom position and let the image fall off the top and bottom of the screen since I did not want to bother with re-zooming and focusing - I found it plenty viewable that way without too much annoyance.


----------



## eclou




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrewturk1970* /forum/post/17409958
> 
> 
> Hi All, Just got my 142" 1.35 BDII and put it up today!
> 
> 
> YAY!
> 
> 
> However, one side is nice and flush with the wall top and bottom, but the right side is ok at the top, but the bottom is 3/4 " of the wall...
> 
> 
> frame seems slightly bent....
> 
> 
> when i push it in towards the wall, the other side comes up. sounds like either the wall is crooked or the frame.
> 
> 
> anyone have this issue before????



Andrew I had the same issue but the solution is easy though: loosen the "L" clamps in all 4 corners of the frame then have an assistant push or put a slight counter twist on the frame to over correct the twist you are experiencing. Now re-tighten the "L" clamps and all should be perfect. I had to do this twice until it was perfectly square with the wall.


----------



## NORLL

The Black Diamond II looks like a very nice concept!


Do any of you know if it is possible to buy the SI Black Diamond II (0.8 or 1.4) screen material for a DIY solution? I have a 2,37:1 DIY torus frame and I am looking for a new screen material for it. I have the Stewart Screen Ultramatte 200 today, but this has to high gain (to much sparklies) for my taste. The Black Diamond II sounds perfect since it scatters much less light into the room...


Also, do you know if the screen material is air tight? The Stewart Screens have a backing that make them air tight. For my torus solution to work I use a small fan to make vacuum behind the screen. If the screen material is not air tight this will work as a giant air filter instead...


----------



## Dave Gillies




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *eclou* /forum/post/17409971
> 
> 
> I was planning on doing that this weekend. I just got it up this past week and have been playing only 2:35 aspect films to enjoy the cinemascope experience. I ran a couple of 1:85 films in the zoom position and let the image fall off the top and bottom of the screen since I did not want to bother with re-zooming and focusing - I found it plenty viewable that way without too much annoyance.



Hi Eclou


Have you had a chance to take pictures with 16:9 or 4:3 material to show the black pillar boxes on your 2.35 screen?


----------



## edpowers

I viewed the Black Diamond for the first time today at my local Best Buy/Magnolia. I'm not sure if it was the BDII or the original, but I was extremely impressed. Its the first time I've ever viewed a projector at any retail store without a dedicated home theater room and walked away impressed. They had a 60" LCD in torch mode on the side wall and tons of lights flowing from the other side and the JVC HD350 / BD combo still managed to look very nice. With the LCD light out of the picture, the screen looked amazing (and that room still had a lot of ambient light). I've always been a fan of the Da-Lite High Power for its big gain, but also for its ambient light rejection qualities ... obviously the Black Diamond is in another league. Unfortunately its in another price league as well.


----------



## Dave Gillies

Hi Eclou


I am still tossing up between the Firehawk G3 or a Black Diamond 1.4 for a cinemascope screen upgrade.


Are you still very happy with your new 1.4 Black Diamond Screen? Are you having any issues with the screen?


Would you highly recommend the BD II 1.4 screen?


Thanks


----------



## eclou

Sorry I have been in and out of town and not put up the 1:85 pictures here yet. Yes, I am absolutely thrilled with this screen. It is extremely expensive but seems worth every penny (and I am a tightwad). Every single person who has seen it is amazed, including my builder who has seen dozens of $100k+ theater builds.


----------



## Capitol K

I'm strongly considering this screen for purchase probably early next year, but am hoping they release a slightly larger size. Right now the largest is I believe 113", and my current set up is 117" - I'd rather not lose those 4 inches...


----------



## 08-450dually

Hmm.... I read all posts here and many BD screens are being compared and contrasted using several PJ's with varying Ansi lumens. What would be the behavior of the BD with a light cannon such as a Sim2 C3Xe (about 1200 calibrated lumens). I'm on a hunt for a screen, 10 feet wide, 20 feet throw distance. Wife would rather not have a bat cave, so wonder if all the extra lumens will punch thru white ceilings with this screen????


thanks in advance.


----------



## noah katz

With light in the room, the more lumens the better.


Black level is set by the room, so the only way to get more contrast (ratio of white level to black level) on screen is with more lumens.


----------



## Dave Gillies




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *eclou* /forum/post/17495388
> 
> 
> Sorry I have been in and out of town and not put up the 1:85 pictures here yet. Yes, I am absolutely thrilled with this screen. It is extremely expensive but seems worth every penny (and I am a tightwad). Every single person who has seen it is amazed, including my builder who has seen dozens of $100k+ theater builds.



Thanks for your opinion. I am taking a leap of faith as I have personally not seen the BD II 1.4 in action. I ordered a 131.5" diagonal 2.35 screen which just fits the width of my living room. I live in New Zealand (no SI dealers here) and I found a really good dealer in the USA. I got about the same price as a same size Stewart Firehawk screen so I was willing to give BD II a chance. Hopefully after my install, I can share my thoughts on comparisons with my Firehawk G3 which it replaces.


----------



## wxnz79

Dave,


I'd love to hear how that goes! I'm also in NZ and so have the same problem re dealers. I'm currently tossing up between Firehawk and BD 1.4, although I'm playing the waiting game at the mo to see whether a motorised one gets released over the next few months. When are you expecting delivery?


----------



## Dave Gillies




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wxnz79* /forum/post/17580049
> 
> 
> Dave,
> 
> 
> I'd love to hear how that goes! I'm also in NZ and so have the same problem re dealers. I'm currently tossing up between Firehawk and BD 1.4, although I'm playing the waiting game at the mo to see whether a motorised one gets released over the next few months. When are you expecting delivery?



I should have my new BD II 1.4 gain screen in 3 weeks. I have my Firehawk G3 screen listed on Trademe at the moment if you are interested in buying it.


----------



## wxnz79

I would be seriously considering it for that price. Unfortunately I need a motorised version.


----------



## wxnz79

Has the new BD screen shown up yet Dave?


----------



## Leffe67

I picked up a 113" 16:9 BD II 1.4 Gain screen last week and have been using it with a new Epson 8500 UB. I have been really impressed with this screen. It exceeds my expectations and looks fantastic with a great deal of light on. I'll just bump the color mode on my Epson to something with a few more lumens with the lights on and it looks great.


----------



## MegaByte

Leffe67....

Any chance of you posting some pic's with lights on and off?

Thinking of going the same combo as you.


----------



## wxnz79

Leffe67.. Whats your throw distance for that screen size? Any signs of hotspotting?


----------



## Leffe67

The throw distance from the lens to the screen is about 13.5 feet. I sit right below the mounted projector, so my eyes are about the same distance from the screen.


I have not noticed any hot spotting. I will switch over to the PS3 with it's backgrounds and my HTPC and the brightness seems pretty uniform across the screen. It's actually much, much better than I ever expected. I highly recommend this screen. As nice as the 8500 UB is, I wouldn't enjoy it 50% as much as I currently due without this screen.


This is set up in my basement which we use as a family room. We watch all our tv and movies in this room, also I have a 7mo old son, so only rarely can we have all the lights off. With the lights on, I usually bump the color mode to "Living Room" on the 8500 UB as I do notice some decrease in contrast, but bumping the lumens seems to make it pop a little more.


I am coming from a 55" crt RPTV, but am quite happy to have made the switch to FP. You are immediately impressed with the size of the screen and the viewing angle when you turn it on, but I have found that after a few minutes I adjust and become more focused on the content as opposed to the size of the screen I'm watching.


I'll try to grab some photos with the lights off and on tonight if I have time.


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wxnz79* /forum/post/17742720
> 
> 
> Leffe67.. Whats your throw distance for that screen size? Any signs of hotspotting?



I'm not Leffe67, but I have owned a 100 inch diagonal Black Diamond II 1.4 gain for about three months.


I see hot spotting whenever white or a bright color is projected on the center of the screen. I find it to be distracting.


In addition, if a bright scene is projected anywhere on the screen (clouds, snow, etc.) visible graining is evident, not just on the hot spot. If a cloud is moving or the camera pans across the snow, the grain shimmers (this might be what some people call sparkles). If I pause the image from the projector the shimmering stops, but if I move my head from side to side with the image paused, the shimmering is evident again. This seems to indicate that the shimmering is a function of the screen. I find this to be distracting, too.


I use two projectors, a 1080p and a 720p, that are mounted 16 feet from the screen. What I described above occurs regardless of which one I use. I sit 12 feet from the screen.


The room I am using for my home theater has a window with blinds and blackout shades on a side wall. I was disappointed to find that the screen does not absorb the stray light from this window when the blinds - only - are closed, but actually reflects it back to the viewing area (according to the angle of incidence = the angle of reflection rule) which causes the picture to be somewhat washed out. This doesn't bother me much when I am watching something like a football game, but when watching a movie, I still have to lower the blackout shades to make the room completely dark.


This screen was an upgrade from a Da-Lite HCCV. If I could do it over again, I would upgrade to a premium screen other than the BDII.


----------



## WilsonL

that's good to know, Carl!

Thanks for the info.


So what other screen are you thinking of?


----------



## wxnz79

Thanks for the info Karl! Is there any chance you can upload some pics to show these issues?


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wxnz79* /forum/post/17764293
> 
> 
> Thanks for the info Karl! Is there any chance you can upload some pics to show these issues?



I have an really old digital camera. I'll try to take some pictures, but I'm not sure what they will show.


I'm not trying to badmouth this screen. Because these screens are expensive for many people, I thought that I should describe what I see. I am not an expert, however.


Having said that, so you can be assured that someone else has seen the same thing, you might want to read post #1051 of this thread beginning with However, over at the Anthem booth:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...r#post17168795 


He describes it as the pixels interacting badly with the screen material. I agree with this description.


I actually read this post just before I ordered my screen. Because I am a very uncritical viewer (about a 2 or 3 on a scale of 10, with 10 being extremely critical), I decided that what he described would never bother me. After all, I had been reading for years that my Da-Lite screen had sparkles, and yet I had never seen any.


One of the first Blu-Rays I watched on the screen was a documentary of Shackleton's failed Antarctic expedition. With all of the camera shots panning across snow and ice flows, I immediately saw what I describe as shimmering, constantly.


With pictures with a very smooth white background, such as the ever present Progressive Insurance advertisements, I don't see shimmering, but I do see a hotspot.


Every now and then an strange occurrence of the pixels interacting badly (or maybe just oddly) with the screen material takes place. For example, I am a motorcycle racing enthusiast and always watch the MotoGP races on ESPN. Sometimes the picture is extremely grainy. Watch a little bit of this video and note that the corners are painted with alternating white and red stripes. Also note that when the camera follows the motorcycles through the corners it pans across these stripes:
http://video.tiscali.it/canali/truveo/2380886733.html 


When I watch one of these races on my screen and the video feed happens to be very grainy, the white stripes sparkle - they almost seem to flash on and off as if illuminated.


----------



## Leffe67

Ugh! ^^ This is exactly why I should never visit the AVSForum after I buy something!


After reading Karl's comments, I wanted to give myself some time with the screen to determine if the issues he is experiencing would trouble me. I had not really noticed the shimmering/sparkle effect prior to reading Karl's comments. When looking for it, I can definitely see it now. I would describe the effect I see as similar to being able to see the texture of the screen, as opposed to something active or flashing. It's rather like there is a light/sparkling film appearing just in front of the image when noticeable. When I'm not looking for it, I tend not to notice it. The only time I really seem to see it is when a commercial with a large bright white logo or graphic is displayed, when I'm actually paying attention to the content I hardly/rarely notice it at all. Further, it looks like the degree to which the effect happens could be a function of viewing distance. If I stand about 2 feet behind my seating position, the effect becomes much less noticeable. Alternatively, if I get closer to the screen, such that I can see the SDE of the projector, I don't see it there either. I was expecting to see this effect due to the screen gain of 1.4. I was under the impression that any higher gain screens would exhibit this, but obviously the effect was less than I expected since I had not noticed it initially.


As far as hot spotting, I can not tell from my experience that this is happening. I have definitely been looking for it, but can't see it on solid backgrounds or in video. Curiously, I did try to snap a few photos of my screen with varying ambient light levels per someone's request here and the photos showed a fair amount of hot spotting which I can not see when looking at it. The pictures did not turn out well, so I haven't posted them yet. I may have to experiment a bit with my camera to get it to capture something close to what I'm seeing.


One thing that surprised me is the viewing angle. When looking at the screen from various angles, it looks at least as good to me as any LCD I have seen and is probably as good as my old Mitsubishi CRT RPTV. I was concerned about this prior to purchasing, needless to say, this is definitely not an issue in my setup.


In my opinion and for my application, the benefits of the BD II 1.4G material significantly outweigh the detriments. I have three rows of recessed lights in my basement and if I shut off the lights closest to the screen and dim the middle row a little, the picture looks fantastic with a ton of ambient light. Under those conditions, I need only hold up a piece of white screen material in front of my BD screen to keep me satisfied with my decision!


----------



## Dave Gillies




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wxnz79* /forum/post/17733996
> 
> 
> Has the new BD screen shown up yet Dave?



MY BD screen is at Christchurch airport clearing customs. I should have it intalled very soon. I will let you know.


----------



## rdjam

Well, finally had time to properly install my new 1.4 gain BDII 133" 2.4 AR screen this weekend.


I am shooting an HD950 at it from 15 feet, and viewing from about 12 to 14 feet. I am using zoom method to expand the 2.4 content into the screen space - works beautifully, as the 950 is both dark enough blacks, and bright enough light source to power this screen bright, with no visible borders.


Had LOTS of funs running lots of test material (before my HD950 motorized lense cover mysteriously CROAKED this morning... bummer, big time...)


Anyway - I love this screen. I still see some sparklies on brighter material, but not as much as I saw in the Anthem demo in Atlanta, as my viewing distance is further than what I saw at that show.


As far as hotspotting is concerned, I have not tested enough. In my first config, the PJ is NOT in my reflected view off of the screen, based on my viewing angle, so I cannot adequately judge hotspotting.


However, I feel that I am below the "sweet spot" for the reflected light from the screen, and will be modifying the install to "tilt" the screen about 10 or 15 degrees down towards the viewing area, to ensure that the viewing area is closer to 90 degrees off the surface of the screen.


At this point, the PJ will be sitting in my reflected viewline, so if hotspotting is an issue, I will see it. I will say, that in my "walk and stand" tests I have not seen any hotspotting yet, even when looking "directly" at the reflection of the PJ - however, this is something that you have to view a lot of material from one position to start to see, so I don't think my random samples would necessarily catch it.


As soon as I get my PJ working again, I'll do more...


LOVE this screen, btw.


Incidentally, I am also going to modify the gamma curve on the PJ to enhance the light in dark scenes. I find that the BDII "sucks out" some of the shadow detail in the darker scenes, so I'll blow it up a little to compensate.


----------



## noah katz

"will be modifying the install to "tilt" the screen about 10 or 15 degrees down towards the viewing area, to ensure that the viewing area is closer to 90 degrees off the surface of the screen."


That would be too much tilt for max gain, which is when angle of incidence from pj to screen = angle of reflection from screen to viewer


----------



## karlsch

Noah is absolutely correct. Don't tilt the screen.


If I remember correctly, the instructions say to have the projector at the same height as the top of the screen. For projectors mounted behind the seating area, this is a very good starting point. The really particular may then have to raise or lower the projector a little bit to attain perfection.


----------



## rdjam

Yes - I definitely understand what you are saying. I'm going to be pretty careful.


In the current position, my picture gets a lot better when I lift my head up a foot or two. The seating is on couches and recliners that are quite low. In fact, the height of the eyes are below the bottom edge of the screen, so outside of the sweet spot.


By tilting the screen forward a few degrees, I'm effectively raising eye height towards the center of the screen, and also "moving" the PJ location from the center, to the "top" of the screen, in relatice terms.


I have to tilt the projector up by the same 10 degrees, to keep it's relative angle at 90% to the screen and avoid distortion (right now I have perfect edges) and the JVC has a 10% operational limit to tilting, due to the cooling system.


If I can nail this, I'll be in the sweet spot of the screen, without looking directly at the projector in the reflection off the screen, so hopefully avoiding hotspotting...


----------



## TedO

I am just planning out my basement HT and need to make some design decisions in this early stage. The furnace goes in and the bathroom build starts this month so I do have some time but I’d like to get the plan finalized. I will have total control of the light as the only 2 windows are in either the utility room or a closet. I will also incorporate non reflective (sound and light) walls and ceiling on the screen side of the room. I will be watching movies with minimum light in the room but would also like to watch sports with as much ambient light as practical.


I know everything has some compromises so I am looking for a happy medium. My initial plan is to go with a used JVC RS20/HD750 (if I can find one) and an SI Black Diamond II screen.


The largest screen that fit well is 132” diagonal 2.35:1 screen. That is the largest screen I can fit, given the wall space, throw and seating distance. I do have a few questions.


Will this projector’s brightness (900 Lumens) be enough with this screen size?


With this projector and screen size, which gain screen would be recommended?

I would prefer the .8 gain screen but fear it wouldn’t be bright enough.


Given the extra cost, how much does a curved screen add to the picture quality?


----------



## rdjam




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *TedO* /forum/post/17869813
> 
> 
> I am just planning out my basement HT and need to make some design decisions in this early stage. The furnace goes in and the bathroom build starts this month so I do have some time but I'd like to get the plan finalized. I will have total control of the light as the only 2 windows are in either the utility room or a closet. I will also incorporate non reflective (sound and light) walls and ceiling on the screen side of the room. I will be watching movies with minimum light in the room but would also like to watch sports with as much ambient light as practical.
> 
> 
> I know everything has some compromises so I am looking for a happy medium. My initial plan is to go with a used JVC RS20/HD750 (if I can find one) and an SI Black Diamond II screen.
> 
> 
> The largest screen that fit well is 132 diagonal 2.35:1 screen. That is the largest screen I can fit, given the wall space, throw and seating distance. I do have a few questions.



133" is one of their "standard" sizes. If you can swing the extra inch, you might find better availability and pricing.



> Quote:
> Will this projector's brightness (900 Lumens) be enough with this screen size?



My answer would be "yes". I have the 950 which is the same light output, and the 133", and it is just fine. It's also fine at 2.35 "zoom" mode, where I waste a lot of light.



> Quote:
> With this projector and screen size, which gain screen would be recommended?
> 
> I would prefer the .8 gain screen but fear it wouldn't be bright enough.



I'm with you on that one. I was "this close" to going with the .8 but I chickened out at the last moment. I would have prefered the picture on the .8, because it didn't have the same sparkle effect that you can see if too close to the 1.4.


But in the end, my seating positions were also a consideration. The .8 screen has a much larger fall-off as you move away from the center of the screen, so I went with the safe bet of the 1.4. I haven't been sorry.


Possibly, someone here has the .8 at that size and can tell you their experience.



> Quote:
> Given the extra cost, how much does a curved screen add to the picture quality?



I'll let someone else answer that...


----------



## noah katz

"The .8 screen has a much larger fall-off as you move away from the center of the screen, so I went with the safe bet of the 1.4."


That's odd.


Gain can only come at the expense of a narrower viewing cone.


----------



## rdjam




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/17877354
> 
> 
> "The .8 screen has a much larger fall-off as you move away from the center of the screen, so I went with the safe bet of the 1.4."
> 
> 
> That's odd.
> 
> 
> Gain can only come at the expense of a narrower viewing cone.



When you've looked at both of them together you'll understand. I looked at a few of them at Cedia.


The fall off in the case of the Black Diamond is not due to the gain, but rather is due to the treatment which rejects and filters light coming on or off the screen at angles other than directly in front. This is why the BD screens appear darker in ambient light conditions.


The .8 screen has a more aggressive filter treatment than the 1.4 screen, which results in a narrower viewing cone. You can see this reflected in the specifications for the screens also.


----------



## wxnz79

SI Screens are at CES this year. Anyone who is going want to ask them if they have a release date on their motorized BD II screens yet?


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/17877354
> 
> 
> "The .8 screen has a much larger fall-off as you move away from the center of the screen, so I went with the safe bet of the 1.4."
> 
> 
> That's odd.
> 
> 
> Gain can only come at the expense of a narrower viewing cone.



A narrower viewing cone tends to result from the amount and type of optical coating used to get that gain and focus the light to the viewer.


I'm pretty sure the .8 version uses a darker screen as a substrate (the thing looks almost black!) and so may have required more boost-in-gain from an optical coating to get usable light levels. If the 1.4 version starts with a lighter substrate then it may not require as much boost from an optical coating to get useful light levels and hence suffer less hotspotting.


----------



## noah katz

Makes sense, thanks


----------



## Sniper2075

Quick question, trying to finish my Living Room, non-dedicated Home Theater. I'm this close to going with just a Fixed Frame Black Diamond and not doing a plasma with a drop down screen. Doing this for a few reasons, but my question is do you think a Black Diamond would work in a living room without light control for TV and movies. I'm working on getting shades for the windows that don't have them but was wondering if you think it will work. Here's my setup


Screen will be a 106" 2.35:1, not sure which gain, maybe .8, could go smaller if I had to

Projector - Panasonic AX-200u will be just over 12' back and have a Lens for 2.35:1, move lens out of way for 16:9

Seating is also around 12' away, as far back as possible in the room, projector will be above my head. Mostly will be just 1 or 2 people watching, maybe 4 across on occasion for movies and maybe 4 or more for sports sometimes.


Again, going to try and block out as much light as possible. Also, would the .8 gain work with the AX-200u for this or should I just go with the 1.4. Anyone else using the 1.4 with an AX-200u?


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Sniper2075* /forum/post/17932605
> 
> 
> Anyone else using the 1.4 with an AX-200u?



I am using this projector. It has more than bright enough for the 1.4 gain screen, even in the dimmer modes. I also use a 1080p projector and it is bright enough, too.


If you have side or rear windows, you will definitely need shades. The picture will be washed out without them


Read these previous posts for my experiences with this screen:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...=#post17763145 

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...=#post17765201 

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...=#post17572955


----------



## studlygoorite

Just installed my new 142" BD with 1.4 gain and can see waves across the screen running vertically in certain scenes, looking behind the screen I can see that the waves all occur where there is a bungie to pull the screen tight. Does this screen need time to settle or something?


----------



## Leffe67




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *studlygoorite* /forum/post/17945632
> 
> 
> Just installed my new 142" BD with 1.4 gain and can see waves across the screen running vertically in certain scenes, looking behind the screen I can see that the waves all occur where there is a bungie to pull the screen tight. Does this screen need time to settle or something?



I had this same issue initially. I called SI about it and it turns out that I did not install the bands correctly. I'm not sure if the instructions are specific about this point, but what you are supposed to do is install the horizontal bands first (all of them). I apparently had done a few on the sides, then some of the vertical bands. I just took the screen down, unhooked the bands at the top and bottom so that the only bands attached were on the right and left side, then I reattached the top and bottom bands starting in the center of the screen and working my way to the edges. This worked for me.


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *studlygoorite* /forum/post/17945632
> 
> 
> Just installed my new 142" BD with 1.4 gain and can see waves across the screen running vertically in certain scenes, looking behind the screen I can see that the waves all occur where there is a bungie to pull the screen tight. Does this screen need time to settle or something?



My BD is just 100 inches. I can feel a wave if I run my along the screen right next to the frame, but once I get more than two inches from the frame, the wave is gone.


The screen is very stiff so I don't think it will settle at all.


You probably have already thought of it, but you might have to reinstall the screen material making sure the side bungees are pulling the screen tight. Your large screen material is probably a lot harder to install than my small one.


As much as these screens cost, you would think that they would come with better instructions.


----------



## studlygoorite




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Leffe67* /forum/post/17945715
> 
> 
> I had this same issue initially. I called SI about it and it turns out that I did not install the bands correctly. I'm not sure if the instructions are specific about this point, but what you are supposed to do is install the horizontal bands first (all of them). I apparently had done a few on the sides, then some of the vertical bands. I just took the screen down, unhooked the bands at the top and bottom so that the only bands attached were on the right and left side, then I reattached the top and bottom bands starting in the center of the screen and working my way to the edges. This worked for me.



Mine did not come with any bands, that is probably my problem. Thanks for the replies.


----------



## studlygoorite




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *studlygoorite* /forum/post/17946768
> 
> 
> Mine did not come with any bands, that is probably my problem. Thanks for the replies.



I will call them today but in the instructions it states, " If you have a curved screen then apply the straps". I do not have a curved screen but we will see what they say.


----------



## Leffe67




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *studlygoorite* /forum/post/17946768
> 
> 
> Mine did not come with any bands, that is probably my problem. Thanks for the replies.



This doesn't sound quite right. I assume that you have the screen already mounted, correct? The bands are what you use to connect the screen to the frame. I think some of the other SI screens use snaps to do this, but my BD II 1.4 gain screen was attached to the frame using these small black bungees/rubber bands. I do not have a curved screen.


----------



## studlygoorite




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Leffe67* /forum/post/17952871
> 
> 
> This doesn't sound quite right. I assume that you have the screen already mounted, correct? The bands are what you use to connect the screen to the frame. I think some of the other SI screens use snaps to do this, but my BD II 1.4 gain screen was attached to the frame using these small black bungees/rubber bands. I do not have a curved screen.



I thought you were talking about the numbered bands that come with a curved screen that go from the top frame to the bottom, several of them across the screen. I also have all the bungies in place and have called SI, they told me to try shaking the screen to loosen the bungies but that did not work they also asked me if I applied the vertical bungies first then the others from the middle out and I did. So to be sure I pulled the screen back down per their instructions and took all the horizontal bungies off and re did them to no avail. I will call them back again tomorrow to see what's next. PS: My first time showing it off and the first thing my friend noticed was the waves in the screen. Doh! Could be a faulty screen.


----------



## studlygoorite




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Leffe67* /forum/post/17945715
> 
> 
> I had this same issue initially. I called SI about it and it turns out that I did not install the bands correctly. I'm not sure if the instructions are specific about this point, but what you are supposed to do is install the horizontal bands first (all of them). I apparently had done a few on the sides, then some of the vertical bands. I just took the screen down, unhooked the bands at the top and bottom so that the only bands attached were on the right and left side, then I reattached the top and bottom bands starting in the center of the screen and working my way to the edges. This worked for me.





When you did the bungies on the top and bottom did you do all the top, working out from the middle, then all the bottom or did you do 1 or 2 at the top then do the adjacent ones on the bottom then go back to the top and so on?


----------



## Leffe67

I started in the middle, did one at the top and the opposite one at the bottom. Then I worked my way out to the edges attaching to the top and bottom to keep the tension. I left the bungees on the left and right of the screen in place when I took off the ones on the top and bottom and put them on again in the way I described.


That sucks that it showed up when you were going to show it off! Good luck!


----------



## studlygoorite




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Leffe67* /forum/post/17956210
> 
> 
> I started in the middle, did one at the top and the opposite one at the bottom. Then I worked my way out to the edges attaching to the top and bottom to keep the tension. I left the bungees on the left and right of the screen in place when I took off the ones on the top and bottom and put them on again in the way I described.
> 
> 
> That sucks that it showed up when you were going to show it off! Good luck!




Then I'm sure I have done it correct, took some pictures and sent them to SI and they seem very eager to rectify the problem. They are going to call me Wednesday morning, hopefully with a solution. Wonder if I will be reimbursed in any way? Thanks again Leffe67 for your help. John


----------



## Leffe67

I'm sure that SI will take care of you. I called them when I had my issue with horizontal tension and they were very helpful. I sent them some pictures and they were able to figure out what I did and how to fix it straight away. Let us know how it turns out.


I'm a big fan of the BD II 1.4 gain material, it works great for my application.


----------



## casey_sdsu




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wxnz79* /forum/post/17877457
> 
> 
> SI Screens are at CES this year. Anyone who is going want to ask them if they have a release date on their motorized BD II screens yet?




AT CES SI has their black diamond screen pair up with a Projection Design Helios projector and their hotel suite was packed. This combination would knock your socks off. (unless they are tube socks)


Currently SI has a release date for both a perforated and motorized screens of "2010". Now that means February 2010 is possible and so is December 30th 2010 so were are keeping our fingers crossed for the earlier part of the year. As of right now t he screens are ready to go they just need to work out some manufacturing issues with the material when cutting the screens. As you guys with Black Diamond screens know the material is sensitive to damage compared to other screens but well worth it when you see the performance.


IMO the Black Diamond screens are the greatest technology increase in projection materials we have seen so far.


If you want updates send me an email or PM I am in contact directly with SI regularly.


Casey Webster

SI Dealer - Southern California

http://www.advanceddigitalhomes.com 


or Direct cell if your local to southern california

619.559.1172


----------



## dukeav

I am considering the BD 0.8, but the half-gain of 22deg looks bad. Looking the pics on projectorcentral review, at 35deg, the far side of the screen is significantly darker than near side.


Will using a curved screen help in improving the half-gain angle?


Seemingly with the curve, the far side of the screen will be at a better angle than the near side. Would this improve the brightness uniformity?


Any thoughts on this theory?


----------



## studlygoorite




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *studlygoorite* /forum/post/17959791
> 
> 
> Then I'm sure I have done it correct, took some pictures and sent them to SI and they seem very eager to rectify the problem. They are going to call me Wednesday morning, hopefully with a solution. Wonder if I will be reimbursed in any way? Thanks again Leffe67 for your help. John



Well I received replacement material and am happy to report that all is good now. SI/Tabi were very courteous and quick to respond to my problem. The Black Diamond is great and it's nice to be able to have lights on while watching sports with very little wash out. Think I should have gone larger though.


----------



## RickAVManiac




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *studlygoorite* /forum/post/18040602
> 
> 
> Well I received replacement material and am happy to report that all is good now. SI/Tabi were very courteous and quick to respond to my problem. The Black Diamond is great and it's nice to be able to have lights on while watching sports with very little wash out. Think I should have gone larger though.



I just began to read about BD II and it seems to be a very good screen. But I have 3 questions :


With no light in the room is the perceived black level really better?


With no light in the room can you still see the black bar in 2.35:1 movie?


With no light in the room is the white are white? Can you see sparkles?


Thanks,


Eric


----------



## tommy def

Eric

-Yes the Blacks are better compared to a white screen.

-I'm using a RS10 right now and when the lights are off I cannot see the black bars at all.

-The whites are white with no lights on. I would have to say that the only drawback is sparkles and off angle viewing. I'm limited to where I can place my projector but if you can adjust where you place yours you could probably achieve better results than I did as far as the sparkles.


----------



## studlygoorite




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *RickAVManiac* /forum/post/18046378
> 
> 
> I just began to read about BD II and it seems to be a very good screen. But I have 3 questions :
> 
> 
> With no light in the room is the perceived black level really better?
> 
> 
> With no light in the room can you still see the black bar in 2.35:1 movie?
> 
> 
> With no light in the room is the white are white? Can you see sparkles?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Eric



My blacks are better than they ever have been, lights on and off.


I cannot see the black bars with 2.35 material because it is a 2.35 screen







I also cannot see the black bars with 16X9 material.


The whites are white and I do see slight "sparklies" with sky views and such, I have the 1.4 gain and a projector with 1600 lumens. I found if I turned my brightness down the "sparklies" are less noticeable but still there, not bad enough for me to regret my purchase as the way it sheds abient light was the seller for me.


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *RickAVManiac* /forum/post/18046378
> 
> 
> I just began to read about BD II and it seems to be a very good screen. But I have 3 questions :
> 
> 
> With no light in the room is the perceived black level really better?
> 
> 
> With no light in the room can you still see the black bar in 2.35:1 movie?
> 
> 
> With no light in the room is the white are white? Can you see sparkles?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Eric



I have a 1.4 gain and I use two different projectors. My old screen was gray.


The black level has improved noticeably.


The black bars are darker than on my old screen, but they aren't as dark as the frame.


Whites are very white. Sparkles are very evident.


What is worse than the general sparkles is the hot spot. The hot spot manifests itself as an area in the center of the screen with dark edged sparkles which are much larger than the sparkles on the rest of the screen.


In my opinion, the screen is better for casual viewing such as sports than it is for critical viewing such as watching movies. When watching movies you shouldn't _see the screen_.


Mainly because of this, but also because the ambient light rejection didn't work out particularly well for my application, I wish I had bought a different screen.


----------



## rdjam




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *studlygoorite* /forum/post/18048693
> 
> 
> I cannot see the black bars with 2.35 material because it is a 2.35 screen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I also cannot see the black bars with 16X9 material.













I also have the 2.40 SI screen, and use the "Zoom" method to drop 2.4 material right onto it. Thanks to the JVC 950, I cannot see these black bars on my walls and furniture either!










I think you need to be at least 12 feet away from the screen to not notice the sparklies.


However, my blacks and contrast have never been better.


----------



## RickAVManiac

Thanks all for the information.


So the sparkles are visible but only at a certain distance?


For the hotspot, is the position of the projector have something to do with that?



Eric


----------



## studlygoorite




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *RickAVManiac* /forum/post/18057890
> 
> 
> Thanks all for the information.
> 
> 
> So the sparkles are visible but only at a certain distance?
> 
> 
> For the hotspot, is the position of the projector have something to do with that?
> 
> 
> 
> Eric




I sit 16' back and can just barely notice the hot spot/sparklies. They are about the size of a grape fruit in the middle about 3/4s the way up, it might be called a hot spot. I too would like to know if the position of the projector would affect this hot spot/sparklies. Mine is mounted so the lens is about 3 to 4" below the top of the screen and when I stand up all is good.


----------



## RickAVManiac




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *studlygoorite* /forum/post/18062925
> 
> 
> I sit 16' back and can just barely notice the hot spot/sparklies. They are about the size of a grape fruit in the middle about 3/4s the way up, it might be called a hot spot. I too would like to know if the position of the projector would affect this hot spot/sparklies. Mine is mounted so the lens is about 3 to 4" below the top of the screen and when I stand up all is good.



Thanks for the info.


Is there any owner here of the BD II 0.8 gain screen?


Owners, can you comments on your experience please?



Eric


----------



## studlygoorite




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *RickAVManiac* /forum/post/18070609
> 
> 
> Thanks for the info.
> 
> 
> Is there any owner here of the BD II 0.8 gain screen?
> 
> 
> Owners, can you comments on your experience please?
> 
> 
> 
> Eric




No one in here with the 0.8 Gain?


----------



## scottyb

It's all about brightness baby!!!!


----------



## misugrad

Hi Eric - I've got a 2.35 118" 0.8gain beauty! Just can't wait to get her out of the box and mounted, er, on the wall!


----------



## RickAVManiac




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *misugrad* /forum/post/18097847
> 
> 
> Hi Eric - I've got a 2.35 118" 0.8gain beauty! Just can't wait to get her out of the box and mounted, er, on the wall!



Make sure to come back and give us some feedback!










Eric


----------



## m3what

I have the .8 gain 92" what do you want to know?


----------



## RickAVManiac




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m3what* /forum/post/18104879
> 
> 
> I have the .8 gain 92" what do you want to know?



Did you see the "sparkels" effect that the 1.4 gain owner see ?


Do you recommand thats screen? Any comments/evaluation?


Thanks,


Eric


----------



## send

FYI .. We just posted two new Black Diamond screen videos. One illustrating a bright room with over 20 foot-candles of ambient light and the other 2.5 foot-candles similar to a home theater environment with the lights on. www.screeninnovations.com 


Best,


Blake Vackar


----------



## dukeav




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *send* /forum/post/18156266
> 
> 
> FYI .. We just posted two new Black Diamond screen videos. One illustrating a bright room with over 20 foot-candles of ambient light and the other 2.5 foot-candles similar to a home theater environment with the lights on.
> 
> 
> Best,
> 
> 
> Blake Vackar



Can you also mention which exact screen is used in each of these videos, 0.8 or 1.4?


thanks


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *send* /forum/post/18156266
> 
> 
> FYI .. We just posted two new Black Diamond screen videos. One illustrating a bright room with over 20 foot-candles of ambient light and the other 2.5 foot-candles similar to a home theater environment with the lights on. www.screeninnovations.com
> 
> 
> Best,
> 
> 
> Blake Vackar



It should be pointed out that the ambient light source on the 2.5 foot-candle video seems to be located below and in front of the screen. The shadows of the demonstrator's hands on the screen demonstrate this. Because this is an angular reflective screen, this light will be reflected above the viewing area and will not wash out the picture.


Having the ambient light source in this convenient but unlikely location does make for a more convincing demonstration, but it might be somewhat deceptive.


For the record, I own a BD 1.4 gain. I also have posted my experience with this screen on this thread.


----------



## send




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *karlsch* /forum/post/18161812
> 
> 
> It should be pointed out that the ambient light source on the 2.5 foot-candle video seems to be located below and in front of the screen. The shadows of the demonstrator's hands on the screen demonstrate this. Because this is an angular reflective screen, this light will be reflected above the viewing area and will not wash out the picture.
> 
> 
> Having the ambient light source in this convenient but unlikely location does make for a more convincing demonstration, but it might be somewhat deceptive.
> 
> 
> For the record, I own a BD 1.4 gain. I also have posted my experience with this screen on this thread.



Correct, Lifestyle videos will be out in two weeks or so. Windows, sun, and kids playing on the floor










PS. if you have any video ideas, please send them to us!


Blake


----------



## send




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dukeav* /forum/post/18160640
> 
> 
> Can you also mention which exact screen is used in each of these videos, 0.8 or 1.4?
> 
> 
> thanks



Black Diamond 92" 1.4 gain


----------



## Pete

Just had the opportunity to see the 1.4 and was amazed at the amount of artifacts and how non-uniform it was. With just white light (no image) and standing a little off axis, the brightness shifted dramatically across the screen. It also seemed prone to hot-spotting. I also noticed faint lines both vertical and horizontal. I don't know why this screen is getting so much attention.


----------



## elmalloc

Can they make special sizes for black diamond?


I tried to configure a screen on their site and it didn't allow me to choose black diamond as the material. I'm doing 2.45'ish ratio at 175" wide.


Thanks,

ELmO


----------



## scottyb

ElmO,

Yes they can make custom size.


Scott


----------



## elmalloc

Not in the size I wanted. =D


----------



## send

Everyone has been asking for these two videos. More coming soon!

No Masking Needed
Black Diamond Dark Room

www.screeninnovations.com 
http://www.youtube.com/user/screenin...C36BD93DEE883C 


Thanks,


Blake V


----------



## studlygoorite




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *scottyb* /forum/post/18097018
> 
> 
> It's all about brightness baby!!!!




True, I just experimented with some sample pieces of the 0.8 gain and opted to stay with the 1.4 gain as I don't want to lose any of the "pop" that I get with the 1.4 gain, quite a difference.


PS: Let me point out again that the people at SI were great, they were very courteous and willing to switch my 1.4 gain out for a 0.8 gain if I wanted.


----------



## casey_sdsu




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *studlygoorite* /forum/post/18196670
> 
> 
> True, I just experimented with some sample pieces of the 0.8 gain and opted to stay with the 1.4 gain as I don't want to lose any of the "pop" that I get with the 1.4 gain, quite a difference.
> 
> 
> PS: Let me point out again that the people at SI were great, they were very courteous and willing to switch my 1.4 gain out for a 0.8 gain if I wanted.



Thats amazing customer service.


----------



## Aphasia




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Pete* /forum/post/18172286
> 
> 
> Just had the opportunity to see the 1.4 and was amazed at the amount of artifacts and how non-uniform it was. With just white light (no image) and standing a little off axis, the brightness shifted dramatically across the screen. It also seemed prone to hot-spotting. I also noticed faint lines both vertical and horizontal. I don't know why this screen is getting so much attention.



How was the projector mounted in relation to the screen. Most high gain screen is rather narrow in angle, and hence, you need a long throw range and the right angles to get rid of most hotspotting, etc.


----------



## studlygoorite




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *casey_sdsu* /forum/post/18239394
> 
> 
> Thats amazing customer service.




And that's after they replaced it once because of a defect.


----------



## Pete




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Aphasia* /forum/post/18241584
> 
> 
> How was the projector mounted in relation to the screen. Most high gain screen is rather narrow in angle, and hence, you need a long throw range and the right angles to get rid of most hotspotting, etc.



It was about 16' back from a 100" screen.


----------



## crackhead2k

Hello first time poster here long time reader.


What projector would it take to display a decent picture on a 16:9, 113" 0.8 screen?

Any recommendations? Any experiences still looking for people that have worked with the 0.8 screen.....


Im sorta looking at the BENQ./ EPSON projectors


----------



## Gior

Hi guys,


Just wondering if any of you know if SI make their Black Diamond II 1.4 gain screen in a motorised 100inch diagonal version?


I've tried to message them directly through their website a few times, but they haven't ever gotten back to me with even a NO. I'm guessing their website messaging system is down (or they just have lousy customer reply service?)


Thanks in advance


----------



## Darth Indy

I so want one of these and NEED one of these due to my setup but the dang price is outta my range. If it was $1,000 I'd bite. My living room has light colored walls, carpet, furniture, and a white ceiling and they are all combining to just kill my pq. The pic is getting washed out and the contrast is being severely hampered by the reflection.


----------



## scottyb




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Gior* /forum/post/18283522
> 
> 
> Hi guys,
> 
> 
> Just wondering if any of you know if SI make their Black Diamond II 1.4 gain screen in a motorised 100inch diagonal version?
> 
> 
> I've tried to message them directly through their website a few times, but they haven't ever gotten back to me with even a NO. I'm guessing their website messaging system is down (or they just have lousy customer reply service?)
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance



No motorized as of yet. They are working on it, I've heard.


----------



## Gior




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *scottyb* /forum/post/18285125
> 
> 
> No motorized as of yet. They are working on it, I've heard.



Thanks for this update scottyb










I'll just continue to wait


----------



## R Harkness

I viewed the Black Diamond 1.4 gain screen in action yesterday. It was a 2:35:1 AR screen, about 118" wide.


Impressions in a nutshell: Brighter than the .8 gain version (duh!). While the projected image was brighter, I didn't find it had that much more "pop" in terms of a sense of contrast. The lower gain version preserves contrast very, very well.


The image still held up fairly well with some ambient light, but to my eyes nowhere near as well as the .8 gain version. With the lights up the .8 gain version still looks great, almost plasma-like. With the lights up the 1.4 gain version definitely washed out to the point I'd want to keep the lights well down to enjoy the image.


Projected black bars (from a JVC HD750 projector) weren't as pitch black as on the .8 gain screen, still being visible dark gray on the 1.4 gain screen.


Unfortunately from my perspective the 1.4 version still suffered from the same issues as the .8 gain version: Pronounced screen texture and visible hot spotting. The screen texture, which I presume comes from the optical coating used to increase gain, placed a speckled, mottled crystalline texture over the image that was especially pronounced in day scenes and shots with the sky. It was hard to look past in a number of shots.


Similarly, if I sat myself to one side of the screen (not outside the screen borders, but to one side of the screen), the other side of the screen noticeably darkened.


So, like everything, there are trade-offs. If you don't want to worry about the effects of ambient or reflected light as much on your screen, then a screen like this can really help. I prefer to put the effort into combating ambient light and room reflections on my own, and go with a white screen that has more transparent, even performance under those conditions. But others may not be in the position to do so, which is why it's great to have products like the BD screens available.


----------



## tommy def

Hi Rich, have you ever seen the Supernova 08-85 from DNP? This screen rejects ambient light like the BD does but it has no screen texture, no hot spot , and with a half gain of 85 degrees its amazing. I have had the BD I .8 gain, the BDII .8 and 1.4 gain and now I am using the SN, it’s a great screen. But I have to say the BDII .8 still rejects the light better. Like you said there is always trade offs.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tommy def* /forum/post/18379638
> 
> 
> Hi Rich, have you ever seen the Supernova 08-85 from DNP? This screen rejects ambient light like the BD does but it has no screen texture, no hot spot , and with a half gain of 85 degrees its amazing. I have had the BD I .8 gain, the BDII .8 and 1.4 gain and now I am using the SN, it's a great screen. But I have to say the BDII .8 still rejects the light better. Like you said there is always trade offs.



tommy,


I've been really intrigued by the Supernova because it's reputation is just as you describe it. But it's really hard to find any place to demo that screen, and it's rarely mentioned or reviewed in the AV community. And it's super expensive.


I have really good light control and a generally dark room, but I'm always looking to reduce room reflections further and lower my black level if possible. I hope to see a SN screen in action some day.


Are you using it in ambient light conditions? What kind of light control do you have when viewing? I'd think the SN could allow for some really nice black levels and good contrast. Actually, the company makes some pretty extravagant claims in that regard. What's the contrast like vs the BD screens or perhaps white screens?


----------



## tommy def

Yes I use it in a living room and the only thing that I have for light control is some heavy dark curtains. As far as the black levels it's as good as the BD with lights off but not with lights on. The BD .8 gain is a darker screen then the SN .8. I think the SN is on par with the 1.4 version of the BD as far as light rejection. I have had a white screen before and it crushed both the SN and BD as far as brightness but that’s a given the white screen does not come close in contrast and black level to either of the screens even with the lights off. Yes the SN cost more than the BD but not much. I feel with the added advantages of the SN, no hot spot, no screen texture, much more Half gain I think it might be worth the added cost to some. the BD is not a bad screen at all if you are looking for maximum light rejection than this will be the screen for you.


----------



## chmedly




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tommy def* /forum/post/18384136
> 
> 
> Yes the SN cost more than the BD but not much. I feel with the added advantages of the SN, no hot spot, no screen texture, much more Half gain I think it might be worth the added cost to some. the BD is not a bad screen at all if you are looking for maximum light rejection than this will be the screen for you.



Do you know how the Supernova flex compares to the SN that you have? I have a location where I must go with a motorized and the Black Diamond is obviously not available yet.


----------



## tommy def




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *chmedly* /forum/post/18420247
> 
> 
> Do you know how the Supernova flex compares to the SN that you have? I have a location where I must go with a motorized and the Black Diamond is obviously not available yet.



Sorry, I have not had the chance to see the flex in action but I have spoken to somebody at DNP about it and they said the flex performs just as well as the core or the one. If you can wait I would hold out for the BD motorized it will be released soon, and it should be less expensive.


----------



## chmedly

Well, I also have a pretty short throw so, based on what I've read, the DNP may be a bit more forgiving on the hot spot issue. I'll be looking at samples soon.

Thanks


----------



## misugrad

Hi All - I've just posted in classified forum a 118" diag 2.40:1 black diamond. Still in box.


----------



## BlakeV

I thought the SP only rejected light in the vertical and the BD rejected light in both the vertical and horizontal.


----------



## Localzone

Hi. I've read most of this thread and have been interested in BD Screen.

This is my very first time to post in this forum. Sorry for my bad English.


I really wanted this one but it's too expensive for me, so I decide to make my own screen using a couple of sony dynaclear screen's textures.


I know dynaclear is outdated stuff, but I think that has same kind of Reflection characteristics(I know BD is more better).


Now I've got 4x dynaclear and ready to make 135" 2.35(using 3 pieces) or 170" 2.35(using 4 pieces) size screen with my friend's architect's help. Is this thread the right place to post these stuff? If it's not, could anyone take me right place?


----------



## MTyson




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Localzone* /forum/post/18696790
> 
> 
> Hi. I've read most of this thread and have been interested in BD Screen.
> 
> This is my very first time to post in this forum. Sorry for my bad English.
> 
> 
> I really wanted this one but it's too expensive for me, so I decide to make my own screen using a couple of sony dynaclear screen's textures.
> 
> 
> I know dynaclear is outdated stuff, but I think that has same kind of Reflection characteristics(I know BD is more better).
> 
> *Now I've got 4x dynaclear and ready to make 135" 2.35(using 3 pieces) or 170" 2.35(using 4 pieces) size screen with my friend's architect's help. Is this thread the right place to post these stuff? If it's not, could anyone take me right place?*



I thought about trying this awhile back, but wasn't sure how feasible it was. Please let me know how it turns out, how you put it together, if you can see a seam, how the image is (screenshots would be great too.







), etc.


Thanks!


----------



## Localzone

Thank you for your reply.

I'm gonna do this work next week. I don't know it works.

But if it works, I'll up some screenshots and how to make thing.


----------



## noah katz




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Localzone* /forum/post/18696790
> 
> 
> Is this thread the right place to post these stuff? If it's not, could anyone take me right place?



You could also try the DIY Screen subforum here.


----------



## Localzone

I've done these works yesterday, It's too hard to paste the screen texture on my frame and I think I've made the wrong choice the way to go. The texture is terribly sagging and the seam is awful.

But it might be fixable. I've fixed the part of the screen and then it has become un-noticeable when I have a long distance from the screen. So I'll try it step by step. Maybe I should go to DIY Screen subforum. There's still my English problem to explain　details, but I've got the screenshots).


Except these issues, Because of the screen size(I've made 170" 2.35:1), I can see so strong hotspotting and that is the worst thing that bother me. The limit of throw range of my room is 17ft and There's nothing I can do with it.I'll try to move my projector vertically just in case but I don't think that would be better.


I'm sorry for my bad English.


----------



## Localzone

Here is the screenshot.









hotspotting

My screen definitely needs curve.










I’ve just fixed the seam only in the middle of the screen temporary to check how this attempting turns out. And because of that, the sagging of the borders area of the screen increased temporary. It's awful but fixable I think.










Black is so black like that.


----------



## MTyson




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Localzone* /forum/post/18717105
> 
> 
> Here is the screenshot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hotspotting
> 
> My screen definitely needs curve.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've just fixed the seam only in the middle of the screen temporary to check how this attempting turns out. And because of that, the sagging of the borders area of the screen increased temporary. It's awful but fixable I think.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Black is so black like that.




Interesting. If you build a frame, cut a horizontal curve of about 6-8" you maybe have a very nice screen if you can fix the other problems. Can we see some screen shots with some room ambient light?


----------



## DLopatin

Any issues with maintenance or cleaning the screen once installed? I have small kids, and I am concerned they could touch the screen. I saw in the installation instructions you have to wear gloves to prevent damaging the screen and it was possible to crease it?


Also, does this screen pretty much eliminate the need for masking?


Thank you!


----------



## Localzone

I've decided to create a new thread in DIY Screen subforum in the near future.

Because it may take a long time and need a lot of post till this work is done.


I'm sorry to interrupt you all.

Thank you.


----------



## snarks

I am buying a LG cf181d and considering a BD II 106". head to screen distance is around 12-13 feet. The room (walkout basement) gets a reasonable amount of ambient light during the day but 70-80% of the viewing will be at night with very low ambient light levels.


Should I get the 0.8 or 1.4 ?


----------



## snarks

is the 0.8 more or less likely to experience sparkles ?


will a brighter projector increase or reduce the hot spotting effect ?


----------



## MississippiMan

So very much written about these expensive Screens...except any real plaudits or exclamations about performance.


Unless one is totally without the means to roll up their sleeves and do some work themselves, or determined to spend for a Mfg. product because it's easier to do so, consider all options before you go the route of spending such considerable sums of cash for performance that is so easily duplicated for less than 1/10th the cost.


If there was not such a wide cost difference, and the performance wasn't more that comparable, I would NOT venture this post, so use it...or not to your advantage.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forum...ysprune=&f=110


----------



## snarks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/18738328
> 
> 
> So very much written about these expensive Screens...except any real plaudits or exclamations about performance.
> 
> 
> Unless one is totally without the means to roll up their sleeves and do some work themselves, or determined to spend for a Mfg. product because it's easier to do so, consider all options before you go the route of spending such considerable sums of cash for performance that is so easily duplicated for less than 1/10th the cost.
> 
> 
> If there was not such a wide cost difference, and the performance wasn't more that comparable, I would NOT venture this post, so use it...or not to your advantage.
> 
> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forum...ysprune=&f=110



well I haven't tested it against a DIY painted wall or sheet but at our local home theater store i was able to view it against several "white" screens and the performance with ambient light was nothing short of astounding.


Maybe I am not picky but while there was some amount of light fall off as you situated yourself to the side of the screen it wasn't that big of a deal and I am 100% certain none of the guests I have over could never notice. I wasn't looking for them but I didn't see the sparkles. Might be just that the movie I was demoing was dark and not prone to sparkles.


anyways the screen was a 1.4 and they didn't have a 0.8 . I wish i could see the 0.8 in action. Do the projector people or BB let you return these if you are unhappy ?


----------



## noah katz




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/18738328
> 
> 
> So very much written about these expensive Screens...except any real plaudits or exclamations about performance.
> 
> 
> If there was not such a wide cost difference, and the performance wasn't more that comparable, I would NOT venture this post, so use it...or not to your advantage.
> 
> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forum...ysprune=&f=110



1) Apparently you haven't bothered to read much about them, as there many reviews attesting that they do indeed perform better in ambient light


2) What DIY solution exhibits *any* amount of the ambient light rejection offered by "black" screens like the BD?


3) Linking to an entire forum isn't very helpful


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *snarks* /forum/post/18740412
> 
> 
> well I haven't tested it against a DIY painted wall or sheet but at our local home theater store i was able to view it against several "white" screens and the performance with ambient light was nothing short of astounding.



When compared to a "White" screen, I'd think the scales would be just a little tipped in favor of the BD. Such disparate 'one on ones' are not valid except to show why one is a more effective solution. Beyond that, it's simply a case of "Apples to Oranges' and nothing much else, other than a sales aid.

(Strange they did not compare the BD to a simple Gray high contrast Screen....?







Ok...not so strange really.







)


If a DIY application was to be compared to a BD Screen, it too would have to aspire to being of similar performance capabilities or that comparison would also be ineffective or valid. The needs of almost any consumer "ambient light" wise are easily accommodated by select existing DIY applications.


It's simply a case of "buy or build", and the justification of effort/savings against expenditure/ease.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/18740501
> 
> 
> 1) Apparently you haven't bothered to read much about them, as there many reviews attesting that they do indeed perform better in ambient light



No actually I've read quite a lot, and for some reason all the comparitive testing and reviews all center around match-ups against White Screens. That's a real "Duh" sorta thing but wholly in keeping with any Mfg taking advantage of such. I did have the opportunity and viewed one (BD .08) personally last month, then made a comparison just a few hours later at a different location of a older Sony Chomaview. The BD was hit by a Epson 9100, the S-CV with a Epson 8100. Considering the age/technology/price difference between the two screens, the performance of the ChromaView was so close to the BD Screen it would have been embarrassing to anyone trying to justify the difference in price.


While the BD's technology may be sound and effective, the trade offs in cost and limitations in application do not justify a blind rush toward that product.


(...something to note; The ChromaVue was saddled with a poor match up of available PJs and a 'too high price' when first introduced. If it would have had a PJ of even the Epson 8100's ilk to utilize back then,(5 yrs ago) things might have turned out differently. As it was, it was exactly that difference in price/performance that led a few on "this" forum to throw down the Gauntlet and challenge the DIY Screen community to come up with something comparable. Once that was done, it has been continually discounted by many of the same people ever since. Go figure.



> Quote:
> 2) What DIY solution exhibits *any* amount of the ambient light rejection offered by "black" screens like the BD?



Must be a trick question. I'm so glad you included *any* since that implies you feel there is *none* to be had via the DIY method. Virtually any well matched up (w/PJ) neutral Gray of a dark shade will effectively combat the effects of reasonable ambient light, without drastically reducing viewing cone. That can be / is fine for some, but not so much so for those wanting a superior image. A simple Gray can...and does attenuate whites.


The old route of going with higher gain "direct" reflective surfaces combined with a Gray shade to reduce washout has been effectively employed in the DIY community for some time, and has been taken quite far down the road with the use of a combination of metallic content and blended primaries within a translucent base. The Mfg Screen industry has had to resort to far more complex and expensive methods to achieve parity, and even of in some aspects they have managed to exceed the potential of DIY, it has come at far too heavy a price for the differences involved.



> Quote:
> 3) Linking to an entire forum isn't very helpful



No? I suppose not if it suggests a source for info, and a place to inquire, but doesn't allow for some to take deliberate issue with any direct referral. My post was meant to suggest to others that they should explore the difference between two widely disparate methods, that also differ insanely in cost.


The gulf between DIY-ism and Retail purchase has always been one fueled by the ignorance of what is available, and further compounded by advertising hype that steers those so inclined to make a retail purchase over getting involved with any 'hands on' project. As I said, the difference between available performance and the required expenditure is simply too vast to not consider the available options. The current crop of uber bright, high contrast PJs only serve to make the job easier for both applications to deliver. However the surge toward acquiring Front projection for use in normal lighting situations by "Joe Average" has spotlighted the need for Mfgs to offer something effective. And when demand hits, seldom do such entities try to make such affordable enough to truly allow such to be mass marketed. No....profit driven motives rule. another "go figure' if you will.


Even so, I acknowledge this forum is dedicated to "sales" not "DIY" and the only reason I posted was to suggest that when someone is looking for a specialty application, one needs to have knowledge of alternatives.


I've spoken my piece, and my intent was nothing more that to suggest that people be given the opportunity to consider all the different opportunities and options available to them, not to promote any specific application. If someone wants details...the link to the appropriate Forum for them to search or post up a query was/is provided.


We DIY'ers are not loathe to suggest to someone when a Mfg Screen is more appropriate. We just don't often have much cause to "go there", that's all.


----------



## snarks

while I love DIY in many of my hobbies I have found most DIY enthusiasts have a standard of "good enough" and the retail product would have to run circles around the DIY product for them to ever break down and admit that the retail product is worth the cost. While that's OK in my aquarium hobby it makes me leery of a DIY screen which is only a fraction of the cost of building a proper home theater and plays a major roll in the quality of the image. I would be very happy to buy a $20 bucket of paint rather than a $2,500 screen if it really was 90% as effective. However if it was 80% as effective enjoying my threater with friends and family trumps the savings.


As to Noah's points


2) What DIY options are close to the ambient light rejection as the BDII ? You mentioned that some exist but the missing link was the links to the threads of what they are and how to do them.


My primary purpose for this screen is to reject ambient light that I know I will have because the theater is in a walkout basement which means sunlight during the day and at night there is also a billiard room connected which often will provide have ambient light as well.


3) Linking to an entire forum isn't very helpful. I have to agree 100% especially when the forum is just a sub forum of the one you are already on. Linking to that forum is the equivalent of telling a runner that they could run faster if they wanted then not telling them how but instead telling them there is a library across town with books on the topic. While it could be viewed by some as helpful since he pointed that person in the right direction, no real knowledge was shared just that the knowledge exists in a sea of books across town. Now if you share with the runner which books at the library are the ones he should checkout that would be a different story. Opening that forum pops up a a sea of DIY ideas and methods, some tested, some proven and some just ideas, certainly many of them work better than others. Speaking for myself, the person looking at a $2,500 screen is not the person who wants to test out 20 different DIY options to get the right one. If your desire is really to help, pointing out specific threads you think apply to the discussion here and methods of building a DIY screen similar to the BD II would be infinitely more helpful.


----------



## MississippiMan

It's counterproductive and not appropriate to wax effusive about DIY Screen making on this, a forum dedicated to Mfg. Screens. My intrusion was meant to make people aware of alternatives to an extremely expensive Screen application, not continue posting to justify the reasons they exist. No one on AVS can state that I am reluctant to share.....but just as one should not post links to specific Mfg Screens over on DIY Screens, I too should not...and will not specifically direct members to specific DIY applications on a Forum dedicated to selling....not "making" screens.


There are other venues one can take to explore options. You can always ask via PM, or post on the Forum I've linked to. _You've gotten a few others sent to you privately._ All that needs to be said is that for over 8 years I personally have tweaked the noses of almost every existing Mfg Screen option that exists. and my primary goal was/ has been /still is to help others experience the satisfaction of accomplishment....not just spend to excess and most certainly not to settle for less than what is needed or expected. More so...to expect more than expected.


How you deal with that opportunity must be up to you.


----------



## noah katz

MM,


The Chromavue is in the category of "black" screens, so I don't see that as a valid counterpoint.


"Virtually any well matched up (w/PJ) neutral Gray of a dark shade will effectively combat the effects of reasonable ambient light, without drastically reducing viewing cone."


True, but you left out the dealbreaker, the cost in brightness.


AFAIK any DIY formulation is saddled with the same tradeoffs as any passive angular reflective screen, i.e. black level, brightness, or viewing angle/hotspotting.


The "black" screens all have unique reflectivity or color-selective properties that increase the on-screen CR in ambient light.


I'd put the Dalite Hipower in an in-between category because of the properties its retrotreflectivity gives.


----------



## dukeav




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/18740849
> 
> 
> (Strange they did not compare the BD to a simple Gray high contrast Screen....?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok...not so strange really.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )



...there a couple of reviews of BD against gray, which put BD on top.


----------



## MTyson

I am currently bidding on a Dynaclear. I just wish they were larger than 80". I will do some direct comparisons if I win.


From what I've seen of the Black Diamond II and Dynaclear is that they crush gray screens in ambient light. I have a gray screen that is fairly dark and have used light gray screens as well. The dark gray screen has a HUGE increase in contrast, but it darkens the image too much in day scenes especially. The difference between them and the BDII and Dynaclear is that those reject ambient light well while retaining the bright end better. And yes, comparisons have shown that the BDII beat the gray screens in ambient light....as it should.


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *snarks* /forum/post/18740412
> 
> 
> well I haven't tested it against a DIY painted wall or sheet but at our local home theater store i was able to view it against several "white" screens and the performance with ambient light was nothing short of astounding.



I have owned a 1.4 gain BD for 8 months.


Look to see where the ambient light in the home theater store is coming from. It is possible to set up the lighting in a viewing room to make the BD look really, really good in comparison to a white screen. However, in your own room, especially if you have side windows, the screen might not look anywhere near as good.


My BD replaced a gray Dalite HCCW. In my viewing room with a side window with closed blinds, I would rate the BD as slightly better than than the HCCW in rejecting ambient light. The BD has a very visible hot spot which I find to be very distracting. It manifests itself as an area with extra large sparklies. I still haven't gotten used to it. I regret spending almost $3000.00 for the BD.


----------



## snarks

man that is really helpful , thank you


----------



## noah katz




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MTyson* /forum/post/18747616
> 
> 
> The dark gray screen has a HUGE increase in contrast, but it darkens the image too much in day scenes especially.



Unless the it has directional properties, it only *appears* to have more contrast because of the lower black level.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MTyson* /forum/post/18747616
> 
> 
> I am currently bidding on a Dynaclear. I just wish they were larger than 80". I will do some direct comparisons if I win.
> 
> 
> From what I've seen of the Black Diamond II and Dynaclear is that they crush gray screens in ambient light. I have a gray screen that is fairly dark and have used light gray screens as well. The dark gray screen has a HUGE increase in contrast, but it darkens the image too much in day scenes especially. The difference between them and the BDII and Dynaclear is that those reject ambient light well while retaining the bright end better. And yes, comparisons have shown that the BDII beat the gray screens in ambient light....as it should.



I have a Dynaclear that I will sell you for cheap. It was used only once.


It looks very nice straight on but has one helluva drop off from the sides.


----------



## snarks

OK this is killing me . I stopped over at best buy and viewed a 0.8 II with a JVC projector. I was looking for sparkles on bright screens and didn't see anything that bothered me. I also moved myself 3-4 feet to the right of where my seats would be placed and the brightness of the screen was more than satisfactory , I certainly didn't notice one side was brighter than the other from a viewing position. The ambient light difference wasn't as dramatic as the 1.4 was at the home theater store but the picture is still what i would call viewable with day time sports. The lighting at BB was much closer to what you would see in a home. There were bright lights in the walls to simulate windows and ceiling lights pointed at the screen as well as away. All of which were separately dimmable so you could see how it would perform. They also had a white screen you could hold in front of it.


I would say the color was a bit different and the whites were not as white but over all I am pretty certain I will be satisfied with it in my home after viewing it at BB. It is possible that another brand or a DIY version might perform close for much less but I haven't had the fortune to see another brand in person that did as well . As to the DIY it seems that it might be possible do as well or better if you are willing to do a lot of research and mess around with several mixes till you get the right one for your room. I am not 100% convinced that the DIY version will be as good but even if it is my weekends with my family are worth more to me than my money, I can always earn more money, time with my family is finite.


----------



## MississippiMan

.....because you still don't know enough to make an informed decision.


I don't know where that "If you have the time to research and experiment" stuff comes from since you don't have to search or experiment, just relate what your needs/situation requires and you can get a specific answer. You have to decide to ask though....and yeah...for some that can be the hardest part...next to actually accepting and taking the advice/suggestion to breast.


DIY holding up to or going beyond the BD .8 was never in question nor in doubt. Only the 1.4 screen offers a challenge. Of sorts.










Viewing the .8 you are not seeing most of the detrimental aspects with the .8 is because really, it as a comparison wasn't being considered. It's far more restrained in what it does and how it does it, so naturally it's not going to exhibit the drop off in viewing cone, nor will it show sparkle-ies at .8 that a 1.4 will most definitely do.


Another thing...with a JVC and it's excellent uniformity of light, true Lumen specs, deep ansi Contrast specs, as well as no visible image structure to be highlighted by reflective grain texture...and lastly with it shooting onto just 80"....my word, if it (BD.8) couldn't look splendid with all that going for it, it would be a sorry arse demo and a poor excuse for a Screen at the price listed. Only a white screen to hold up, eh> Too bad they didn't offer a simple Gray HCCV or risk a Stewart Fire Hawk. The Boys there obviously knew how to mitigate issues and use what they could/can/should to best advantage. No different that what we teach people over yonder.










But as you said, at least it was an attempt to duplicate a real world lighting situation.


The real choice, since time, choice, availability and cost are not at issue with DIY, is if you want to spend more money than necessary for the convenience and considerable extra expense of just "buying", and thereby restrict yourself to size and brightness limitations.


To me, that's a easy choice...I wouldn't do it. But that's me ...and Wadda I no frum nuthin'?










But your last paragraph really speaks volumes as to where the differences lie.....not so much in getting value AND performance....



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *snarks* /forum/post/18751843
> 
> 
> I am not 100% convinced that the DIY version will be as good *but even if it is* my weekends with my family are worth more to me than my money, I can always earn more money, time with my family is finite.



......but just being willing to spend and get it the hell over with. That has always been the toughest reasoning to overcome...and quite frankly, the reason there are two separate "Screens" forums. When people want to spend...not "do"...the gulf shows just how wide it is between the two camps.


But of course the most important thing of all is that it is indeed your decision to make, be you informed or aware regardless....and I'm not going to be one to dispute the value of having all the quality time possible with your family.


I've sacrificed a lot of that myself....right here.


----------



## pb_maxxx

Lawguy - (dynaclear) - It looks very nice straight on but has one helluva drop off from the sides.

Noah Katz - Unless the it has directional properties, it only *appears* to have more contrast because of the lower black level.

Karlsh - I have owned a 1.4 gain BD for 8 months.


Look to see where the ambient light in the home theater store is coming from. It is possible to set up the lighting in a viewing room to make the BD look really, really good in comparison to a white screen. However, in your own room, especially if you have side windows, the screen might not look anywhere near as good.


My BD replaced a gray Dalite HCCW. In my viewing room with a side window with closed blinds, I would rate the BD as slightly better than than the HCCW in rejecting ambient light. The BD has a very visible hot spot which I find to be very distracting. It manifests itself as an area with extra large sparklies. I still haven't gotten used to it. I regret spending almost $3000.00 for the BD.


...................................


All excellent real world responses and experiences with a $3000 screen... so unless someone can show me that spending 30x more for it then my own screen... which my family can watch during the daytime... even from extreme angles...


i'll keep the money in pocket and pass the love to my family.


----------



## noah katz




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/18752940
> 
> 
> DIY holding up to or going beyond the BD .8 was never in question nor in doubt.



Correct; I have no doubt that DIY cannot come close to the improved ambient light CR.


----------



## snarks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/18752940
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ......but just being willing to spend and get it the hell over with. That has always been the toughest reasoning to overcome...and quite frankly, the reason there are two separate "Screens" forums. When people want to spend...not "do"...the gulf shows just how wide it is between the two camps.
> 
> 
> But of course the most important thing of all is that it is indeed your decision to make, be you informed or aware regardless....and I'm not going to be one to dispute the value of having all the quality time possible with your family.



It really seems like you are trying to win a battle here rather than share your opinion on what worked for you. While I appreciate your input it comes across like you found the DIY Holy Grail and anyone who doesn't do what you did or suggest is wasting their money or time.


You are right, there is a DIY screen forum and a retail forum and probably for good reason. The priorities and needs of the two different segments do not overlap as much as one might think. DIY by nature is for people who enjoy hands on projects and want to save money doing it. While you don't have to agree with other peoples priorities it is important to respect them.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/18752940
> 
> 
> 
> Viewing the .8 you are not seeing most of the detrimental aspects with the .8 is because really, it as a comparison wasn't being considered. It's far more restrained in what it does and how it does it, so naturally it's not going to exhibit the drop off in viewing cone, nor will it show sparkle-ies at .8 that a 1.4 will most definitely do.



I disagree with this portion above.


I've checked out both the .8 and the 1.4 BD screens. The .8 version actually seems to be the more "aggressive" screen in terms of the approach to rejecting ambient light and room reflections. It takes a Stewart Firehawk kind of approach, with a darker screen substrate (gray on the Firehawk) to help lower reflected light on the screen, and gain coating to raise the brightness to acceptable viewing levels, focused toward the viewer (which also helps keep reflected light off the surroundings).


The BD takes this approach and puts it on steroids, with a super dark screen substrate, looking almost "black" in person...but this means they also clearly had to apply a lot of gain via an optical coating to both direct light off surroundings and focus it to the viewer to get acceptable brightness back.


In contrast to your characterisation, I find it a very aggressive screen coating in that respect - heavy on the "sparkly screen" effect and with the most severe hot-spotting I've ever encountered in a screen.


When I viewed the 1.4 version I was disappointed at it's much less impressive performance in rejecting ambient light. The .8 BD screen is a monster in that respect, really impressive with ambient light; the 1.4 not nearly so...while the 1.4 also tends to carry forward the same problems of sparkly screen structure and hot-spotting too.


To me Black Diamond's "killer app" is their .8 screen, which really does offer a level of performance in ambient light hard to find elsewhere. If I were looking for a brighter image, personally I'd sooner be looking to something like the Stewart Firehawk vs the BD 1.4 screen.


FWIW.


----------



## snarks

well i went back to BB tonight to look at the 92" 0.8 screen again in more depth. This time i turned off all the other TV's in the room and played with the lights even more. I still didn't notice any sparkles however I did notice a couple things


1) I would like it if the image was a bit brighter. Possible the LG cf181d would provide the additional light I'd like? i didn't see the model but it was a JVC projector.


2) the whites were not as white as I'd like. Again would a brighter projector help with this or this a limitation of the screen material ?


3) things looked a bit bluer than normal, I had read about this in a review and probably the only reason I noticed it. This something you can calibrate around ?


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pb_maxxx* /forum/post/18753366
> 
> 
> ... so unless someone can show me that spending 30x more for it then my own screen... which my family can watch during the daytime... even from extreme angles...
> 
> 
> i'll keep the money in pocket and pass the love to my family.



Was someone trying to show you something?










I am not sure why the DIYers are so up in arms about this screen.


Personally, having seen the .8 BD, I think it has its strengths and weaknesses.


Its biggest weakness is that it needs a lot of lumens to light it up. I saw it with a JVC RS15 and even with its iris wide open. With the lights on (there was a lot of light in that room) it had a hard time lighting up a 92" 16:9 screen. It has a visible texture also (the screen does not disappear) but I think I could live with that because it was not so bad. I didn't see any hotspotting and off axis viewing wasn't too bad. There also seemed to be a pretty big color shift, but that was hard to tell because the RS15's colors are off to begin with.


Its biggest strength is that it does a better job of preserving blacks with room lighting on than any other screen I have ever seen. My High Power is probably more watchable with lighting on for sports or material that doesn't depend on blacks. This is so because the HP is much brighter. But, the BD does a much better job preserving blacks in a lit room. It does so at the expense of lumens.


I didn't spend much time with the BD with the lights off.


As a general rule, many people want to think that screens can be magic but that is clearly not so. The biggest mistake someone could make would be to buy a large BD screen (over 92", which is not really large), pair it with a "typical" HT projector (ie not the brightest projector around) and place it in their living room. They will surely be disappointed. But, if you have a very bright projector and a reasonable screen size, the BD will probably work very well. I wonder how a BD would look with a low contrast high-lumen LCD projector. My guess is that it would pretty darn good.


People are, in many respects, trying to fit a square peg in a round hole when they try to turn their front projector into a living room TV. You might get there, but only in some ways, and there will be things that you don't like. Ideally, to best preserve image quality, have a dark room and a 1.0 gain screen that has a wide viewing angle and no color shift.


Like many other people, I am guilty of trying to cheat a little and mostly sleep well at night with the compromises that I have made.


----------



## bud16415




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/18755713
> 
> 
> I am not sure why the DIYers are so up in arms about this screen.



I’m an avid DIYer and I have no opposition to any commercial screens. I sometimes have opposition to the way things get marketed and there is as much if not more marketing over in the DIY screen forum as here.


In the case of the BD screens I remember watching their demo and the astonishment everyone had when seeing it. You take a light canon and blast it on a white screen at a calibration so high there is absolutely no CR in the image. All that extra rebound light is bouncing around the room lighting it up and then you add in some lights that hit the diffusive screen washing out all but enough CR that you can tell there is a image there. Then you lower a BD screen that’s very dark and properly calibrated with some directional gain that rejects the outside placed ambient lights, and the dark screen attenuates much of the projected light limiting the rebound ambient. Then you stop the screen and compare a half screen ANSI like image very bright on the white and much better on the dark screen, causing the eyes iris to contract further improving the perception of contrast.


Like you mentioned the images are selected also to be more ANSI in contrast, and it’s amazing. We have people in the DIY world that show similar comparisons all the time.


Overdriving a darker neutral screen. is a tried and true method for combating ambient light, the more lumens the darker you can get and the ratio of outside light to projected light improves preserving ANSI CR from the projector and promotes the perception of contrast. The down side is always going to be images that are less mixed contrast and closer to on off contrast. Those inky blacks go away pretty fast when the screen fades to black.


If you have ambient or you desire ambient as in my case, the more lumens the better and the darker screen the better. Just be aware things like sports will reward much more than dark movie images. I desired a sports bar lighting room so most of my ambient was added back in. what I found in that case was the dark screen worked very well also in movie mode when killing the lights. Kind of a compromise with a nice twist.


----------



## noah katz

I wonder how a HP tinted down to .8 gain would compare to the BD...


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/18756795
> 
> 
> I wonder how a HP tinted down to .8 gain would compare to the BD...



I would love to see that also.


----------



## snarks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/18752940
> 
> 
> .....because you still don't know enough to make an informed decision.



I decided you may be right.


I like the DBII 0.8 in person and feel it suits my needs but it is crazy expensive. I decided I should open my mind and should give a DIY version like silver fire a try.


Since i wont have a BDII in the room I wont be able to really compare the two but will report back if the ambient light rejection coupled with the LGECF181D produces satisfying results.


----------



## carloserodriguez

I want to purchase the JVC DLA HD-990 and the Screen Innovations Black Diamond II. Are you familiar with these? If so, which gain, .8 or 1.4 would serve better in a family room that is not very dark, except at night?


----------



## coldmachine

The BDII is, without doubt, one of the most disappointing HT products I have ever seen.


Its off axis performance renders it utterly useless for any decent sized viewing angle. The horrendous sparklies are also intolerable.


It does reject ambient light well, subject to its incidence angle, and reduces the nasty effects of wall and ceiling reflections in a poor room.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *coldmachine* /forum/post/18804818
> 
> 
> The BDII is, without doubt, one of the most disappointing HT products I have ever seen.
> 
> 
> Its off axis performance renders it utterly useless for any decent sized viewing angle. The horrendous sparklies are also intolerable.
> 
> 
> It does reject ambient light well, subject to its incidence angle, and reduces the nasty effects of wall and ceiling reflections in a poor room.



It's only disappointing if you expect magic. This is not a reference-quality screen or something close to it. It is a screen for people who want something bigger than currently available Plasmas or LCDs for use in a room with strategically placed light for people who are willing to make some compromises. It is a niche product.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *carloserodriguez* /forum/post/18803811
> 
> 
> I want to purchase the JVC DLA HD-990 and the Screen Innovations Black Diamond II. Are you familiar with these? If so, which gain, .8 or 1.4 would serve better in a family room that is not very dark, except at night?



Your money is probably better spent in buying window treatments to block the light.


----------



## coldmachine




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/18805009
> 
> 
> It's only disappointing if you expect magic. This is not a reference-quality screen or something close to it. It is a screen for people who want something bigger than currently available Plasmas or LCDs for use in a room with strategically placed light for people who are willing to make some compromises. It is a niche product.




I certainly didn't expect magic. I am more than experienced enough to understand that there is no free lunch in his game. I am also fully aware of the intended use(s) for this screen.


The 2 points I made regarding a very poor half gain angle, and its predisposition to generate sparklies, are simple statements of fact.


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *coldmachine* /forum/post/18805214
> 
> 
> I certainly didn't expect magic. I am more than experienced enough to understand that there is no free lunch in his game. I am also fully aware of the intended use(s) for this screen.
> 
> 
> The 2 points I made regarding a very poor half gain angle, and its predisposition to generate sparklies, are simple statements of fact.



A voice of reason heard emanating from the wilderness.










Compromising "any" degree of performance has never been on my agenda. If such must be done to any extent, that extent has to fall within so low a level as to be inconsequential. Of course, then it no longer bothers one anyway.


But a product such as this is really intended for those who need something to compensate for circumstances that they really should be working to correct at the root of the problem.


Only after acquiring such, do they become aware of the caveats. Bluntly put (..and actually in keeping with Lawguy's statement..) it's a product that is best suited for those with annoying yet _*reasonably*_ tractable lighting issues, who also want a "somewhat" larger screen than 65" diagonal, and who sit within a very limited seating arrangement. Also they must have money to burn, and be willing to accept obviously staged promotional shots as being sacrosanct to actual real life performance.


Who ARE these people????? I don't know, but they need to remember to turn off their garden hose before going to bed lest they bleed off even more money needlessly.


----------



## Lawguy

It's not always about the money. I can see where a Black Diamond would be worth it for many people. With a typical HT projector and a screen size of 90" or less, I think that this would look great in many living rooms. Its biggest fault is that it needs a lot of light. Off axis permormance is really not that bad, at least on the .8 gain version.


----------



## coldmachine




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/18805438
> 
> 
> It's not always about the money.



Absolutely. Im motivated by performance rather than cost. If it had been able to deliver as promised, I would have been glad to pay far more than the asking price.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *coldmachine* /forum/post/18805501
> 
> 
> Absolutely. Im motivated by performance rather than cost. If it had been able to deliver as promised, I would have been glad to pay far more than the asking price.



The biggest problem is, as you say, that too much has been promised. I don't think there is any guidance on SI's website or otherwise that really tells anyone the dos and don'ts for this screen.


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/18805566
> 
> 
> The biggest problem is, as you say, that too much has been promised. I don't think there is any guidance on SI's website or otherwise that really tells anyone the dos and don'ts for this screen.



Well that's a given.










It would be counterproductive for the Mfg of such a high price screen to point out the issues that come along with it.


Nope...it's all about movin' dem screens out the door.










As far as the .8 gain version, that's even less an issue because there are other far less expensive solutions that meet or exceed that particular unit, especially since with it's lower gain, it needs extra lumens all the more. If the Lumens are available...then so too are the alternatives, most without nearly the issues the BD has to offer.


----------



## coldmachine




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/18805594
> 
> 
> It would be counterproductive for the Mfg of such a high price screen to point out the issues that come along with it.



I dont think thats necessarily true per se, and its certainly not the case with many companies who make far more expensive screens. Many provide data sheets that are not only extensive, but very accurate, and every parameter is absolutely guaranteed.


----------



## noah katz




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/18805369
> 
> 
> Compromising "any" degree of performance has never been on my agenda. If such must be done to any extent, that extent has to fall within so low a level as to be inconsequential.



Good luck with that.


You seem to be claiming immunity to the laws of physics, whence the need to compromise arises.


----------



## send

Here is the latest Black Diamond screen review. http://www.screeninnovations.com/rev...t-butterworth/ 


We appreciate everyone's support.


Blake


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/18807119
> 
> 
> Good luck with that.
> 
> 
> You seem to be claiming immunity to the laws of physics, whence the need to compromise arises.



Noah, your always the first to declare such, but in virtually ANY example i show of Silver Fire under similar or worse lighting than the reviewed BD screen above, it trumps what was shown.


...and Brother, you'll never EVER see those hanging folds either!





















:


I'd be sooooooooo PO'd to spend even $500.00 for that sort of result, let alone 5x that. I do however commend the Poster offering up the review for sacrificial consumption though. It takes real Gonads to wave and smile just before throwing one's self off the precipice.







If Honesty is the best Policy, then we all just heard a truly abject Confession


To wit....compare THIS amount of lighting, and resulting LACK of wash out. Yes there is some, but in no manner or degree as much as the BD screen showed with Florescent Bulbs situated to the SIDE...not directly in front as shown below (..which FYI were 500 Watt Clear Incandescent Bulbs..)


Physics or no...the image below doesn't lie, nor pull any punches. The BD would have given up the Ghost for sure.


PJ used was a Optoma 1610 WXGA ... Screen is a 140" diagonal Silver Fire Light Fusion 6.0 All Images taken 'hand held' with a $200.00 Canon ELP Digi-cam while the image was in "motion".









*

Viewing cone issues? T'ain't nun....







*









*

A little fuzzy this next one due to motion, but the angle....? Whoo Boy!*











This last shot shows the greatest effect due to 1000 watts staring it down, ....but simply because it doesn't even contain much "black" content.

And keep in mind the PJ is shooting "through & between' those big lamps











I've said and shown all that needs to be done, so I'll depart...dragging the Corpse of my Foe behind my Chariot.


----------



## Lawguy

I'm not sure why you think those pictures with the lights in front of them don't look washed out. They look very washed out to me.


----------



## noah katz




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/18810712
> 
> 
> I've said and shown all that needs to be done, so I'll depart...dragging the Corpse of my Foe behind my Chariot.



You can't win a comparison by showing only one of the contenders.


Show them side by side in the same image so that camera settings aren't a variable and maybe you'd have a case.


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/18814074
> 
> 
> You can't win a comparison by showing only one of the contenders.
> 
> *And why not.....SI & the Reviewer certainly didn't bother too, and when SI does it't always against a White screen....hardly a comparison. Instead, I show an example with perhaps 10x as much lighting and get your typical "living in denial" response.*
> 
> 
> Show them side by side in the same image so that camera settings aren't a variable and maybe you'd have a case.



Like anyone else but you couldn't see that if anything, both the screen and the Camera were at particular diadvantage, and still the image was/is far improved over the BD under obviously far worse lighting conditions.

*I did not favor my results by having weak light coming from the side, leaving my strong suit (forward reflectability) unchallenged, but rather showed "far more intense" light coming directly from the Front.


You tell me what Camera setting can effectively ignore a source of brighter light between the subject and the lens?


Look at the BD again. The entire top 1/3rd of the image is GONE! And that with just sideways directed light, supposedly the BD's strongest (most easily) handled specialty.


Sorry... there can be no excuses, only tears.*


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/18811917
> 
> 
> I'm not sure why you think those pictures with the lights in front of them don't look washed out. They look very washed out to me.



Compared to the BD and being under far more duress, the images show much better. It's not supposed to be an ideal example of "dark room performance" you know. But rather a depiction of one screen doing a better job under worse circumstances than another screen uunder lessor disadvantage.


The Reviewer himself said the BD suffered, but the image was something he "could" watch. Hardly a plaudit...just really a honest evaluation. How much more so "watchable" would he judge the images above?


Quite a bit I'd venture. But thats MHO.


----------



## dukeav




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/18814605
> 
> 
> 
> Quite a bit I'd venture. But thats MHO.



MHO, "humble" really? ...MHO should be read as MAO "arrogant", you ignore all the positive reviews and bash BD.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/18814534
> 
> 
> *
> 
> Look at the BD again. The entire top 1/3rd of the image is GONE! And that with just sideways directed light, supposedly the BD's strongest (most easily) handled specialty.
> 
> 
> Sorry... there can be no excuses, only tears.*



Look at the "BD" again, its not BD. The image on page 2 of the review is of the drop down Gamma screen, perhaps your arrogance blinds you.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/18814605
> 
> 
> Compared to the BD and being under far more duress, the images show much better. It's not supposed to be an ideal example of "dark room performance" you know. But rather a depiction of one screen doing a better job under worse circumstances than another screen uunder lessor disadvantage.
> 
> 
> The Reviewer himself said the BD suffered, but the image was something he "could" watch. Hardly a plaudit...just really a honest evaluation. How much more so "watchable" would he judge the images above?
> 
> 
> Quite a bit I'd venture. But thats MHO.



You're not getting it. The BD does a good job of preserving contrast (ie black level) with a pretty large amount of ambient light in the room. This is its real strength. Your pictures may show a brighter image but they totally lack contrast. There is nothing close to black in your pictures.


----------



## snarks

My LG projector arrived yesterday and we plugged it in. The image is being projected on my dark brown walls to about 130". The colors were certainly off however the image was very watchable to the point that my wife suggested we go without a screen so the room looks better LOL .... Even when we turned on every light and opened all the shades the image was extremely watchable. To the point that I know guests wouldn't know any better if i invited them over for football during the day.


We then covered half the viewable area with white sintra. The effect was very similar to what you see in the SI videos. Completely washed out and not viewable in any way while the dark half was just fine.


What I got out of this for myself is BD may be a really nice screen and I believe it is "possible" that it will outperform DIY paint if you our you guests have a real discerning eye. However if you are an average TV viewer I don't think you would appreciate the 3k screen more than the Diy screen enough to justify the cost. This projectors out of the box ambient light performance on my dark brown walls leaves me knowing that I will be satisfied with silver fire 3/6 or black widow. I am going to try all three this weekend.


----------



## swgiust

Missippi man, geez take a chill pill. Nobody is making you buy this screen.

BTW the pictures you show would not be acceptable to me.


Snarks, thanks for your input. I will be interested in following up on your test.


I have been reading this thread for information on the Black Diamond. If I want info on other screens, I will read other threads.


I am going to see one this weekend. 100" with a JVC HD-550 projector.

Pretty much exactly what I want to buy.


The goal is to be able to watch sports, but not in total darkness. I am able to control the light in my room, and there will be no sunlight.


So I will continue to read, and hope that people will continue to post information on this screen.


----------



## noah katz

"The goal is to be able to watch sports, but not in total darkness. I am able to control the light in my room, and there will be no sunlight."


Sounds like a HP might work for you, at much lower cost.


----------



## swgiust

Thanks Noah,


I have been looking at the HP screens as well. There is ALOT of information to try and digest. I wish I had a light meter so I could sit in my room and decide exactly how much light or lack of that I can stand while watching sports.


I am very concerned about blacks. That's why I'm looking at the JVC projector. I hate LCD tv's, they looked washed out. That's what got me thinking about "black" screens.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/18805438
> 
> 
> It's not always about the money. I can see where a Black Diamond would be worth it for many people. With a typical HT projector and a screen size of 90" or less, I think that this would look great in many living rooms. Its biggest fault is that it needs a lot of light. *Off axis permormance is really not that bad, at least on the .8 gain version.*



(Bolding mine)


I'm always amazed how differently people can see things.


I've viewed most of the contender commercial screens in action, including most of the leading gray screens/gray screens with gain that help combat ambient/reflected light. The .8 version of the Black Diamond, which I viewed numerous times, was easily the worst offender I've ever seen in terms of producing hot-spotting/uneven illumination with off-axis viewing.

I was just appalled how dim the far side of the image became as I moved off-axis (and not extreme off axis at that).


Projector central described this issue in their review and even provided screen shots to show the issue. Look at the 3 first screen shots, how dark the right side of the image becomes by the time you are even 35 degrees off-angle.

http://www.projectorcentral.com/si_b...een_review.htm 


I didn't need to get near 35 degrees off axis to notice the issue.


And I think some folks assume the screen with the lower gain rating is the one that has less optical gain and might have better viewing angles. But with specialty screens like the BD that's not the case. The .8 version actually has quite a bit of added gain via an optical coating - more than the 1.4 version. Look at how amazingly dark the substrate screen color is - it borders on black. That is mostly for absorbing the room reflections. To get the image up to a usable brightness and focus that light to the viewer, I'm sure they have to add substantial gain to the screen coating - hence the comments of screen grain and narrow viewing angle. The 1.4 version has a substantially lighter substrate - looks closer to a Stewart Firehawk shade, so less gain is needed on the coating. And the optical coating/gain is what focuses the light to the viewer, making the image brighter from on axis. Which is why Sound and Vision reported much wider viewing angles on the 1.4 version over the .8 version.


Note also that the 35 degress to 1/2 gain spec is, I'm sure, for the side of the image closer to the viewer. Remember this screen is not retro-reflective like the Da Lite High Power screen (which allows the HP screen to maintain mostly even screen brightness even as it drops gain off-axis). Since the BD screen hot-spots so severely, it doesn't maintain anything like an even gain as you move off axis. Look at the projector central photos again and you'll see the closer side of the image (left side) drops to what looks like the 1/2 gain point at 35 degrees, whereas the far side (right side) drops to much darker than 1/2 gain. So well before you've moved to 35 degrees off axis you are already dropping the gain significantly on one side of the screen.


Now I'm definitely not saying the BD screen isn't a viable product. I'm very glad it exists to offer the type of option it does to people. There are some type of compromises to be made in almost any screen choice - at least for non dedicated rooms. And for me, so long as you are watching from the sweet spot, one big benefit of a BD .8 screen is how little light it throws back on to the surrounding ceiling/walls/floor. Having the front of the room less lit up definitely enhances the viewing experience.


But if the off-axis performance of this screen is "really not that bad" I can't think of what "bad" would be, given I've never seen worse.


Cheers,


----------



## Lawguy

I don't think I disagree with anything you wrote, Rich. What is "not that bad" is subjective. It is certainly better than the Dynaclear (another black screen - but one in which the image virtually disappears at extreme angles). I would say that what I saw is typical for what one sees with the average high-gain rear projection TV. Either you can live with this or you can't.


For me, the off-axis permormance is not the biggest issue with this screen. The biggest issue for me is brightness. The 92 inch .8 gain screen that I saw was not as bright as I wanted it to be when fired by a JVC rs15 with the iris wide open. That issue is followed by the visible surface texture that is a product of the screen's high gain coating. I would place the off-axis issue as the third issue with this screen.


I did not see any hot spot - by which I mean the typical bright spot in the center of the screen (mostly visible on bright, uniform scenes) that is common on high gain screens like the Silverstar. It could be that there is one but it did not reveal itself on the material that I viewed.


I have not seen the 1.4 gain version on anything except a small sample so I can't really address how good or bad it is, except that when I taped the sample to my screen, the texture of the sample was very noticable, moreso than the .8 version.


Again, I think that the BD would work best either by keeping screen size small (90" or under) or using a very bright projector. If used in these ways, I think the BD would look very good for day time viewing.


----------



## bud16415




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/18823804
> 
> 
> Again, I think that the BD would work best either by keeping screen size small (90" or under) or using a very bright projector. If used in these ways, I think the BD would look very good for day time viewing.



That's why I went with a .45 gain dark screen 120 inch and 2000 lumens lighting it up. High dispersion wide viewing angle and no hot spotting. It's all about taking from Peter to pay Paul. If I could find a 4000 lumen projector I would go darker lower gain yet.


As the ambient level in the room goes up the returning FL have to also, along with the gain going down (darker screen) so you need twice the lumens you think each time you step up one.


IMO people with desire for lights on or have ambient light they can't deal with should be much more concerned with the projectors brightness spec than the CR spec. And then adjust the screen. you are going to loose the CR anyway you look at it with ambient light issues. Your best chance at preserving CR is with lumens and a dark screen.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bud16415* /forum/post/18825818
> 
> 
> That's why I went with a .45 gain dark screen 120 inch and 2000 lumens lighting it up. High dispersion wide viewing angle and no hot spotting. It's all about taking from Peter to pay Paul. If I could find a 4000 lumen projector I would go darker lower gain yet.
> 
> 
> As the ambient level in the room goes up the returning FL have to also, along with the gain going down (darker screen) so you need twice the lumens you think each time you step up one.
> 
> 
> IMO people with desire for lights on or have ambient light they can't deal with should be much more concerned with the projectors brightness spec than the CR spec. And then adjust the screen. you are going to loose the CR anyway you look at it with ambient light issues. Your best chance at preserving CR is with lumens and a dark screen.



Great insight.


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *swgiust* /forum/post/18820173
> 
> 
> Missippi man, geez take a chill pill. Nobody is making you buy this screen.
> 
> BTW the pictures you show would not be acceptable to me.



It seems that no one who has offered rebuttal on my comments seems to take into consideration that the observed results were in no way taken with any intent to mitigate or compensate for the amount of, intensity of, nor direction of the light involved. Nor do they make note of the extremely larger Screen size in use (135" diagonal vs 100")


Those shots were intentionally taken in a worst case lighting situation, (...*FAR* worse than the "tested BD...) specifically to show that even under such duress, the Screen could and does perform better than virtually anything else available....and most assuredly at the size shown. I certainly know well enough how to "favor" results, but posting up such favoritism doesn't bode well when someone else tries to duplicate such a thing and fails to do so. Companies care about the "Bottom Line" profits when they advertise. DIY advocates who make recommendations to others have reputations to uphold. There IS a difference between the two camps for certain, although I'll admit that those who are inclined to 'purchase' rather than "make" usually cannot see such as being relevant.


Brook no mistake, at 100" diagonal and under the meager amount of light the BD screen was shown at, the SF screen I offered up for viewing would show a marked improvement, if not indeed equal or surpass the BD in every aspect of viewing performance.


My posting was not / is not to be construed as being an attempt to sway anyone toward DIY'ism. I know this particular Forum is for Mfg. Screens. But when considering such a Mfg. Screen, especially one at the price point it is at, it behooves anyone with specific knowledge and experience with such things....experience that goes beyond simply buying something themselves...to relate the truths and facts about what is really happening.


I've been involved with working against the Ambient Light Issue for 6 years. I've seen the ChromaVu - Clear View - BD all up close and personal, and I feel completely justified in reporting my observations and evaluations.


The BD has it's strong points, and it has it's obvious caveats. If one is not a DIY'er, or simply just wants something 'quick', then very obviously the BD Screen is really the obvious choice for combating ambient light issues.


Truth be known though, that old girl the ChromaVu, matched up with a Panny 200u, would do just as good a job as the BD .80 under any/all circumstances.


Prospective Owners should know all the points of order, and my commentary, along with everyone else's, is essential to providing a balanced outlook.

*It has nothing to do with being arrogant.* However as someone who has always done his darnedest to help people realize exceptional results for the least amount of cash outlay, in this case...just as any dissatisfied Customer has the right to have, I have little else but disdain for the BD's performance claims / value.


----------



## send

FYI: You are referring to Black Diamond I not Black Diamond II. The viewing cone has been significantly increased. Here are the latest reviews.


Projector Central
http://www.projectorcentral.com/SI_b...een_review.htm 


Sound & Vision
http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/con...ection-screens 


Thanks,


Blake



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/18821949
> 
> 
> (Bolding mine)
> 
> 
> I'm always amazed how differently people can see things.
> 
> 
> I've viewed most of the contender commercial screens in action, including most of the leading gray screens/gray screens with gain that help combat ambient/reflected light. The .8 version of the Black Diamond, which I viewed numerous times, was easily the worst offender I've ever seen in terms of producing hot-spotting/uneven illumination with off-axis viewing.
> 
> I was just appalled how dim the far side of the image became as I moved off-axis (and not extreme off axis at that).
> 
> 
> Projector central described this issue in their review and even provided screen shots to show the issue. Look at the 3 first screen shots, how dark the right side of the image becomes by the time you are even 35 degrees off-angle.
> 
> http://www.projectorcentral.com/si_b...een_review.htm
> 
> 
> I didn't need to get near 35 degrees off axis to notice the issue.
> 
> 
> And I think some folks assume the screen with the lower gain rating is the one that has less optical gain and might have better viewing angles. But with specialty screens like the BD that's not the case. The .8 version actually has quite a bit of added gain via an optical coating - more than the 1.4 version. Look at how amazingly dark the substrate screen color is - it borders on black. That is mostly for absorbing the room reflections. To get the image up to a usable brightness and focus that light to the viewer, I'm sure they have to add substantial gain to the screen coating - hence the comments of screen grain and narrow viewing angle. The 1.4 version has a substantially lighter substrate - looks closer to a Stewart Firehawk shade, so less gain is needed on the coating. And the optical coating/gain is what focuses the light to the viewer, making the image brighter from on axis. Which is why Sound and Vision reported much wider viewing angles on the 1.4 version over the .8 version.
> 
> 
> Note also that the 35 degress to 1/2 gain spec is, I'm sure, for the side of the image closer to the viewer. Remember this screen is not retro-reflective like the Da Lite High Power screen (which allows the HP screen to maintain mostly even screen brightness even as it drops gain off-axis). Since the BD screen hot-spots so severely, it doesn't maintain anything like an even gain as you move off axis. Look at the projector central photos again and you'll see the closer side of the image (left side) drops to what looks like the 1/2 gain point at 35 degrees, whereas the far side (right side) drops to much darker than 1/2 gain. So well before you've moved to 35 degrees off axis you are already dropping the gain significantly on one side of the screen.
> 
> 
> Now I'm definitely not saying the BD screen isn't a viable product. I'm very glad it exists to offer the type of option it does to people. There are some type of compromises to be made in almost any screen choice - at least for non dedicated rooms. And for me, so long as you are watching from the sweet spot, one big benefit of a BD .8 screen is how little light it throws back on to the surrounding ceiling/walls/floor. Having the front of the room less lit up definitely enhances the viewing experience.
> 
> 
> But if the off-axis performance of this screen is "really not that bad" I can't think of what "bad" would be, given I've never seen worse.
> 
> 
> Cheers,


----------



## snarks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *snarks* /forum/post/18819660
> 
> 
> My LG projector arrived yesterday and we plugged it in. The image is being projected on my dark brown walls to about 130". The colors were certainly off however the image was very watchable to the point that my wife suggested we go without a screen so the room looks better LOL .... Even when we turned on every light and opened all the shades the image was extremely watchable. To the point that I know guests wouldn't know any better if i invited them over for football during the day.
> 
> 
> We then covered half the viewable area with white sintra. The effect was very similar to what you see in the SI videos. Completely washed out and not viewable in any way while the dark half was just fine.
> 
> 
> What I got out of this for myself is BD may be a really nice screen and I believe it is "possible" that it will outperform DIY paint if you our you guests have a real discerning eye. However if you are an average TV viewer I don't think you would appreciate the 3k screen more than the Diy screen enough to justify the cost. This projectors out of the box ambient light performance on my dark brown walls leaves me knowing that I will be satisfied with silver fire 3/6 or black widow. I am going to try all three this weekend.



ok so i painted three 106" screens this weekend, all on sintra board and I was wrong. Basically I think it was a $250 lesson that I'm glad I did but I wont be using DIY paint in my home theater. On the bright side I found out that we want a screen larger than 106" so I saved a fortune verses buying the BD and being unhappy with the size. BD only goes up to 113" so I doubt that will be the screen we go with.

*Blackwidow*

This was ridiculously easy to purchase, mix and apply. I think I would recommend anyone looking for a DIY screen to at least try this one and see if they are happy. Downsides, even after 4 coats I could see a few roller marks which were visible in bright screens. On bright scenes I could also see the texture of the paint. The color also seemed a bit off when compared side by side with the silverfire skin tones looked a bit yellow and some whites seemed to have a "tiny" bit of red. However I am absolutely sure i wouldn't notice the the color issue unless it was side by side with another screen and it may be that it is the correct color but just that I liked the silver fire better personally.

*Silverfire 3.0*


Finding the materials and mixing the paint isn't that hard but compared with blackwidow it is a royal pain in the ass. The paint mix in the bucket looks very close in color to the blackwidow. In the end I can't tell you how this looks because I was unable to properly spray the sintra with the suggested wager paint sprayer. It was extremely difficult to find the right consistency for the sprayer to work properly. When I found it no matter how thin I sprayed I ended up with drops running down the screen. I am going to openly admit this is probably user error however I have spray painted the exterior of 3 homes and the ceiling of around 10 rooms, useing several different brands/types of spraying equipment without any problems I know I am not the only one that will experience this type of frustration with this paint/equipment combo. In the end I would never recommend this to someone who wasn't really comfortable with spraying, certainly not to a novice like myself.

*Silverfire 6.0*


I just rolled this on with a high quality 1/4 nap roller. This took a lot longer to dry than the blackwidow so it took a couple days to get the 5 coats I wanted. In the end I could still see subtle roller marks however I couldn't see them when viewing the screen. I liked the color better than the blackwidow however It certainly added a tiny bit of blue to everything. I think this would bother someone picky about accurate colors however everyone who viewed it thought it looked great even though they could see the blue push. All of us agreed that without the white sintra or the blackwidow we would not notice the blue and we would say the color is fantastic. Downside is we could all see the texture of the paint on bright scenes if we were sitting in the center seats , we couldn't in the side seats because it was darker from that viewing angle. there are only 4 seats so the side seats are not at severe angles. I found this to be so annoying I have to rule this paint out as an option. We are sitting over 13 feet from the screen , if i was sitting farther I might consider it because you might not be able to see the texture from futher away.


*What I learned from this.*


DIY screens are not the holy grail solution for everyone and should not be treated as such. They are just "an" option and have their limitations and benefits like every other screen. I think it is the "best" option for anyone who's primary goal is to save money or enjoys DIY projects.


I found I personaly like the dark grey screen and will be looking for one. I would buy the BD 0.8 right now if it came in a size that I was looking for.


Visible screen texture is one of the things I notice and way more bothersome to me than any of the other issues people bring up so it will play a major role in my ultimate choice.


----------



## snarks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/18845095
> 
> 
> *It has nothing to do with being arrogant.* However as someone who has always done his darnedest to help people realize exceptional results for the least amount of cash outlay, in this case...just as any dissatisfied Customer has the right to have, I have little else but disdain for the BD's performance claims / value.


*arrogance*


Main Entry: ar·ro·gance

Pronunciation: \\ˈer-ə-gən(t)s, ˈa-rə-\\

Function: noun

Date: 14th century

: an attitude of superiority manifested in an overbearing manner or in presumptuous claims or assumptions


You can decide for yourself if that fits the bill. One could certainly say you use an attitude of superiority manifested in an overbearing manner to jam DIY screen options down peoples throats and make presumptuous claims or assumptions that DIY screens the best option for everyone.


----------



## drjay71

Question for all of you BD (preferably BD II 1.4 gain) screen owners:


Is it true that the screen does not require masking if your room has no to very little ambient lighting??


Thanks!


----------



## drjay71

Also for those using a BD II 1.4 screen:


Which projector do you have and wish you had?


Thanks


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *drjay71* /forum/post/18850964
> 
> 
> Question for all of you BD (preferably BD II 1.4 gain) screen owners:
> 
> 
> Is it true that the screen does not require masking if your room has no to very little ambient lighting??
> 
> 
> Thanks!



Black bars will not be as black as the screen frame. At least from my experience, many of the claims for this screen are exaggerated. Many of the online video demos that seem to show _near miracles_ are not even close to what I have seen on my screen.


----------



## dukeav

For anyone considering this screen, here's a recent review of dnp:

http://hometheaterreview.com/dnp-sup...reen-reviewed/ 


The 7 layer tech/0.9 gain sounds very similar and I think someone here a while back mentioned that dnp and BD share something common.


Two point, however:

1. dnp claims 178 degrees viewing angle

2. dnp is extremely expensive, at least the one reveiwed


----------



## Kevin 3000

This is my set-up with a BD II 1.4 110" JVC HD-350 850 Lamp hours.

Ambient light killer screen works in my room........


----------



## drjay71

Nice set up and pic Kevin. Looks like you have the 16:9 HDTV content there zoomed in right?


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *drjay71* /forum/post/18865444
> 
> 
> Nice set up and pic Kevin. Looks like you have the 16:9 HDTV content there zoomed in right?



Not zoomed but shows how ambient light is crushed notice the darker corners.


----------



## drjay71

but isn't that hdtv (16:9) on a 2.35:1 screen? or, am i just not seeing the black bars on the sides?


----------



## swgiust

Wow, if they made it in a 120" electric, I would buy it!!


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *drjay71* /forum/post/18865596
> 
> 
> but isn't that hdtv (16:9) on a 2.35:1 screen? or, am i just not seeing the black bars on the sides?



It looks like it as camera is fully zoomed out 18mm wide angle it is 16:9

fullscreen AR pic HDTV SKY shot at an angle to get the door in.


----------



## karlsch

My results aren't as impressive as Kevin's. It's hard to see exactly where his door is in relation to the screen.


I have a 106" BDII 1.4 gain with a side window and an Epson 1080ub with an almost new bulb in bright living room mode.


This window is the only major light source in the room:










I took three photos of each scene: camera even with left edge of screen, camera even with center of screen, camera even with right edge of screen. Seating position makes a big difference.


These pictures are very close to what you see.


There was a dark shaded tree background in this shot:




























This had a brighter background:


----------



## drjay71

Luckily for me the room I will use is a cave however I think with a little ambient light the picture is watchable


----------



## dukeav




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *karlsch* /forum/post/18866246
> 
> 
> My results aren't as impressive as Kevin's. It's hard to see exactly where his door is in relation to the screen.
> 
> 
> I have a 106" BDII 1.4 gain with a side window and an Epson 1080ub with an almost new bulb in bright living room mode.
> 
> 
> This window is the only major light source in the room:
> 
> ...



Karl, does it make any difference if you close the shades closest to the screen?

I am guessing that's what is killing the screen.


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dukeav* /forum/post/18867681
> 
> 
> Karl, does it make any difference if you close the shades closest to the screen?
> 
> I am guessing that's what is killing the screen.



Both blinds have to be closed. Then the picture is better than, but not by a whole lot, the picture on the gray screen it replaced. The light leaking from the blinds still causes the picture to be washed out, somewhat. I have blackout shades behind the blinds. I still have to lower them to get what I consider a satisfactory picture - that is what I thought I would avoid when I bought the BDII.


My room with the side window is probably fairly typical of a non-dedicated viewing room.


----------



## karlsch




Kevin 3000 said:


> *SUNLIGHT reflecting off carpet STILL WATCHABLE...*
> 
> 
> If by watchable you mean that you can watch the golf game, you are right.
> 
> 
> If by watchable you mean a satisfactory, enjoyable viewing experience - what you should expect after spending $3000 on a screen that is supposed to solve ambient light problems such as light reflecting off of a carpet, then I would say you are wrong.


----------



## glennQNYC

When I see results like those above... I think that screen technology may have helped as much as possible, and conditions seem to argue for a higher performance projector.


----------



## snarks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *glennQNYC* /forum/post/18869492
> 
> 
> When I see results like those above... I think that screen technology may have helped as much as possible, and conditions seem to argue for a higher performance projector.



can't help but wonder how the 0.8 would have performed as well .


----------



## snarks

Well I want to go on record that I would have tried the BDII 0.8 if they made it in a 123" . I ended up ordering a firehawk g3 123" from AV science people who gave be a way better deal than I expected. About a grand off MSRP.



I am 100% satisfied. The ambient light rejection outperforms my expectations and I would be very happy to have friends over to watch football during the day with lights on and the shades drawn. Everything other than the images with the spot lights right on the screen is very watchable to me.


This is the room . As you can see there are tons of lights and no shortage if light coming in at a side angle from the sliding glass doors and windows.










this is the screen with every single light on "including ceiling lights aimed right at the screen"


















this is with just the ceiling lights turned off


















all the lights off and the shade closed. The room is still very far from a bat cave. I could read a book in the chairs with ease.



















My guess is the BDII 0.8 would have done even better considering how much darker the screen is


----------



## snarks

Few more images. In the following order again.


1) every light on including ceiling spot lights aimed at the screen and shades open.


2) just the spotlights off.


3) lights off and shade closed but still very far from ideal projector conditions.


----------



## scottyb

snarks,

Gorgeus Room!!!


Scott


----------



## snarks

thanks : )


You wouldn't by chance be this scotty ?

http://www.scottyb.com/temp.php?page=home


----------



## scottyb

Oh you are correct sir!!!!


Didn't even notice you are from Minnetonka.


Give me a shout.


I'll PM ya a phone #.


What is your "real" name?


Scott


----------



## snarks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *scottyb* /forum/post/18912539
> 
> 
> Oh you are correct sir!!!!
> 
> 
> Didn't even notice you are from Minnetonka.
> 
> 
> Give me a shout.
> 
> 
> I'll PM ya a phone #.
> 
> 
> What is your "real" name?
> 
> 
> Scott



Small world.... Can't say I have been to your shop but I lived in mound for a handfull of years.


Ryan B,


----------



## scottyb

Ryan,


We've been in biz for 20 years!!!

When did you live here.

Sent you a PM with phone and email so we won't sidetrack this anymore!!


Scott
www.scottyb.com


----------



## drjay71

I am getting my BD II 1.4 screen installed today paired with an RS25 in a dark room. I will try to take some pictures with and without ambient lighting.


Nice to see how well the LG projector and Firehwak G3 go together. The LG was my second choice and I still may end up going with it if the JVC is not bright enough for me.


----------



## dukeav




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *snarks* /forum/post/18911939
> 
> 
> Few more images. In the following order again.



Snarks/Kevin/Karl - Thanks for the pics. Finally we have in this thread real world pics of ambient light conditions and what to/what not to expect from BD and competition.


----------



## swgiust

Thanks for the picks. Now you have me second guessing my screen purchase. I really like how the Firehawk looks. I have ordered a Da-lite

cinema vision. Hope I can get close to the same results. I know my RS-15

won't be a bright as the LG.


----------



## snarks

I should note those pics were taken in cinema with auto iris at 1 for the best blacks. It is much brighter in vivid but I find the colors to look so unnatural I can't watch it that way.


I want to give the downsides as well but I knew these going into it. The more research I did the more clear it was that there is no perfect screen for all applications. My priority is definitely flexibility with lighting conditions.
Once in a while I do notice a sparkle

If you stand at extreme angles you will notice a shift in brightness on the screen. One side is darker than the other. It is possible to see this if you are really looking for it in the seat furthest to the right. You would have to really be looking for it and pausing scenes to be sure. It is very noticeable if i am 40 feet back and 15 feet to the right behind the pool table. One note , I am violating the minimum distance from projector to screen suggested by Stewart by around 4-5 feet because of room aesthetics. If i had followed their advice I am sure it would be even better.

On really bright scenes I can see the texture of the screen. Most of the screen has to be white for me to see this. I just have to get over that I might see the screen from time to time. I think If i was just a few feet further back I wouldn't see it.
I would not expect it to work well at all if there was direct sunlight on the screen. While my room is rather bright and the light isn't really even there is no direct sunlight on the screen.


----------



## drjay71

Well I finally got my system set up. To refresh everyone's memory here is what I have:


JVC HD-950 projector

Screen Innovations Black Diamond II 1.4 gain screen 2.35:1 aspect ratio 142" diagonal

Sony BD S-570 Blu-Ray player

Denon AVR 3311 receiver

Dali IKON 2 MK2 speakers (LR)

Dali Lektor center channel

Speakercraft AIM Cinema dipole

Speakercraft AIM MT7 surround speakers

Verizon FioS TV

Playstation 3

Nevo Q50 remote


Well, I am happy to report that I LOVE the setup. No, I did not go too big. Movies in cinemascope look fantastic. I know they will look even better with a lens but for now, sitting back even at 10 feet is no problem. I will try to post some screenshots.


Specific impressions about the projector and screen.

The JVC is mind blowing. As you might know, I was debating between the Sony VPL-VW85 and this one. Both are awesome but the black levels on this one are great. The Clear Motion Drive (frame interpolation) is OK for sports but on Blu-Rays, there is a bad ghosting artifact on moving objects. Not sure what this is called. I think the "soap opera" effect is cool for about 10 minutes but I don't think I could ever watch a movie with it on.


The BD II screen is awesome as well. With all of the room lights on the picture is very watchable. With the lights off, the picture competes with any LCD I think. On 16:9 content, masking is nice but not really needed when the lights are dimmed or off. You need masking with the lights on.


Overall, very happy


Thanks to all on this forum for their input and help!


----------



## send

 http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/acces...on-screen.html 


Thanks,


Blake


----------



## drjay71

two thumbs up to the BD II!


----------



## Flatnate

Just stopped by the local Buffalo Wild Wings and immediately noticed that two screens were different, went a little closer to check them out and my suspicions were correct. They replaced two screens with Black Diamonds. Not sure on the gain (probably .8) but wow did it make a difference in an environment like that one. I can't stand watching washed out sport bar projectors, but this was the first time I found myself going to the big screen over the hanging LCD. For my own room I was pretty sure I was going to go acoustically transparent neutral gain along with a bat cave and a tasteful but darker paint shade; but now the wife is like "ooooh we don't have to keep it so dark now".... uh oh. So any other screen purchase chosen at this point will have to be justified against the black diamond. Darn Buffalo Wild Wings.


----------



## scottyb

Flatnate,

Check your PM's.


Scott


----------



## swgiust

As I posted above, I ended up with a Da-Lite Cinema Vision screen. BD did not have the size and electric that I wanted.


Now that I have seen 2 movies on my screen I have a couple of observations.

I saw the BD in small pieces at a local dealer. Contrast was quite nice.


Overall I was impressed. But I have also been impressed with my white screen. There can be alot more light in the room that I ever expected.


So my point is that I really liked the BD screen, but I would be cautious of spending the extra money. Your room may need it, but it may not.


----------



## send

Here is a video illustrating how the Black Diamond screen allows 3D projection to work well with the lights on. You will see the first (all-in-one) 3D front projector by LG. The LG CF3D was impressive.


Black Diamond works well with both passive and active 3D projectors.

www.screeninnovations.com 


Enjoy,


Blake


----------



## Cliffside

I need help in deciding on the right screen. I have a Pioneer Projector-RS2 clone and am just starting to set things up in my basement. For now the seats are 12-13' away from where the screen will be and the projector sits at 14.5', but is not yet mounted to the ceiling. I'm leaning towards either the BD or possibly a Stewart screen. My local dealer suggests that I go with the BD in the 100" for the room I'm in. Walls and carpet are beige and tan.


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *send* /forum/post/19051120
> 
> 
> Here is a video illustrating how the Black Diamond screen allows 3D projection to work well with the lights on. You will see the first (all-in-one) 3D front projector by LG. The LG CF3D was impressive.
> 
> 
> Black Diamond works well with both passive and active 3D projectors.
> 
> www.screeninnovations.com
> 
> 
> Enjoy,
> 
> 
> Blake



I would like to see a demo of an LED based machine projected onto a BD as I have read Runco recommends a pure white screen for their LED PJ.


----------



## Notguilty

I want to start by saying I am no expert. I have read most of this thread and every online review for BD II screens. Here is my question, are the people writing the reviews all getting paid off? All the online reviews I read praise the screen like it has totally changed projection forever. A true game changer. Then I read what people write here and it makes me question everything I read. The guys who write these articles are experts, right? How could their opinions be so consistently positive and the contributors to this thread be so negative? (not everyone but certainly enough to give me pause). Any thoughts?


----------



## snarks

I think the experts have a better understanding that no one screen is going to be best at everything so the review it based on what the screen is attempting to do. This screens claim to fame is being able to watch it with tons of ambient light and high contrast.


That said reviewers often get this stuff for free and make money via advertizing or affiliate marketing on the site. That doesn't work long if you bash the products people send you.


Customers also only typically look for avenues to post about the product if they are unhappy, very rarely because they are so elated that go looking for ways to share the good news. Considering this thing is sold at best buys and the amount of people who must own one there are really very few complaints.


Frankly I would find a store locally that has one on display and go see it. make sure to play with the lights as much as they will let you, especially uneven lighting


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Notguilty* /forum/post/19069436
> 
> 
> I want to start by saying I am no expert. I have read most of this thread and every online review for BD II screens. Here is my question, are the people writing the reviews all getting paid off? All the online reviews I read praise the screen like it has totally changed projection forever. A true game changer. Then I read what people write here and it makes me question everything I read. The guys who write these articles are experts, right? How could their opinions be so consistently positive and the contributors to this thread be so negative? (not everyone but certainly enough to give me pause). Any thoughts?



I did read one review where I suspect the reviewer might be paid off, but I think most are trying to do a good job.


The professional reviewers are viewing the screen in their screen review rooms or dedicated home theater rooms which are not at all like the rooms that many of the actual amateur purchasers of the screen are using - family rooms, multi-purpose rooms, living rooms, etc. These amateurs, after watching the videos on the Screen Innovations Web site that show miracles and reading all of the glowing reviews, buy the screen and are disappointed with the results. They find that the screen is extremely fussy about where light sources are - if they are in the wrong spot, the screen will have a washed out picture. (There are also other problems such as sparklies and hot spotting.)


One respected professional reviewer actually pointed out this major problem:
_One note of caution: If your light source is coming from somewhere close to your viewing chair or the projector, the Black Diamond II material will reflect it. When I tried moving one of the torchieres to the midpoint of the right wall, about 10 feet from the front wall, its yellowish light washed out the picture on the screen. Thus, you can't just hang your Black Diamond II any old place and expect great results you still may need to put a bit of thought into the configuration of your room lighting._

The whole review here:
http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/con...ection-screens 


I am one of the disappointed people. I posted pictures of my BDII on the previous page of this thread. I didn't do it because I'm cranky, I did it to let people know that they should analyze their room configuration before they spend a lot of money for this screen.


----------



## PLB

After reading the review by Art Feirman of the Black Diamond II, I read a couple pages of this long and very interesting thread. Everyone agrees that the BDII rejects light from directly overhead but less well from the sides. That seems an odd design choice.


I looked around my house and the only rooms with built in overhead lights are the kitchens. I indeed have a TV in my upstairs kitchen. It is an LCD under cabinet model. It has a four inch screen.


Almost all the other rooms other than the bathrooms have floor to ceiling windows. I set up the one room in the house that doesn't have glass walls as my combination den-Home Theater. Like in most modern houses this room has no built in overhead lighting fixture. So my only light sources are the the light fixtures I add and the one ten foot wide window on the east wall. I had my girl friend sew me some light proof drapes for that window.


I think my house and my HT setup is fairly common. All the light I have to control comes from the side. Why would Screen Dimensions design their product to reject light from above?


My ceiling is painted a cream color as are the walls. If I really worried about light reflections from the screen I could repaint them a medium flat gray. Except for reflections who has light coming from above?


In some of the photos on this thread I see rooms where there are recessed spot lights above the screen - but surely you can just turn them off when you want to watch. Unless I'm missing something the only people who have an overhead light problem are those with skylights.


I have a Da-Lite HP screen which being retroreflective has some small ability to reject light from the side.


I turn on my HT system at 5:00PM to watch - or rather to listen to - the news. Sometimes I pull the drapes, often I don't bother. I don't care very much if Bill O'Reilly looks washed out. I imagine the Black Diamond II is better at this hour with the drapes open than my HP - but I'm not sure. I'm pretty certain however that after the sun sets (or I pull the drapes) my Da-Lite HP will deliver a much brighter and more vibrant image.


----------



## mlang46




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *PLB* /forum/post/19076792
> 
> 
> After reading the review by Art Feirman of the Black Diamond II, I read a couple pages of this long and very interesting thread. Everyone agrees that the BDII rejects light from directly overhead but less well from the sides. That seems an odd design choice.
> 
> 
> I looked around my house and the only rooms with built in overhead lights are the kitchens. I indeed have a TV in my upstairs kitchen. It is an LCD under cabinet model. It has a four inch screen.
> 
> 
> Almost all the other rooms other than the bathrooms have floor to ceiling windows. I set up the one room in the house that doesn't have glass walls as my combination den-Home Theater. Like in most modern houses this room has no built in overhead lighting fixture. So my only light sources are the the light fixtures I add and the one ten foot wide window on the east wall. I had my girl friend sew me some light proof drapes for that window.
> 
> 
> I think my house and my HT setup is fairly common. All the light I have to control comes from the side. Why would Screen Dimensions design their product to reject light from above?
> 
> 
> My ceiling is painted a cream color as are the walls. If I really worried about light reflections from the screen I could repaint them a medium flat gray. Except for reflections who has light coming from above?
> 
> 
> In some of the photos on this thread I see rooms where there are recessed spot lights above the screen - but surely you can just turn them off when you want to watch. Unless I'm missing something the only people who have an overhead light problem are those with skylights.
> 
> 
> I have a Da-Lite HP screen which being retroreflective has some small ability to reject light from the side.
> 
> 
> I turn on my HT system at 5:00PM to watch - or rather to listen to - the news. Sometimes I pull the drapes, often I don't bother. I don't care very much if Bill O'Reilly looks washed out. I imagine the Black Diamond II is better at this hour with the drapes open than my HP - but I'm not sure. I'm pretty certain however that after the sun sets (or I pull the drapes) my Da-Lite HP will deliver a much brighter and more vibrant image.



Actually the Hp which i also own being retro reflective has a large ability to reject light from the sides.


----------



## send

Please see the latest Black Diamond screen review at http://www.projectorreviews.com/scre...nd/summary.php 


Enjoy!


Blake


----------



## fraisa

Wanted to get some opinions on this type of screen.,

Have been quoting a home theater job using a epson 9500 ub screen

was going to go with a Stewart SNDQ120HFHG3Wez Fire Hawk G3 120 inch

the room light is 1.6 afc and thats the brightest it gets

Heard about the black diamond .8 and 1.4 gain screens

Was leaning toward the .8 gain screen if i go with the SI Screen.


The attraction to the .8 screen is that it looks like a lcd hanging on the wall

but what i want to know if this is a step down from Stewart ...


There is alot of mixed reports out there and i would like to hear peoples opinions that own the black diamond .8 and 1.4....


Main content being viewed is Sports , Movies and Video Games....


thanks


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *send* /forum/post/19094374
> 
> 
> Please see the latest Black Diamond screen review at http://www.projectorreviews.com/scre...nd/summary.php
> 
> 
> Enjoy!
> 
> 
> Blake



Thanks for the review Blake. It confirms for me that this screen would not work for my room. We have two windows and one arcadia door along one side of my room, so my source of ambient light is not limited to just the ceiling. I think most of the folks who were disappointed with this screen (in this thread) had windows along at least one side wall.


Dave


----------



## send




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks* /forum/post/19096668
> 
> 
> Thanks for the review Blake. It confirms for me that this screen would not work for my room. We have two windows and one arcadia door along one side of my room, so my source of ambient light is not limited to just the ceiling. I think most of the folks who were disappointed with this screen (in this thread) had windows along at least one side wall.
> 
> 
> Dave



Certainly not the case. The screen rejects light the same from the sides as the top and bottom. The issue some people are discovering is the direct reflection from the window itself. If your window is next to the screen and you are on the other side sitting at the same angle the light is coming from you will see glare from the window. This is the case with any surface.


If you are in the middle of the screen or closer to the window the image will look like the attached pictures. These images were taken with a 2K lumen projector with a ton of sunlight coming in the room from side windows.


Call me tomorrow and we will run our screen wizard to verify what projector spec you need.


Blake


----------



## send

Here are two images taken with a Mitsubishi projector with sunlight coming in from both sides. The Mits projector had around 2000 lumen.


We always ask our customers what their seating arrangement is to ensure no one is sitting at the same angle the sunlight is entering at.


Blake


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *send* /forum/post/19096884
> 
> 
> Here are two images taken with a Mitsubishi projector with sunlight coming in from both sides. The Mits projector had around 2000 lumen.
> 
> 
> We always ask our customers what their seating arrangement is to ensure no one is sitting at the same angle the sunlight is entering at.
> 
> 
> Blake



The picture of the cup with powder is deceptive because the camera taking the picture seems to be positioned far to the right of the screen. If it had been to the left of the screen, the picture probably would have been washed out. I'm not sure what the "Discovery" picture with the partially blocked window far off to the side is supposed to show, but I see glare on the left side.


I posted pictures on page 43 of this thread, post #1267. You can see my actual window and pictures of my BDII with the camera positioned even with the right edge of the screen, the center of the screen and the left edge of the screen. How much the picture is washed out depends on the position of the camera.


----------



## Kevin 3000

karlsch


What projector do you have? 1000 lumens +?


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/19098109
> 
> 
> karlsch
> 
> 
> What projector do you have? 1000 lumens +?



An Epson 1080UB which is 1600 lumens in brightest mode. The pictures I posted were second from brightest mode, not sure the lumens but very bright, which is what I usually use when watching during the day. The bulb was a new one with about 80 hours.


----------



## Kevin 3000

Snapped a few more with New Lamp JVC-HD350 1.4 Gain BDII

Shows how screen deals with patio doors.


----------



## msmCutter

Tell me about your ceiling.


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *karlsch* /forum/post/19098441
> 
> 
> An Epson 1080UB which is 1600 lumens in brightest mode. The pictures I posted were second from brightest mode, not sure the lumens but very bright, which is what I usually use when watching during the day. The bulb was a new one with about 80 hours.



So this is what a review found for your PJ


Living Room: 915 lumens (is this what you used?)

Dynamic: 1818 lumens (default settings - green is way up)

Dynamic: 1527 lumens (after some adjustments to "tame" the colors a bit to make everything look more natural)


Post some pics in Dynamic Mode 600 lumens higher than your first pics as your room is filled with ambient light from both sides so you need all the lumens you can get.


----------



## Notguilty

Kevin,


The screen seems to do well but there is a significant and noticeable glare on pics one and three. Also, the last shot looks like it may be a little washed out in the same location where the glare is.


The pictures are taken off center. Is the glare still present when you are sitting dead center?


thanks for the pics


By the way, I think the picture is very watchable and far better than other screens I have seen in similar conditions.


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19099071
> 
> 
> Tell me about your ceiling.



All this screen detail and you want to know about a dull ceiling


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/19099114
> 
> 
> So this is what a review found for your PJ
> 
> 
> Living Room: 915 lumens (is this what you used?)
> 
> Post some pics in Dynamic Mode 600 lumens higher than your first pics as your room is filled with ambient light from both sides ...........



Yes I used living room. Dynamic is only slightly better - not enough better to make me go through the trouble of reposting picture.


The *ONLY* light in the room when I took the pictures was from the side window - no light from the other side.


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Notguilty* /forum/post/19099131
> 
> 
> Kevin,
> 
> 
> The screen seems to do well but there is a significant and noticeable glare on pics one and three. Also, the last shot looks like it may be a little washed out in the same location where the glare is.
> 
> 
> The pictures are taken off center. Is the glare still present when you are sitting dead center?
> 
> 
> thanks for the pics
> 
> 
> By the way, I think the picture is very watchable and far better than other screens I have seen in similar conditions.



That glare is caused by the angle of ambient light hitting the screen. If the doors were closer to the screen the glare angle would be less.

I made sure to show this but in raelity it is less visible to the eye than what the pics show. I wish i had a light meter as there is a lot of light in the room the camera don`t show the real amount i see.


----------



## send

Per request we have created an About Screen Innovations video. Take a look...

http://www.screeninnovations.com/about-us/ 


The video illustrates how we build our US made projection screen products and explains SI's future direction.


Thanks,


Blake


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *send* /forum/post/19096864
> 
> 
> Certainly not the case. The screen rejects light the same from the sides as the top and bottom. The issue some people are discovering is the direct reflection from the window itself. If your window is next to the screen and you are on the other side sitting at the same angle the light is coming from you will see glare from the window. This is the case with any surface.
> 
> 
> If you are in the middle of the screen or closer to the window the image will look like the attached pictures. These images were taken with a 2K lumen projector with a ton of sunlight coming in the room from side windows.
> 
> 
> Call me tomorrow and we will run our screen wizard to verify what projector spec you need.
> 
> 
> Blake



Hi Blake,


Thanks for the info and pictures. It's strange how different your pictures look compared to the pictures in post #1267. Perhaps it's the angle as some have mentioned and/or 2000 lumens in the Mitsubishi vs. the 915 lumens in the Epson. The other thought was projector position. Is there any way to show a picture of the projector position for that same room?


Thanks,


Dave


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks* /forum/post/19099693
> 
> 
> Hi Blake,
> 
> 
> Thanks for the info and pictures. It's strange how different your pictures look compared to the pictures in post #1267. Perhaps it's the angle as some have mentioned and/or 2000 lumens in the Mitsubishi vs. the 915 lumens in the Epson. The other thought was projector position. Is there any way to show a picture of the projector position for that same room?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Dave



Also the gain used 0.8 with 2000 lumens i would say.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/19099742
> 
> 
> Also the gain used 0.8 with 2000 lumens i would say.



Hi Kevin 3000,


I must have missed it, because I didn't see where it mentioned that the screen was .8 - how do you know that it's .8?


Thanks,


Dave


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks* /forum/post/19099947
> 
> 
> Hi Kevin 3000,
> 
> 
> I must have missed it, because I didn't see where it mentioned that the screen was .8 - how do you know that it's .8?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Dave



My thinking is why would you need gain if you have 2000 lumens to play with only the guy who took the shot will answer that for you.


----------



## fraisa

dont want my question to get missed really would like someone to comment on my question ....

thanks


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19096175
> 
> 
> Wanted to get some opinions on this type of screen.,
> 
> Have been quoting a home theater job using a epson 9500 ub screen
> 
> was going to go with a Stewart SNDQ120HFHG3Wez Fire Hawk G3 120 inch
> 
> the room light is 1.6 afc and thats the brightest it gets
> 
> Heard about the black diamond .8 and 1.4 gain screens
> 
> Was leaning toward the .8 gain screen if i go with the SI Screen.
> 
> 
> The attraction to the .8 screen is that it looks like a lcd hanging on the wall
> 
> but what i want to know if this is a step down from Stewart ...
> 
> 
> There is alot of mixed reports out there and i would like to hear peoples opinions that own the black diamond .8 and 1.4....
> 
> 
> Main content being viewed is Sports , Movies and Video Games....
> 
> 
> thanks



thanks


----------



## jlemieu1

Is there any difference between the current Black Diamond II screen and a BD screen of about 3 years ago?


The reason why I am asking is I have a chance to buy a used screen out of a mutli-million dollar home. It is s 110" diag screen which they think they paid $2600 for 3 years ago. They want me to make an offer for the screen.

I was wondering what should be the top price I should offer. (Is $1500 crazy if it is in perfect condition?)


Thank you for your help.


----------



## msmCutter

I'd offer $3.50 (say it tree fitty). If they reject the offer go to tree fitty fie. If they reject that offer tree fitty fie and whatever is in your pocket (a gum wrapper, lint, etc).


Why?

A) They're likely getting ready to throw it out or throw it in a closet.

B) They've got a multi-million dollar house, such a comparitively small asset won't be valued.

C) Even if they got full retail, the time they'd lose trying to sell it is more valuable.


----------



## jayn_j

The question is not whether this particular screen is worth $1500. The question is actually 2 parts. First, does THIS screen meet your needs? Second, what is a screen worth to YOU? Would you be as happy with a $300 Elite screen? If so, this screen is worth at most $300. Period.


As a general rule though, custom stuff like this loses its value quickly. The owner can't expect to get more than $300-500 for this on the open market. Offering more than that is wasteful.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *send* /forum/post/19096864
> 
> 
> Certainly not the case. The screen rejects light the same from the sides as the top and bottom. The issue some people are discovering is the direct reflection from the window itself. If your window is next to the screen and you are on the other side sitting at the same angle the light is coming from you will see glare from the window. This is the case with any surface.
> 
> 
> If you are in the middle of the screen or closer to the window the image will look like the attached pictures. These images were taken with a 2K lumen projector with a ton of sunlight coming in the room from side windows.
> 
> 
> Call me tomorrow and we will run our screen wizard to verify what projector spec you need.
> 
> 
> Blake



Hi Blake,


Any chance of getting a picture of the projector position in this room? Any chance of getting a picture of the screen from another angle (from the left side of the screen), as some have suggested?


Thanks,

Dave


----------



## jlemieu1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jayn_j* /forum/post/19104165
> 
> 
> The question is not whether this particular screen is worth $1500. The question is actually 2 parts. First, does THIS screen meet your needs? Second, what is a screen worth to YOU? Would you be as happy with a $300 Elite screen? If so, this screen is worth at most $300. Period.
> 
> 
> As a general rule though, custom stuff like this loses its value quickly. The owner can't expect to get more than $300-500 for this on the open market. Offering more than that is wasteful.



Thank you for the "jayn_j".

The size is exactly what I need. A new BD screen in the same line is around $3k versus the amount I offer.


My quote of the multi-million dollar home is a reference to me telling them $3.50 and getting them offened so they rather throw it away what could be a great screen in my theater.


----------



## jayn_j




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jlemieu1* /forum/post/19104914
> 
> 
> Thank you for the "jayn_j".
> 
> The size is exactly what I need. A new BD screen in the same line is around $3k versus the amount I offer.
> 
> 
> My quote of the multi-million dollar home is a reference to me telling them $3.50 and getting them offened so they rather throw it away what could be a great screen in my theater.



NP. Just to be clear, I never said $3.50. That was Cutter. My suggestion was $300-500 because you can get a very servicable fixed frame screen at that price. This is certainly a better screen, but it is used. Don't forget that you are going to have to take it apart and transport without damaging it. I expect the original packaging is missing. Then you need to re-assemble (without instructions). All of that removes value.


----------



## msmCutter

TREE FITTY!


If they throw it out go yank it from the trash.


A serious answer is a fine(ish) bottle of wine. But say tree fiddy because it's LOLZ funny.


----------



## jlemieu1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jayn_j* /forum/post/19105238
> 
> 
> NP. Just to be clear, I never said $3.50. That was Cutter. My suggestion was $300-500 because you can get a very servicable fixed frame screen at that price. This is certainly a better screen, but it is used. Don't forget that you are going to have to take it apart and transport without damaging it. I expect the original packaging is missing. Then you need to re-assemble (without instructions). All of that removes value.



I'm taking your advice; I'm going to offer $300 for the screen. This should be a good deal because the screen was removed by the professional installer and stored without disassembling it.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19101230
> 
> 
> thanks



didnt get any response to my question so i started my own thread...

Please check it out,

and leave your comments

THanks
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1272867


----------



## fraisa

Just did a Demo on SI Black Diamond....



So went into a out of town dealer that has Stewart and SI Black Diamond screens and did a demo test with BluRay Dark Knight...


Wow were my eyes opened.


Projector was a Runco LS-3 1000 lumens...

First off the Stewart Fire Hawk G3 screen was impressive Decent picture..

Good Detail but poor with reflecting the screen light in the room...


But when we went to the SI Screen it was a definite WoW moment..

The 1.4 gain made gave the blacks the detail and the whites true...

there is actually a scene where they show buildings and on the far left there were cars parked on a side street..

With the Stewart screen i didnt know that there where cars parked there because it was just black...

But the SI screen was vivid in detail to show what the filmaker actually filmed in the scene...


Then the next test Came.....

Hockey Game from Last Night..

Even though the Leafs Lost he put on the game from last night .....


The Stewart was okay but a the whites on the ice where dull..

So switch to the SI Screen.......


Holy Crap you should see the Ice and Blacks on the game...

Unfreakin Believable

Felt like you where in the stands watching the game

The whites where white and unwashed

Very close to matching the plasma in the other room

(Projector mode was for a hd picture and for the black knight mode settings for Film...)


Bottom line is i have been looking for a screen that is to go into a multi purpose Family Room were if you watch Movies ,,.,, lots of Sports and the Kids play the video games, you can do it Lights on or Off....


The black diamond has got my vote...

It is going to be more expensive than the stewart but the quality and detail of the picture is So worth it...


Also will comment on hot spotting ...

I was sitting 13 ft from the screen...( too close for my own taste but wanted to see if i could see any hotspoting..and this also was the show room set up)

And there was no hot spotting...

and with every SI Screen put in by this dealer there has not been one issue with regards to hot spoting...

There installers use the tools from the SI website to caculate throw distance and give and take a Foot +/- either direction

No one has complained with that issue...


I will be ordering the SI screen in 3 weeks and will post pics of the install when done...

and will make sure to have some pics from video games , bluRay, and Don Cherry and hockey night in Canada ........


----------



## h00kemh0rns

jlemieu1...$300 is good to start but realistically expect them not to dump it for that price. Expect $500-$800 as the end price. The only good argument is that this is the first BD edition. So they can't expect top end dollar.


I have (2) 92" .8 BD's for sale now. One the first edition and the other the newest edition. The 1st edition is being listed @ $800 and the newest is @ $1,000.


----------



## msmCutter

Good luck with your sale. Let us know the outcome.


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19232343
> 
> 
> Good luck with your sale. Let us know the outcome.



Thanks.


I'm actually selling my entire HT setup (Klipsch 7.1 speakers, Aspen Home motorized leather seating, Panasonic AE2000U project, Onkyo 875 receiver, StudioTech hutch, and some misc other items.) Moving and there isn't a place to put all this stuff. I'd rather find a home where someone would appreciate it than putting into storage.


----------



## msmCutter

Nice gear :threadjack:

Prices?


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19234422
> 
> 
> Nice gear :threadjack:
> 
> Prices?



PM sent.


----------



## fraisa

h00kemh0rns good luck on your gear sale .....


----------



## h00kemh0rns




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19234475
> 
> 
> h00kemh0rns good luck on your gear sale .....



Appreciate it...hoping to find someone for all of it if not the big items so I don't have store.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns* /forum/post/19234480
> 
> 
> Appreciate it...hoping to find someone for all of it if not the big items so I don't have store.



If i am chating with anyone will point them your way.....


----------



## dukeav

I got my BD II 0.8 about two weeks back and here's my feedback. Its a 100" 2.35 curved screen and I am using a Benq W6000 with Prismasonic HD5000R. Its in my living room, and almost no light control. There's one window on one side and some light from other side and back (no direct sunlight anywhere, though).


Also note that its my first screen/projector and I have no prior experience in judging this against other screens. I can only compare it to the 3 year old 50" LG plasma it replaced.


There was definite vertical banding the first couple of days, noticeable when the camera pans over grass (e..g cricket field). I don't see it now, probably the screen has settled now.


During daytime Contrast and black levels are excellent, better than the plasma. The plasma would reflect stuff all around like a partial mirror, but no such impacts on BD. I can watch a star wars movie without any issues during daytime.


The screen is quite dark, though not as black as I expected.


Viewing angle is good within about 64 deg cone. I am not (can't) measuring half-gain, just going by my eyes. The curve helps here, otherwise it would have only about 45 deg.


The screen shows texture in bright area, as reported by others. I did not notice any hot-spotting though. I hope my mind can tune out the texture once I have stopped looking at the screen and am actually watching movies.


As Karl's picture showed, though he has 1.4, part of screen can get washed out if light comes from an opposite angle from where you sit. For me it was being affected by light leakage from the side of the window curtain, fixed by closing the gap. This was noticeable to the person sitting on the opposite side of the window, other positions (center, window side), not much difference.


That's all I can think of now.


Overall, I am really really happy with the screen.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dukeav* /forum/post/19251007
> 
> 
> I got my BD II 0.8 about two weeks back and here's my feedback. Its a 100" 2.35 curved screen and I am using a Benq W6000 with Prismasonic HD5000R. Its in my living room, and almost no light control. There's one window on one side and some light from other side and back (no direct sunlight anywhere, though).
> 
> 
> Also note that its my first screen/projector and I have no prior experience in judging this against other screens. I can only compare it to the 3 year old 50" LG plasma it replaced.
> 
> 
> There was definite vertical banding the first couple of days, noticeable when the camera pans over grass (e..g cricket field). I don't see it now, probably the screen has settled now.
> 
> 
> During daytime Contrast and black levels are excellent, better than the plasma. The plasma would reflect stuff all around like a partial mirror, but no such impacts on BD. I can watch a star wars movie without any issues during daytime.
> 
> 
> The screen is quite dark, though not as black as I expected.
> 
> 
> Viewing angle is good within about 64 deg cone. I am not (can't) measuring half-gain, just going by my eyes. The curve helps here, otherwise it would have only about 45 deg.
> 
> 
> The screen shows texture in bright area, as reported by others. I did not notice any hot-spotting though. I hope my mind can tune out the texture once I have stopped looking at the screen and am actually watching movies.
> 
> 
> As Karl's picture showed, though he has 1.4, part of screen can get washed out if light comes from an opposite angle from where you sit. For me it was being affected by light leakage from the side of the window curtain, fixed by closing the gap. This was noticeable to the person sitting on the opposite side of the window, other positions (center, window side), not much difference.
> 
> 
> That's all I can think of now.
> 
> 
> Overall, I am really really happy with the screen.



Awesome ....

How do you find your whites with the .8

when i did a recent test i found that the whites where a little dull..

Do you find that at all?

Also can you post some pics ?

Thanks


----------



## send

Here are several Black Diamond screen videos including the one from AVS!


NOTE: you will see the Black Diamond Motorized screen prototype in action on the CEDIA 2010 trade show floor. The light on the show floor was a measured 28 foot-candles of ambient light coming from all directions.

http://www.screeninnovations.com/cat...iamond-videos/


----------



## bud16415




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *send* /forum/post/19265407
> 
> 
> Here are several Black Diamond screen videos including the one from AVS!
> 
> 
> NOTE: you will see the Black Diamond Motorized screen prototype in action on the CEDIA 2010 trade show floor. The light on the show floor was a measured 28 foot-candles of ambient light coming from all directions.
> 
> http://www.screeninnovations.com/cat...iamond-videos/



I just watched the videos and I always have the same few questions maybe someone could answer.


When they compare their screen with the white screen, what screen was the projectors gray scale calibrated to?


How can a screen improve the contrast ratio 900% ? Are they saying it improves what the projector is capable of doing? Or is it comparing contrast ratio off a highly dispersive white screen compared to a directional dark screen, being subjected to side angled ambient light.


I'm a proponent of dark screens, I just think some of the comparisons are smoke and mirrors. The images look amazing given the ambient light why not just turn it on and let people see for themselves without the tricks and hype?


Last question: Does anyone know how many lumens they were hitting the screen with, or better incoming foot lamberts?


----------



## glennQNYC




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bud16415* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> The images look amazing given the ambient light why not just turn it on and let people see for themselves without the tricks and hype?



Would you expand on the above? How was the CEDIA demonstration anything other than "turning it on and letting people see for themselves?"


----------



## MississippiMan

1. Those all were very small screens getting blasted by a very bright PJ. The LG3D is no slouch. It would have been far more revealing to show the larger BD Screens now available.


2. Was the 3D video showing 2D content?, Normally there would be very noticeable ghosting in the 23D Video being shown and being recorded in 2D. If that was not the case, then that would suggest that the 3D effect was less than one would have expected. I do see the People wearing the Polarized glasses.


3. The "Floor Demos' were still effectively shielded from any directed light...as is obvious in the non-light saturated surfaces surrounding the Screen. Still the representative example does show exceptional "non-directed" ambient light performance.


It's all good concerning the SI-BD if one actually takes the examples shown in proper context.


----------



## bud16415




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *glennQNYC* /forum/post/19267323
> 
> 
> Would you expand on the above? How was the CEDIA demonstration anything other than "turning it on and letting people see for themselves?"



Well I wasn't at CEDIA but I viewed the videos posted and the fellow that was explaining the screen in the video was working for them I presume. He said in the video that this screen improves contrast 900% and he also raised a white screen to cover half the BD screen and showed how much improvement there was with the BD screen over the competition / basic high dispersive white. I would think a better comparison would be something similar say another manufacture of a dark screen etc. I never felt these videos to be fair when a properly calibrated light cannon on a fairly small screen shows how washed out a white screen looks in comparison as a selling point.


It's the same as when you go to the Bose sound room and they amaze you with the big theater sound and then lift off the fake speakers boxes to reveal the tiny mini Bose. What they don't show you are the subs sitting behind the potted plant in the corners.


Another example is the row of lights beneath the screen and the strip of black velvet above the screen to show how good the screen rejects ambient light. The coating that produces the gain also skips light off the screen at the same angle it comes to the screen at and then is absorbed in the black above. It's a good demo but not anything all that meaningful in a real world room IMHO.


Thanks MM for filling me in on the projector etc.


----------



## dovercat

Screen Innovation videos are deceptive in my opinion, they unsurprisingly want to show the product to the best possible advantage.


They claim they are the new standard, with contrast improved by 900%, that it is superior to a white screen even in a black dark room, that it enables front projection in light colored rooms with the lights on with no sacrifice in image quality. Sounds too good to be true to me and lacks specifics.


Details about the setup where the 900% improvement was measured.

Details about projector lumens screen size and foot Lambert.

Details about projector, viewer, other lighting position relative to the screen.

Details about how the screen works, angular or retro-reflective, half-gain angle, diffuse/specular gain, surface texture.


No mention of how the projector - screen - viewer, other lighting positions are critical for best results, so it is not suited to every room. No mention of how screen brightness vs room brightness is critical so why you may need to use a high lumen projector or small screen for best results.


They say seeing is believing but cameras lie, a camera can under or over expose and is incapable of capturing the full contrast ratio of a well setup projector, so it can easily make the black level look allot better than it is.

The comparison screen is not the same gain or surface color as the Screen Innovation screen, and the projector is setup for the Screen Innovation screen, any comparison done like that is going to make it look like it produces a much higher contrast image.


Many home cinema projectors are ceiling mounted and relatively low Lumen and have lens offset and keystone adjustment for off axis positioning. The screen is often relatively low on the wall and viewers seated. Most living rooms have windows at around the same height as the screen, and living room ceiling lighting height is not incredibly high.

The demos correct me if I am wrong use very high lumen projectors and/or smallish screens. The projector is at near the same height as the viewers projecting straight at the screen. Other sources of light are very off angle to the screen either very high up or on the same wall as the screen, the most obvious source of reflection at the same height and angle as the projector, the opposite wall is very far away. No windows on sidewalls are present.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dovercat* /forum/post/19272082
> 
> 
> Screen Innovation videos are deceptive in my opinion, they unsurprisingly want to show the product to the best possible advantage.
> 
> 
> They claim they are the new standard, with contrast improved by 900%, that it is superior to a white screen even in a black dark room, that it enables front projection in light colored rooms with the lights on with no sacrifice in image quality. Sounds too good to be true to me and lacks specifics.
> 
> 
> Details about the setup where the 900% improvement was measured.
> 
> Details about projector lumens screen size and foot Lambert.
> 
> Details about projector, viewer, other lighting position relative to the screen.
> 
> Details about how the screen works, angular or retro-reflective (I belive it is retro-reflective), half-gain angle, diffuse/specular gain, surface texture.
> 
> 
> No mention of how the projector - screen - viewer, other lighting positions are critical for best results, so it is not suited to every room. No mention of how screen brightness vs room brightness is critical so why you may need to use a high lumen projector or small screen for best results.
> 
> 
> They say seeing is believing but cameras lie, a camera can under or over expose and is incapable of capturing the full contrast ratio of a well setup projector, so it can easily make the black level look allot better than it is.
> 
> The comparison screen is not the same gain or surface color as the Screen Innovation screen, and the projector is setup for the Screen Innovation screen, any comparison done like that is going to make it look like it produces a much higher contrast image.
> 
> 
> Many home cinema projectors are ceiling mounted and relatively low Lumen and have lens offset and keystone adjustment for off axis positioning. The screen is often relatively low on the wall and viewers seated. Most living rooms have windows at around the same height as the screen, and living room ceiling lighting height is not incredibly high.
> 
> The demos correct me if I am wrong use very high lumen projectors and/or smallish screens. The projector is at near the same height as the viewers projecting straight at the screen. Other sources of light are very off angle to the screen either very high up or on the same wall as the screen, the most obvious source of reflection at the same height and angle as the projector, the opposite wall is very far away. No windows on sidewalls are present.



Curious Dover what screen and projector are you using?


----------



## dovercat




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19272159
> 
> 
> Curious Dover what screen and projector are you using?



Having become addicted to home cinema with my ultra budget setup below, I am now contemplating converting my empty garage into a larger home cinema. Maybe buying a higher resolution projector, a blu-ray player and a proper screen. But remain unconvinced paying a lot of money will yield massive improvement. The picture quality I enjoy is already hugely impressive to me with incredibly image depth.


Currently I am using a 2.35:1 screen. The screen is the ultra-budget standby painted wall. Bottom coat is Ford Moondust Silver metallic paint because I thought it might increase gain. Top coat is Dulux light & space absolute white rich matt, with lumitec technology

RGB R249 G250 B247 (RGB ideal is for them to be as close to each other as possible)

CIE xyY x0.314 y0.332 Y94.9 (CIE ideal is D65 x0.31271 y0.32902 Y luminance as bright/close to 100 as possible)

L*ab L98 a-0.75 b+1.27 (L*ab ideal is L lightness as bright/close to 100 as possible, ab as close to 0 as possible, a +red/magenta -green, b +yellow -blue)


Screen masking is black cotton velvet angled on to the screen from ceiling, sidewalls and floor, rather than flat on the wall.


Projectors I own a few and half a dozen spare lamps, all bought extremely cheap second hand. Currently I am using the ultra-budge standby business presentation projectors.

Two overlayed Mitsubishi XD460U DLP projectors running old dim lamps in low lamp mode,(replacing with a new lamp means using only one projector in low lamp mode with a ND2 or ND4 filter)

Projectors shipped June 2006 - July 2008 MSRP $5495 Street Price $2895

2600 Lumen, 250/200 Watt Lamp.2000/5000Hrs (I use them to watch TV in the evening)

2 x Speed colorwheel RGBWY

Darkchip3 XGA native resolution. (I am in Europe so Standard Definition Widescreen 16:9 is 576x1024, I am using a 2.35:1 screen so only 1024x436 display resolution, I use projector masking hanging from the ceiling a few feet infront of the projectors to reduce the light spill from the 4:3 chip)

Contrast Ratio claimed 2500:1


I am running a high gamma midpoint of about 2.6. The projectors detail mode is only about gamma 2.2 but I use the DVD recorder to push gamma up for better perceived contrast.


I sit close to the screen, horizontal field of view of about 65 degrees.


Dedicated home cinema room completely light controlled and completely black, with black fabric covering the walls, ceiling, floor and furniture.


Going by
http://www.dolby.com/uploadedFiles/E...screensize.pdf 

Treating the black fabric as if it was paint 5% reflective, I get a room limiting contrast of 522:1 and fabric is significantly less reflective than paint, so I expect intra-scene contrast is quite good. The projector is darkchip3 so about 400-500:1 ansi checkerboard contrast, if room limiting contrast the amount of light from the screen reflected back on to the screen is 522:1, then I think it would drop the ansi checkerboard contrast to 226.9-255.6:1. In room on/off contrast is >2000:1.


Current sources are

PAL DVD. Sony RDR-HX525 DVD & Hard Disk Recorder.

Satellite TV via motorized dish system (in Europe so get a lot of TV channels) Comag SL100 High Definition receiver.


Current soundsystem

Sony STR-DB930 Home Cinema Receiver 5.1, 5x100Watt

Rega Vulcan Active Subwoofer 200mm longthrow 100Watt

2 pairs of Mission 731i Bookshelf/Stand Speakers

No center speaker


----------



## dukeav




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19252364
> 
> 
> Awesome ....
> 
> How do you find your whites with the .8
> 
> when i did a recent test i found that the whites where a little dull..
> 
> Do you find that at all?
> 
> Also can you post some pics ?
> 
> Thanks



I don't see the whites being dull, however screen texture causes speckling(?) in large expanses of white (or lighter color).


Will post some pictures soon.


----------



## send

Several new videos from CEDIA. http://www.screeninnovations.com/cat...iamond-videos/ 


The show floor had around 28 foot-candles of ambient light coming from all directions. We had the Projection Design projector in the low theater28 mode.


Since Black Diamond is angular reflective, we also lost some light by having the projector tabletop instead of overhead.


Blake


----------



## rdjam

Well, I did a quick test of the BD II screen's ability to retain light polaristation this week.


Fired up the projector and viewed the screen through polarised glasses I held in my hands and rotated, while putting up test patterns.


The polarisation on all three colors from my JVC were retained when reflected back from the BD II.


I did these tests in preparation for a 3D system I will be putting together in my home, to replace my current 2D setup.


I am not able to tell yet whether ALL the light was sent back unchanged, or whether some of it may have been changed. Only way for me to know that will be when I am using the system and see whether thre is any ghosting.


But this initial test looks real good.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rdjam* /forum/post/19284147
> 
> 
> Well, I did a quick test of the BD II screen's ability to retain light polaristation this week.
> 
> 
> Fired up the projector and viewed the screen through polarised glasses I held in my hands and rotated, while putting up test patterns.
> 
> 
> The polarisation on all three colors from my JVC were retained when reflected back from the BD II.
> 
> 
> I did these tests in preparation for a 3D system I will be putting together in my home, to replace my current 2D setup.
> 
> 
> I am not able to tell yet whether ALL the light was sent back unchanged, or whether some of it may have been changed. Only way for me to know that will be when I am using the system and see whether thre is any ghosting.
> 
> 
> But this initial test looks real good.



what screen 1.4 or .8?


----------



## glennQNYC




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bud16415* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> Well I wasn't at CEDIA but I viewed the videos posted and the fellow that was explaining the screen in the video... said that this screen improves contrast 900% and he also raised a white screen to cover half the BD screen and showed how much improvement there was with the BD screen over a conventional screen material. I would think a better comparison would be something similar say another manufacturer. I never felt these videos to be fair when a properly calibrated light cannon on a fairly small screen shows how washed out a white screen looks in comparison as a selling point.



SI was using 100" screens at CEDIA. I don't know how many people would agree to consider that "fairly small," but it is the most popular size screen sold by CEDIA professionals.

How is showing the difference between (their own) conventional screen material and the Black Diamond technology lacking "fairness?" Considering most integrators are speccing a standard screen material, this A/B comparison is what most dealers want to see when considering the cost/benefit of a high-technology screen.

BTW, I cannot think of ANY manufacturer ever putting a competitor's product in their booth for comparison. It is considered bad taste, and lacks tact.


----------



## msmCutter

I thought he did a good job of explaining why it's not fair.


----------



## noah katz




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *glennQNYC* /forum/post/19292008
> 
> 
> BTW, I cannot think of ANY manufacturer ever putting a competitor's product in their booth for comparison. It is considered bad taste, and lacks tact.



What's wrong with that if it's used as the mfgr intended?


----------



## msmCutter

:shrug: no mfgr intended their product run side by side?


----------



## karlsch

I have a BDII 1.4 gain screen. It replaced a Da-Lite HCCV which I still have. The HCCV is a light gray screen with a reflective surface to increase gain.


When I have time, I will assemble the Da-Lite, place it in front of the BDII so it covers the bottom half (similar to what BDII does with a white screen) and take some pictures.


When I do it, I will post the pictures here.


----------



## glennQNYC




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *noah katz* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> What's wrong with that if it's used as the mfgr intended?



It is considered lacking tact... At least by most people I know.

Has anyone had a different industry trade show experience?


----------



## rdjam




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19284862
> 
> 
> what screen 1.4 or .8?



1.4


I'd be worried about using a .8 with a 3D system, as the polarisation will take out a chunk of the light before it even gets to the screen. OK if you have light canons, but cutting it close with the RS 40 units I'll be using for my project.


----------



## R Harkness

The .8 gain version is a tough screen to light up, to be sure. You need a very bright projector for "big" screen sizes (that is well beyond 100" diagonal, which many people are favoring these days). And *quality* projectors that put out tons of brightness tend to be exceedingly expensive. You just have to know what compromises you are willing to make with all these things.


----------



## rdjam

Agreed, when I was configuring my 140" theater in my head, I was very worried about light, so I went with the 1.4, and also dropped to one of their standard sizes, the 133", for a little security.


If there were 5,000 lumen moonsters available in this price range, I'd have gone .8 for sure.


It has worked out great with the RS 550 and RS 950, but I'm still interested in seeing how much difference the extra light in the RS 40 and RS 50 will look.


----------



## Screeny24

Alternate have a look onto this new screen from Germany: screen-tech.eu


----------



## dukeav

The setup is BD II 0.8 100" with Benq W6000. The Benq is running in economic lamp mode and output as lamp native.


The pictures are from daytime and taken from Sony Handycam in photo mode. Actual room pictures are in the end.


Note that the pictures have more contrast than actual, I'd say maybe a point and half more on a scale of 10.


----------



## dukeav




----------



## dukeav




----------



## dukeav

The room pics, panning from left to right...


----------



## clausdk

Thanks for the pics!


Any word on the motorized version seen at CEDIA?


----------



## turls




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *CTO* /forum/post/13710310
> 
> 
> First, thanks to all of you for your interest in SI's Black Diamond screen material. It has been years in development and we are very proud of the results. Based on what we've seen on this thread, I decided to post. Hopefully this will clear things up a bit regarding deliverables on these units.
> 
> 
> Our new Black Diamond fixed screens have begun to ship. The incredible levels of excitement, enthusiasm, and pre-launch orders we have received have been phenomenal. As should occur with any completely new technology, the first production runs are being heavily scrutinized to insure optimal quality. This extra attention to the manufacturing process will limit production capacity for a short while. Both gains are being independently analyzed and may deliver at different paces. We appreciate your patience while we get ramped up to full capacity.
> 
> 
> Since I am heavily focused on the launch of this product, I am not on the Forum daily. Feel free to reply to my post or PM me with questions, but please understand that my response might not be immediate.
> 
> 
> Thanks again.



Just an observation independent of the product after my first viewing of the thread--post once and never come back and post again or respond publicly? On a product as "groundbreaking" as this? Seriously?


----------



## Jrunr




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *clausdk* /forum/post/19397763
> 
> 
> Any word on the motorized version seen at CEDIA?


















*

x 2!!! Anything?*


----------



## jrs91

Ugh... Sometimes I hate AVS. It makes it so difficult to come to a conclusion. I have a white room with white walls and white vertical blinds covering a wall of floor to ceiling windows to the right of the viewing area. Most movies, besides space movies, look decent enough with an epson 8500ub during the daytime and the blinds closed. I'm projecting onto a white wall right now.


My biggest problem is loss of contrast because of all the light bouncing around my white room. i want to project 100-106" from 17' back. Viewing distance is 12'.


Everything was looking good until i got to the posts about hotspots and sparklies. So hard to decide, but daytime results are way less important to me than getting the absolute best performance I can at night with the lights off.


I guess the main contender is the firehawk g3? Someone tell me what to buy lol. I don't care about money.


----------



## dukeav




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jrs91* /forum/post/19418334
> 
> 
> Ugh... Sometimes I hate AVS. It makes it so difficult to come to a conclusion. I have a white room with white walls and white vertical blinds covering a wall of floor to ceiling windows to the right of the viewing area. Most movies, besides space movies, look decent enough with an epson 8500ub during the daytime and the blinds closed. I'm projecting onto a white wall right now.
> 
> 
> My biggest problem is loss of contrast because of all the light bouncing around my white room. i want to project 100-106" from 17' back. Viewing distance is 12'.
> 
> 
> Everything was looking good until i got to the posts about hotspots and sparklies. So hard to decide, but daytime results are way less important to me than getting the absolute best performance I can at night with the lights off.
> 
> 
> I guess the main contender is the firehawk g3? Someone tell me what to buy lol. I don't care about money.



Well you are not going to love it anytime soon then! There was comparison of various screens by someone around here (I think the link was in someone's signature) and that also reported sparklies with firehawk. Something to do with the optical coating on these gray screens...


----------



## DigsMovies




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jrs91* /forum/post/19418334
> 
> 
> Ugh... Sometimes I hate AVS. It makes it so difficult to come to a conclusion. I have a white room with white walls and white vertical blinds covering a wall of floor to ceiling windows to the right of the viewing area. Most movies, besides space movies, look decent enough with an epson 8500ub during the daytime and the blinds closed. I'm projecting onto a white wall right now.
> 
> 
> My biggest problem is loss of contrast because of all the light bouncing around my white room. i want to project 100-106" from 17' back. Viewing distance is 12'.
> 
> 
> Everything was looking good until i got to the posts about hotspots and sparklies. So hard to decide, but daytime results are way less important to me than getting the absolute best performance I can at night with the lights off.
> 
> 
> I guess the main contender is the firehawk g3? Someone tell me what to buy lol. I don't care about money.



If you don't care about money, then you should LOVE AVS not hate it!










It's good to hear about the downsides of products we are considering. If you look long enough, you will find drawbacks to just about everything. Compromise is a necessity for almost everyone in this hobby though. That is a notion that gets trampled so often around here. Some responses and opinions are technically correct, but support perfection over practicality. These are useful posts, but one has to keep them in perspective.


A good example is the issue of a horizontal center speaker vs. a vertically aligned one. I have no doubt the "best" solution is 3 identical vertical speakers up front. Ask for opinions about this in the speaker section, and you will be flooded with this opinion. And yet.... I've heard some fantastic systems with horizontal center speakers! To me, this is a minor compromise- but hang around the speaker forum long enough and you'll think you won't be able to understand a single word of dialog with a horizontal center!


Want perfection? Board up those windows, install black carpet, cover the walls and ceiling with black velvet, and pick up a $35K Sim2. Anything less is a compromise.


Screens like the Black Diamond allow people to use projection systems that might otherwise not be able to. Maybe a few sparklies is a compromise you can live with? Go see one in person and find out. Drive a ways if you have to. The BD screens were good enough for JVC to use at Cedia to demo their new projectors. They are not for everyone, but for some they are a lifesaver.


----------



## msmCutter

With price no object you can't find a dealer that would let you run full examples? It'd probably cost you an extra $500 but someone else would install it and you'd be sure to have the "right" screen.


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jrs91* /forum/post/19418334
> 
> 
> Ugh... Sometimes I hate AVS. It makes it so difficult to come to a conclusion. I have a white room with white walls and white vertical blinds covering a wall of floor to ceiling windows to the right of the viewing area. Most movies, besides space movies, look decent enough with an epson 8500ub during the daytime and the blinds closed. I'm projecting onto a white wall right now.
> 
> 
> My biggest problem is loss of contrast because of all the light bouncing around my white room. i want to project 100-106" from 17' back. Viewing distance is 12'.
> 
> 
> Everything was looking good until i got to the posts about hotspots and sparklies. So hard to decide, but daytime results are way less important to me than getting the absolute best performance I can at night with the lights off.
> 
> 
> I guess the main contender is the firehawk g3? Someone tell me what to buy lol. I don't care about money.



Ask the main man for guidence......



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Alan Gouger* /forum/post/19419712
> 
> 
> If anyone visits or lives near Bradenton FL area you have a free invitation to see this projector. Drop me a PM.
> 
> For reference I am running long throw on a 9 foot wide .8 dark screen from Screen Innovations. This is a negative gain screen dark in color. Plenty bright, can leave lights on, no shortage of brightness. I have also ran this on a silver screen same size, image was to bright
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This thing is brighter then most of its competition in its price range. LED will maintain this brightness longer.


----------



## jrs91

^^ Ya.. Some perspective is needed on here at times. It can be difficult to decide sight unseen which issues that people bring up are worth worrying about. Sometimes it just makes it impossible to decide. For something like this, where I may want to test a couple different options, I think you're right, I should find a local dealer that carries stewart and SI and maybe some regular grey screens. Gonna call SI now.


----------



## msmCutter

Heck... if you can't find a dealer with all the options or won't work with you, buy them all and return the lossers. There might be a restock fee but who cares?


----------



## fraisa

here is one of my pics of the new screen setup...


----------



## fraisa

i still have to play with my settings for skin tone but these pics some are with lights on ... .8 gain screen....

No speckling or Hot spotting....


----------



## send




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/18821949
> 
> 
> (Bolding mine)
> 
> 
> I'm always amazed how differently people can see things.
> 
> 
> I've viewed most of the contender commercial screens in action, including most of the leading gray screens/gray screens with gain that help combat ambient/reflected light. The .8 version of the Black Diamond, which I viewed numerous times, was easily the worst offender I've ever seen in terms of producing hot-spotting/uneven illumination with off-axis viewing.
> 
> I was just appalled how dim the far side of the image became as I moved off-axis (and not extreme off axis at that).
> 
> 
> Projector central described this issue in their review and even provided screen shots to show the issue. Look at the 3 first screen shots, how dark the right side of the image becomes by the time you are even 35 degrees off-angle.
> 
> http://www.projectorcentral.com/si_b...een_review.htm
> 
> 
> I didn't need to get near 35 degrees off axis to notice the issue.
> 
> 
> And I think some folks assume the screen with the lower gain rating is the one that has less optical gain and might have better viewing angles. But with specialty screens like the BD that's not the case. The .8 version actually has quite a bit of added gain via an optical coating - more than the 1.4 version. Look at how amazingly dark the substrate screen color is - it borders on black. That is mostly for absorbing the room reflections. To get the image up to a usable brightness and focus that light to the viewer, I'm sure they have to add substantial gain to the screen coating - hence the comments of screen grain and narrow viewing angle. The 1.4 version has a substantially lighter substrate - looks closer to a Stewart Firehawk shade, so less gain is needed on the coating. And the optical coating/gain is what focuses the light to the viewer, making the image brighter from on axis. Which is why Sound and Vision reported much wider viewing angles on the 1.4 version over the .8 version.
> 
> 
> Note also that the 35 degress to 1/2 gain spec is, I'm sure, for the side of the image closer to the viewer. Remember this screen is not retro-reflective like the Da Lite High Power screen (which allows the HP screen to maintain mostly even screen brightness even as it drops gain off-axis). Since the BD screen hot-spots so severely, it doesn't maintain anything like an even gain as you move off axis. Look at the projector central photos again and you'll see the closer side of the image (left side) drops to what looks like the 1/2 gain point at 35 degrees, whereas the far side (right side) drops to much darker than 1/2 gain. So well before you've moved to 35 degrees off axis you are already dropping the gain significantly on one side of the screen.
> 
> 
> Now I'm definitely not saying the BD screen isn't a viable product. I'm very glad it exists to offer the type of option it does to people. There are some type of compromises to be made in almost any screen choice - at least for non dedicated rooms. And for me, so long as you are watching from the sweet spot, one big benefit of a BD .8 screen is how little light it throws back on to the surrounding ceiling/walls/floor. Having the front of the room less lit up definitely enhances the viewing experience.
> 
> 
> But if the off-axis performance of this screen is "really not that bad" I can't think of what "bad" would be, given I've never seen worse.
> 
> 
> Cheers,



Please Note: The viewing angle you are referring to was our first version of Black Diamond I. We are continually improving the technology and have enhanced the viewing angle significantly.


Blake


----------



## send




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rdjam* /forum/post/19302479
> 
> 
> 1.4
> 
> 
> I'd be worried about using a .8 with a 3D system, as the polarisation will take out a chunk of the light before it even gets to the screen. OK if you have light canons, but cutting it close with the RS 40 units I'll be using for my project.



We usually recommend using the BD1.4 for 3D. Optima, Wolf, JVC, and Epson all used the BD1.4 with their 3D projectors at the CEDIA trade show a month ago.


Best,


Blake


----------



## fraisa

here are some more pics

Projector is Epson 9700 ub


----------



## msmCutter

I see a pretty pronounced cone in the "little flockers" pick.


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jrs91* /forum/post/19418334
> 
> 
> Ugh... Sometimes I hate AVS. It makes it so difficult to come to a conclusion. I have a white room with white walls and white vertical blinds covering a wall of floor to ceiling windows to the right of the viewing area.



I have windows to the right of the viewing area. I posted pictures comparing a BDII 1.4 gain to an much cheaper ordinary light gray screen here:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1282153 


The BDII is better, but not by much.


----------



## dukeav




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19423703
> 
> 
> i still have to play with my settings for skin tone but these pics some are with lights on ... .8 gain screen....
> 
> No speckling or Hot spotting....



Do you not see speckles at all? I mean not even not at higher brightness or closer to the screen?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19424232
> 
> 
> I see a pretty pronounced cone in the "little flockers" pick.



its my digital camera not the screen...

again i need to play with my camera to maximize the pics

But if you mean coning to be the Flockers reflection under the word in white ,,,

thats not a cone its the actual reflection of the word thats on the video

which when i watch it back on my lcd the same reflection is present....


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dukeav* /forum/post/19424827
> 
> 
> Do you not see speckles at all? I mean not even not at higher brightness or closer to the screen?



I watch hdtv in vivid mode for ultimate brightness and i dont see any but i am sitting around 15ft 113 inch...

i have a very fussy eye so if it was there i would see it...

but that is one reason i went with the .8 gain screen .....

Again all i can say is wow ...

My vivid mode produces blacks and whites and colours that would go head to head with top LED LCD,s


----------



## fraisa

also the Wrestling pics of Wade Barett and Niadia Niedhart are zoomed in and are at extreme brightness and there is no speckling....

Watching Sports makes it feel like i am at the event ...

I can see me hosting alot of WWE , Football and UFC parties...


----------



## send

Here is the latest .8 Black Diamond 3G screen review.

http://www.laaudiofile.com/anthem_ltx_500v.html 


Best,


Blake


----------



## send




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19426203
> 
> 
> also the Wrestling pics of Wade Barett and Niadia Niedhart are zoomed in and are at extreme brightness and there is no speckling....
> 
> Watching Sports makes it feel like i am at the event ...
> 
> I can see me hosting alot of WWE , Football and UFC parties...



FYI - on the latest BD1.4 we have significantly reduced sparkle.


Best,


Blake


----------



## fraisa

here is a pic that shows off whites

























Black and Whites.....










And Screen Shot with Lights on.....Very High Contrast and Colour...


----------



## andrios




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19426668
> 
> 
> here is a pic that shows off whites
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Black and Whites.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Screen Shot with Lights on.....Very High Contrast and Colour...



Wow that looks really good with all those lights on!


How do white whites look?? Also does this help with the annoying black bars when watching movies?


----------



## andrios

How does this screen compare price wise to a Carada horizontal masquerade w/screen system?


I haven't called Carada so I dont know what it cost for there system.


----------



## GetGray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *send* /forum/post/19426452
> 
> 
> FYI - on the vs.12 of the BD1.4 we have significantly reduced sparkle.
> 
> 
> Best,
> 
> 
> Blake



What about the .8? How is it in the sparkle and shimmer dept, particularly if you are using a suitably bright PJ?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/19427353
> 
> 
> Wow that looks really good with all those lights on!
> 
> 
> How do white whites look?? Also does this help with the annoying black bars when watching movies?



THe white whites look very natural and pure ... was watching the hockey game tonight and you could easliy see the players reflection on the ice..

It was the best whites i have seen even better than my old plasma..

Just looked so Natural...

As for the black bars... They dissapear when watching a film..

I have seen 2.35 screens in show rooms and have watched demo's ,

It to me felt like i was watching a movie on a 2.35 screen...


The pic below is a 2.35 source on my 16x9 screen... again the screen and wall dissapears ...

giving me an image that looks like i have spent a bundle in a masking system..

Its awesome


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/19427362
> 
> 
> How does this screen compare price wise to a Carada horizontal masquerade w/screen system?
> 
> 
> I haven't called Carada so I dont know what it cost for there system.



Personally i am So Glad i didnt spend the money on a Carada System..

The Carada is not user friendly..

The black diamond produces the same result will alot of less effort...


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray* /forum/post/19427982
> 
> 
> What about the .8? How is it in the sparkle and shimmer dept, particularly if you are using a suitably bright PJ?



Just look at all the pics i have posted

Using an Epson 9700ub

Black Diamond .8 gain screen...

Just watched Hockey Game Tonight and as the leafs could find the net till the third period there was no Sparkle ..

If there was sparkle you would definitly see it on a hockey game...


----------



## dukeav




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19428218
> 
> 
> Just watched Hockey Game Tonight and as the leafs could find the net till the third period there was no Sparkle ..
> 
> If there was sparkle you would definitly see it on a hockey game...



Very interesting. Whats your projector location, throw and seating distance?

Mine is the top edge of the screen and 14ft throw, and seating at 13ft.


----------



## andrios

Epson 8350 2k lumens. Throw 15ft away, seating is about 10-12 feet away. Projector is ceiling mounted at top part of screen.


I really want the best picture with the lights on, but I don't wanna see black bars when I watch a movie at night.


1.4 or .8?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dukeav* /forum/post/19428639
> 
> 
> Very interesting. Whats your projector location, throw and seating distance?
> 
> Mine is the top edge of the screen and 14ft throw, and seating at 13ft.



Projector is Ceiling Mount,

My Throw distance is 14.7 Ft and seating is around 16.5 ft..

Here is a pic of my projector

Epson 9700ub


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/19428851
> 
> 
> Epson 8350 2k lumens. Throw 15ft away, seating is about 10-12 feet away. Projector is ceiling mounted at top part of screen.
> 
> 
> I really want the best picture with the lights on, but I don't wanna see black bars when I watch a movie at night.
> 
> 
> 1.4 or .8?



If you went with a 90-100 inch screen you would be okay...

i think 12 ft seating distance would be pushing it for a 113 inch screen

Best picture lights on would be a 1.4 gain screen would produce a brighter pic..

but

if you go .8 gain screen and turn up the settings on your projector,

you can achieve a very bright image with lights on,

as seen in my pics....

then also achieve blacker blacks with lights off to elimate the bars ...


I really investigated and studied this alot before putting this .8 gain screen in


Side Note SI was using all .8 gain screens at cedia for there demo's...


----------



## msmCutter

fraisa - you really don't see the cone? How the middle of the picture is bright and the corners are dull? Everything inside the cone is better than outside? If you stood off to the side it would mean the side you're on looks good while the far side of the screen would be cut off.


----------



## DigsMovies




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19428981
> 
> 
> If you went with a 90-100 inch screen you would be okay...
> 
> i think 12 ft seating distance would be pushing it for a 113 inch screen
> 
> Best picture lights on would be a 1.4 gain screen would produce a brighter pic..
> 
> but
> 
> if you go .8 gain screen and turn up the settings on your projector,
> 
> you can achieve a very bright image with lights on,
> 
> as seen in my pics....
> 
> then also achieve blacker blacks with lights off to elimate the bars ...
> 
> 
> I really investigated and studied this alot before putting this .8 gain screen in
> 
> 
> Side Note SI was using all .8 gain screens at cedia for there demo's...



Nice report and pics of your BD set-up fraisa! For the recored, JVC was actually using the 1.4 gain version at Cedia, but said they could have used the .8 instead.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *cdeutsch* /forum/post/19356579
> 
> 
> ...Regarding the demo on the floor at CEDIA, the 2D material was "The Sorcerer's Apprentice", and the 3D demo was "Despicable Me". You are correct that we used a Screen Innovations Black Diamond. It was a 113" screen and it was the 1.4 gain version.
> 
> 
> Given how bright our projectors turned out to be we could have probably improved things a little further by going with the .8 gain. That would have cut down on some of the "sparklies" that you mention. I believe we'll address that when we show the projectors next time at CES.
> 
> 
> Chris


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19429563
> 
> 
> fraisa - you really don't see the cone? How the middle of the picture is bright and the corners are dull? Everything inside the cone is better than outside? If you stood off to the side it would mean the side you're on looks good while the far side of the screen would be cut off.



I am going to pull up my BLuRay reference disc and pretty sure there is a video graph image on it

that would really show coning if there was any...

Personally think was the source of video..

did just watch TSN Sports Center and the bottom corners are just as bright as the center...


----------



## fraisa

Here is a couple of screen shots from Cars BluRay

Lights Off....


























Now with Some Ambient Light....


































And Final Pic NBA 2k11 PS3


----------



## msmCutter

Can you take a picture or two from your far most left or right seating positions?


----------



## jrs91




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *karlsch* /forum/post/19424631
> 
> 
> I have windows to the right of the viewing area. I posted pictures comparing a BDII 1.4 gain to an much cheaper ordinary light gray screen here:
> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1282153
> 
> 
> The BDII is better, but not by much.



Did you also take pics comparing them with the lights off? Would love to see them...



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/19427362
> 
> 
> How does this screen compare price wise to a Carada horizontal masquerade w/screen system?
> 
> 
> I haven't called Carada so I dont know what it cost for there system.



Carada's masking system is relatively cheap. For instance, if i decided to go carada gray screen + masking, it would cost me a little over 3k. The SI BDII would cost a little under 3k.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jrs91* /forum/post/19437508
> 
> 
> Did you also take pics comparing them with the lights off? Would love to see them...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Carada's masking system is relatively cheap. For instance, if i decided to go carada gray screen + masking, it would cost me a little over 3k. The SI BDII would cost a little under 3k.



But if you went with Carada's Gray screen you wouldnt achieve the black levels as per SI .8 Gain...


I would rather spend the extra $ on a screen rather than masking...

Especially a screen that doesnt need Masking...

that was the deal breaker for my on choosing SI...

Also SI customer Service is Very Very Good..

Everytime I have called i have spoken to a live person....

Even when Cedia was one they had some one there answering the phones and giving Support...

I have never called Carada so dont know what there service is like...


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jrs91* /forum/post/19437508
> 
> 
> Did you also take pics comparing them with the lights off? Would love to see them...



Look again. The third picture in each set of pictures is in a dark room.


----------



## fraisa

Here is some pics of a trailer HD in THX Mode on Epson 9700ub

SI .8 Gain...


----------



## Kelvin1965S

I tried to arrange a demo at a UK dealer as I'm interested in this screen as an alternative to my current arrangement of black cloth tent and other dark materials I put out when watching a film. I currently have a Beamax 1.5 gain Matt White 2.35:1 tab tensioned screen, so the BD 1.4 would seem to be the obvious choice for me. However I bought the Beamax as I found that my previous Greywolf II screen had a very annoying texture which particularly jarred during panning scenes. The Beamax has none...the image just floats in space, so I don't want to take a step backwards on this score. However I can't seem to find a UK dealer that has one on show that can demonstrate. I emailed one place without getting a reply and I don't know of any others in the South of England.










It's no good discussing texture or not on a thread as the only answer is to see one for myself, but if I can't see one I'm not buying blind. I'm slightly concerned as all the videos I've seen of the screen in action show still pictures, so the cynic in me makes me think they are avoiding showing it's potential weak point.


If anyone knows of a decent UK dealer, please let me know.


----------



## fraisa

Okay every year i host 2 parties for Football,

1. The Grey Cup....

2. Super Bowl...


Grey Cup is on 28th of Nov and i was getting ready planning for the event when i came across a pic from Last years Super Bowl Party..


Last year we went with a very good projector and we just projected the game on the wall...

Results was washed out pic.

BUt the kool thing is i have a pic below of a shot from the game last year..

then i have a shot of the same play on my black diamond and it blew me away....

Enjoy











and this is the same play on black Diamond


----------



## Fritzl Dog

I'm compelled to write about my experiences with the Black Diamond 1.4 gain screen. Posts on this thread seem generally favorable with a few detractors. Some personal background: age 60, semi-retired, a film buff my entire life. For 25 years approx., I've dreamed of having a front projection set-up. The setting, however, is not ideal. A small room, approx. 22' x 11', 7 foot high ceiling, all painted a pastel yellow. This was my wife's home before we met, and she was adamant on keeping the room color. So, the black screen technology intrigued me. I recall reading about Sony's Dynaclear(?), but that never reached the market(around here, anyway). Enter Screen Innovations. The videos on ambient light rejection showcased on their site were the impetus for me to find a dealer in the Green Bay/Appleton Wisconsin market. Fortunately, our local Magnolia dealer had a .8 gain/92" on display. However, even with rich black levels in a fully-lit demo room, I felt the picture a tad too dim. The other dealer - and the one I eventually purchased from - happened to be a JVC dealer besides.

In July, I purchased a 100" size screen but the Austin, TX factory was back-ordered so I had to wait a few weeks. Both the screen and the projector - the DLA-HD950B - arrived together.

Other issues intervened, preventing me from getting my gear delivered and installed until just last week. To say I'm thrilled is an understatement.

Now, I'm not a professional reviewer, so I'm not familiar with the technical jargon. All I can do is trust my eyes. My DVD collection has never looked this good!

An example for me was "The Godfather" on Blu-Ray. The opening scene where Brando is meeting with the undertaker whose daughter was violated, and seeks retribution. I've seen this film many times, but never was able to pick out detail in the black-as-night study room until now. And speaking of blacks - and knowing the projector has no small measure in impacting this - the pillar borders on 4x3 and letterbox bands on 2:35 material seem to dissolve into the elegant black frame that surrounds the screen. Whites seem pure and are plenty bright, and therein lies the one nitpick I have with the Black Diamond. It does have a subtle sheen, noticable on white expanses. Others, I believe, have called this(these) "sparklies". It is not, by any stretch, a deal breaker. I actually HAVE to look for them to notice them. With all room lights off, the screen reminds me of the 65" plasma that used to occupy the area.

In closing, I highly recommend this screen if you can afford it. In a light-colored room, even with ambient light intruding, the images produced will impress you. Thanks.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Fritzl Dog* /forum/post/19456681
> 
> 
> I'm compelled to write about my experiences with the Black Diamond 1.4 gain screen. Posts on this thread seem generally favorable with a few detractors. Some personal background: age 60, semi-retired, a film buff my entire life. For 25 years approx., I've dreamed of having a front projection set-up. The setting, however, is not ideal. A small room, approx. 22' x 11', 7 foot high ceiling, all painted a pastel yellow. This was my wife's home before we met, and she was adamant on keeping the room color. So, the black screen technology intrigued me. I recall reading about Sony's Dynaclear(?), but that never reached the market(around here, anyway). Enter Screen Innovations. The videos on ambient light rejection showcased on their site were the impetus for me to find a dealer in the Green Bay/Appleton Wisconsin market. Fortunately, our local Magnolia dealer had a .8 gain/92" on display. However, even with rich black levels in a fully-lit demo room, I felt the picture a tad too dim. The other dealer - and the one I eventually purchased from - happened to be a JVC dealer besides.
> 
> In July, I purchased a 100" size screen but the Austin, TX factory was back-ordered so I had to wait a few weeks. Both the screen and the projector - the DLA-HD950B - arrived together.
> 
> Other issues intervened, preventing me from getting my gear delivered and installed until just last week. To say I'm thrilled is an understatement.
> 
> Now, I'm not a professional reviewer, so I'm not familiar with the technical jargon. All I can do is trust my eyes. My DVD collection has never looked this good!
> 
> An example for me was "The Godfather" on Blu-Ray. The opening scene where Brando is meeting with the undertaker whose daughter was violated, and seeks retribution. I've seen this film many times, but never was able to pick out detail in the black-as-night study room until now. And speaking of blacks - and knowing the projector has no small measure in impacting this - the pillar borders on 4x3 and letterbox bands on 2:35 material seem to dissolve into the elegant black frame that surrounds the screen. Whites seem pure and are plenty bright, and therein lies the one nitpick I have with the Black Diamond. It does have a subtle sheen, noticable on white expanses. Others, I believe, have called this(these) "sparklies". It is not, by any stretch, a deal breaker. I actually HAVE to look for them to notice them. With all room lights off, the screen reminds me of the 65" plasma that used to occupy the area.
> 
> In closing, I highly recommend this screen if you can afford it. In a light-colored room, even with ambient light intruding, the images produced will impress you. Thanks.



Would love to see a couple of screen shots ....


----------



## Kevin 3000

Fritzl Dog


Out of interest are you using max lumens - High Lamp Iris open - If so close the Iris until the lamp ages a few hundred hours as is super bright at first especially with 1.4 gain - I know that plasma look is intoxicating at this size.










Thanks for your impressions.....


----------



## send




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kelvin1965S* /forum/post/19444757
> 
> 
> I tried to arrange a demo at a UK dealer as I'm interested in this screen as an alternative to my current arrangement of black cloth tent and other dark materials I put out when watching a film. I currently have a Beamax 1.5 gain Matt White 2.35:1 tab tensioned screen, so the BD 1.4 would seem to be the obvious choice for me. However I bought the Beamax as I found that my previous Greywolf II screen had a very annoying texture which particularly jarred during panning scenes. The Beamax has none...the image just floats in space, so I don't want to take a step backwards on this score. However I can't seem to find a UK dealer that has one on show that can demonstrate. I emailed one place without getting a reply and I don't know of any others in the South of England.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's no good discussing texture or not on a thread as the only answer is to see one for myself, but if I can't see one I'm not buying blind. I'm slightly concerned as all the videos I've seen of the screen in action show still pictures, so the cynic in me makes me think they are avoiding showing it's potential weak point.
> 
> 
> If anyone knows of a decent UK dealer, please let me know.



Contact [email protected] for international.


FYI we just released the latest version of BD1.4 that significantly reduces sparkle/texture.


Blake


----------



## Future Vision

Then do you think the motorized BD II 1.4 version will be available and how big will you make them?


----------



## send




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Future Vision* /forum/post/19458438
> 
> 
> Then do you think the motorized BD II 1.4 version will be available and how big will you make them?



Goal is early next year. We believe 115" 16:9 and 145" 2.40. The product is in testing.


----------



## Kelvin1965S




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *send* /forum/post/19458425
> 
> 
> Contact [email protected] for international.
> 
> 
> FYI we just released BD 1.4 version 12 that significantly reduces sparkle/texture.
> 
> 
> Blake



Thanks for the info: I had a reply on a UK forum that said just under 110" was the maximum width available and only at 0.8 gain. Having seen you post above, I might be able to get a 120" wide 2.40:1 at some point then, hopefully not too long. I take it that there was some issue with texture on the previous 1.4 version, despite me being flamed elsewhere for even questioning if there was a texture...



EDIT: Have emailed Shannon to ask about demos and UK dealers.


----------



## send




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kelvin1965S* /forum/post/19458451
> 
> 
> Thanks for the info: I had a reply on a UK forum that said just under 110" was the maximum width available and only at 0.8 gain. As I'd need at least 112" (to match my current screen) ideally a little wider, say, 120" would this be possible in future? I'd also want 2.35:1 (or perhaps 2.40:1 if possible) and the newer 1.4 gain of course.
> 
> 
> Is any of this possible in the near future or am I a lost cause?



FYI I was talking diagonal inch for the screen size. 2.40 or 2.35 is almost 12' wide. For the latest updates on BDM join our facebook page www.screeninnovations.com


----------



## Screen Innovatio

FYI: Screen Innovations new AVS user name is Screen Innovatio. Send will no longer be used.


Best,


Blake


----------



## GetGray

Get them to take the space out of it and you can be ScreenInnovation. Better, IMO.


----------



## fraisa

Calibrated my System last night ...

Here are some fresh pics....


----------



## fraisa

Here is Some with Colour Detail......


----------



## fraisa

And Here is some pics for Black & Whites....


----------



## mmiles

Fraisa, what media? DVD, BR, PC? Like to get a copy


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *mmiles* 
Fraisa, what media? DVD, BR, PC? Like to get a copy
Hi-Definition.Reference.Disc.BLURAY


----------



## GetGray

Frasia: Where is your PJ mounted relative to the screen (height and distance)?


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *GetGray* 
Frasia: Where is your PJ mounted relative to the screen (height and distance)?
Projector is Ceiling mounted 9ft ceilings..

Projector is Flush Mounted

Front of lens is 13.7 Ft from Screen

Screen is mounted 2 inchs from Top of Ceiling..

Sitting Distance is 16.5 Ft from Screen

Ceiling is Painted White......

Walls Painted Light tope


----------



## BillFree

Fraisa, These pictures are excellent and a model display for all of us newbies.


You mentioned Hi-Definition Reference.Disk.Bluray that was shown. Where can I obtain/purchase same disk to test my new system as a reference tool. Again they are awesome!!


Bill


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BillFree* /forum/post/19471808
> 
> 
> Fraisa, These pictures are excellent and a model display for all of us newbies.
> 
> 
> You mentioned Hi-Definition Reference.Disk.Bluray that was shown. Where can I obtain/purchase same disk to test my new system as a reference tool. Again they are awesome!!
> 
> 
> Bill



Thanks for the complement....

The pics turned out really good .....


Here is the info on the Ref Disc

http://www.cdjapan.co.jp/detailview.html?KEY=QVDB-1003


----------



## Screeny24

Why all pictures are shown in 0º axis? Pictures out of axis telling much more about light distribution. See movie of our patent reg. ST-Silver-Screen-3D at screen-tech.eu


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Screeny24* /forum/post/19476142
> 
> 
> Why all pictures are shown in 0º axis? Pictures out of axis telling much more about light distribution. See movie of our patent reg. ST-Silver-Screen-3D at screen-tech.eu



All pics above where taken from the Right side of the seating area..

was not 0 axis....

the screen is 113 inchs

Was sitting 33 inchs off center when taking the picture

What was the actual view angle ...

Figure it out......!


----------



## DigsMovies




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Screen Innovatio* /forum/post/19459829
> 
> 
> FYI: Screen Innovations new AVS user name is Screen Innovatio. Send will no longer be used.
> 
> 
> Best,
> 
> 
> Blake



Blake, can you please comment on the possibility of an acoustically transparent version of the Black Diamond Screen? Is this something we might look forward to, or is it not possible with this technology?


Thanks


----------



## msmCutter

33" off axis might be your furthest seat, but it's not really a wide angle. I still see a cone even with this modest angle. The right side of the screen is obviously brighter.


----------



## Screen Innovatio

We are experimenting with micro perfing a Black Diamond but right now the focus is getting the BD motorized to market in the first Q of next year and then we can turn the engineers attention to micro perf.

This will be a long testing process I am sure so I cannot even guess when it may be available.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19489887
> 
> 
> 33" off axis might be your furthest seat, but it's not really a wide angle. I still see a cone even with this modest angle. The right side of the screen is obviously brighter.



Unless you have a really Big room i dont see anyone watching a projector screen at a 45-60 degree viewing angle...

Dont really see the point of takeing pics or screen shots at an undesired view angle.

Every Home Theater i have installed in the past i have never had some one with seating at a 45-55 angle...


My Room is very big but even with my side sofa it is at the out side of the screen...


----------



## msmCutter

Certainly. I like how close to center your side most seat sits. It gives you a good view of the screen. However, even with the that not so drastic angle, I can see part of the screen is dimmer while the closer side is brighter. Do you notice?


----------



## myz350




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *send* /forum/post/19426452
> 
> 
> FYI - on the 3G of the BD1.4 we have significantly reduced sparkle.
> 
> 
> Best,
> 
> 
> Blake



Hi Blake, I will be purchasing the Black Diamond 1.4 soon, but how would I know if I am getting the 2G or 3G screen? Do I have to specify to my retailer? And does it say on the box so I can check to verify? Thanks.


----------



## DigsMovies




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Screen Innovatio* /forum/post/19496408
> 
> 
> We are experimenting with micro perfing a Black Diamond but right now the focus is getting the BD motorized to market in the first Q of next year and then we can turn the engineers attention to micro perf.
> 
> This will be a long testing process I am sure so I cannot even guess when it may be available.



Good luck with this! I really hope it comes to be. An AT version of the BD screen would be great!!


----------



## Audiojan

Received my BD II 0.8 yesterday, mounted on the wall and watched a movie last night... utter disbelief! Could never have imagined that a screen could make THAT much of a difference.


DVD's now look just as good as BluRay did on my old screen. Yes, that much of a difference.


To say that I'm thrilled with the BD would be a severe understatement.


----------



## chrischaos

I apologize if this is in poor taste, but would anyone be willing to discuss what they paid for their screen? I'm in Canada and somewhat reluctant to pay the agent for the rep for the dealer etc. Last price was $3800 for 1.4 113" diagonal.


----------



## myz350




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *chrischaos* /forum/post/19508434
> 
> 
> I apologize if this is in poor taste, but would anyone be willing to discuss what they paid for their screen? I'm in Canada and somewhat reluctant to pay the agent for the rep for the dealer etc. Last price was $3800 for 1.4 113" diagonal.



That's wayyyyyy too much! That's like full retail. Where do you live?


----------



## BlackShark

I have a question regarding Stereoscopic 3D using polarised presentation on the BlackDiamond.


I read the press release claiming the BD screen works well for polarised 3D but I do not know how well.

Most silverscreen manufacturers designed for 3D provide a value for the ability to maintain light polarisation properties, ideally a polarisation extinction ratio.

Has such a measurement been made with the BlackDiamond screens ? (i'd be mostly interested in the higher gain model, but values for both models would be interesting)


I'd like to know how it compares with my current silverscreen. That would maybe motivate me to start sparing money for a possible upgrade to a BD screen sometime next year.


----------



## andrios




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Audiojan* /forum/post/19507083
> 
> 
> Received my BD II 0.8 yesterday, mounted on the wall and watched a movie last night... utter disbelief! Could never have imagined that a screen could make THAT much of a difference.
> 
> 
> DVD's now look just as good as BluRay did on my old screen. Yes, that much of a difference.
> 
> 
> To say that I'm thrilled with the BD would be a severe understatement.



Got before and after pics? What projector you using? how far is your throw distance?


I still don't think I can shell out so much money for this screen....


----------



## Audiojan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/19536708
> 
> 
> Got before and after pics? What projector you using? how far is your throw distance?
> 
> 
> I still don't think I can shell out so much money for this screen....



Wish I did have before and after pictures... the difference is very obvious.


The projector is an Pioneer Elite Pro FPJ-1, so a rebranded JVC RS2, ceiling mounted 18' front the screen. I did have a bit of concern that the screen would be even darker than my old Draper High-contrast grey, and maybe it is a bit darker, but the increased contrast more than makes up for it. My wife even commented on how "bright the new screen is" and contined "it's like watching real life through a window". Yes, it's THAT good.


Money was a major concern when I started to look for a new screen and I did look at multiple other options. High Power, Silver Star, FireHawk, et al. (all at my local HT store). The Black Diamond turned out to be a bit more than the others (although not by that much actually), but for me, there was no other option after I saw it. Now after living with it for a little over a week, I could not be happier. Just a simple thing as being able to turn on the accent light in the room (which I did at a football party this weekend) and still have an outstanding picture is worth a lot. And then with the lights off, it's really just like my wife said, "watching real life through a window".


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Audiojan* /forum/post/19538779
> 
> 
> Wish I did have before and after pictures... the difference is very obvious.
> 
> 
> The projector is an Pioneer Elite Pro FPJ-1, so a rebranded JVC RS2, ceiling mounted 18' front the screen. I did have a bit of concern that the screen would be even darker than my old Draper High-contrast grey, and maybe it is a bit darker, but the increased contrast more than makes up for it. My wife even commented on how "bright the new screen is" and contined "it's like watching real life through a window". Yes, it's THAT good.
> 
> 
> Money was a major concern when I started to look for a new screen and I did look at multiple other options. High Power, Silver Star, FireHawk, et al. (all at my local HT store). The Black Diamond turned out to be a bit more than the others (although not by that much actually), but for me, there was no other option after I saw it. Now after living with it for a little over a week, I could not be happier. Just a simple thing as being able to turn on the accent light in the room (which I did at a football party this weekend) and still have an outstanding picture is worth a lot. And then with the lights off, it's really just like my wife said, "watching real life through a window".



Thats why this is the best screens on the Market...

Awesome that you are seeing what i have seen..

My wife actually said the same thing its like looking thru a window ...

We watched Imax Deep Sea the other day and it was like we where on a boat looking out at the whales..


Glad you like it

Hope you take some pics would love to see your set up

Welcome to the Black Dia .8 Gain Club....

Fraisa


----------



## andrios

Would an epson 8350 at 14' away from screen be to dim for the .8 with the lights on?


I really want the best performance when I got the lights on. Lol at the same time I don't wanna see black bars when I watch movies at night.


Obviously I can put my 8350 on cinema mode, would I still have black bars with the 1.4??


Thanks.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/19542954
> 
> 
> Would an epson 8350 at 14' away from screen be to dim for the .8 with the lights on?
> 
> 
> I really want the best performance when I got the lights on. Lol at the same time I don't wanna see black bars when I watch movies at night.
> 
> 
> Obviously I can put my 8350 on cinema mode, would I still have black bars with the 1.4??
> 
> 
> Thanks.



THe epson 8350 at 14 feet away would not be to dim the lights on...

You have to remember that the 8350 has 2000 ansi lumens


You definetly would want to go with the .8 gain with that much lumens


With regards to going with the 1.4, i would stick with the .8 gain

just because of the ansi lumens is so high on the 8350....


that combo would be killer though

and produce an amazing picture...


here is the link to SI Screen wizard

put in all your info and it will recommend the best screen

http://www.screeninnovations.com/tools/screen-wizard/


----------



## trgraphics

Where is the best place to purchase one of these screens, cost wise of course.


----------



## Audiojan

Unfortunately, you can't find much of a discount on the Black Diamond... talk to you local dealer and see what they are willing to do (basically, how much of their profit are they willing to forego).


----------



## fraisa

Grey Cup Screen Shots.....

SI Black Diamond Screen .8 Gain

Pics are taken with settings on Epson 9700ub

VIvid...

COntrast 8

Brightness -8

Colour Saturation 6

Some may think thats a little to strong but thats the way i watch Sports....


----------



## myz350




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19554566
> 
> 
> Okay finally got around to taking some pics of the dark KNight...
> 
> Enjoy



WOW!







Those are pretty unimpressive screen shots. I hope it's your projector, or your camera, or both. Cause the pictures sure makes me want to cancel my BD 1.4 order.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *myz350* /forum/post/19560606
> 
> 
> WOW!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those are pretty unimpressive screen shots. I hope it's your projector, or your camera, or both. Cause the pictures sure makes me want to cancel my BD 1.4 order.



I uploaded the shots on my laptop ...and my camera was in a wrong setting.

Have rededited shots from the grey cup...

Shots in a Vivid Mode for Sports....

....

Enjoy


Also i want to give this praise regarding the Black Diamond

I had a full house in my Media Room tonight for the Annual Grey Cup Party.

We had 2 full rows of seating across the middle of the room

so i had no choice but to put seats at the far sides of the room..

I got nothing but complements all night on the Picture quality from the guys sitting on the sidelines...

guys where really pleased with the great quality and that made my party that much more great.....


Pics from the Far Side viewing Angle with Ambient Light...


















Straight center pic


----------



## fraisa

FYI

the side shot pics where taken at full motion not still shots..

Was taken during watching the live event...


----------



## R Harkness

fraisa,


I'm glad you like your BD screen. It's an amazing solution to the issue of ambient light/light room decor that many people face.


That said, even from your recent photos the uneven illumination/ hot-spotting is very visible (Brighter on the side closest, dark on the far side - look at the football shots and how much brighter the grass on the right side is vs the far side of the image. Personally, I notice that stuff immediately). This is not the type of thing you expect guests to comment on because most wouldn't be thinking about such things.

They just take the image as is.


Much like how most people don't have their TV poorly calibrated and never notice how bizarre it may look. (I had one friend with a cheap projector that was clearly dying. About 1/4 of the screen had a huge blue light spilling on to it from a problem with the optics. I said "So when are you getting your projector fixed?" He asked me what I was talking about. He never noticed any problem).


This nit-picky stuff is more for people who hang out in forums like this.


I personally much prefer to watch movies in full darkness. Having any lights on for me diminishes the immersion. Even though my projected image looks almost as good with some task lights on as it does off, I even like to watch sports with the lights off...and so do my guests when watching, for instance, the fights at my place. So personally I don't need a screen that helps with ambient lighting.


But if you like lights on when watching stuff...the BD screens are terrific.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/19560879
> 
> 
> fraisa,
> 
> 
> I'm glad you like your BD screen. It's an amazing solution to the issue of ambient light/light room decor that many people face.
> 
> 
> That said, even from your recent photos the uneven illumination/ hot-spotting is very visible (Brighter on the side closest, dark on the far side - look at the football shots and how much brighter the grass on the right side is vs the far side of the image. Personally, I notice that stuff immediately). This is not the type of thing you expect guests to comment on because most wouldn't be thinking about such things.
> 
> They just take the image as is.
> 
> 
> Much like how most people don't have their TV poorly calibrated and never notice how bizarre it may look. (I had one friend with a cheap projector that was clearly dying. About 1/4 of the screen had a huge blue light spilling on to it from a problem with the optics. I said "So when are you getting your projector fixed?" He asked me what I was talking about. He never noticed any problem).
> 
> 
> This nit-picky stuff is more for people who hang out in forums like this.
> 
> 
> I personally much prefer to watch movies in full darkness. Having any lights on for me diminishes the immersion. Even though my projected image looks almost as good with some task lights on as it does off, I even like to watch sports with the lights off...and so do my guests when watching, for instance, the fights at my place. So personally I don't need a screen that helps with ambient lighting.
> 
> 
> But if you like lights on when watching stuff...the BD screens are terrific.



Hey Rich

Receive your comments

BUt do keep in mind the side shots are extreme...

I dont sit their at that angle every day

i sit Straight on ...

These are high Saturation colour shots

and i for one watch Sports Lights on , Higher Saturation like the above shots


I have thx mode thats a calibrated setting for lights off..


again alot of Non Avs Forum people like the punchier picture..

also i am aware that most on avs find it over kill

..

Even though there is a more punchier pic i still dont have alot of Red Push..


To each his own

Hope you watched the grey cup .. it was a close game.

Fr


----------



## fraisa

any just so i am not loosing my mind regarding the Grey Cup Pics

here is a comment regarding my screen shots....


Posted the same screen shots over in the Epson 8700ub thread...


fraisa


from

Browninggold

AVS Special Member

And i Quote.....



wow, wow and wow....excellent screen shots of the 8700UB. Was debating on the 8350/8700UB. I think I will go with the 8700UB. Thanks for the shots-


----------



## rdjam

I love my BD II in fully blacked out room. The CR is awesome and there is a lot less light reflected on ceiling and walls. Nice immersion. It's ok for watching Fox news with ambient light also, but for movies it excels.


----------



## BlackShark

Rdjam, have you tried polarised 3D on the BD screen yet ?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlackShark* /forum/post/19562789
> 
> 
> Rdjam, have you tried polarised 3D on the BD screen yet ?



I have tried the older style 3D with black diamond and normally you would have to adjust to make it look good

but with the black diamond i just went into my thx movie mode and didnt have to touch a thing

and everyone loved it

with regards to the new 3 d ,,

Have heard from other dealer friends that its amazing...


----------



## BlackShark

Well I don't know what kind of 3D you tried but polarised 3D is about 50 years old, even shutter glasses based 3D was invented in the 1930's. They're all old.


The question was not about how good 3D looks, it was about the ability of the BD screen to maintain polarisation, for use with a polarised dual-projector system or with a polarised 3D projector like the LG-CF3D.

(see the ultimate 3D projectior thread in rdjam's signature)


We know from the press releases that that SI claims that the BD screen is good at maintaining polarisation but the question is "how good is it really ?".

Regardless of colour, contrast, view angles and so on... the only thing that matters here is does it beat silver-screens at maintaining polarisation.


----------



## R Harkness

As rdjam points out, and as I've agreed before, there are also reasons why the BD screens can excel in fully dark rooms as well. I love the idea they don't reflect as much light around the room. (I found the .8 version significantly better than the 1.4 version in this regard).


----------



## ncnmra

To you Canadians, where did you pick up your BDs from?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ncnmra* /forum/post/19567721
> 
> 
> To you Canadians, where did you pick up your BDs from?



Hey

Ncnmra....I am a dealer and carry BDs

.....

There are also many dealers in the Ontario,

....

Not sure where you are,

but I am sure i could find you a dealer in your area if needed....

......

PM me for more info...


----------



## Lawguy

I am looking to buy a 100" 16X9 .8 BD for a second room. Can someone direct me to a dealer who has decent prices? THX.


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Lawguy* 
I am looking to buy a 100" 16X9 .8 BD for a second room. Can someone direct me to a dealer who has decent prices? THX.
What City Are you In?


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19580647
> 
> 
> What City Are you In?



I am in Long Island in New York.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/19580765
> 
> 
> I am in Long Island in New York.



This is a couple of contacts for New York from SI website,

You could call SI and ask for more dealers if needed
http://www.screeninnovations.com/rep...atives/USA/NY/


----------



## fraisa

More Screen Shots

Taken at 1.6 afc setting

Dish Network

Cartoon Network HD

























































Football CBS

Dish NEt HD









Victoria Secret Fashion Show

Dish Network HD


----------



## fraisa

Epson 9700ub

Black Diamond .8 Gain

Insignia 10 MP Camera

Dish Network HD VIP 722

Smackdown SYFI









I love any pic of Kelly Kelly...lol


----------



## fraisa

Here is a couple of more shots


----------



## tosnam

Can you take some photos with the lights on? Thanks. I am stuck in deciding between the .8 and the 1.4. i'll have a fair amount of ambient light in my living room.


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *tosnam* 
Can you take some photos with the lights on? Thanks. I am stuck in deciding between the .8 and the 1.4. i'll have a fair amount of ambient light in my living room.
Here ya Go Full Ambient light

SHots taken during the day...

All Pot lights on

Side window blinds up

Opening from back stairway from Great room ( that lets in light)

ISO on Camera at low

Epson 9700ub

SI .8 Gain

Bell Express Vu 9241 HD TSN Grey Cup




















And this is Dim....


----------



## tosnam

seems the .8 is just as good as an option as the 1.4. Thanks


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tosnam* /forum/post/19589798
> 
> 
> seems the .8 is just as good as an option as the 1.4. Thanks



For Sure....


----------



## myz350




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19589931
> 
> 
> For Sure....



Dude! Not sure if you realize, almost every picture you have taken is out of focus!!!


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *myz350* /forum/post/19590289
> 
> 
> Dude! Not sure if you realize, almost every picture you have taken is out of focus!!!



Dude

Other than the two football pics above thats the only thing a lil out of focus,

and i was trying to show what the pic looks like in full light...

and even if its a lil out it is still an amazing accomplishment to get those colours in full light...


I dont know about you but i dont think Kane's Face below is out of focus...


It just *isses me off that people go ahead and leave stupid comments

that has nothing to do with what i was trying to accomplish...

...

Tosman asked for a screen shot in full Ambient light...

He wanted to see if you get Black blacks and white whites...

and if the colours would be washed out....


If you can do better in full ambient light

GO Get A Camera and take some pics

and SHOW ME HOW ITS DONE....


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *myz350* /forum/post/19590289
> 
> 
> Dude! Not sure if you realize, almost every picture you have taken is out of focus!!!



Here Myz

there is a focused football....


----------



## myz350




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19591108
> 
> 
> Here Myz
> 
> there is a focused football....



Okay, I see that it's not your camera's problem here, just your projector. It's obviously not calibrated properly, see the purple/blue fringe on the left side of the football and also on the right side of the clock.


----------



## myz350




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19591085
> 
> 
> If you can do better in full ambient light
> 
> GO Get A Camera and take some pics
> 
> and SHOW ME HOW ITS DONE....



I will definitely do that when my BD 1.4 arrives. Got my Sony 90ES today, BD comming on the 16th. Will take some photos with my D200 after my Sony is properly adjusted.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *myz350* /forum/post/19591310
> 
> 
> Okay, I see that it's not your camera's problem here, just your projector. It's obviously not calibrated properly, see the purple/blue fringe on the left side of the football and also on the right side of the clock.



Thats not my projector its the Source of the Video ...

That Image has the same thing on my LCD Flat Panel..

If it was my Projector you would see that on every thing...










I have just looked at more stills of other images just to make sure

No Fringe on any thing...



Edit.

Just did some reading on your Sony Projector,

that will go very well with a Black Diamond 1.4 gain screen...

That projector will really make the BD Shine....

Kant wait for your shots........


----------



## myz350




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19591490
> 
> 
> Thats not my projector its the Source of the Video ...
> 
> That Image has the same thing on my LCD Flat Panel..
> 
> If it was my Projector you would see that on every thing...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have just looked at more stills of other images just to make sure
> 
> No Fringe on any thing...
> 
> 
> 
> Edit.
> 
> Just did some reading on your Sony Projector,
> 
> that will go very well with a Black Diamond 1.4 gain screen...
> 
> That projector will really make the BD Shine....
> 
> Kant wait for your shots........



I have a few windows in my basement, and lots of pot lights, it will be interesting to see how well the BD 1.4 looks during the day time.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *myz350* /forum/post/19591820
> 
> 
> I have a few windows in my basement, and lots of pot lights, it will be interesting to see how well the BD 1.4 looks during the day time.



I will suggest for your pot lights to go with Spot lights and not flood..

and get the spot lights that are tiny and will be well up into the pot...


----------



## andrios

Is there a 30 day return window for a screen like this? If I purchase and im not happy what can I do?


----------



## Audiojan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/19599241
> 
> 
> Is there a 30 day return window for a screen like this? If I purchase and im not happy what can I do?



I think this is something you need to discuss with your local dealer... I don't think SI has a communicated policy to that effect, but you never know... I would guess that most local dealers if anything, would allow you to borrow a store screen and let you decide for yourself, but I doubt they will special order a screen and then let you try it out...


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/19599241
> 
> 
> Is there a 30 day return window for a screen like this? If I purchase and im not happy what can I do?



If there were such a policy, I would have returned my BDII 1.4 gain after a week. You just have to keep it.


SI did say they were sending me a sample of the .8 gain material to see if it worked better in my viewing room, but they never did.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...1#post19309851 

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...6#post18866246


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19589687
> 
> 
> Here ya Go Full Ambient light
> 
> SHots taken during the day...
> 
> All Pot lights on
> 
> Side window blinds up
> 
> Opening from back stairway from Great room ( that lets in light)



Judging by how dark the room appears, especially the wall that the screen is mounted on, what you consider *Full Ambient light* would be a very dark room for most people.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *karlsch* /forum/post/19602802
> 
> 
> Judging by how dark the room appears, especially the wall that the screen is mounted on, what you consider *Full Ambient light* would be a very dark room for most people.



THat is full light its just how my camera handles the light..

That pic is actually taken during the day

Pot lights fully on and using 4 60 watt bulbs..

My Camera Iso is at 100

My Side window is blinds open

And i have light coming from an open stairway...


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *karlsch* /forum/post/19602275
> 
> 
> If there were such a policy, I would have returned my BDII 1.4 gain after a week. You just have to keep it.
> 
> 
> SI did say they were sending me a sample of the .8 gain material to see if it worked better in my viewing room, but they never did.
> 
> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...1#post19309851
> 
> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...6#post18866246



Did the dealer that sold you the screen do a home Theater Room Visit to your house before you bought your screen...

I always do a home visit quote system

where i come out and see the room where my customer is going to set up the projector and screen..

So i know what gain of screen to go with...


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19603166
> 
> 
> I always do a home visit quote system
> 
> where i come out and see the room where my customer is going to set up the projector and screen..
> 
> So i know what gain of screen to go with...



Are you a dealer?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *karlsch* /forum/post/19603251
> 
> 
> Are you a dealer?



Yes i am...


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19603150
> 
> 
> THat is full light its just how my camera handles the light..
> 
> That pic is actually taken during the day
> 
> Pot lights fully on and using 4 60 watt bulbs..
> 
> My Camera Iso is at 100
> 
> My Side window is blinds open
> 
> And i have light coming from an open stairway...



It's all about composition...aperture...and shutter/film speed.


Try this:


Move as far away from the screen "centering" the camera on the screen. Let the light/s shine! Set ISO to 800. Use Zoom to frame in the largest expanse of the Screen Wall...room's corners & side walls / windos. Ceiling Cans are good to include.


Do that....using zoom to stop down light, while the camera's metering can average out exposure, and you'll see on camera (your images) what the eye sees.


At 800 ISO you might see a little noise, but this isn't all about Eye Candy.


In the images you show, the Camera "has" to give preference to the bightest content, enhancing it accordingly. You have to weigh the "Eye Ball's" accuracy against the Camera's dipepiction.


Compose some shots using the aforementioned critera. The results should show what you see, and what most want to see represented.


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19603438
> 
> 
> Yes i am...



It's good to know that you are a seller of BDII screens. That makes a difference.


I am just an end user who bought one. But being an end user, I am in a good position to judge whether claims made for this screen are valid or deceptive or sometimes even dishonest. All I have to do is look at my screen.


Lets get back to the pictures you posted that are supposed to be in a room with a lot of ambient light including a side window (I commented that the room appears dark, you claimed is was your camera's fault). Your description: Here ya Go Full Ambient light SHots taken during the day... All Pot lights on Side window blinds up. The pictures are in this post:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...postcount=1474 


Here is a picture of my screen with light coming from a side window:










Notice that the light coming from the side window causes the speakers and other things to throw shadows.


Now look at your pictures again. There are no shadows that would be there if there truly were light coming from a side window. Did you accidentally post a picture of a dark room with no light coming from a side window or is it your camera's fault again?


----------



## msmCutter




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19603438
> 
> 
> Yes i am...



I was wondering the same thing. It explains a lot.


----------



## Lawguy

People have to evaluate the pictures that have been posted and their own room to determine what they can expect. Also, people need to have realistic expectations about screen size.


Looking at Karlsch's room, I don't think I would ever place a front projector there, at least not with the expectation that I could watch it with those blinds open. SI says that the BD fights ambient light. It does in a sense. But, it is not a cure-all. This is not clear from SI's literature. Too much hype.


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/19604449
> 
> 
> Looking at Karlsch's room, I don't think I would ever place a front projector there, at least not with the expectation that I could watch it with those blinds open. SI says that the BD fights ambient light. It does in a sense. But, it is not a cure-all. This is not clear from SI's literature. Too much hype.



I never expected the picture to be satisfactory with the blinds open. I sometimes post pictures with the blinds open because the sensational claims made for this screen lead people to believe that it would.


Actually, I wanted it to be satisfactory with the blinds closed. Much to my disappointment, it wasn't much better than my old moderately priced workhorse screen for which no sensational claims have ever been made.


If you haven't seen them, here are comparison pictures with the blinds open, the blinds closed, and the blinds closed with a block out shade pulled down:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...1#post19309851


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *karlsch* /forum/post/19604186
> 
> 
> It’s good to know that you are a seller of BDII screens. That makes a difference.
> 
> 
> I am just an end user who bought one. But being an end user, I am in a good position to judge whether claims made for this screen are valid or deceptive or sometimes even dishonest. All I have to do is look at my screen.
> 
> 
> Lets get back to the pictures you posted that are supposed to be in a room with a lot of ambient light including a side window (I commented that the room appears dark, you claimed is was your camera’s fault). Your description: “Here ya Go Full Ambient light SHots taken during the day... All Pot lights on Side window blinds up.” The pictures are in this post:
> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...postcount=1474
> 
> 
> Notice that the light coming from the side window causes the speakers and other things to throw shadows.
> 
> 
> Now look at your pictures again. There are no shadows that would be there if there truly were light coming from a side window. Did you accidentally post a picture of a dark room with no light coming from a side window or is it your camera's fault again?



No its my Camera,

Its an Insignia 10 MegaPixal

Model NS-DSC10SL


My Camera adjust per Bright Ambient light setting...


If you where in my area

I would invite you to my showroom for a demo of the .8 gain

In Full Ambient Light...


Also there is a new video up at the SI Website that shows The Black Diamond 1.4 gain in Full Ambient Light...


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* 
It's all about composition...aperture...and shutter/film speed.


Try this:


Move as far away from the screen "centering" the camera on the screen. Let the light/s shine! Set ISO to 800. Use Zoom to frame in the largest expanse of the Screen Wall...room's corners & side walls / windos. Ceiling Cans are good to include.


Do that....using zoom to stop down light, while the camera's metering can average out exposure, and you'll see on camera (your images) what the eye sees.


At 800 ISO you might see a little noise, but this isn't all about Eye Candy.


In the images you show, the Camera "has" to give preference to the bightest content, enhancing it accordingly. You have to weigh the "Eye Ball's" accuracy against the Camera's dipepiction.


Compose some shots using the aforementioned critera. The results should show what you see, and what most want to see represented.
Ya did some playing with the camera

It was in Basic Setting Mode

So moved it to advanced and will have to play with the settings and your

above suggestions

Will post some repost pics when i get it dialed in...


----------



## andrios

Well best buy sells them. They should have a return policy.


----------



## andrios




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *karlsch* /forum/post/19604186
> 
> 
> It's good to know that you are a seller of BDII screens. That makes a difference.
> 
> 
> I am just an end user who bought one. But being an end user, I am in a good position to judge whether claims made for this screen are valid or deceptive or sometimes even dishonest. All I have to do is look at my screen.
> 
> 
> Lets get back to the pictures you posted that are supposed to be in a room with a lot of ambient light including a side window (I commented that the room appears dark, you claimed is was your camera's fault). Your description: Here ya Go Full Ambient light SHots taken during the day... All Pot lights on Side window blinds up. The pictures are in this post:
> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...postcount=1474
> 
> 
> Here is a picture of my screen with light coming from a side window:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Notice that the light coming from the side window causes the speakers and other things to throw shadows.
> 
> 
> Now look at your pictures again. There are no shadows that would be there if there truly were light coming from a side window. Did you accidentally post a picture of a dark room with no light coming from a side window or is it your camera's fault again?



Did you send this picture to SI?


That dont look like its worth $2800......


----------



## myz350

Quote:

Originally Posted by *karlsch* 
It's good to know that you are a seller of BDII screens. That makes a difference.


I am just an end user who bought one. But being an end user, I am in a good position to judge whether claims made for this screen are valid or deceptive or sometimes even dishonest. All I have to do is look at my screen.


Lets get back to the pictures you posted that are supposed to be in a room with a lot of ambient light including a side window (I commented that the room appears dark, you claimed is was your camera's fault). Your description: Here ya Go Full Ambient light SHots taken during the day... All Pot lights on Side window blinds up. The pictures are in this post:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...postcount=1474 


Here is a picture of my screen with light coming from a side window:










Notice that the light coming from the side window causes the speakers and other things to throw shadows.


Now look at your pictures again. There are no shadows that would be there if there truly were light coming from a side window. Did you accidentally post a picture of a dark room with no light coming from a side window or is it your camera's fault again?
Dude! I think you have the screen on backwards!!!


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *andrios* 
Well best buy sells them. They should have a return policy.
And if your a Rewards Silver Plat Member its 45 Day Return Policy...


----------



## Lawguy

Quote:

Originally Posted by *karlsch* 
Actually, I wanted it to be satisfactory with the blinds closed. Much to my disappointment, it wasn't much better than my old moderately priced workhorse screen for which no sensational claims have ever been made.
I have learned that in this hobby, you often pay a big premium for incremental improvements. This stinks but it is a fact of life.


From what I can tell from your pictures, the BD did make a real difference in the dark and very dark pictures. It made a differnce with the blinds open too, but that does not translate into a watchable picture.


To be honest, the differences in those pictures, are to me, pretty significant from an on screen contrast perspective. This is the kind of difference some people would be happy to pay for.


I wonder whether you might be better off with a smaller sized .8 BD screen.


Try zooming in a bit and see how much of a difference a smaller image size makes.


----------



## karlsch

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Lawguy* 
I wonder whether you might be better off with a smaller sized .8 BD screen.


Try zooming in a bit and see how much of a difference a smaller image size makes.
It's only a 100 inch screen. Going much smaller defeats the purpose of having front projection so I'm not going to do that. That's too much to give up to have the *privilege* of owning an over hyped screen.


If I changed screens I would get one that didn't have the sparklies/graininess and hot spotting that the BDIIs have.


----------



## Lawguy

Quote:

Originally Posted by *karlsch* 
It's only a 100 inch screen. Going much smaller defeats the purpose of having front projection so I'm not going to do that. That's too much to give up to have the *privilege* of owning an over hyped screen.


If I changed screens I would get one that didn't have the sparklies/graininess and hot spotting that the BDIIs have.
You could sell your screen but I suspect that you would take a beating on the price.


In your room, you are going to need a screen with gain (that and good window treatments). Most screens with gain have sparklies/graininess. Generally, the higher the gain, the more sparklies/graininess. The Dalite High Power (which I own) doesn't have these issues but it does have its own set of limitations. I think that High Power would also get washed out with your blinds open as in your first set of pictures. In the other two (dark and darker) I bet that the High Power would be brighter but would have less contrast (blacks would be blacker on your BD). But, for things like sports, I bet the HP would be better overall. For movies with the lights off and the room dark, I bet the BD would be better. A High Power would be much less expensive.


SI's problem is that their videos are designed to show their screens in the best circumstances with lights properly placed. They are not inaccurate. But, they are misleading because of the claims of ligth rejection and the like. I think that Fraisa's pictures accurately show his setup, but they are by no means a torture test for any screen. Shine a flashlight on a BD it is unwatchable, just like any other screen out there.


That said, I am still impressed by the .8 BD screen.


----------



## karlsch

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Lawguy* 
SI's problem is that their videos are designed to show their screens in the best circumstances with lights properly placed. They are not inaccurate. But, they are misleading because of the claims of ligth rejection and the like.
The SI videos are deceptive, they are like infomercials. All that's missing is Billy Mays (R.I.P.) in a cocaine induced frenzy yelling: *Wait!!! There's More!!! Buy your BDII today and throw away your expensive masking system forever!!*!


A company reputable like Stewart Filmscreen would never have videos like these.


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *karlsch* /forum/post/19607726
> 
> 
> The SI videos are deceptive, they are like infomercials. All that’s missing is Billy Mays (R.I.P.) in a cocaine induced frenzy yelling: *Wait!!! There’s More!!! Buy your BDII today and throw away your expensive masking system forever!!*!
> 
> 
> A company reputable like Stewart Filmscreen would never have videos like these.



Actually, they post Photos in ALL their magazine ads that do exactly the same thing.....all the time.


But Guys....this is Business. You don't / won't get far illustrating your weak points. You highlight your strengths. Consumers have been lamenting what "They are NOT told" prior to purchasing something "special" since the first pair of Moccasins traded for a sharp knife resulted in a severed finger.


The BD screens do in fact do a far FAR better job than a standard Gray....and appreciably better than a Fire Hawk, Gray Wolf, or almost anything else in that category. That promotional hype and illustrations that do not show anything but ideal circumstances are used.....that's the way it is / must be at the Corporate decision making level...all the way down to where the Dealer who must stay in business.


This must sound peculiar coming from me, someone who exalts "other" ambient light solutions, but they / I do share a common goal. Making for better viewing experiences in ambient light levels than what people can...or normally should have a right to expect. Yes...my images try their darnedest to show things exactly as they are....and I always send a Man to do a Man's job "PJ wise" as far as illuminating a specific screen, but all in all, it's all the same.


Put your best foot forward and keep the one with a hole in the sole behind you.


All this would be moot if the Screen's in question did not cost enough that they should have Ignition Keys. But they do, and because of that, and because there are some things that potentially will affect the End User's satisfaction index that are not clearly stated or presented with complete accuracy, a Thread like this can serve a good purpose.


This is a Forum dedicated to "discussion", and when a Thread is obviously posted up to promote something, even by a AVS Sponsor, it can be expected to garner some adversity.


But also keep in mind that there are / have been a LOT more people expounding upon the virtues of the BD line-up than there have been calls for somebody to "Get a Rope".


Myself, I like having Mfg Screens around that cost a Poop-load if they purport to do something extraordinary. Makes what I do seem all the more valid an option.










OK....so give fraisa a chance here to re-post some /more accurate depictions before all ya all start loading Firewood around the Stake. I think you'll still see some impressive images.


----------



## fraisa

This is why someone who is considering a SI Screen needs to have there dealer do a home visit,

So the dealer see's the room and conditions

The dealer right away would recommend what type of screen to offer.

I like the fact that you can get an SI Screen from Best Buy,

But if it was me and i was buying a screen like this it would be thru a Dealer...


----------



## airscapes

I saw this screen at BB with a JVC projector and was not impressed at all. I was curious to compare the BD to my small HP screen with my Old 720p DLP projector so I asked for a demo. It was better than the HP in the blacks but the brights suffered even in a dark room. Unfortunately the sales person was as knowledgeable as could be and had no idea what gain the screen was. After the unimpressive demo I asked the price and left with tears in my eyes from laughing so hard! I guess in the proper environment with a bright projector (not a JVC strong point I understand) it could be cool, but for those of us with real world income, this would not be the best bang for the buck.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *airscapes* /forum/post/19608829
> 
> 
> I saw this screen at BB with a JVC projector and was not impressed at all. I was curious to compare the BD to my small HP screen with my Old 720p DLP projector so I asked for a demo. It was better than the HP in the blacks but the brights suffered even in a dark room. Unfortunately the sales person was as knowledgeable as could be and had no idea what gain the screen was. After the unimpressive demo I asked the price and left with tears in my eyes from laughing so hard! I guess in the proper environment with a bright projector (not a JVC strong point I understand) it could be cool, but for those of us with real world income, this would not be the best bang for the buck.



Ya some BB Mag stores have an older Generation of SI Screen in the .8 gain. the BD I,


The Current Gen of BD II has extensive improvements on the .8 gain screen.


I too have seen an old gen .8 at the bb store in Ann Arbor Mi and i can clearly tell its the older Gen..


And i have a very very anal eye when it comes to the New vs the Old...


----------



## GetGray

What did they change? I have some large .8 samples that say BD II. Is there a revision past those? I'd be interested to see if there is and if it addresses what I don't like about it.


----------



## airscapes




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray* /forum/post/19609109
> 
> 
> What did they change? I have some large .8 samples that say BD II. Is there a revision past those? I'd be interested to see if there is and if it addresses what I don't like about it.




BB guy said it real fast so it would not sound so bad $2500.


----------



## Audiojan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *airscapes* /forum/post/19608829
> 
> 
> I saw this screen at BB with a JVC projector and was not impressed at all. I was curious to compare the BD to my small HP screen with my Old 720p DLP projector so I asked for a demo. It was better than the HP in the blacks but the brights suffered even in a dark room. Unfortunately the sales person was as knowledgeable as could be and had no idea what gain the screen was. After the unimpressive demo I asked the price and left with tears in my eyes from laughing so hard! I guess in the proper environment with a bright projector (not a JVC strong point I understand) it could be cool, but for those of us with real world income, this would not be the best bang for the buck.



Sounds like the setup was quote poor... I have a Pioneer FPJ-1 (which is a JVS RS-2) and a BD II 0.8 and the picture quality is stunning, especially in a dark room. Yes, it does handle room light quite well, but with the light off, the picture is like "watching life thru a window"... (my wifes comment... and no, she has no doesn't know anything about HT, but she can tell bad from good).


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray* /forum/post/19609109
> 
> 
> What did they change? I have some large .8 samples that say BD II. Is there a revision past those? I'd be interested to see if there is and if it addresses what I don't like about it.



Ya the BB in Ann Arbour had the BD I .8 gain...

Thats the first genereation

Second GEN is BD II

So when you go to a BB Mag Store you need to find out if its BD I or BD II...

I can tell soon as i look at it ...

There is no Rev past BD II


----------



## myz350




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19611026
> 
> 
> Ya the BB in Ann Arbour had the BD I .8 gain...
> 
> Thats the first genereation
> 
> Second GEN is BD II
> 
> So when you go to a BB Mag Store you need to find out if its BD I or BD II...
> 
> I can tell soon as i look at it ...
> 
> There is no Rev past BD II



According to Blake from SI, the latest is 3rd generation, but it still says BD II. It reduces the sparkles and better picture quality then 2nd generation.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *myz350* /forum/post/19611848
> 
> 
> According to Blake from SI, the latest is 3rd generation, but it still says BD II. It reduces the sparkles and better picture quality then 2nd generation.



you are correct...


----------



## rdjam




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> you are correct...



How do I know which generation I have, out if curiosity? I purchased a BDII at the start of 2010; is there any way to know?


----------



## MississippiMan

OK fraisa,


135''s diagonal shown in both muted and some pretty intense light...including overhead "floods", not Spots.


This first series was taken at 3 different levels of ambient light, w/no attempt to mitigate such lighting. Even the overhead Floods.











This next series was all taken in the same lighting, but done so as to show the difference "Zoomed Framing" can make as far as the exposure. In the "Long Shot" w/Iris wide open, you get an exacting view of both the level of the Room's lighting as well as an accurate view of the Screen's reflective light output. Obvious is the image's overall improvement when the camera's metering is focused on the screen's framed content alone.










I wish I could say the image looked as good in the long shot as it does when "framed' but that would not be.....an accurate statement. In the long shots, the camera is 'averaging out" the light sources, and giving preference to the brightest areas.


These last collages are all framed "Dark Room" shots intended to show Contrast and image quality. Pertinent in that if a screen is gonna look good in ambient light it must also excel in controlled lighting.





























Please note the last shot in the lower right...the "Reconstructing the Arm' one. See the number of visible individual "Bone Bands"? I've been taking / viewing Screen shots for years and so far have never seen anyone...with any PJ or camera, be able to catch that level of detail. PJ Contrast and resolution combined with screen gain/color all must balance to get that sort of detail.


Ok...so these shots are up....let's see you post something similar. Choose yer poision. BD .08 or 1.4 - 1.8. Pick the Generation.


For comparative purposes only, of course.










Awww....gotta toss in these last ones too.


First 135" in obscene direct lighting:





























Same screen at 80 degrees off axis (in the dark)











Now if you ca show any BD screen that can handle such "direct lighting" in such close proximity...and directly forward of the Screen, I'm certain there will be no more "calling out".



And lastly...the Biggun....225" diagonal w/Side spots and only 700 lumens (JVC RS-2 @ 27' throw). To die for stuff....




















Belly up to the bar.....


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *myz350* /forum/post/19611848
> 
> 
> According to Blake from SI, the latest is 3rd generation, but it still says BD II. It reduces the sparkles and better picture quality then 2nd generation.



I saw this about the 1.4 version but has it been reported on the .8 version also?


----------



## andrios




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> OK fraisa,
> 
> 
> 135''s diagonal shown in both muted and some pretty intense light...including overhead "floods", not Spots.
> 
> 
> This first series was taken at 3 different levels of ambient light, w/no attempt to mitigate such lighting. Even the overhead Floods.
> 
> 
> This next series was all taken in the same lighting, but done so as to show the difference "Zoomed Framing" can make as far as the exposure. In the "Long Shot" w/Iris wide open, you get an exacting view of both the level of the Room's lighting as well as an accurate view of the Screen's reflective light output. Obvious is the image's overall improvement when the camera's metering is focused on the screen's framed content alone.
> 
> 
> I wish I could say the image looked as good in the long shot as it does when "framed' but that would not be.....an accurate statement. In the long shots, the camera is 'averaging out" the light sources, and giving preference to the brightest areas.
> 
> 
> These last collages are all framed "Dark Room" shots intended to show Contrast and image quality. Pertinent in that if a screen is gonna look good in ambient light it must also excel in controlled lighting.
> 
> 
> Please note the last shot in the lower right...the "Reconstructing the Arm' one. See the number of visible individual "Bone Bands"? I've been taking / viewing Screen shots for years and so far have never seen anyone...with any PJ or camera, be able to catch that level of detail. PJ Contrast and resolution combined with screen gain/color all must balance to get that sort of detail.
> 
> 
> Ok...so these shots are up....let's see you post something similar. Choose yer poision. BD .08 or 1.4 - 1.8. Pick the Generation.
> 
> 
> For comparative purposes only, of course.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Awww....gotta toss in these last ones too.
> 
> 
> First 135" in obscene direct lighting:
> 
> 
> Same screen at 80 degrees off axis (in the dark)
> 
> 
> Now if you ca show any BD screen that can handle such "direct lighting" in such close proximity...and directly forward of the Screen, I'm certain there will be no more "calling out".
> 
> 
> And lastly...the Biggun....225" diagonal w/Side spots and only 700 lumens (JVC RS-2 @ 27' throw). To die for stuff....
> 
> 
> Belly up to the bar.....



What kind of screens/paints are these?


----------



## Kevin 3000




MississippiMan said:


> Please note the last shot in the lower right...the "Reconstructing the Arm' one. See the number of visible individual "Bone Bands"? I've been taking / viewing Screen shots for years and so far have never seen anyone...with any PJ or camera, be able to catch that level of detail. PJ Contrast and resolution combined with screen gain/color all must balance to get that sort of detail.
> 
> 
> Ok...so these shots are up....let's see you post something similar. Choose yer poision. BD .08 or 1.4 - 1.8. Pick the Generation.
> 
> 
> For comparative purposes only, of course.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> I posted this pic last year BDII 1.4 gain JVC (RS10) lights off what are we comparing?
Click to expand...


----------



## fraisa

Hey Kevin 3000

been a while

Hows it going..


----------



## myz350




Kevin 3000 said:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/19612927
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I posted this pic last year BDII 1.4 gain JVC (RS10) lights off what are we comparing?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WOW!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That sure looks better than Mississipiman's screen shot! Either you have a better screen, or you have a better camera!
Click to expand...


----------



## GetGray

Anyone had a professional calibrate their system with an off the screen high end (i.e. PR650 or better) meter?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray* /forum/post/19617658
> 
> 
> Anyone had a professional calibrate their system with an off the screen high end (i.e. PR650 or better) meter?



Just Curious why you would ask this hear?


----------



## fraisa




myz350 said:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/19614705
> 
> 
> 
> WOW!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That sure looks better than Mississipiman's screen shot! Either you have a better screen, or you have a beeter camera!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THats one benifit of a Black Diamond Screen and a Camera thats better than mine...
> 
> Think i am going to put a new Digital Camera on the santa list
> 
> Kev thanks for coming to da Party
Click to expand...


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/19614705
> 
> 
> 
> I posted this pic last year BDII 1.4 gain JVC (RS10) lights off what are we comparing?



Those "Close Up Zoom" shots don't say anything but that the Camera is helping things look better through interpolating pixels and augmenting contrast.

My shots are all taken in conditions and circumstances that are NOT intended to help make things look better than they are...but EXACTLY how they appear.


frasia, I asked if you'd reciprocate. If you do not, (...and you have not...)then that speaks volumes.


You/none of you want to get into a "Eye Candy" war on this subject with me. I've made screen shots that look as good as or better than "35 mm quality Studio rushes" off of "every" screen I've ever constructed, and with low lumen 720p units. That's easy....and I'm bettin' you/all you know just how easy it is. This Thread and it's Screen/s is supposed to be about "AMBIENT LIGHT PERFORMANCE", not "Zoomed In Portraits" That is why Screen shots taken optimally offer NO real approximation as to how good the image under real conditions are. Add the room into the equation or you can only call the whole thing just an exercise in camera wizardry.


Do you, any of us watch the Screen from 6' away or closer? That's exactly what your images portend to show. Well...of course with the smaller sizes of the BD screens being shown, perhaps you could....but consider this;


Not a single shot I have posted is on a screen under 120" diagonal, and many are in excess of 130"s All were taken in a good deal of ambient light. The shot above sure was not.










I did not intend for this to become a pissin' contest. I actually made my suggestions to help frasia show what the BD could (...or could not?) do. I posted my own images after there was no response. The response that generated is in keeping with what has unfortunately become the norm.


I actually thought it would turn out differently. I know the BD Screens can perform....but how well? Truth or Dare....either way it's something you should address, or stop promoting.


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/19614332
> 
> 
> What kind of screens/paints are these?



Send me a PM. I'm not one here to promote one thing over another.


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* 
Send me a PM. I'm not one here to promote one thing over another.
Hey Miss,

I wont be posting anything for a few days

i am just swamped with other things.

A couple of big projects on the go....


So ya its going to be a couple of days before I get the time to post something


Will say this ,

after looking at your pics my room is no where near as bright as yours ,

When i turn my overhead spots off...


I really apprietiate your help and comments regarding how to better screen shots...



Also just want to let you know i have huge Respect for your setup and what you have accomplished with a paint based solution....


Again its going to be a few days

Fraisa


----------



## MississippiMan

Quote:

Originally Posted by *fraisa* 
Hey Miss,

I wont be posting anything for a few days

i am just swamped with other things.

A couple of big projects on the go....


So ya its going to be a couple of days before I get the time to post something


Will say this ,

after looking at your pics my room is no where near as bright as yours ,

When i turn my overhead spots off...


Also just want to let you know i have huge Respect for your setup and what you have accomplished with a paint based solution....


Again its going to be a few days

Fraisa
Thank you frasia,


I really did feel that your intentions were above board, and getting too adverse a response. Honestly, it's the response I might get from others who do not/can not see the purpose of my posts that i worried about more.


I can wait...I know it'll come. These days it does not good to leave anything unclear, as to some people's tendency to jump and bite on anything that is seemingly "out of sorts".


In keeping with your post, I'll refrain from adding any more content, and look forward to your images.


----------



## GetGray

Quote:

Originally Posted by *GetGray* 
Anyone had a professional calibrate their system with an off the screen high end (i.e. PR650 or better) meter?
I was trying not to say. But since you asked, becasue I am concerned about the substantial purple colorshift I'm seeing on BD samples and had one well known calibrator mention it to me when I told them I was considering the material. I wanted to see if the "new" version has tamed this any, and whether or not a (professional) calibrator was able to compensate for it much.


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *GetGray* 
I was trying not to say. But since you asked, becasue I am concerned about the substantial purple colorshift I'm seeing on BD samples and had one well known calibrator mention it to me when I told them I was considering the material. I wanted to see if the "new" version has tamed this any, and whether or not a (professional) calibrator was able to compensate for it much.
I dont see that but maybe someone from SI could give you a more direct answer....


----------



## Kevin 3000

Quote:

Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* 
Those "Close Up Zoom" shots don't say anything but that the Camera is helping things look better through interpolating pixels and augmenting contrast.

My shots are all taken in conditions and circumstances that are NOT intended to help make things look better than they are...but EXACTLY how they appear.


You/none of you want to get into a "Eye Candy" war on this subject with me. I've made screen shots that look as good as or better than "35 mm quality Studio rushes" off of "every" screen I've ever constructed, and with low lumen 720p units. That's easy....and I'm bettin' you/all you know just how easy it is. This Thread and it's Screen/s is supposed to be about "AMBIENT LIGHT PERFORMANCE", not "Zoomed In Portraits" That is why Screen shots taken optimally offer NO real approximation as to how good the image under real conditions are. Add the room into the equation or you can only call the whole thing just an exercise in camera wizardry..
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My shot was taken `as is` in a light controlled room 110" diagional no camera trickery slightly underexposed. I was only trying to compare like for like after your bragging on the bone bands pic. If you can`t handle the heat.......BUY A BD SCREEN off fraisa - No commission required fraisa










Not a pissin` contest just responding to your `Beat this attitude post`....


----------



## GetGray

If you aren't sensitive to color accuracy, your eyes will get used to it. Tape a piece of something neutral to it, e.g. ST130, put up a white pattern, or a face shot with normal skin tones. You'll see it. Just wondered if anyone here had dealt with it. I'm not mentioning to dog the screen, just wanted to know. I won't say any more about it.


----------



## Lawguy

Quote:

Originally Posted by *GetGray* 
If you aren't sensitive to color accuracy, your eyes will get used to it. Tape a piece of something neutral to it, e.g. ST130, put up a white pattern, or a face shot with normal skin tones. You'll see it. Just wondered if anyone here had dealt with it. I'm not mentioning to dog the screen, just wanted to know. I won't say any more about it.
There is a WSR review of this screen in the current issue. It claims that the screen is neutral, but that is not what my eyes tell me.


----------



## GetGray

Thanks I subscribe but never have time to look as they come. I'll check it out. My sample isn't. The value of screen shots has already been demonstrated (I think) or I'd try to captue it.


I'm interested to see who the reviewed was and what he used to test.


----------



## Lawguy

Quote:

Originally Posted by *GetGray* 
Thanks I subscribe but never have time to look as they come. I'll check it out. My sample isn't. The value of screen shots has already been demonstrated (I think) or I'd try to captue it.


I'm interested to see who the reviewed was and what he used to test.
The review was a positive one. But, it was short on specifics: no projector or screen size.


The review was done in an all white "torture room" with a bank of windows behind the screen.


Only a few pictures were given.


The reviewer was Seth Schbnaibel.


----------



## GetGray

Well, without seeing the article, the first thing that comes to mind from that is that it would be impossible to measure a screens neutrality in such a room.


----------



## Lawguy

Quote:

Originally Posted by *GetGray* 
Well, without seeing the article, the first thing that comes to mind from that is that it would be impossible to measure a screens neutrality in such a room.
I agree. But, the reviewer concludes (through measurements) that having the lights on or off makes very little difference in the amount of light that is coming off the screen.


Even though (I supect) that the screen is not color neutral, I use a CMS and calibrate. So, you can correct for color shifts. Whether shifts are different at different viewing angles such that some angles could not be corrected, I don't know.


----------



## GetGray

Read it, wasn't impressed with the review in general. But except for Greg Roger's reviews which I have a lot of respect for, I rarely am. I found some humor that the photo in the review was of purple irises. Should look good







. I didn't see a mention of the equipment used to produce the CIE charts and I can't tell in the on-line PDF version, blown up full screen where any of the datapoints are.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray* /forum/post/19622833
> 
> 
> Read it, wasn't impressed with the review in general. But except for Greg Roger's reviews which I have a lot of respect for, I rarely am. I found some humor that the photo in the review was of purple irises. Should look good
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I didn't see a mention of the equipment used to produce the CIE charts and I can't tell in the on-line PDF version, blown up full screen where any of the datapoints are.



Yeah. Not a great technical review for the reasons that you mention.


But, maybe this 3G version is color neutral? You would think that SI would call these a BD3 if that was the case because that would be a pretty big change.


The sample I have looks purpleish, a color that one finds nowhere on the grayscale.







I have not measured the sample but it is clearly no shade of gray. You don't need very expensive measuring tools to tell you that.


Still, it can be calibrated around.


----------



## GetGray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/19624715
> 
> 
> Yeah. Not a great technical review for the reasons that you mention.
> 
> 
> But, maybe this 3G version is color neutral? You would think that SI would call these a BD3 if that was the case because that would be a pretty big change.
> 
> 
> The sample I have looks purpleish, a color that one finds nowhere on the grayscale.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have not measured the sample but it is clearly no shade of gray. You don't need very expensive measuring tools to tell you that.
> 
> 
> Still, it can be calibrated around.



I have 2 larges pieces of it hung with some other samples on a test screen. It mainly rears it's purple head on white shots (sky) and fleshtones. Don't get me wrong, it's not horrible. You'll need some substantial light headroom to calibrate it out though I think, if it can be done. If my whole test screen were made of it I don't think many non-video people would notice it. It's not like they would walk into your theater and say "all those white football players uniforms look purple", maybe







. I have a large Firehawk G3 sample hanging right next to it though. As much as you hear the video gurus and professional calibrators poo-poo the FH and say it isn't color neutral those same people would fall out of their chair if I said the BD was. I've always liked the FH material as a great all around performer. I see no visible color shift on the FH. Whites are hair dimmer than the reference materials, but nothing like the 0.8 BD. An interesting thing to me is, that the FH does just as well in what I'd call realistic lighting conditions. Where the BD exceeds is if I have a light (a lamp) on that is to the extreme side of the screen (as is used in their lighting torture demos). Since it's viewing cone is so narrow, that side light is rejected *V*ery well. If you had a dark theater with a couple of near front or front wall sconces that didnt' raise the ambient too much, then it would do very well with those. But when I light the room overall with high ambient, none shining on any of the materials directly, the FH does as well as the BD with no color shift. And the FH has some gain so it doesn't require a light cannon to light it up (or you could go bigger screen with the same PJ). I am running a 3 chip DPI DLP so I do have a relative light cannon. Actually that was one of the reasons I was looking at the BD and DNP screens in the first place to burn up some extra lumens. If I needed a screen where I had a lot of ambient light all the time, AND the screen was sized appropriately to the PJ's output with it's 0.8 gain, AND you were within it's other limitations, AND the slight purple tinge wasn't a big deal, then the 0.8 BD would be a better candidate for me. I don't fit all those parameters so, so far, for me the FHG3 is my preference. But I'm still playing with it. There are conditions where it has a better black floor that I beleive is related to more than having less gain than the FH (as others had mentioned). I think it is becasue of the relatively narrow reflection cone so it's not as affected in those conditons. Turn the lights very low or off though and the FH wins to my eye, FOR MY PURPOSES, so far. Also have a DNP 0.8 sample screen I've been looking at, I have had a similar conclusion with it, details appropriate for a different thread.


My conclusion is it's a great screen for those needing ambient light rejection most of the time, particularly if the light is from the side, and the screen is sized appropiately. And I can see cases where I would recommend it and install it. This is all relative to the lower gain material, which FWIW, looks substantailly different color wise, samples side by side. I have not played with the higher gain material. So if you have one, or love them, please don't take this as me dogging it. I don't mean to be. Just being frank about how it's doing for my specific needs and expectations. I may install one yet and have not ruled it out at all. I think the best 3 good choices when it comes to ambient light rejection woudl be the FH, BD, and DNP. All have pro's and cons.


As with all thing high end home theater, there are tradeoffs and compromises with every turn. No free lunch







.


----------



## GetGray

Edited last post. Sounded more critical than I intended....


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray* /forum/post/19624928
> 
> 
> I think the best 3 good choices when it comes to ambient light rejection woudl be the FH, BD, and DNP. All have pro's and cons.
> 
> .



I agree with your assessment of the Firehawk screen. I've seen it countless times in tons of challenging light situations and it amazes me how well the image holds up. Although I have a very big problem with it's hotspotting. But mostly I think for most purposes a consumer is likely to have for his screen, the Firehawk will provide excellent performance, and a brighter image than say a .8 gain screen.


I'm very curious about your experience with the DNP screens as they have a great reputation. I'll be getting some samples myself soon.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/19625016
> 
> 
> I agree with your assessment of the Firehawk screen. I've seen it countless times in tons of challenging light situations and it amazes me how well the image holds up. Although I have a very big problem with it's hotspotting. But mostly I think for most purposes a consumer is likely to have for his screen, the Firehawk will provide excellent performance, and a brighter image than say a .8 gain screen.
> 
> 
> I'm very curious about your experience with the DNP screens as they have a great reputation. I'll be getting some samples myself soon.



The SI BD 1.4 or .8 gain screen does a better job with Reflecting Ambient Light on the ceiling and walls than the Fire Hawk...

BTW

As a Dealer I sell both SI and Stewart..

If my cusotmer wants a Stewart and is hell bent on it,

then i can get him one...

but as for my preference,

just look at all my posts you can see which one i prefer...


----------



## myz350




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19625100
> 
> 
> The SI BD 1.4 or .8 gain screen does a better job with Reflecting Ambient Light on the ceiling and walls than the Fire Hawk...
> 
> BTW
> 
> As a Dealer I sell both SI and Stewart..
> 
> If my cusotmer wants a Stewart and is hell bent on it,
> 
> then i can get him one...
> 
> but as for my preference,
> 
> just look at all my posts you can see which one i prefer...



I have seen both Firehawk and BD, what sold me on the BD is exactly what you pointed out, the better handling of light reflecting off the screen onto ceiling and walls. Anyone that's concerned with ambient light obviously doesn't have their walls covered with dark light absorbing material/paint, and it annoys me to see these distractions.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *myz350* /forum/post/19626190
> 
> 
> I have seen both Firehawk and BD, what sold me on the BD is exactly what you pointed out, the better handling of light reflecting off the screen onto ceiling and walls. Anyone that's concerned with ambient light obviously doesn't have their walls covered with dark light absorbing material/paint, and it annoys me to see these distractions.



Hey Myz

One week away from getting your system set up

Are you Excited?


----------



## myz350




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19626833
> 
> 
> Hey Myz
> 
> One week away from getting your system set up
> 
> Are you Excited?



"Excited" is an understatement!


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *myz350* /forum/post/19627279
> 
> 
> "Excited" is an understatement!



A week before christmas thats awesome,

I just watched Elf on BluRay with the family...

Christmas movies are to a whole new level with 2 piece front projection...


----------



## myz350




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19628886
> 
> 
> A week before christmas thats awesome,
> 
> I just watched Elf on BluRay with the family...
> 
> Christmas movies are to a whole new level with 2 piece front projection...



I will have two 3D movies to try out, Avatar and Despicable me. I will be using the Sony S570 player for now, until I get the Oppo 93.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *myz350* /forum/post/19628957
> 
> 
> I will have two 3D movies to try out, Avatar and Despicable me. I will be using the Sony S570 player for now, until I get the Oppo 93.



I am actually suprised with the amount of 3d titles due for release in the next month...

I am Eyeing the Mits 9000 for 3d....

Sony is good i just dont carry there line...


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray* /forum/post/19622833
> 
> 
> Read it, wasn't impressed with the review in general. But except for Greg Roger's reviews which I have a lot of respect for, I rarely am. I found some humor that the photo in the review was of purple irises. Should look good
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I didn't see a mention of the equipment used to produce the CIE charts and I can't tell in the on-line PDF version, blown up full screen where any of the datapoints are.



On one of the videos on SI's site, SI claims that the BD .8 has a "burgundy" push that can be calibrated round. So, SI sees the issue (hard not to).


I wonder if the 3G .8 is now color neutral as the WSR review suggests.


B/T/W a reddish push can actually help increase calibrated lumens in the many UHP lamp projectors that are red deficient.


----------



## GetGray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/19630186
> 
> 
> On one of the videos on SI's site, SI claims that the BD .8 has a "burgundy" push that can be calibrated round. So, SI sees the issue (hard not to).
> 
> 
> I wonder if the 3G .8 is now color neutral as the WSR review suggests.
> 
> 
> B/T/W a reddish push can actually help increase calibrated lumens in the many UHP lamp projectors that are red deficient.



Well, its interesting the fans here don't see it but SI (and I) do. Glad to see they are forthcoming about it anyway. I fully understand not making a big deal of it, it's not good marketing to show any potential anomaly.


So that brinngs it back to my original question, sort of. I'd like to see some professional calibration results before and after. That is, calibrated for white out of the PJ vs. calibrated off the screen.


Looks like you are it


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray* /forum/post/19630671
> 
> 
> Looks like you are it



Maybe not yet, unfortunately (for me anyway).


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray* /forum/post/19630671
> 
> 
> Well, its interesting the fans here don't see it but SI (and I) do. Glad to see they are forthcoming about it anyway. I fully understand not making a big deal of it, it's not good marketing to show any potential anomaly.
> 
> 
> So that brinngs it back to my original question, sort of. I'd like to see some professional calibration results before and after. That is, calibrated for white out of the PJ vs. calibrated off the screen.
> 
> 
> Looks like you are it



Will testify to this

I calibrate to reduce red push in my demo room

My Epson 9700 ub had red push at the beginning

and have reduced it

dont have burgandy push hear....


----------



## BlakeV




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *karlsch* /forum/post/19607726
> 
> 
> The SI videos are deceptive, they are like infomercials. All that’s missing is Billy Mays (R.I.P.) in a cocaine induced frenzy yelling: *Wait!!! There’s More!!! Buy your BDII today and throw away your expensive masking system forever!!*!
> 
> 
> A company reputable like Stewart Filmscreen would never have videos like these.



I thought I was more like the Sham WOW! Guy than Billie Mays.












Blake


----------



## DrT77

Ok so this is my 1st post ever in this or any forum. I have a BDII 1.4 on the way. Never have seen any of them in real life. Just the videos on youtube and the pictures from you guys in here. I just about bought a Carada screen but decided that if I was gonna eventually go 3D one day I might as well go ahead and get the BDII 1.4

I am reading in some places about 2nd and 3rd generation screens, when did the generation change?

Overall is the consensus good for the BD screens, of those of you who have them or not?

Mine arrives tomorrow so I guess I will be finding out soon enough myself.

Any thoughts?


----------



## Audiojan

That's quite an expensive screen to buy sight unseen... I have a BDII 0.8 and absolutely love it. Yes, the picture is very watchable with the lights on, but with the lights off, it really pops. My wife said it best "it's like watching real life through a window". Yes, it's that good.


I think the change from 2nd to 3rd generation is pretty much in the last few months. I'm fairly certain I have a 2nd generation and the sparkle that has been discussed, I could never see... maybe I'm just enjoying the movies too much, or maybe I'm not sensitive to that... who knows?! Either way, this is screen will stay for many, many years to come.


----------



## fraisa




BlakeV said:


> I thought I was more like the Sham WOW! Guy than Billie Mays.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For sure the Sham Wow Guy
> 
> Just need to get a chopper in the next video and throw it in the sink...
> 
> lol...
> 
> 
> been a few days since posting been in the midst of a blizzard up here in Sarnia Area of Ontario...
> 
> today there is actually over 300 Cars and Trucks stranded on one of our major hwy...
> 
> Army is being called in not pretty ...
> 
> 
> We just got our internet back been off since Sunday...


----------



## myz350

Feel sorry for the guy that got trapped for 24 hours in the cold!!!!












fraisa said:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeV* /forum/post/19639472
> 
> 
> I thought I was more like the Sham WOW! Guy than Billie Mays.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For sure the Sham Wow Guy
> 
> Just need to get a chopper in the next video and throw it in the sink...
> 
> lol...
> 
> 
> been a few days since posting been in the midst of a blizzard up here in Sarnia Area of Ontario...
> 
> today there is actually over 300 Cars and Trucks stranded on one of our major hwy...
> 
> Army is being called in not pretty ...
> 
> 
> We just got our internet back been off since Sunday...
Click to expand...


----------



## fraisa

In keeping with your post, I'll refrain from adding any more content, and look forward to your images.[/quote]


Okay Miss finally got around to taking some pics and having an internet connection to upload them...

Notes To EveryOne including the Myz(loL)...

THese Pics are taken per Miss Mans Request

Shots taken at High Ambient Light and High Iso 1600

to get close to the actually room Light....

Again First Time taking Shots at this High Iso please Go Easy On Me Guys...

BD .8 Gain

Epson 9700ub

Popcorn hour BluRay Justice League

All Shots are Live shots



















Same Light Lower Camera ISO 800


----------



## fraisa

Here is some Screen Shots

Home Theater Install from this past weekend

BD 1.4 Gain Screen

Epson 9700 Ub

Cogeco HD DVR ,,,,, All Live shots

















Lower Camera ISO


----------



## andrios

WOW nice pics


Looks like a lot of lighting in the first two pics!


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/19656376
> 
> 
> WOW nice pics
> 
> 
> Looks like a lot of lighting in the first two pics!



Thanks


Okay here is an example to the other end of the scenerio..



Took a couple of more pics on my Storm 2 5mp Phone

Close to same light settings as pics above

Now my phone is not the same as a 10 mp camera but in the pic you can make out the speakers

on the shelf but you cant make out the dark images on the screen...



Sony BRAVIA 1080p SXRD Projector (VPLHW15)

Accuscreen 92" Motorized Projection Screen (800013)

Close to same Light Conditions


----------



## myz350

I have been moving, so it's still a mess in my new house. Haven't had a projector for 10 yeas, so had to set up everything. Maybe my expection was too high looking at all the video on SI's web page, but what I noticed that bothered me a lot was these tiny little purple sparkles. I think some others talked about this before, and it's not on all the time, but just certiain colors will show this all the time while others will not. I poped in Despicable Me, and the skin tone on the main character always showed this problem. I was also hoping to eliminate any of the light reflecting off the walls, but it didn't. It did show a pretty decent picture with the lights on, so I am happy with that part, but the pink/purple sparkles are very distracting. Will post photos once I find my D200 in one of them boxes that my wife packed up....


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *myz350* /forum/post/19669409
> 
> 
> I have been moving, so it's still a mess in my new house. Haven't had a projector for 10 yeas, so had to set up everything. Maybe my expection was too high looking at all the video on SI's web page, but what I noticed that bothered me a lot was these tiny little purple sparkles. I think some others talked about this before, and it's not on all the time, but just certiain colors will show this all the time while others will not. I poped in Despicable Me, and the skin tone on the main character always showed this problem. I was also hoping to eliminate any of the light reflecting off the walls, but it didn't. It did show a pretty decent picture with the lights on, so I am happy with that part, but the pink/purple sparkles are very distracting. Will post photos once I find my D200 in one of them boxes that my wife packed up....



I'm interested to see pictures.


What size screen? What is your throw distance?


The sparkles are a byproduct of the gain on the screen. Moving the projector farther back can sometimes make the sparkles less visible. I doubt that you can get rid of it completely.


----------



## myz350




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/19669558
> 
> 
> I'm interested to see pictures.
> 
> 
> What size screen? What is your throw distance?
> 
> 
> The sparkles are a byproduct of the gain on the screen. Moving the projector farther back can sometimes make the sparkles less visible. I doubt that you can get rid of it completely.



Screen size is 113", but I measured it and it's actually 115" corner to corner. the lens of 90ES is 14.5 feet from the screen, I think that's the recommended distance. Beside, it's on the back wall, and I can't move it any further back.


----------



## Kevin 3000

myz350

1.4 BDII 110" Diag JVC RS10 15ft throw not seeing what you described even close up to the screen?


----------



## fraisa

Here is my pics from same movie,

.8 Gain


----------



## myz350




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/19670410
> 
> 
> myz350
> 
> 1.4 BDII 110" Diag JVC RS10 15ft throw not seeing what you described even close up to the screen?



found the camera, but the friking battery is dead!!! will have to go buy a new battery, won't let me recharge no more. these sparklies are very small, tiny little sparkles, comes and goes as scenes changes. it improves if I turn down the brightness, but i can still see it.


----------



## MississippiMan

Guys, if you have any of the "Underworld" series, post a few shots of those under at least the more modest lighting conditions the BD's are supposed to handle. Gotta be at least as bright as frasia's room is showing though. Anything less is not a good example.


"V" is another good'in. Ditto "The Black Knight" in it's darker scenes.


Cartoons are pretty easy...being so over saturated "color & brightness" wise. HDTV Sports as well. If a Ambient Light screen can at least keep "Cinema" Blacks from fading to "Brown", then ya have sumptin' goin' fer ya.











BTW frasia, I liked that last shot....cartoon or not. VERY effective use of those "Spots". THAT is what planning for good lighting is all about! Was that at 600-800 ISO?


Kevin 3000, the RS10 is such an excellent, bright PJ w/exceptional native Contrast, your job should be the easiest on of all w/a 1.4 BD II. I envy you your machine....it's a Killer Diller.


----------



## Shellbmb




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19652988
> 
> 
> Here is some Screen Shots
> 
> Home Theater Install from this past weekend
> 
> BD 1.4 Gain Screen
> 
> Epson 9700 Ub
> 
> Cogeco HD DVR ,,,,, All Live shots
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lower Camera ISO



So why the 1.4 here and not the .8 in this setup?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Shellbmb* /forum/post/19679727
> 
> 
> So why the 1.4 here and not the .8 in this setup?



Went with the 1.4 gain because of the customers Preference..

Thats what they wanted...


----------



## R Harkness

Quote:

Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* 
BTW frasia, I liked that last shot....cartoon or not. VERY effective use of those "Spots". THAT is what planning for good lighting is all about!


Agreed. It's like room sound: if you plan your room well you don't need to add fixes (like room EQs) to try and fix things afterward.


Similarly, if you plan your lighting right you reduce the need for screens that fix the problems. Take a look at this screen shot, taken with some lights on in the room:











I use a white (Stewart) 1.3 gain screen, but the task lights are aimed properly so it doesn't wash out the image. You can see the ottomans a few feet from the screen are being lit by some track lights which are on over the sofa area. I can have lights over the seating area quite bright, while maintaining a vivid on-screen image. FWIW.


----------



## Kevin 3000

The above sample is why Black Diamond sells - compare that to fraisa top pic.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/19683445
> 
> 
> The above sample is why Black Diamond sells - compare that to fraisa top pic.



In what way? I see a more vivid, clear image with more "pop" (even more "plasma-like") on the LOTR screen shot. What are you seeing?


(In the end it's kinda silly to compare screen shots unless you have the same images shot in the same room. I was just posting an example of a screen shot with some lights on).


Avatar screen shot under the same lighting conditions, FWIW...











Funny...when I originally posted that image someone posted they thought a real person was standing in front of the screen (the guy in the image).


----------



## Kevin 3000




R Harkness said:


> In what way? I see a more vivid, clear image with more "pop" (even more "plasma-like") on the LOTR screen shot. What are you seeing?
> 
> 
> 
> Its more like what i am not seeing YOUR ROOM!!!
Click to expand...


----------



## R Harkness

Ok, if I understand correctly you mean, in some of Fraisa's pictures the room is lit up more and more visible. Fair enough. However, in my shots you only see the tip of the portion of the lighting in the room. If the camera were reversed, looking at the seating, you'd see it lit up substantially with lights over the sofa. That's what I mean by planning lighting. Typically an issue with projection is simply that the room tends to be very dark, with the lights out in order to see a good image. But this can be awkward if you need to see, like for snacks or talking to people, or even if some people just prefer not to sit in pitch darkness. But with carefully planned lighting you can have nice, bright task lighting over the seating area to solve those issues, without needing to pay more for a specialty screen to fix poorly planned lighting. That's all I'm saying.


However, a lot of people are dealing with rooms they aren't going to alter and they have ambient light issues, so a specialty screen like the Black Diamond can help greatly with those issues (especially the .8 gain version).


----------



## snarks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19625100
> 
> 
> The SI BD 1.4 or .8 gain screen does a better job with Reflecting Ambient Light on the ceiling and walls than the Fire Hawk...
> 
> BTW
> 
> As a Dealer I sell both SI and Stewart..
> 
> If my cusotmer wants a Stewart and is hell bent on it,
> 
> then i can get him one...
> 
> but as for my preference,
> 
> just look at all my posts you can see which one i prefer...



I wanted a BD 0.8. I ended up ordering a firehawk g3 123" because the BD didn't come in a size that big .


I am 100% satisfied. The ambient light rejection outperforms my expectations. I have people over to watch football almost every weekend. This is done in the middle of the day with the most ambient light possible and everyone is stunned with how fantastic it looks. I do not have a single complaint. It is very possible something looks better or costs less but that wont take away how completely happy I am with this purchase.


This is the room . As you can see there are tons of lights and no shortage if light coming in at a side angle from the sliding glass doors and windows.





























I'd take night photos but they look as stunning as everyone elses and there isn't much point.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *snarks* /forum/post/19688589
> 
> 
> I wanted a BD 0.8. I ended up ordering a firehawk g3 123" because the BD didn't come in a size that big .
> 
> 
> I am 100% satisfied. The ambient light rejection outperforms my expectations. I have people over to watch football almost every weekend. This is done in the middle of the day with the most ambient light possible and everyone is stunned with how fantastic it looks. I do not have a single complaint. It is very possible something looks better or costs less but that wont take away how completely happy I am with this purchase.
> 
> 
> This is the room . As you can see there are tons of lights and no shortage if light coming in at a side angle from the sliding glass doors and windows.
> 
> 
> I'd take night photos but they look as stunning as everyone elses and there isn't much point.



Looks like that wall helps make a kinda cove for your screen from some of the light...

But still very nice,

Its amazing if we look back from 4 yrs ago where tech has come from ,,

you couldnt even have dreamed of this type of set up unless you where bill gates... cause it would have taken big dollars and still wouldnt have come close...


----------



## snarks

for what it's worth this is what it looks like when the ceiling spot lights are directed right at the screen from a few feet away, all the lights are on and shades drawn. Same lighting as the photo below. I wouldn't watch it this way but it is astounding that the picture is still what I'd call viewable.


----------



## snarks

I would note that there have been a couple winter days where the combination of white snow and bright sun has made the room bright enough that I have considered a dark curtain for the windows.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *snarks* /forum/post/19690176
> 
> 
> I would note that there have been a couple winter days where the combination of white snow and bright sun has made the room bright enough that I have considered a dark curtain for the windows.



Would you ever consider going with a more flush mount instead of a long extend type mount?


----------



## Kevin 3000












Torture Conditions Underworld scene mainly to show the screens limitations, notice the amount of light around the frame









1.4 BDII JVC RS10 600 Lamp Hours around 500 Lumens the 0.8 gain will improve things further as long as you have the lumens to light it up










Note to SI send cheque to the usual address


----------



## fraisa

Here is a pic I took awhile back

this was taken before i did indepth calibrating,

but does show extreme conditions...

side view shot...











Then here is a zoomed shot calibrated skin tones... ThX Mode











Another shot for blacks THX Mode


----------



## Shellbmb

Quote:

Originally Posted by *R Harkness* 
However, a lot of people are dealing with rooms they aren't going to alter and they have ambient light issues, so a specialty screen like the Black Diamond can help greatly with those issues (especially the .8 gain version).
I'm still a little confused about the difference between the .8 and 1.4. I thought the 1.4 was for rooms that had ambient light issues? And the .8 was more for dedicated theater rooms? At least that is what Blake from SI has told me.


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Shellbmb* 
I'm still a little confused about the difference between the .8 and 1.4. I thought the 1.4 was for rooms that had ambient light issues? And the .8 was more for dedicated theater rooms? At least that is what Blake from SI has told me.
K this is how i gage it,....

if its in a room like sparks lots of windows and uncontrolled Light

Go 1.4 gain


If its controlled man made light ie Pot lights

Go .8 gain...


If I was to put a screen upstairs in my Office that has alot of light during the day definetly would go 1.4 gain...


----------



## andrios




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> K this is how i gage it,....
> 
> if its in a room like sparks lots of windows and uncontrolled Light
> 
> Go 1.4 gain
> 
> 
> If its controlled man made light ie Pot lights
> 
> Go .8 gain...
> 
> 
> If I was to put a screen upstairs in my Office that has alot of light during the day definetly would go 1.4 gain...



So what if I got controlled pot lights but I want them on? Only 2 come near screen.


----------



## Kevin 3000

You also have to consider - tell your installer - what PJ is being used with the 1.4 or 0.8. I woyld advise for a PJ with around 1000 lumens new Lamp get the 1.4 otherwise the 0.8 will soon look dim as the lamp ages.


NO comments on my lasr true to life picture? Stunned silence


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/19690565
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Torture Conditions Underworld scene mainly to show the screens limitations, notice the amount of light around the frame
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1.4 BDII JVC RS10 600 Lamp Hours around 500 Lumens the 0.8 gain will improve things further as long as you have the lumens to light it up
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Note to SI send cheque to the usual address



There is a lot of light in your picture. That is for sure. On the other hand, that image looks washed out. It is watchable, which is an achievement with that amount of light. But, if you compare's Rich Harkness's "control the light" approach to your "battle the sun" approach, I don't think you can argue that Rich's results provide a better picture.


I don't think the goal should be just to have a "watchable" image. I think we are enthusiasts and we all want something more than that. We want an image with lots of on screen contrast, that is vivid and basically jumps off the screen. I think you understand that because you've made everything in your room black. Note that Rich has not done that, instead he has worked with a template of colors that would help him to achieve his goals.


I know that you can close those drapes and then image will improve substantially. I guess I am just trying to say that I am puzzled about what your picture is trying to show.


----------



## fraisa




Kevin 3000 said:


> You also have to consider - tell your installer - what PJ is being used with the 1.4 or 0.8. I woyld advise for a PJ with around 1000 lumens new Lamp get the 1.4 otherwise the 0.8 will soon look dim as the lamp ages.
> 
> 
> Ya thats a very good point that i forgot to add
> 
> It all depends on your ansi lumens
> 
> SI has a calculator that will figure out what is better for you based on your ansi lumens and projected light in the room
> 
> 
> What projector are you going with?


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/19695898
> 
> 
> There is a lot of light in your picture. That is for sure. On the other hand, that image looks washed out. It is watchable, which is an achievement with that amount of light.
> 
> I don't think the goal should be just to have a "watchable" image.
> 
> I know that you can close those drapes and then image will improve substantially. I guess I am just trying to say that I am puzzled about what your picture is trying to show.




Responding to this link http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...2#post19677502 with the worst i could show off my screen but still watchable, i usually watch sports in that light and general TV `full screen so brighter images` Movies get the blackout treatment


----------



## msmCutter

With full black out treatment you're better off with any number of screens over the BD.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19696246
> 
> 
> With full black out treatment you're better off with any number of screens over the BD.



Not always.


If your room is properly treated with non-reflective black velvet you are right - a white screen is the way to go. But, if you have a "normal" room with white ceilings and lighter colored walls, the BD can help by reducing the washout that reflected light can produce, even in an otherwise pitch black room. Like most compromises, this comes at some cost.


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19696246
> 
> 
> With full black out treatment you're better off with any number of screens over the BD.



Thats true if you want to sit in a black hole watching sports etc hence my choice of screen drapes open watchable daylight viewing, been there tried matt white 1.0 gain - Greywolf 1.8 gain now this BD 1.4 suits my needs.


----------



## Shellbmb

I will be going with the 9700; however, even if I go with a brighter projector, as the lamp fades, I still want a watchable picture. With the 1.4, I would assume I could run the PJ at a more conservative mode and prolong the bulb life, no?


I do have light coming in from side windows that I can block out with plantation shutters, but there is still some light. So I am going with the 1.4.


I also think a lot of other screens would work in my situation, but I'm staying on the safe side with the BD. Plus the price is reasonable on the BD and I'm supporting a local company (Austin, TX). I actually went to their showroom/factory and toured the place. Blake was very helpful.


Now a decision on size. 12' viewing distance. Thinking 100". Maybe 106"?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Shellbmb* /forum/post/19696475
> 
> 
> I will be going with the 9700; however, even if I go with a brighter projector, as the lamp fades, I still want a watchable picture. With the 1.4, I would assume I could run the PJ at a more conservative mode and prolong the bulb life, no?
> 
> 
> I do have light coming in from side windows that I can block out with plantation shutters, but there is still some light. So I am going with the 1.4.
> 
> 
> I also think a lot of other screens would work in my situation, but I'm staying on the safe side with the BD. Plus the price is reasonable on the BD and I'm supporting a local company (Austin, TX). I actually went to their showroom/factory and toured the place. Blake was very helpful.
> 
> 
> Now a decision on size. 12' viewing distance. Thinking 100". Maybe 106"?



If you are concerned about bulb life then 1.4 is your way to go...

12 feet viewing distance is that your sitting distance aswell?

100 inch is the biggest but if it was me i would do 90 inch...


Thumbs up to you for supportting your Local Company....thats awesome...


wish more people would support there local dealers instead of just saving a buck, then coming on these forums and asking dumb questions that they clearly would have had answered if they went thru there local dealer and not a internet order house that doesnt have any technical info.......

thats my rant of the day....lol


Thats really cool that you had a tour of the SI facility...

thats what i like about SI they are very Consumer Friendly when it comes to customers....

And there customer service is A1....


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19694667
> 
> 
> K this is how i gage it,....
> 
> if its in a room like sparks lots of windows and uncontrolled Light
> 
> Go 1.4 gain
> 
> 
> If its controlled man made light ie Pot lights
> 
> Go .8 gain...
> 
> 
> If I was to put a screen upstairs in my Office that has alot of light during the day definetly would go 1.4 gain...



I believe it's just the reverse.


The darker substrate of the .8 version is precisely to combat more extreme lighting scenarios. That's the whole point of using such an incredibly dark substrate combined with a very directional screen optical coating. That's what is going to absorb heavy room light and keep those shadow areas darker, to maintain contrast in brighter rooms.


The best combination for fighting serious ambient light is a bright projector projecting against a dark screen like the BD .8 version.


The 1.4 version will provide a brighter picture but it doesn't do nearly as well at rejecting ambient light and maintaining deeper black levels. It starts with a brighter screen surface to begin with and is a significantly higher gain, so it's already raised the black levels and is going to reflect and raise whatever ambient light hits it more than the .8. Frankly, when I saw the 1.4 gain screen in action with some ambient light I thought "This performance isn't particularly better in ambient light than lots of other such screens..I would not really like to watch images this washed out."


Whereas the .8 version can be seriously impressive in some ambient light.

I haven't seen anything better for maintaining contrast in challenging conditions, personally. But for the very reasons it does so, it takes a brighter projected image to light up that screen.


The BD .8 screen is more extreme in it's blackness for a reason; it's for more extreme ambient light conditions. It's great there are companies like Black Diamond making these screens as options for us.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/19697279
> 
> 
> I believe it's just the reverse.
> 
> 
> The darker substrate of the .8 version is precisely to combat more extreme lighting scenarios. That's the whole point of using such an incredibly dark substrate combined with a very directional screen optical coating. That's what is going to absorb heavy room light and keep those shadow areas darker, to maintain contrast in brighter rooms.
> 
> 
> The best combination for fighting serious ambient light is a bright projector projecting against a dark screen like the BD .8 version.
> 
> 
> The 1.4 version will provide a brighter picture but it doesn't do nearly as well at rejecting ambient light and maintaining deeper black levels. It starts with a brighter screen surface to begin with and is a significantly higher gain, so it's already raised the black levels and is going to reflect and raise whatever ambient light hits it more than the .8. Frankly, when I saw the 1.4 gain screen in action with some ambient light I thought "This performance isn't particularly better in ambient light than lots of other such screens..I would not really like to watch images this washed out."
> 
> 
> Whereas the .8 version can be seriously impressive in some ambient light.
> 
> I haven't seen anything better for maintaining contrast in challenging conditions, personally. But for the very reasons it does so, it takes a brighter projected image to light up that screen.
> 
> 
> The BD .8 screen is more extreme in it's blackness for a reason; it's for more extreme ambient light conditions. It's great there are companies like Black Diamond making these screens as options for us.



Its because of companies like SI that people can get back into the 2 pc projection world and away from limited flat panel.....


When people see the BD in action alot of people are shocked that the image is coming from a Projector....

I remember doing a demo once and beside us was a the sharp Aquos and the colours on the BD where killing that lcd flat panel ....


----------



## Kevin 3000

JVC RS10 600 Hour Lamp around 500 Lumens 15ft Throw

BDII 1.4 screen 110"

2x20 watt Halogen Lamps Daylight Test


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* 
JVC RS10 600 Hour Lamp around 500 Lumens 15ft Throw

BDII 1.4 screen 110"

2x20 watt Halogen Lamps Daylight Test

















Awesome...

But i would be dusting over by the ps3....lol


----------



## MississippiMan

2- little 20 watt spots illuminating two small areas? Is this something to be touting...or stifling a chuckle over?


Tell ya what, move those little guys out about 6'...level to the center of the Screen, turn them both into the Screen and let 'em shine. They are not big lights....certainly not crazy bright either, so there should be no real risk involved. Why, I'd even suggest you turn every other light off while doing so. Do likewise from 4' to each side of the Screen and 6' out. Show us something to contemplate.


Guys, I'm really on "all our sides" when it comes to getting decent ambient light performance out amongst the Masses, no matter what the price point. Simply put, if it's gonna be stated that such performance can come with either a high or low price tag, the real choice/s need to be shown in/under circumstances that can/should be construed as representing real world situations....not in contrived or inappropriate (ie: silly) examples.


Doing so in the latter only makes it all seem a little bit senseless and more than a bit self-defeating when playing to a critical crowd such as is the reading Membership on this Forum. I can't say it any plainer than that. Exhibit your strong points in a strong, unmistakable manner.


(In truth, and with the JVC RS10, I'd think that showing a scene with lot's of Black content would have performed nicely even with the daylight coming in from the Window on the right.)


----------



## Kevin 3000

MississippiMan

Those 20 watt lamps are Halogen lamps bright little suckers and are both angled towards the screens center + the *daylight factor*. I had the lamps further out but wanted to show the screens properties. Will post some more shots soon.


What can you show in comparison? I am only interested in the best performing options.


I only have 500 lumens on tap no light canon here.


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/19713186
> 
> 
> No comparisons MississippiMan?
> 
> 
> Just Googled the lumen output for a 20 watt Halogen around 600 Lumens about the same as an unshaded incandecent 60w bulb, so just imagine the devastating washout this would cause on other screens unless MississippiMan knows of an alternative?



I'd be quick to venture to say you must have missed the examples shown on this thread in the "linked to" post a short while back....but we both know better....yes?








http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...7#post19612927 


Of course I have more, (..a great many...) and all under more lighting duress than has ever been shown here.

But this isn't about promoting one wholly different Genre against another, but rather validating "performance vs cost" claims for a specific Mfg Screen.


You don't want a Screen Shot contest here......that would be unproductive....if not indeed self-defeating. We went over that a short while back when you posted a Dark Room shot of a shot I had taken in significant ambient light. I've spent years making sure I could justify every screen shot I post....that means I do not tip the scales in favor of producing only eye candy. But when I do, it's as sweet a treat as it can be.







I'm not alone in that respect...it's a pretty easy thing to accomplish these days under the right circumstances.


(...btw, those are 2- "500 watt" Globe assemblies 8' away and on level with the Top of the "135" diagonal" SF Screen seen in the link.







.......and against 20 watt halogens? Not really a fair comparison.







Those shots are intended to impress not for sheer image quality, but to show considerable ability to offset the adverse effects of ambient light. In the case shown it's taken to ridiculous extremes because that's what people want to seen done. Give 'em what they want....they'll still want more.







)


The truth is, combating the effects of ambient light is the goal. "Combat" as in "to fight". No where has it ever been stated "sensibly" that any normal, residential Screen application can "defeat' the effects. Nope...we all can only "mitigate" the loss of Contrast, by trying to "minimize" the loss through effect.


We do so using Non Reflectrive or Highly Reflective Dark Screens w/High lumen PJs. Variances on that theme work only as well as respective to the balance acquired between Screen/PJ/Lighting.


While there is no Magic Bullet, some ammunition does have more effect than others. Some "Hi-Tech Loads" cost quite a bit, while others fall squarely in the "Cap & Ball" category. And sometimes, a 50 Caliber "Ball" can do more "dirty work" than a Nylon Capped Hollow Point.


But all of it depends upon how well one can use the advantage of a dark surface's properties to staunch the effect that bright light has on dark areas.. For eons we have been trying to bring light into all our darkest corners....now we are regressing. We want Blacker Blacks.


The question remains....can they be found...and had, for something less than the price of a used car?







Or...if that is the price....is it giving one the value expected of it?


----------



## Kevin 3000

So MississippiMan no alternatives to improve my setup with my projector? Those samples you posted will not help my room as the light sources are a long way from the screen + shaded and there is no daylight in the rooms.


Below are examples of almost like for like 1000 watts shaded light 8` from screen.

4x40 watt halogens unshaded 9` from screen + 2x20 watt halogens directed at screen = 600 watts total room


Anyhow keep up the goodwork you may stumble on that magic mix 1 day but until that day we are stuck with specialist screens.


----------



## MississippiMan

Ahem. I see 4 "On" lights currently pointed "down & slightly away from" the screen, another one pointing Down . I'll give you this...point them all directly down. Ditch the Little Spot lamps. Try that.







Afterward, reset the lights like I know you like to have them, so that they "don't" work against you. Turn 'em all on. Take images under "full" and "50%" illumination. Let us note the improvement just a little bit of muting and directionality on the lighting can make.


Really, one need only look at your room at a glance to know that you know what helps a situation...and what can hurt. Can you really state you think my expounding on this dedicated Thread about "another option" would be welcome, proper, or even advisable?*** Lets be real...and offer up real life questions and answers concerning "these Screens" . Most such Threads usually follow that route.


Ol Man Sol....he's tough.










The Sunlight is a natural source of light, full spectrum, and more a "real life" example of a major reason people might consider such Screens as being a real advantage. Even then, practical common sense is required as far as indirect/directed lighting circumstances, or the room/PJ/Screen must be absolutely optimized together. Extremely dark Gray surfaces being hit with 3k+ Lumens is one route...tried and true. Who would have thought you'd see a 3000 lumen 1080p DLP @ $1595.00. (EH-1020) Although some might say "Why did you say THAT?", if I had such a PJ, I'd intuitively know that a BD-I .9 screen would work splendidly with it, and show images of excellent quality in more adverse lighting than you've cared to show so far. That screen, and the older Sony ChromaVu based their advantage as much on "darkness" as on anything. The 1.4 BD is very much akin to other "dark yet reflective" applications. Up to a point, if a PJ such as the EH1020 was sold as a bundle with a BD .9'er, I'd bet there would be few dissatisfied Customers. With a 1.4 version, some thought as to Projector placement would be necessary, but the end result on Low Lamp would be a real "Ambient Light Lion Tamer".


I know fraisa can relate. He's expressed the importance of fitting the Screen and Projector in carefully with the needs of both the Room and the Customer. He wants to see the Room before a recommendation is given. Then with him knowing what to do out of hand in any given situation, that is what really is helpful. No hemming, hawing...hopeful guesses. Seeing what is needed and expected, one gives them the real skinny, and show 'em what will work to fulfill such promises. If they waffle on equipment or room design.....then all they need to know that choices made that fall somewhere below the suggested Screen/ PJ/Lighting application in effectiveness, will resort to having compromises settle in.


Faced with that, I've seen more Wives opt for 4" Spot Cans and Perimeter Lighting schemes and Husbands who DID NOT want any "I told you so's" coming back to haunt them, so they do what is best. Not always though. That's why I have Gray hair.







.


Moving on, I also see two very highly directed Spot Lamps effectively destroying everything on screen within their cone of influence. (...thank the Higher Spirits those "Rectangles" blocked a good portion of what was headed that way!) That's expected....for that is not real life.


BTW...very wise not to have used those spots @ 8' from and even angled at a goodly surface of the Screen...that's a big challenge...and frankly not a plausible scenario nor within normal performance expectations.


I suppose that what is happening here is that I'm asking a few questions and requesting a few examples from a member who has a particular Screen, and who is proud enough to want to show & tell it. Nothing new in that..we all like to do so.


Yes, I've had a few years jump on you Guys having to explain and justify performance claims along the same lines as the SI-BD product line. You get your share of Believers / advocates...and your share of Naysayers as well. The latter always seem to be a lot fewer in number but all the more outspoken for that reason.


I'm not gonna bring down that hard rain on anyone's head. I appreciate this Screen for what it is...does...and what it represents. For those needing such a Screen and who can consider the purchase, properly set up an accommodated for, it will over achieve most expectations.


The real question remains, just how good can the image quality remain at specific levels of "Normal" lighting. Once that is truly settled, and the benchmark established, who then can have any arguments or dismissals? After all that hard work come the real fun...for then comes the time to fool around playing with the "abnormal" instances.


Since I'm considered decidedly "abnormal" by some, I'll be residing with my own miscreant Screen endeavors while waiting for your photo- illustrated response. Honestly...I hope you do your best and wow 'em all. Me as well. Just do them right.



*** If you ever are serious about trying out something different, you know what Forum I normally reside in.


----------



## MississippiMan

Now you REALLY don't think the Lighting you showed was in any manner equal to the twin fixtures in the Photo of mine you re-posted?









Those Globes were Venticular Reflective, and essential sent light out in all directions....including sideways. Just so you know...mind you.










...btw, I did promise fraisa I wouldn't post any more supposedly "competitive" shots. I'll stress again, I'm not here for that. I'm here because I know the difference in what is, what might be, and what some might have others think.


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/19714827
> 
> 
> People can see for themselves and make their own minds up ...........



What I see are two washed out pictures, one barely watchable, the other unacceptable.


----------



## fraisa

With all this indepth talk going back and forth

I am really Glad i posted a pic of the Hockey Fan in the Helmet....lol


----------



## andrios

Has the .8 version changed since projectorcentral did there review on it?


----------



## Kevin 3000

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Screen Innovatio* 
Kevin,


If you move your lights forward a bit, you could leave them on all the time.


Blake
They are facing straight down the bulbs proturde out of the holders a bit so unshaded and i do leave them on sometimes as you see them. If i took a pic around the other side they are just as bright 9ft from screen.

5x40 watt halogens when bulbs not blown.


----------



## MississippiMan

Removed out of consideration of circumstances.


----------



## Acta7

This video post on the site of the official italian BD2 import seller also make the screen look very crap with the lights on.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-U-4...layer_embedded


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/19719833
> 
> 
> That image is clearly manipulated. There is no color, no depth, and the overall contrast has been reduced intentionally, overall brightness bumped up to compensate...the whole thing smacks of a clear attempt to mislead the viewer. Then there is the fact it just looks terrible to start with.
> 
> 
> I've tried hard to suggest some screen shot pointers that would help to validate the BD's performance claims, and serve to eliminate the contrary comments that this thread was piling up against it. But you seem to not only want to ignore that effort, your really doing all that much more to perpetrate the same issues that led others to call BS on previous Photos.
> 
> 
> Now the image above.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Continue on in this manner and you'll essentially destroy what credibility the BD screen has to offer.



Moderators please delete this message as it refers to my pic which is actually unfounded and as its been deleted irrelevant now.??


----------



## Audiojan

I think you've made it quite clear that you simply do not like the Black Diamond screen, and you are of course perfectly entitled to hate if you so choose, but you're getting very close to the line when you accuse people of tampering with their photos. Let's just agree that you don't like what you see and some others do.


Now, let's get back to the BD related discussions.


----------



## Kevin 3000

JVC RS10 600 Hoursish Lamp

BDII 1.4 Screen TEST

4x40 watt Halogens Un-shaded Bulbs protrude from Eyeball holders about 4mm pointing straight down - 9ft from screen really bright conditions.


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/19722400
> 
> 
> JVC RS10 600 Hoursish Lamp
> 
> BDII 1.4 Screen TEST
> 
> 4x40 watt Halogens Un-shaded Bulbs protrude from Eyeball holders about 4mm pointing straight down - 9ft from screen really bright conditions.



What are you trying to demonstrate with this and the Sin City picture? Because both of them are so washed out, most people would consider them to be unwatchable.


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *karlsch* /forum/post/19722531
> 
> 
> What are you trying to demonstrate with this and the Sin City picture? Because both of them are so washed out, most people would consider them to be unwatchable.



LOL....Looks very watchable here hard to capture with those lights in the lens but how else can i prove they are on and bright at the same time as the screen. All things considered its amazing its not a total washout.


Some may find it useful.


----------



## andrios

Kevin, why did you pick the 1.4 over the .8??


----------



## andrios




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Has the .8 version changed since projectorcentral did there review on it?



Can anyone answer this please? I'm bought to splurge a little on a screen and I need the details!


----------



## andrios

Do any of you know where I can find a side by side image of the .8 and 1.4? Can anyone confirm they both do a good job of masking? I know the 1.4 has a tint of grey in it so obviously the .8 gets blacker...


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *andrios* 
Do any of you know where I can find a side by side image of the .8 and 1.4? Can anyone confirm they both do a good job of masking? I know the 1.4 has a tint of grey in it so obviously the .8 gets blacker...
YOu may have answered this before,

but is there not a dealer near you where you could see both of these .8 and 1.4 ...

YOu really need to see a side by side in real life and not a screen shot...


----------



## andrios

Quote:

Originally Posted by *fraisa* 
YOu may have answered this before,

but is there not a dealer near you where you could see both of these .8 and 1.4 ...

YOu really need to see a side by side in real life and not a screen shot...
All dealers around me have to special order the screens.


Best buy doesn't even carry the BDII....


----------



## programmergeek

Where are you located if you are near NJ, I have them comming in you can come look.


----------



## andrios

Quote:

Originally Posted by *programmergeek*
Where are you located if you are near NJ, I have them comming in you can come look.
Im in Illinois :-/


----------



## msmCutter

Don't rat out the CRT boys!


----------



## Kevin 3000

All Lights on even the 4x40 Halogens above the camera. 40w Lamp on speaker 20 watt Halogens each corner.

BDII 1.4 110" JVC RS10 601 Lamp Hours 500ush Lumens


Tell us how it compares to others.


----------



## andrios




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> All Lights on even the 4x40 Halogens above the camera. 40w Lamp on speaker 20 watt Halogens each corner.
> 
> BDII 1.4 110" JVC RS10 601 Lamp Hours 500ush Lumens
> 
> 
> Tell us how it compares to others.



Would that picture look better with the .8?


----------



## fraisa




Kevin 3000 said:


> Yes in ambient conditions Darker material just make sure you have all the facts q fraisa.
> 
> 
> Hey Kevin
> 
> Sent you a PM....
> 
> BTw,. looks like you dusted the ps3...lol
> 
> Nice
> 
> ..............................
> _Light Scatter_
> 
> Okay here is a pic taken with the new Tripod....
> 
> Okay this pic i have the contrast dialed up on my 9700 for a reason...
> 
> Take a look at the ceiling even where the left side of the screen is ..
> 
> if this was a matte white screen that reflective light scatter would be Huge ,,,,
> 
> alot more than whats present..
> 
> also a quik note i have my tripod up at a high level than the normal viewing seating position , so you dont see the glare off my center speaker if your sitting down.
> 
> Was planning on taking more pics but the camera died ,
> 
> will post some high ambient light pics tomorrow...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now to be fair here is an extreme bright image,
> 
> this would show how light scatter is handled with an extreme amount of top image light..
> 
> Even at the extreme condition the performance is amazing when it comes to light scatter.....


----------



## andrios

Was told SI is actually shipping a newer version of the BD2. They have added an extra layer on both and the 1.4 is a little darker looking.


Im probably gonna go with the 1.4 as my room/lighting is controlled and im even able to watch with the lights on without a screen. The 1.4 should be even better!


----------



## prof55

OT and bickering posts removed, stay civil or expect a lock.


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *prof55* /forum/post/19731440
> 
> 
> OT and bickering posts removed, stay civil or expect a lock.



Did i miss something? Last post i made i was only asking for screen comparisons off MississippiMan to justify his opinions.


Somebody please tell me whats occurred as its morning here in the UK?


My next question i was going to ask MisisippiMan was about the Light scatter properties in low light and how that compared to Black Diamond screens.


----------



## Kevin 3000

Just came across this thread as we are on the subject of Ambient Light properties of screens.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1294087


----------



## fraisa

Here is some High Ambient light pics

Epson 9700ub

SI Black Diamond .8 gain screen.

COD Xbox 360

Are we there yet, Popcorn Hour A-200 720p upconvert to 1080p hdtv


----------



## fraisa

Same projector on the painted Taupe Wall

Not as high ambient light....

clearly the BD is the winner....


----------



## fraisa

another pic

lower light level...

ISO at 50


----------



## fraisa

Will take and post more in the next couple of days.....

ALso will play more with lower iso...


----------



## MississippiMan

Very Nice Work.


----------



## fraisa

Some More,,,

Really Cravin Junk Food.....lol

Epson 9700ub

.8 Gain Black Diamond

Dish Net Vip 722

ISO 50



















Got to love some TNA...


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/19737575
> 
> 
> Very Nice Work.



Thanks...


----------



## fraisa

As you can see above you dont have to watch

2pcs projection with the lights off Anymore...


----------



## andrios

Quote:

Originally Posted by *fraisa* 
As you can see above you dont have to watch

2pcs projection with the lights off Anymore...








Very nice pics, cant wait for my 113".


----------



## Kevin 3000

Stunning Fraisa!!!


If you want a proper ambient light solution Black Diamond .8 gets the job done.

Just look at the contrast retained awesome.


Yes a bit expensive but the results are worth the extra.


Starting to sound like a salesman but then again i have had a 1.4 BDII over a year and not looking to change it as i did with my previous 2 screens.


Think carefully people and make the right choice.......


----------



## MississippiMan

All HDTV and No Movies makes Jack a Dull Boy.


How about some Dark Scenes of Color or B&W Movies at that Light level or slightly lower. (You'd watch Sports but not a Movie with that much light)


Here are a few comparisons of easy to duplicate material. The Screen in use (shown below) is a bit lighter in shade than usual though...











Night at the Museum -Smithsonian


B&W Sequence




















Underworld ROTL











Guess What Movie?


----------



## Kevin 3000

Ok just saying this as i see it not having a go MissisippiMan.


You ask for movie pics to compare to why not show us a scene from Sin City like i took on my 1.4 in a bright room as a starting point because the .8 will take that to another level.


I am interested in alternatives but you have got to playball.


Mods if this gets deleted i will ban myself.......


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* 
All HDTV and No Movies makes Jack a Dull Boy.


How about some Dark Scenes of Color or B&W Movies at that Light level or slightly lower. (You'd watch Sports but not a Movie with that much light)

Guess What Movie?









Dont worry miss i got some movies coming....


----------



## fraisa

Sneak Peak...


----------



## msmCutter

I still see a "cone" in almost all your pictures Fraisa.


I'm sure MM's solutions are as good or better. If I had to do something I guess you're all providing something. But still none of these shots really hold a candle to a decent screen (or piece of lamenant) in a light controlled room. At the same time, if you're satisfied with reduced contrast or brightness or restricted viewing cones a whole new world of "watchable" opens for you. I can get any/all of that stuff without a $3k screen.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19738857
> 
> 
> I still see a "cone" in almost all your pictures Fraisa.
> 
> 
> I'm sure MM's solutions are as good or better. If I had to do something I guess you're all providing something. But still none of these shots really hold a candle to a decent screen (or piece of lamenant) in a light controlled room. At the same time, if you're satisfied with reduced contrast or brightness or restricted viewing cones a whole new world of "watchable" opens for you. I can get any/all of that stuff without a $3k screen.



WHatEver...

Okay here is what you are missing

you focus on a cone but you miss that the black is black.

How about You Post some screen shots in that much light

then we will talk.

Since you are the expert to notice the flaw,

Then IN the same ambient light post a PIC.....


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/19738353
> 
> 
> Ok just saying this as i see it not having a go MissisippiMan.
> 
> 
> You ask for movie pics to compare to why not show us a scene from Sin City like i took on my 1.4 in a bright room as a starting point because the .8 will take that to another level.
> 
> 
> I am interested in alternatives but you have got to playball.
> 
> 
> Mods if this gets deleted i will ban myself.......



I don't think that should happen either way if it's obvious that this is a discussion about the varying properties and performance envelopes of Ambient Light Screens. This Thread started out being an "Official" thread intended to allow people to discuss and learn about SI-BD products, not a showroom to attract buyers. Of course just about every similar type Thread also gears itself to that intent eventually, because owners want to brag and show how happy they are. (...hello? fraisa?







)


Anyway, I don't own that movie, (SC) but in any case, any one of the Underworld movies, or perhaps some scenes from "V", all actually show "Blacks" better.


Sin City is a Noir film whose composition is essentially blown out B&W and does not intentional have the depth of Black levels you find in a piece like Underworld.


Choosing a Movie like Sin City, whose content is higher in Dynamic contrast (...the whites and Grays are artificially enhanced to create more detail...) to try to show ambient light handling ability is essentially the same as always using CGI Cartoons or HDTV content to do likewise. Of course such content will show better because the intensity of the projected light produced to drive those images is far greater than that needed to produce a truly "black as Midnight" scene from the first Underworld.


You'll note that most all my shots are NOT taken directly in line with the Screen. And the content shown is not always chosen to help things look better. No, I make it hard on the Screen to perform. I've become a "Contrast Diabetic". I choose to avoid "Candy".


The Spots are a full 90 watts each. The Sconces are 60 watts. I crank 'em up. The room shown has been painted to optimize Contrast. A mid-tone Gray for walls, a ultra Dark Gray for the Ceiling. You'll have to admit there is no trouble seeing any colors that are illuminated by lighting, yet where the cone of illumination fades, it gets "inky".


In such an environment, when a Screen is producing an abundance of reflected light, and not suffering to illuminate the surrounding walls & ceiling, all the Camera has to use to meter on is that image. Taking a shot from a distance becomes much harder...and it's understood why so many zoom way in...to attenuate the reflected light to a point the images taken do not appear blown out.


However...and likewise, if the Screen IS highly reflective but of a lighter shade...(...and the one shown is, being for a dedicated Theater... obviously...) it will have more of a tendency to reflect any light coming at it from any source.


So actually, my images put me at a disadvantage because the Screen shown is not a darker representation....probably on the order of being 4x lighter than the BD 1.4 and who knows how much lighter than a BD .8


Kevin, this is a subject I'm intimately familiar with. While there may be a few exceptions, almost no one on AVS has spent a longer time advocating the use of PJs in environments not considered suitable for such. And as such, 95% of my efforts have centered around Screen dedicated to producing results to compliment such efforts.


That said, and while not being combative by saying so, one cannot slide an obviously "made to be advantageous" screen shot past me. Goodness knows, I've had to be really careful not to do likewise, and even then, you would not want to have to spend the time reading through all the exclamations of disbelief posted over the examples I have posted.


So when I evaluate something along the lines of a Screen such as the ones we both prefer, I do so with both a jaded and critical eye.


When the first Sony ChromaVu came out, it required a Light Cannon to do what it was designed to do best. And basically, excepting Presentation PJs, the SONY VPL-HS10 was the only PJ SONY advised using with it...at a time when most 720p LCD/DLP PJs were still rooted at the 700-800- lumen level.


Recently I saw one of those old 84"ers get hit with a Epson 8100 and it looked pretty damn good! I can postulate that a Black Diamond .8 would excel under the output of a Epson 8350, or kill people with a Optoma 1080. And the Screenies!


So listen and realize I'm NOT trying to discredit BD products. Well, I do think the design behind the 1.4 version is a bit misplaced since it essentially opens the door for side lighting to have more of a detrimental effect than the .8 ever allowed.


I'll repeat one more time. Effectively shown images showing the BD line up's strongest suits will impress more people than will drive away those who see and understand some lighting tricks are being indulged in (...please, I mean no offense...)


If that means your changing out those lights for actual spots, and aiming them effectively, by Gosh and by Golly Gee, you should do it! Light up that room! But do so because you want to show people how to take advantage of using a BD Screen for what it does best.


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19738857
> 
> 
> I still see a "cone" in almost all your pictures Fraisa.
> 
> 
> I'm sure MM's solutions are as good or better. If I had to do something I guess you're all providing something. But still none of these shots really hold a candle to a decent screen (or piece of lamenant) in a light controlled room. At the same time, if you're satisfied with reduced contrast or brightness or restricted viewing cones a whole new world of "watchable" opens for you. I can get any/all of that stuff without a $3k screen.



I suggest you Demo a screen before dismissing it what you are seeing is a combination of vignetting from camera lens and distance from screen + how the screen scatters ambient light away from the camera. Look at my spotlight pics to see the scatter in action.


Stand as far back as you can fraisa may reduce this barely visible cone.


----------



## fraisa

When taking ambient light pics i cant go back any further as i have a

Over head bulk head that doesn't have any light.,

So what happens even though my room is Really bright my camera doesn't pic it up

Some time over the weekend i will post a pic infront of the bulk head and behind it to illustrate what i am describing.

As even for taking screen shots in high ambient light..

MSMCutter these pics are not the easiest to take ,

it is very hard you have so much light coming in that can effect your camera

its not the easiest task to do..

And again that cone you speak of is just slight...

Understand that when you post something there will always be a critic.

..

Again i have set the standard regarding an ambient light screen shot..

I have the Title i am the champ..

If anyone thinks they can go toe to toe with this type of screen shot,

go dust off the camera and come step into my Ring....lol

Happy New Year...

BTW more film pics are coming....


THats my Bulk Head..


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/19739061
> 
> 
> I suggest you Demo a screen before dismissing it what you are seeing is a combination of vignetting from camera lens and distance from screen + how the screen scatters ambient light away from the camera. Look at my spotlight pics to see the scatter in action.
> 
> 
> Stand as far back as you can fraisa may reduce this barely visible cone.



msmcutter,


On the point I gotta agree. No matter what else, very few of the images any of us has shown as of late are intended to compete with Matte White surfaces in dedicated Theaters. Hey...you'd not even see an image on a Matte White screen on virtually any of the images fraisa, Kevin or I have posted.


But turn the lights off and .....wow.


A piece of WA-DW would be a terrible thing to try to watch under anything less than basically ideal circumstances, and it would be unfair to point a finger at it and say, "See how bad it looks".... because common sense says that's not where it's strongest suit lies.


Yet compared side to side in a Dark Room, a BD 1.4 isn't going to give up a single Foot lambert to a WA-DW...of that I'm certain. Yet oops, someone is coming into the Theater...you don't want them to trip with that plate of food they are carrying. And they ask you to leave the lights up a bit so they can see what they are doing / eating.


Do you whine? Do you lament the total loss of image dynamics because of the increased ambient light? No Sir! Not with the right Screen Everything still looks good while you wait for the Lout to choke on his sandwich and then you can turn the lights back down.


We've talked about comparing Apples to Apples. That's not completely easy but we are trying to the best we can. I mentioned before comparing a White to a Gray is an exercise in futility...unless your simply trying to make the point about the differences between them.


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19739134
> 
> 
> ..
> 
> Again i have set the standard regarding an ambient light screen shot..
> 
> I have the Title i am the champ..
> 
> If anyone thinks they can go toe to toe with this type of screen shot,
> 
> go dust off the camera and come step into my Ring....lol
> 
> Happy New Year...
> 
> BTW more film pics are coming....



Oh my.


PM me to arrange a Neutral Corner (different thread) where we can duel this one out.









Be advised that both lighting and composition will be strictly adhered to by the participating parties, matching PJs, content and lighting levels as precisely as possible. No compromises...no crutches.


Well OK...you can use a crutch as you hobble away afterward.


----------



## Kevin 3000

MississippiMan


I can only judge on what you post and so far i am not inpressed with the

level of contrast "screen" with the amunt of Ambient light "room" in your pics

others may disagree, just look at fraisa latest bright room shots. I own a BD so i know what i see and this shows in the pics i post just showing it the best i can as an owner nothing more.


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19738857
> 
> 
> I still see a "cone" in almost all your pictures Fraisa.



You can be sure that this problem, along with any others that people notice, will be declared _the camera's problem._ It's always a problem with the camera, never the screen. The screen is flawless.


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/19739061
> 
> 
> I suggest you Demo a screen before dismissing it what you are seeing is a combination of vignetting from camera lens and distance from screen + how the screen scatters ambient light away from the camera. Look at my spotlight pics to see the scatter in action.
> 
> 
> Stand as far back as you can fraisa may reduce this barely visible cone.



If by "scattering light" you mean having a wider viewing cone because the light is scattered more than reflected straight back, you should get much more an indication of that by taking the shots in the dark and from a far a distance away from the scree as possible. The sides of the walls should light up.


But conversely...isn't that opposite as to why the 1.4 is designed as it is, to try to prevent that by being a bit (...just a bit...) more retro-reflective, thus higher in gain... and in being so, work to reject "interfering sideways light", be it ambient or reflected?


That's a little confusing there for some of the uninitiated to grasp. But I do understand the premise behind your statement because every screen I make is supposed to do exactly that. Have darkness, gain, and light rejection all in one package....at least to varying degrees.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/19739178
> 
> 
> Oh my.
> 
> 
> PM me to arrange a Neutral Corner (different thread) where we can duel this one out.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Be advised that both lighting and composition will be strictly adhered to by the participating parties, matching PJs, content and lighting levels as precisely as possible. No compromises...no crutches.
> 
> 
> Well OK...you can use a crutch as you hobble away afterward.



Hey Miss,,,

I don't take Crutches to the Ring ,

I grab the tables under the ring to put my opponent thru it ....lol

ha ha

And the crowd will cheer

We want tables.... da da da da...

We what tables.... da da da da

We want tables.......

ha ha


Hey maybe we could turn this into a ppv event and both of us make millions,

then we could buy MSM cutter a real screen...lol

ha ha


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *karlsch* /forum/post/19739217
> 
> 
> You can be sure that this problem, along with any others that people notice, will be declared _the camera's problem._ It's always a problem with the camera, never the screen. The screen is flawless.



Again

I lay down the open challenge ,

the champ is hear...


Take some screen shots in the same ambient light

the title is on the line.










same light under bulk head









normal


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/19739179
> 
> 
> MississippiMan
> 
> 
> I can only judge on what you post and so far i am not inpressed with the
> 
> level of contrast "screen" with the amunt of Ambient light "room" in your pics
> 
> others may disagree, just look at fraisa latest bright room shots. I own a BD so i know what i see and this shows in the pics i post just showing it the best i can as an owner nothing more.



Well then, if I go out and take a slew of HDTV content shots, will that make a difference? You betcha it will. And BTW, look at how most of the colors in those shots are skewered. That's a trait of that particular screen when it's getting blasted by over driven content...and HDTV is nothing if not over driven compared to actual Film content.


You yourself had the right approach using darker Film content, and I have to think you yourself would have to say the same thing then about your own images in comparison to fraisa's. So why bring up those differences when you yourself commented about comparing "Like to Like"?


Now if you REALLY want me to go down that road...I can, but that is not my intent. At best all it will be is a *"Hey! Look at that!"* moment, not conclusive in any real way...and conclusive results should be what will serve this thread and the BD screens in the best stead.


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19739243
> 
> 
> 
> Hey maybe we could turn this into a ppv event and both of us make millions,
> 
> then we could buy MSM cutter a real screen...lol
> 
> ha ha



Now that's cold.


msmCutter is only stating things as he sees them, and if he's watching a WA-DW screen in controlled lighting, he's seeing a pretty nice image.


But when the lights go up?


OW.


(...I'm leaving now to go to 2 different locations, one with a 84" Screen that is pretty dark, and the 122" location seen just a few post back. HDTV will be on the menu. I'll only post a few, and afterward we should move on/away from all that. )


----------



## msmCutter




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/19739138
> 
> 
> msmcutter,
> 
> 
> On the point I gotta agree. No matter what else, very few of the images any of us has shown as of late are intended to compete with Matte White surfaces in dedicated Theaters. Hey...you'd not even see an image on a Matte White screen on virtually any of the images fraisa, Kevin or I have posted.
> 
> 
> But turn the lights off and .....wow.
> 
> 
> A piece of WA-DW would be a terrible thing to try to watch under anything less than basically ideal circumstances, and it would be unfair to point a finger at it and say, "See how bad it looks".... because common sense says that's not where it's strongest suit lies.
> 
> 
> Yet compared side to side in a Dark Room, a BD 1.4 isn't going to give up a single Foot lambert to a WA-DW...of that I'm certain. Yet oops, someone is coming into the Theater...you don't want them to trip with that plate of food they are carrying. And they ask you to leave the lights up a bit so they can see what they are doing / eating.
> 
> 
> Do you whine? Do you lament the total loss of image dynamics because of the increased ambient light? No Sir! Not with the right Screen Everything still looks good while you wait for the Lout to choke on his sandwich and then you can turn the lights back down.
> 
> 
> We've talked about comparing Apples to Apples. That's not completely easy but we are trying to the best we can. I mentioned before comparing a White to a Gray is an exercise in futility...unless your simply trying to make the point about the differences between them.



I'm cool with the product so long as it is promoted the right way. It seems to me like a lot of flash and sizzle and not enough steak. Many would like you to think it performes as well, perhaps better, then a truly controlled room with a matte white screen. They'd make you think it looks as good even with the lights on or the sun streaming in from the bay window or sliding glass door. But really, it doesn't look "good". It just looks "better" and only during the worst conditions. Maybe it's just me but if I'm spending all kinds of loot building a room and buying equipment, I'm not going to be okay with "viewable" or "okay". It's got to match/beat fixed panel plasma/LCD and be bigger or I'm feeling I wasted the money.


----------



## msmCutter

I'd do WA-DW screen if I didn't want AT. AT screens have even more light issues...


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/19739297
> 
> 
> Now that's cold.
> 
> 
> msmCutter is only stating things as he sees them, and if he's watching a WA-DW screen in controlled lighting, he's seeing a pretty nice image.
> 
> 
> But when the lights go up?
> 
> 
> OW.
> 
> 
> (...I'm leaving now to go to 2 different locations, one with a 84" Screen that is pretty dark, and the 122" location seen just a few post back. HDTV will be on the menu. I'll only post a few, and afterward we should move on/away from all that. )



Would really be interested in anyone else posting screen shots that match this high ambient light level....


Anyway have fun guys ,

got a get together to plan for and if i dont get off this computer my wife is going to have my head,

Just hope i didnt tell everyone to bring potato salad...









..

Everyone have a safe and happy new yrs eve...


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19739341
> 
> 
> I'd do WA-DW screen if I didn't want AT. AT screens have even more light issues...



Would be intrested in seeing how your screen handles light scatter,

As you can see i have a White ceiling and have posted a pic a page back that showed ceiling light scatter....

Alot of steak when it comes to reflecting Light...


And I do like me a good Steak but its got to be Medium Well.....

But since my Heart attack i dont get it as much....

Damn sure miss Alberta Steak ..


----------



## msmCutter




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *karlsch* /forum/post/19604186
> 
> 
> It's good to know that you are a seller of BDII screens. That makes a difference.
> 
> 
> I am just an end user who bought one. But being an end user, I am in a good position to judge whether claims made for this screen are valid or deceptive or sometimes even dishonest. All I have to do is look at my screen.
> 
> 
> Lets get back to the pictures you posted that are supposed to be in a room with a lot of ambient light including a side window (I commented that the room appears dark, you claimed is was your camera's fault). Your description: Here ya Go Full Ambient light SHots taken during the day... All Pot lights on Side window blinds up. The pictures are in this post:
> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...postcount=1474
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a picture of my screen with light coming from a side window:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Notice that the light coming from the side window causes the speakers and other things to throw shadows.
> 
> 
> Now look at your pictures again. There are no shadows that would be there if there truly were light coming from a side window. Did you accidentally post a picture of a dark room with no light coming from a side window or is it your camera's fault again?



Even my bare wall was as good as this (your screen) in ambient conditions. None of my present setup has to deal with this. I've got a black room. Black cloth over linacoustic RC. I don't do compromise. I'd wager your screen would beat mine in a scenerio with true ambient light just like maybe the shamWOW! would beat my %100 Cotton made in America towel for drying a countertop. But really, I'm not seeing your product as a magic bullet that will all of a sudden allow me to do something I couldn't before. It's perhaps a slight upgrade but hardly a revolution in projector capability.


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/19739270
> 
> 
> Well then, if I go out and take a slew of HDTV content shots, will that make a difference? You betcha it will. And BTW, look at how most of the colors in those shots are skewered. That's a trait of that particular screen when it's getting blasted by over driven content...and HDTV is nothing if not over driven compared to actual Film content.
> 
> 
> You yourself had the right approach using darker Film content, and I have to think you yourself would have to say the same thing then about your own images in comparison to fraisa's. So why bring up those differences when you yourself commented about comparing "Like to Like"?
> 
> 
> Now if you REALLY want me to go down that road...I can, but that is not my intent. At best all it will be is a *"Hey! Look at that!"* moment, not conclusive in any real way...and conclusive results should be what will serve this thread and the BD screens in the best stead.



Miss

Just remember what thread you are in and why you are here. Fraisa has set the benchmark so the ball is in your court....you want to playball.......we will be watching.....at this point in time if i wanted a new ambient controlled screen the .8 would be it..........amaze us with your years of taking screenshots you must have something..


Reply if you must i will not read it just looking for samples....


Happy New Year


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19739482
> 
> 
> Even my bare wall was as good as this (your screen) in ambient conditions. None of my present setup has to deal with this. I've got a black room. Black cloth over linacoustic RC. I don't do compromise. I'd wager your screen would beat mine in a scenerio with true ambient light just like maybe the shamWOW! would beat my %100 Cotton made in America towel for drying a countertop. But really, I'm not seeing your product as a magic bullet that will all of a sudden allow me to do something I couldn't before. It's perhaps a slight upgrade but hardly a revolution in projector capability.



Okay you have to compare apples to apples,

I have Taupe walls and a white ceiling...

With your screen in my room i could land a plan at the amount of light that would be on my wall and ceiling...

in a dark ambient setting....

BTW

my wife would kill me if my room was black....


----------



## msmCutter

I don't even know what color "Taupe" is










You guys (BD + MM) clearly are doing the best you can with what you have. I appreciate your pursuit. It's just not there yet. I personally wouldn't pay for "not there yet" and I don't appreciate the marketing/hype about it being in the same league as ShamWOW! (side note, I bet it makes a wiked screen surface. That thing is amazing in the infomercials). But like infomercials, it doesn't seem to work the same for many people in real life. See Karlsch. There's not much worse then feeling like a sucker after a $3k purchase.


So word to those looking: Understand the limitations of the real world and that you can't beat physics.


Sorry about your wife. Mine gave me the room since I gave her the baby. She made me pay for the room too... I'm such a sucker.


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19739792
> 
> 
> I don't even know what color "Taupe" is
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You guys (BD + MM) clearly are doing the best you can with what you have. I appreciate your pursuit. It's just not there yet. I personally wouldn't pay for "not there yet" and I don't appreciate the marketing/hype about it being in the same league as ShamWOW! (side note, I bet it makes a wiked screen surface. That thing is amazing in the infomercials). But like infomercials, it doesn't seem to work the same for many people in real life. See Karlsch. There's not much worse then feeling like a sucker after a $3k purchase..



Well its a good job myself and others are showing it like it is the 1.4 can work if you understand its properties and make things happen, not just fill the room with light from obtuse angles or there abouts and wonder why the picture is washedout.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19739792
> 
> 
> I don't even know what color "Taupe" is
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You guys (BD + MM) clearly are doing the best you can with what you have. I appreciate your pursuit. It's just not there yet. I personally wouldn't pay for "not there yet" and I don't appreciate the marketing/hype about it being in the same league as ShamWOW! (side note, I bet it makes a wiked screen surface. That thing is amazing in the infomercials). But like infomercials, it doesn't seem to work the same for many people in real life. See Karlsch. There's not much worse then feeling like a sucker after a $3k purchase.
> 
> 
> So word to those looking: Understand the limitations of the real world and that you can't beat physics.
> 
> 
> Sorry about your wife. Mine gave me the room since I gave her the baby. She made me pay for the room too... I'm such a sucker.



MSM again take some screen shots ,

and post them

I am legand BluRay

18.52 sec scene

I will do the same

then lets talk

I will post some in ambient and dark light.

Let your shot do the talking...


Now i gave my wife the babys 13 yrs ago

that *hit doesnt last

now if i dont get back to work she is going to beat me....lol

laterz


Edit

Here is the screen shot with ambient light

before you say there is a cone,

the actual image of that scene is faded in the corners...

Okay i have stepped up with ambient pic

and challenge anyone for the title in this much ambient light,

will post a dark pic of the same scene tomorrow,(fyi dark screen shots are so eazy to do)..


----------



## dovercat

What do screen shots prove?

I have always read they are a unreliable way of judging what the picture quality will be.


Since the Black Diamond is I think retro reflective how well it performs is going to be completely dependent on the setup, projector/screen/viewer/other light sources positions. I think the demo videos showing the screen to best advantage are purely marketing and comparing it to a standard matt white screen completely pointless. The style of the marketing, seeing is believing this revolutionary production, I think is counter productive building up huge expectations. More modest claims and getting the product reviewed more by forums etc... would I think be more beneficial to direct sales than the marketing hype. Which seems to just encourage a backlash.


Given the high price it strikes me the target customers are probably people who are paying installers. So like most things primarily sold through custom installers price is more indicative of exclusivity than bang for the buck. It strikes me as a product completely at the opposite end of the market to DIY solutions.


If buying for a self install I would primarily be put off by the returns policy. The 50% re-stocking fee and postage costs for opened and undamaged return within 30 days. As how well it works in a particular setup and how happy you are with the cost vs performance is completely down to individual expectations and setup. There are simply too few places to demo projectors or screens or dealers willing to let you take home and trial. The returns policy makes it too risky.


I live in the UK where return of goods purchased via the internet from UK companies are covered by distant selling law, and credit card legislation. So if the product is available via a UK based distributor it would be less of a gamble. As the returns policy would be a lot more customer friendly.


----------



## MississippiMan

Hello.


I got snookered today...locked out of both locations. Seems the owners think it's a Holiday or sumpthin'










All ya all will just have ta wait 'till next year. (Mon) for some additional shots from my direction.


Dovercat,


The people who rail the most about the worthlessness of Screen Shots are those who don't take them, can't take decent ones, and /or don't have a Clue how to effectively duplicate what they see in front of them using whatever medium the have.


And even if they are a Pro, it comes down to having people believe their assurances of "WYSIWYG".


All the people ranting against Screenies do seem to garner more attention than the ones who approve of them....but that's the Internet. People are empowered to be as crass or as disbelieving as they care to be. And others tend to notice a squaling Kid more than a quiet little angle.


So in the end it's all about trust....and when someone does something to dispell that trust...it seldom is reclaimed on a Forum where people have long memories.


That is why years ago we came up with steadfast rules for Screen Shot taking. It helped, but only so far as how many nasty individuals wanted to post disclaiming the things.(...not referencing you here, mind you!!!)


So Screenies play well to those looking for something visual to latch onto. Some are good. Some are bad. And some deserve to be burned at the stake for heresy.


Really, most can tell when a shot speaks truth...least wise to some degree. In this instance, showing as accurately as possible what the screens do in worst case scenarios is intended to help convince others that it will do great in more accommodating circumstances.


Well, that's the plan. Sometimes it can go terribly wrong.


----------



## pb_maxxx

hmmm....


given the PJ you have... and the incandescent light present... i find the screenshots you've posted are very good... just not _amazing_.


in fact, if i'm gonna fork over 3 grand for a 100" screen, i'd expect the screen to handle most anything incandescent that i throw at it... within reason.


now...


let's see how that 3 grand puppy handles broad daylight... with maybe even a little bit of sun reflecting off the screen


----------



## Lawguy

I have yet to see anyone post shots from any material, DIY or commercial, that look anywhere near as good as Fraisa's with a similar amount of ambient light in the room. By "good" I mean having acceptable contrast - no washed out blacks.


To say that a screen is not good because you can't bring it outside at noon on a sunny day and fire it with a 300 lumen projector is crazy. Of course, putting the screen in direct sunlight will wash it out. You have to deal with sunlight with flat panels also.


The key to the Black Diamond is that it permits good quality front projection in rooms with a lot of light. It really does this in ways that other screens that I have seen do not. The more attention to controlling light that you pay, the better your results will be - and you will be able to go about your business (reading, eating, playing, whatever) without fumbling around in the dark.


This is with the .8 version, b/t/w. I have not seen the 1.4 on anything but a sample.


Yes. This screen is expensive. So are other screens. Do people hate it because they want to find a reason not to have to think about spending the money? Putting cost aside, I bet that many more people would own one or at least give it a more serious look.


----------



## airscapes

It would be fun to have a space shuttle and take the gang up for a few spins around the the world wouldn't it? Price to value has to be considered firsts since very few have all the money! Perspective is important, lots of very good inventions and products, but many are beyond the normal consumers reach. People put things down that they can not afford and can not see the value in. Don't take it personal, unless you are trying to sell the products and make your living off the item. People hate the HP cause they can not ceiling mount their projector, "Oh well" looks great at my house with the projector on the table.. do I care they don't like it, NOPE. Get with it guys.. it is just a screen and it has a target placement (non light controlled room) and it works well for the purpose, just to much money for the value it brings to be all that popular. Just my 2 cents and will step away cause I don't need a new screen, Happy New Year!


----------



## dovercat




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/19742250
> 
> 
> Hello.
> 
> 
> Dovercat,
> 
> 
> The people who rail the most about the worthlessness of Screen Shots are those who don't take them, can't take decent ones, and /or don't have a Clue how to effectively duplicate what they see in front of them using whatever medium the have.
> 
> 
> And even if they are a Pro, it comes down to having people believe their assurances of "WYSIWYG".
> 
> 
> All the people ranting against Screenies do seem to garner more attention than the ones who approve of them....but that's the Internet. People are empowered to be as crass or as disbelieving as they care to be. And others tend to notice a squaling Kid more than a quiet little angle.(



I thought the reason why people view screen shots as unreliable was because of the limitations of the camera.


I can not take a photo of a grey scale ramp 0-100% with 5% steps, showing all the bars I can see in person. My camera is incapable of capturing the full contrast range in a single image. So my camera photos are going to misrepresent on screen contrast. Color balance is likewise effected by the camera, and apparent image sharpness down to if I used a tripod, exposure time and how good the camera lens.


I disagree that screen shots are proof of how a screen performs. With the same screen it would be perfectly possible to take photos showing it to be wonderful and terrible. I would always want to see a projector or screen in person if possible. Sight unseen I would put just as much faith in technical specs, independent reviews and other forum members opinions as pictures showing off a product to best advantage or highlighting its weaknesses.


----------



## dovercat




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/19743188
> 
> 
> Yes. This screen is expensive. So are other screens. Do people hate it because they want to find a reason not to have to think about spending the money? Putting cost aside, I bet that many more people would own one or at least give it a more serious look.



Along with the cost I would say the marketing style and hyperbolae, enables projectors to be used with the lights on with no sacrifice in image quality, improves contrast by 900% even in black dark room, along with the returns policy, is the reason why I would literarily need to see it to believe it lives up to the hype and the asking price.

Too many products making similar claims have gone before.


If money was no object and I was using a custom installer who said it was the best screen to use in my setup then yeah I would get it.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dovercat* /forum/post/19743260
> 
> 
> Along with the cost I would say the marketing style and hyperbolae, enables projectors to be used with the lights on with no sacrifice in image quality, improves contrast by 900% even in black dark room, along with the returns policy, is the reason why I would literarily need to see it to believe it lives up to the hype and the asking price.
> 
> Too many products making similar claims have gone before.
> 
> 
> If money was no object and I was using a custom installer who said it was the best screen to use in my setup then yeah I would get it.



The truth is, if you use this screen (at least the .8 gain version) and take reasonable (not extreme) measures to control light, you can watch with the lights on with very little sacrifice in image quality. By reasonable measures, I mean two things: (1) proper placement of man-made lighting so that it is not shining directly on the screen and (2) control of the light of the sun through window treatments so that it is not shining directly on the screen. I would do many of these same things when using a flat panel for best image quality. Also, you do not need to pay as much attention to blacking out walls and ceilings as you might with a conventional screen. So, you can place this screen in many kinds of rooms that would not work well with other screens. There are also benefits to the Black Diamond when all the lights are out and the room is dark


Of course, choosing the proper screen size for the projector and the amount of light in the room is also important.


People accept the limitations of other screens: to get the most out of a High Power screen you should shelf mount the projector, for example. Some screens require a ceiling mount. To get the most out of a Black Diamond, you should take some reasonable light control measures.


Screen Innovation's products are American made and that may be part of why they are expensive (although their prices are comparable to other premium screens). I think their business model is designed to serve dealers and the custom installer situation that you mention. The might be able to sell more screens and lower prices if they had a direct-to-consumer business model, but that is speculation on my part. But, with a direct-to-consumer model, SI would surely deal with support issues from people who are disappointed because they put their screen opposite their bay window and they wonder why they are unhappy with the results.


----------



## andrios




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> The truth is, if you use this screen (at least the .8 gain version) and take reasonable (not extreme) measures to control light, you can watch with the lights on with very little sacrifice in image quality. By reasonable measures, I mean two things: (1) proper placement of man-made lighting so that it is not shining directly on the screen and (2) control of the light of the sun through window treatments so that it is not shining directly on the screen. I would do many of these same things when using a flat panel for best image quality. Also, you do not need to pay as much attention to blacking out walls and ceilings as you might with a conventional screen. So, you can place this screen in many kinds of rooms that would not work well with other screens. There are also benefits to the Black Diamond when all the lights are out and the room is dark
> 
> 
> Of course, choosing the proper screen size for the projector and the amount of light in the room is also important.
> 
> 
> People accept the limitations of other screens: to get the most out of a High Power screen you should shelf mount the projector, for example. Some screens require a ceiling mount. To get the most out of a Black Diamond, you should take some reasonable light control measures.
> 
> 
> Screen Innovation's products are American made and that may be part of why they are expensive (although their prices are comparable to other premium screens). I think their business model is designed to serve dealers and the custom installer situation that you mention. The might be able to sell more screens and lower prices if they had a direct-to-consumer business model, but that is speculation on my part. But, with a direct-to-consumer model, SI would surely deal with support issues from people who are disappointed because they put their screen opposite their bay window and they wonder why they are unhappy with the results.



One of the most important parts of this screen you left out is that its self masking. I watch lots of sports and I game in 16:9, when the lights go off my movies are usually 2:40 and I HATE BLACK BARS!!


----------



## Kevin 3000

JVC RS10 610 Lamp Hours.

BDII 1.4 110" 200 watts of Halogen Lamos 4x40 above camera unshaded.

White Balance for Halogens needs attention but getting there.

Showing a good representation of bright room conditions it goes without saying in real life its 15-20% more dynamic as the cameras dynamic range is limited.


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* 
JVC RS10 610 Lamp Hours.

BDII 1.4 110" 200 watts of Halogen Lamos 4x40 above camera unshaded.

White Balance for Halogens needs attention but getting there.

Showing a good representation of bright room conditions it goes without saying in real life its 15-20% more dynamic as the cameras dynamic range is limited.









Nice Job,

even at that brightness you still dont loose colour detail


----------



## Kevin 3000

Tweaked the white balance and shot this tester for my screen bright room same as before.











Slooooow down Fraisa you post junkie










Monday tomorrow samples from MississippiMan hopefully.......


----------



## fraisa

Here is some shots from the last

Ep of the Red Zone this Season...

All Live Shots....


----------



## prof55

Over 40 screenshots from the same member deleted; no need to bury the thread.


Please post a few that are representative of your point, and leave it at that.


Thanks,

Garry

AVS Moderator


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *prof55* /forum/post/19751257
> 
> 
> Over 40 screenshots from the same member deleted; no need to bury the thread.
> 
> 
> Please post a few that are representative of your point, and leave it at that.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Garry
> 
> AVS Moderator



As Per the Above,

Here is just a couple of Pics to highlight the black Level of the Black Diamond..

Blacks Are Black...

and I cant see the frame .....


----------



## msmCutter

How about I post screen shots from Stewart or Screen Excellence or Da-lite? They'll all have better image quality than a BD.


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19753794
> 
> 
> How about I post screen shots from Stewart or Screen Excellence or Da-lite? They'll all have better image quality than a BD.



I would like to see some. May get go see MississippiMan`s ambient screenshots aswell today


----------



## markrubin

posts deleted: beware or you may be asked to leave the thread


----------



## fraisa

Is SI listed to being at CES?


----------



## msmCutter

I just did a quick search. Here's a shot of your projector on a Graywolf:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...092012&page=11 (post 644)


Here's another no BD set...
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...092012&page=14 (post 806)


That thread is pretty full of great shots on other screens.


----------



## msmCutter

Here is the screenshot war thread. Check out any over overclkr's shots. They're all on an AT screen and put your BD to shame:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...831&highlight= 


No bad cones. No restricted viewing angles. No sparklies. No problem ambient light.


----------



## Kevin 3000

Quote:

Originally Posted by *msmCutter* 
Here is the screenshot war thread. Check out any over overclkr's shots. They're all on an AT screen and put your BD to shame:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...831&highlight= 


No bad cones. No restricted viewing angles. No sparklies. No problem ambient light.
I thought you were going to show some new samples of bright room scenes of the mentioned screens? Not links to dark room conditions?


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19754700
> 
> 
> Here is the screenshot war thread. Check out any over overclkr's shots. They're all on an AT screen and put your BD to shame:
> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...831&highlight=
> 
> 
> No bad cones. No restricted viewing angles. No sparklies. No problem ambient light.



Yeah but..........*


*......he's using a G90 Stack set up. Twin 9" 3-Gunner CRTs.









It should be able to drive him around on Saturday Night to the Clubs for all it costs to reach a performance level most any decent 1080p / Screen set up can accomplish today. And besides that, I'm betting he has a very expensive Video Scaler/Multiplier on that system (...he has to...it's mandatory.)


In 2007 it was the Bomb. In 2011, it's just....well, it's still one great set-up.


I'm a'gonna post a few shots over there...some true Eye Candy as it were.

Probably all Epson 8350 shots...you know...a PJ that cost less than 1/20th a *single* "New" G90 did in 2007.


But first...I'm about to sail off to a couple of locations to get'ter dun.


Hang on to that Cardboard Burger King Crown, frasia. The Usurper cometh.


----------



## msmCutter

He also uses a nice digital JVC (I think an RS1) - but whatever the projector we're talking about best screen right? The best screen is a matte white screen in a light controlled room. No other screen of any kind can match the results. Claiming there is a product that presently can manage the feat is ridiculous. We've seen here from actual users that light control of some kind is always required. So long as the topic is broached with that understanding, I'm cool with the conversation.


A BD screen will, at best, allow you to manage some specific ambient light problems. It's not some magic bullet that will make an impossible situation possible. It does this at the cost of very obvious PQ limitations.


Then we get into a value judgement. Is a screen with such glarring faults worth the MSRP? Perhaps to some. After reading this thread, I'd have a hard time pulling the trigger even if it was priced like an Elite. I'd rather spend my money on controlling the light.


----------



## programmergeek

msmcutter that is kind of strong. I have several screens in our demo room and I find the best screen is the one that matches the projector and room. I do have total light control and I have gone from white screens to gray screens and have a BD coming in so we will see. However sometimes the gray screen is good sometimes it hides shades of black. Sometimes the white screen is too washed out, although now better with the higher contrast projectors. I think screens have a long way to go and white is not the end all. Light control in the screen is a big step in the right direction for a lot of applications. I am glad to see however one company pushing the bar and introducing some cutting edge technology to the market. We will have to see how it plays out.


----------



## dovercat




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19756183
> 
> 
> The best screen is a matte white screen in a light controlled room. No other screen of any kind can match the results. Claiming there is a product that presently can manage the feat is ridiculous.



Even in a light controlled batcave you get room reflections, reducing on screen contrast.

I would of thought a correctly setup directional gain limited viewing arc screen was better than a matte screen as more light from the projector is reflected toward the viewer, less all over the room.

I would of thought a higher lumen projector and a gray screen is better than a lower lumen projector and a white screen as it would lower the amount room reflections reduce contrast.

So the best setup would be a high lumen projector with a directional gain gray screen.


----------



## GetGray

Unless you have a videlo velvet room, and you don a velvet robe, and you have a tan







, I agree. I prefer extra lumens and a little gain over matt white. .


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19756183
> 
> 
> The best screen is a matte white screen in a light controlled room. No other screen of any kind can match the results. Claiming there is a product that presently can manage the feat is ridiculous. We've seen here from actual users that light control of some kind is always required. So long as the topic is broached with that understanding, I'm cool with the conversation.





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *programmergeek* /forum/post/19758574
> 
> 
> msmcutter that is kind of strong.



Let me clarify programmergeek's comment;



That's just crazy!









(...but we must be glad if you "cool" with the coversation as long as it follows your stated reasoning, right?







)


Even with controlled lighting...or no lights whatsoever, the Contrast value of the PJ, it's lumen output, the proximity of the Room's reflective surfaces and their degree of reflectivity, and the quality of the Screen itself, all will combine to determine the ability of ANY screen to accomplish the desired goal....the best image possible under a given situation.


Even a JVC RS40 hitting a Stewart ST130 will look pretty bad along it's edges if the Screen is placed too close to the side walls or ceiling. And suppose it simply MUST be in those positions? Because it's "OK" to consider a Matte White surface as being the best screen for a light controlled room, the viewer should just deal with reflective washout?


And if the quality of the Screen is any indicator of value/Performance, it's a stretch to consider a ST130, one of the best...if not THE Best reference white Screens around as being any less a financial hit than Elite VMax let alone A BD II.


So "OK", I gotta agree that under ideal circumstances, with a 90K:1 Native Contrast PJ, an image shot onto a 1.3 gain White Screen will look pretty fabulous. Then again, a Matte White sprayed Wall will almost assuredly garner just as good a review from 98% of all who see such.


But introduce just "ONE" adverse aspect of Room conditions/ Lighting control, Contrast deficiency...and it all goes up in wisp of speculative end results. I've installed hundreds of FP Theater rooms and Family Rooms , in every imaginable circumstance and a few you'd find hard to fathom as being in any manner a sane environment. Basically, the type Screen that's best in ALL of those situations is a highly reflective Gray Surface.


A White Screen has actually been more of a crutch for a PJ to lean on...as has been turning out all the lights. Necessary evils that have led a great many Significant Others to say "Not in my Family Room your not!", or others to say, "Will you turn off the light....PLEASE!"


While there is a LOT of references to "Ya Gotta Getch one a'dese!" on this thread, and some, "This is the Best thing since Memory Foam Mattresses." statements, the emphasis is actually on illustrating the strong points of what ambient light screens can do in...well, ambient light. To illustrate that best, showing a lot of images that are taken in insane lighting levels can illustrate that just about a much worthiness as showing a RS40 hitting a ST130 in absolute darkness..


Both are done in circumstances that one or the other cannot say are their strongest suits.


In this day and age we live in, more and more "Normals" who do not have dedicated Theaters are considering and going with "The Really BIG Picture". The environments that pertains to dismisses Matte White as an option about 95% of the time.


Really though, just as fraisa should not come onto a Elune Vision thread and post missives about how a BD Screen can outperform a Matte White screen in ambient light, neither should someone else come onto the SI-BD thread and post about how a Matte White will look better in a dark Room setting.


Besides not being an effective comparison, it just might not be actually correct to say so dependent upon many factors not related to actual Light control.


It's also OT.











Now why hasn't MMan posted his Screenies?


Because the Klutz of a Client fell through the Attic Ceiling over the week end! He almost took out the Epson 8350 too!


Fortunately, he survived the 12' plummet onto a Tile Floor with just a couple cut Finger Tips, but it was close as he narrowly missed bouncing off a Kitchen Island. And considering the gentleman is 72 yrs old...he's a study in being VERY lucky indeed.


Not so much me, as I had to drive 30 miles to find this:











So this is the environment my up coming screenies will be shot in.











Certainly not your typical Theater Room that calls for a Matte White Screen, lemmie tell ya!


(I see a few others have posted their own take on Matte White vs Gray while I hunt-& pecked out my own contribution. Good stuff.)


----------



## R Harkness

I also disagree with generalisations that there is a "best screen." In the real, practical world that most of us live in we are dealing with compromises and that includes those of us who've gone to lengths in combating room reflections. There are just too many other factors in the mix, in terms of room/projector/screen/seating angle interactions to simply say a white screen will be best.


I originally wasn't going to go with such extreme room treatment as I was making a living room into my home theater. So naturally I investigated specialty screens (gray, gray with gain, black diamond type screens etc) to keep contrast. After doing so I realised that I'm personally sensitive to the compromises each of those brought to the table. So I decided to go with a white screen and treat my room heavily to avoid room reflections. But even doing so it's not perfect and you have to have a pitch black bat cave to fully cut out any room effects...and a white screen is going to suffer from room reflections more than the specialty screens. Even in a very, very controlled environment it's at least theoretically possible a specialty screen from the right seating will maintain better contrast.


Even within the white screens you have to choose your compromise. A neutral 1.0 gain white screen would be "best" in terms of viewing angles, reducing hot-spotting and having lower possibility of visible screen texture. However, with my JVC projector on a neutral gain screen it would limit my screen size in order to get an image I consider bright enough. So I went with a screen with a bit more gain, the Stewart ST-130. Now I can have the image size I wanted. But it's not without compromise. Sometimes I can spot a bit of the optical coating in action. I'd rather not have that, but I look at the trade-off: It's rare enough compared to the gains in image size flexibility that I'll take that compromise. There are also issues having to do with our eye-brain perception of picture quality. It's well known that (within certain parameters) increasing the brightness of an image (all other things like contrast ratio being equal) will increase our perception of sharpness and often contrast as well. The brighter image often looks sharper and more dimensional (I see this often when I open up my projector's iris). So often a screen with some gain can look "better" in those parameters than a neutral gain screen. That's what I see even with my ST-130 over the neutral gain screens I've tried. (For my set up). Yet in other circumstances, for instance with a projector that has poorer black levels, a darker gray screen could make the image look "better" by lowering the image brightness, thereby lowering the dark areas of the image and making them look darker and more solid. That can aid an images density and dimensionality (which is why gray screens were so popular, paired with earlier digital projectors that couldn't project convincing black levels).


So there are always things to consider.


If someone has a true bat cave I'm not sure I can think of reasons for a specialty gray or "black" screen over a white screen. Except perhaps the interaction with a particular projector (if cutting the brightness of a certain projector will be to your advantage, a negative gain screen may work better. Having a flexible aperture setting on a projector, like the JVC, can bring in interactions of changing ANSI/On-Off contrast as you adjust the aperture, and depending on which you want to emphasise can influence how bright a screen you would want). But in most real world scenarios, even in lots of very light controlled rooms, we are dealing with compromises so "best" screen choice is a case by case basis, looking to satisfy the particular goals of the viewer.


----------



## msmCutter




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/19760008
> 
> 
> Even a JVC RS40 hitting a Stewart ST130 will look pretty bad along it's edges if the Screen is placed too close to the side walls or ceiling. And suppose it simply MUST be in those positions? Because it's "OK" to consider a Matte White surface as being the best screen for a light controlled room, the viewer should just deal with reflective washout?
> 
> 
> And if the quality of the Screen is any indicator of value/Performance, it's a stretch to consider a ST130, one of the best...if not THE Best reference white Screens around as being any less a financial hit than Elite VMax let alone A BD II.
> 
> 
> So "OK", I gotta agree that under ideal circumstances, with a 90K:1 Native Contrast PJ, an image shot onto a 1.3 gain White Screen will look pretty fabulous. Then again, a Matte White sprayed Wall will almost assuredly garner just as good a review from 98% of all who see such.



If your room is busted, fix it. Don't try a duct tape workaround with a screen. We already know that in ideal conditions a BD is NOT going to give you ideal results. You're better off using your money on paint and room fixes than a BD or any other $3k screen. If you've got the money after the room is right go ahead and grab that Stewart or JKP or whatever. But if the room is wrong it doesn't matter how much you spend on a screen.


I've seen your screen shots of sporting events in gyms and what have you. I get it there. I'm down with temporary areas or one time events that would require a sweet mirror backed screen or some such. If you're talking HT I don't see the payoff.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19760262
> 
> 
> If your room is busted, fix it. Don't try a duct tape workaround with a screen. We already know that in ideal conditions a BD is NOT going to give you ideal results. You're better off using your money on paint and room fixes than a BD or any other $3k screen. If you've got the money after the room is right go ahead and grab that Stewart or JKP or whatever. But if the room is wrong it doesn't matter how much you spend on a screen.



I think that you would be surprised by what it takes to get "ideal conditions." I covered much of my room with black velvet and I was still getting significant washout in brighter scenes.


Plus, not everyone wants to live in a black velvet lined room. Many people want to enjoy quality big screen images in ordinary rooms that are decorated to their taste.


As they say, there are many ways to skin a cat.


----------



## Kevin 3000

*Can the Black Diamond be defeated in bright rooms for which it was designed for!!!


Nothing i have seen `as yet` still looking waiting for that day......*


----------



## msmCutter

Can any of us beat a turtle in a swimming race? Who cares? We're not build for water just like screens/projectors aren't built for ambient light.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/19760333
> 
> *Can the Black Diamond be defeated in bright rooms for which it was designed for!!!
> 
> 
> Nothing i have seen `as yet` still looking waiting for that day......*



We watched the Hockey Junior tourney game last night..

Full lights on...

The picture was something of beauty...

btw

Canada owned the USA and knocked them out...

bring us Russia....lol

...


Again my room and alot of other rooms today are Media rooms,

Gone is the day where 2 pc projection is limited to the dark..

Dont know about you but when i watch sports with 20 guys over

i dont want to be in the dark...
















Now if it was 20 ladies that would be a different story


----------



## msmCutter




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *karlsch* /forum/post/19604186
> 
> 
> It's good to know that you are a seller of BDII screens. That makes a difference.
> 
> 
> I am just an end user who bought one. But being an end user, I am in a good position to judge whether claims made for this screen are valid or deceptive or sometimes even dishonest. All I have to do is look at my screen.
> 
> 
> Lets get back to the pictures you posted that are supposed to be in a room with a lot of ambient light including a side window (I commented that the room appears dark, you claimed is was your camera's fault). Your description: Here ya Go Full Ambient light SHots taken during the day... All Pot lights on Side window blinds up. The pictures are in this post:
> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showp...postcount=1474
> 
> 
> Here is a picture of my screen with light coming from a side window:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Notice that the light coming from the side window causes the speakers and other things to throw shadows.
> 
> 
> Now look at your pictures again. There are no shadows that would be there if there truly were light coming from a side window. Did you accidentally post a picture of a dark room with no light coming from a side window or is it your camera's fault again?




I'd be embarrased to show this to 20 friends regardless of gender. They'd laugh at me for spending $3k for just the screen in this picture.


----------



## Kevin 3000

No they would laugh at you for flooding the screen with daylight and then show you how it should be done....


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19760535
> 
> 
> I'd be embarrased to show this to 20 friends regardless of gender. They'd laugh at me for spending $3k for just the screen in this picture.



How do you think a flat panel would look in that space? Probably like this:


----------



## msmCutter

It'd look like half the price... a bargain for the same (if not better) results.


----------



## dovercat

Why is all the emphasis on using projection in a room with ambient lighting placed on specialty screens.


Home cinema projectors seem to be designed for bat caves, they lack lumens, unless your idea of screen size is small


If using a relatively small screen size or if lots of room is available why is not back projection more popular, for rooms with ambient lighting.


For front projection what is wrong with the cine4home black screen in ambient lighting way. A very high 4500 to 6000+ lumen projector on a very dark


----------



## msmCutter

That's kinda my point. This is trying to make a square peg fit in the round hole.


----------



## BlakeV

SI will be showing at the Venetian suite 30-311. We will display with a Projection Design projector and a 119", 2:40 Black Diamond .8 gain.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeV* /forum/post/19761011
> 
> 
> SI will be showing at the Venetian suite 30-311. We will display with a Projection Design projector and a 119", 2:40 Black Diamond .8 gain.



Great to know you will be there....

Awesome...


----------



## msmCutter

Here's a great rear projection example:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...3#post15669023 


...Amazing home. His setup in the dining room/nook/whatever is rear projection. It seems to handle ambient light like a champ.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dovercat* /forum/post/19760858
> 
> 
> Why is all the emphasis on using projection in a room with ambient lighting placed on specialty screens.



I guess the reason is that it works really well and fills a need that many people have.


It may not be something that you'd consider but other people do. You must be a little bit interested because something brought you to this thread.


----------



## msmCutter

The shamwow hype brought us in. Anyone who had a starter projector on a wall immediately realized how much it suffered in the day.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19761102
> 
> 
> The shamwow hype brought us in. Anyone who had a starter projector on a wall immediately realized how much it suffered in the day.



Dont think you get it.

My room in ambient light isnt hurting my image period.....

The Hockey Game last night looked amazing.

I have posted enough screen shots and dont need to post anymore to prove my point.

Its proven and proven Very Well...



I have a Media Room...

Alot of people are looking for a Media room vs a theater dark room

Watch Sports Every Day With Lights on...

No Problem...

Watch a movie with lights on

No Problem...


I have gone 2 pcs projection because we dont want a big rear projection in our room. Its Plain Ugly...



Anyone who see's a black diamond on a wall thinks that its a plasma or lcd

and thats without a projector even on...


Your not bringing up anything new in your posts but its the same tune.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19761102
> 
> 
> The shamwow hype brought us in. Anyone who had a starter projector on a wall immediately realized how much it suffered in the day.




As people keep pointing out, a BD-type screen is useful for quite a number of situations. One type of situation: A lot of people want the Big Screen experience but also like the decor of their rooms as is and don't want to have to redecorate or re-paint a room around the demands of a projector screen. That's an entirely rational set of competing desires and BD screens can be an excellent help in meeting both desires. A BD screen will maintain much more contrast in such rooms and provide a very satisfying viewing experience to many people.


A local AV store has projectors in various demo rooms. One room was just silly: a small room with a white ceiling and somewhat light walls. For a long time they had a neutral gain white screen in the room and the contrast of the image tended to suck. It was so washed out by the reflections, especially from the ceiling. Once they replaced it with a BD screen the difference was dramatic. Now the contrast looks great and they didn't have to change the decor. It's really amazing to see how much less light the BD screen scatters around the room vs a white screen. (.8 gain version of BD).


So someone may be able to keep the decor they prefer for a room and get the big screen experience with good picture quality, which is where the BD screens offer their greatest value (IMO).


----------



## msmCutter




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19761066
> 
> 
> Here's a great rear projection example:
> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...3#post15669023
> 
> 
> ...Amazing home. His setup in the dining room/nook/whatever is rear projection. It seems to handle ambient light like a champ.



Or you do something like this and don't look back.


----------



## MississippiMan

The next to last post above is really all that needs to be said.



Except that coming onto a thread dedicated to Ambient Light screen performance doesn't really merit exclamations about the need for or usage of White Screens in Bat Caves.


At all, actually.


The post directly above is simply "Tit for Tat" OT fare.


I understand that when hype draws attention, things will get a little heated if not actually strained. A couple folks on this thread could mute that tendency, reduce the hype-like statements, and just let examples by them, and better still, by other BD Screen owners do the talking. I myself used to try hard to convince any/everyone of the superiority of a screen application that could do many things great, if not EVERYTHING stupendously.


I first coined the phrase, "It looks better'n a Plasma" back in 2004, and it took 3-4 years for the hue & cry to die down.










Start treading on the collective toes of the CRT Boys by posting Screenies that look just as good as theirs, and saying "See, where is a hanging Coffee Table needed?" and you've got a Bulls Eye painted on every subsequent post you compose thereafter.


I saw that happening fast on this thread about a month ago, and started trying to suggest a more measured approach. But I can't reach out a B-slap someone who goes a bit crazy with his rhetoric.


I suppose that's a good thing...because myself, I'd most like be a dead man 5 years removed if such interaction was possible by those who disagree with what is stated/claimed/ or shown to any degree not acceptable to the reader.


That's the Web, Baby. Empowerment through anonymity.










So waddya say? Those with Screenies to post or comments to offer pertaining to Black Diamond Screens as they are intended to be used keep on keepin' on? Certainly so. Those who just want to dismiss or rant/rail about hyped statements or simply the gross injustice of it all? All those Folks should instead author a dedicated Thread on such, as that can do more to advise/educate others than someone getting one's self Banned for disrupting a Thread with OT or adverse commentary.


Awww, there I go again, makin' like I have some authority. Sorry.


----------



## Kevin 3000

*Black Diamonds are 3D Active*


Just a reminder......


----------



## msmCutter

If you scroll through there are only a couple of actual BD owners posting. The others posting are part of the company or sellers of the product. It's roughly split between actual owners. We have Kevin who loves his and Karl who feels suckered.


This thread is the correct place to post gripes and/or doubts about the claims. Like why does the return policy stink so bad if they're so sure it's the best out there? Why not let people try it out in their specific space to see if it gives the claimed improvements? And why does it seem to work well in screenshots posted by a dealer but not so well in screenshots posted by someone who owns the screen?


----------



## msmCutter

Kevin, are you just a happy owner or do you have a piece of the pie? Part owner of the company? Dealer? Installer?


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19761938
> 
> 
> Kevin, are you just a happy owner or do you have a piece of the pie? Part owner of the company? Dealer? Installer?


*No MississippiMan showed me the path to Enlightenment......1.4 BD more 3D Active than 0.8 BD......*


Just saying.......


----------



## msmCutter

So are you JUST a personal owner or do you have some connection with the company?


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19762086
> 
> 
> So are you JUST a personal owner or do you have some connection with the company?



Why do you find that so hard to believe.......


----------



## msmCutter

You still haven't answered the question







I just want to be clear that I have this right. You're the happy owner. Karl is the miserable owner. Fraisia is the dealer. Right?


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19761782
> 
> 
> Or you do something like this and don't look back.



Ever wonder why rear projection (of the sort you posted) is so incredibly rare? It's because it is quite demanding to set up and is not a realistic option for most people, even AV enthusiasts on a site like this. Rear projection often involves custom building or altering new structures/walls to accommodate (did you notice that from the link you posted? not to mention this guy obviously had the money to do this stuff). BD-type screens are about introducing good quality projected images into "real world" spaces and reducing the effort necessary to do so. The suggestion to create a rear projection set up does precisely the opposite: it seriously increases the effort, money and work needed to get it to work. So folks wanting a minimum fuss solution to watching decent images with some ambient lighting can just put up a BD screen, whereas your suggesting is instead to start doing things like this to their rooms:











That guy had to start cutting out his walls to do rear projection. Not exactly what most people are looking to do to their home (even if they could).



BTW, I'm not affiliated with Black Diamond or any seller of AV equipment. I'm just an AVS member who has evaluated the BD screens against many other types of screen. It has compromises like anything, but it also can be very helpful in letting people incorporate a big picture into challenging home scenarios _while minimising the fuss and work necessary to do so_.


----------



## dovercat




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/19761859
> 
> 
> coming onto a thread dedicated to Ambient Light screen performance doesn't really merit exclamations about the need for or usage of White Screens in Bat Caves.
> 
> 
> At all, actually.



Screen Innovations do not state their screen is for use only in rooms with ambient light. They state it out performs matt white screens in dedicated light controlled home cinemas. They feature both types of rooms in their videos. So I do not see why posts comparing Black Diamond to other screens - projection setups in various conditions are not relevant.




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/19761859
> 
> 
> So waddya say? Those with Screenies to post or comments to offer pertaining to Black Diamond Screens as they are intended to be used keep on keepin' on? Certainly so. Those who just want to dismiss or rant/rail about hyped statements or simply the gross injustice of it all? All those Folks should instead author a dedicated Thread on such, as that can do more to advise/educate others than someone getting one's self Banned for disrupting a Thread with OT or adverse commentary.



OT posts can be entertaining if they are not offensive.

Adverse commentary without them what do you have a mutual appreciation society of happy customers and people who sell the screens extolling their virtues. If that was all I wanted to read I would read testimonials at manufactures websites.


The posts of Karlsch the unhappy customer who posted screen shots and disagreed with fraisa were I think the most adverse posts.


The only problem I have with the screen is the returns policy for opened and undamaged. Makes it too expensive to try it and see. Next time I am in London maybe I will see if I can get a demo.


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19762142
> 
> 
> You still haven't answered the question
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just want to be clear that I have this right. You're the happy owner. Karl is the miserable owner. Fraisia is the dealer. Right?



Quid pro qou, whats your affiliation to Hannibal Lecter?


----------



## fraisa

FYI

Regardless of my Occupation,


I too am an a proud owner of a black diamond Screen have one in my house..

and Next year i am putting one in my office...

Cause its Bright...

Window faces South...

Mid day can hardly see my LCD PC Monitors...

and thats with no glare.


----------



## msmCutter




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/19762231
> 
> 
> Quid pro qou, whats your affiliation to Hannibal Lecter?



I ate his liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti.


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/19761995
> 
> *No MississippiMan showed me the path to Enlightenment......1.4 BD more 3D Active than 0.8 BD......*
> 
> 
> Just saying.......



Oops. Almost any decently bright white Screen can make the claim of being "Active 3D ready", and of the two BDs, obviously a 1.4 gain version will be better with Active 3D by helping to retain what brightness is lost via Shutter Glass usage.


Nope, what I said is that the properties in the BD II are at least workable with "Passive" 3D where the retaining of polarized light emitted by the PJ is essential. And the ones I've seen do the best job with Passive are at minimum 3.0 gain.


If I somehow misquoted my intended response awhile back and led you astray K3K, I apologize. I post a lot of posts on a variety of subject matter and at times, hey...I misquote facts I know well but that get typed via trans-positional thinking.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dovercat* /forum/post/19762191
> 
> 
> Screen Innovations do not state their screen is for use only in rooms with ambient light. They state it out performs matt white screens in dedicated light controlled home cinemas. They feature both types of rooms in their videos. So I do not see why posts comparing Black Diamond to other screens - projection setups in various conditions are not relevant. .



They can be if done with some aspect of sense and sensibility. It's just too easy for it to become a war of attrition...so authoring a Thread with none of those concerns and considerations inherent is a better way to bring those things to bear.


Myself, for years I have extolled the virtues of similar applications, and I know how much improved Color and Contrast became with such reflective Gray surfaces. But that doesn't stop those who have ST130s from getting upset.


Yes, SI is not correct in that presentation, but in the world of commercials and advertisements, few times do you see disclaimers or warnings except on Cigarettes or Booze.


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19762365
> 
> 
> I ate his liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti.



Sup-sup-sup.....










Human Liver consumption is most definitely OT.


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/19762380
> 
> 
> Sup-sup-sup.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Human Liver consumption is most definitely OT.



BD-Your pain runs deep, share it with us.


MM-What do you know of my pain?


BD-Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with us... and gain strength from the sharing.


Need a clue "Sybok" i found it funny.....



msmCutter

Just a happy owner


----------



## pb_maxxx

a penny for msm.

a penny for fraisa.

a penny for K3K.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19762365
> 
> 
> I ate his liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti.



So i bet you got those beans and chainti on clearance right,,,

cause your not going to pay a premium for a product.....lol


----------



## msmCutter

I already paid a premium on the liver. I couldn't afford the markup of non-clearance fava beans or chianti. But I did properly handle the clearance items to maximize flavor!


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19763116
> 
> 
> I already paid a premium on the liver. I couldn't afford the markup of non-clearance fava beans or chianti. But I did properly handle the clearance items to maximize flavor!



Nice......


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/19762416
> 
> 
> BD-Your pain runs deep, share it with us.
> 
> 
> MM-What do you know of my pain?



Yeah.....wait a minute...I think I know.



> Quote:
> BD-Let us explore it... together. Each man hides a secret pain. It must be exposed and reckoned with. It must be dragged from the darkness and forced into the light. Share your pain. Share your pain with us... and gain strength from the sharing.
> 
> 
> Need a clue "Sybok" i found it funny.....



Could be your just into pain....or really into being one.


Yep....there's the answer! Gol' Durn it! It was right there in front of us all along!




































































(Cruel, I know...but it beats joking about eating liver & fava beans. Then again, almost anything does....)


----------



## Kevin 3000

Anybody knows the polarization extinction ratio of the Black Diamonds.


Or other screens? Must be above average like the bright room *WINNER* is.


----------



## pb_maxxx

i think what we have here is a disagreement on the "amount" of ambient light folks are trying to "show" the BD can handle.


daylight and incandescent are two entirely different animals.


what can work very well in large amounts of incandescent light can falter ungracefully when daylight is present.


the picture that msm continues to show of is (not sure of the projector make/model...) is a BD in broad daylight. this is a worst case scenario at best and most here would agree... if you a bought cheap PJ for viewing in this kind of light and then paid 3K for a BD...

you probably need to have your head examined.


what fraisa and k3k are trying to show is how well the BD can handle large amount of ambient incandescent light. one in a well controlled room and the other similiar to many family rooms.


now if fraisa and K3k were willing to show some screenshots of how the BD can handle daylight... then we'd have more rounded info to go by.

i don't think that either of their setups are setup to do that though.


and really, many would argue why should they given how much incandescent light they already show... certainly more that most would dare to.


lastly, since SI seems to be saying that the BD beats out other white screens in controlled viewing...

...then i say, _"let the BD vs white screen controlled screenshot war begin!"_


oops. it already has...


except that only fraisa and k3k are willing to show their cards.


----------



## fraisa

Trust me on the to do list for 2011 is get screen shots of

BD in a room thats ambient light comes from Sunlight...

Even am thinking of taking a screen outside and putting an image on it during the day...


Till that day comes this is the best i can do....


----------



## fraisa

Hey Blake,

Thought i remembered seeing a video of a resturant that had a

blackdiamond on there patio

Any chance of getting a screen shot of it

to really put this arguement to rest....?


----------



## pb_maxxx

i'm still waiting on that 5000 lumen 10,000:1 1080p PJ to show up on my doorstep


----------



## MississippiMan

Fraisa,


The problem is your setting too low a standard as far as room lighting, then calling it a "Winner". Until images are taken that show obvious balance of color off walls/ Furniture, Draperies, etc, instead of the brownish or reddish cast hue low level Incandescent light presents, or the dull, suppressed colors of muted Sunlight under low ISO delivers, your not gonna convince anyone that a "Winner" has sprang forth from such mediocrity. Simply put, High Ambient Light means the "Room" is illuminated enough to let you see "the Room"...including colors, detail, and such.


You see, every time you switch to showing screenies to CGI or Sports Content, the light levels you set in the room are increased because you know they can be. But every "Film" shot shows "brown/yellow/ or Gray surroundings in the lower light levels you must step it down to so as to show any decent contrast at all. And while that might actually be a big improvement over a Matte White screen under the exact same lighting, it's just not anything earth shattering compared to the buy in cost. That's what has many so willing to call out the performance claims as of late. Mush has been claimed, even touted as fact and a "Winner", yet Where's The Beef?


It's pretty obvious....and nothing so bad as to have to slink away about. But just the same, no one is gonna wake up and listen to a Rooster whose crowing sounds like a Duck quacking either


But there must be a reference to go by, and so far SI-BD has not provided anything either consistent or accurate enough to pass muster beyond the determinations of those who need a BD so bad they MUST go down that road. Under that premise, yes...it works for them and they are happy.


I've been hoping that the recent opportunities you have had would do so...and a few shots have indeed shown well, but some....a majority in fact....not so much.


BTW, just got word repairs are done. AM appointment. Morning Sunlight through "Sliding Glass Doors". White Ceiling. NO DRAPES pulled.


Actually....I'm a little nervous.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/19763852
> 
> 
> Fraisa,
> 
> 
> The problem is your setting too low a standard as far as room lighting, then calling it a "Winner". Until images are taken that show obvious balance of color off walls/ Furniture, Draperies, etc, instead of the brownish or reddish cast hue low level Incandescent light presents, or the dull, suppressed colors of muted Sunlight under low ISO delivers, your not gonna convince anyone that a "Winner" has sprang forth from such mediocrity. Simply put, High Ambient Light means the "Room" is illuminated enough to let you see "the Room"...including colors, detail, and such.
> 
> 
> You see, every time you switch to showing screenies to CGI or Sports Content, the light levels you set in the room are increased because you know they can be. But every "Film" shot shows "brown/yellow/ or Gray surroundings in the lower light levels you must step it down to so as to show any decent contrast at all. And while that might actually be a big improvement over a Matte White screen under the exact same lighting, it's just not anything earth shattering compared to the buy in cost. That's what has many so willing to call out the performance claims as of late. Mush has been claimed, even touted as fact and a "Winner", yet Where's The Beef?
> 
> 
> It's pretty obvious....and nothing so bad as to have to slink away about. But just the same, no one is gonna wake up and listen to a Rooster whose crowing sounds like a Duck quacking either
> 
> 
> But there must be a reference to go by, and so far SI-BD has not provided anything either consistent or accurate enough to pass muster beyond the determinations of those who need a BD so bad they MUST go down that road. Under that premise, yes...it works for them and they are happy.
> 
> 
> I've been hoping that the recent opportunities you have had would do so...and a few shots have indeed shown well, but some....a majority in fact....not so much.
> 
> 
> BTW, just got word repairs are done. AM appointment. Morning Sunlight through "Sliding Glass Doors". White Ceiling. NO DRAPES pulled.
> 
> 
> Actually....I'm a little nervous.



Hey Miss

Sorry should have mentioned it above the pic.

Wasnt trying to say Hey Look at this amazing screen shot,

but that this is the only screen shot i have with side Real Non Artifical Light.....


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pb_maxxx* /forum/post/19763559
> 
> 
> i
> 
> 
> now if fraisa and K3k were willing to show some screenshots of how the BD can handle daylight... then we'd have more rounded info to go by.
> 
> i don't think that either of their setups are setup to do that though.
> 
> 
> and really, many would argue why should they given how much incandescent light they already show... certainly more that most would dare to.
> 
> .



Posted back on page 54 Daylight pics......


Will the Black Diamond lose its Bright Room *CROWN* to a teeny tiny excuse for a Projector Screen we shall soon see......


Help me out here I have this burning question -


Would someone be in direct violation of one`s own ethos by admitting to installing hundreds of screens thus by definition classed as a professional, thereby. as laid down by the DIY rules "Professionals in the Home Theater business may post here, but any promotion of products or services is prohibited" so if one`s promoting one`s products/services one`s posts of that nature should be deleted?


No need to argue semantics just read between the lines.


Mods may have to delete this if inappropriate....


Just after clarification....


----------



## Lawguy

One thing that appears not to be appreciated is that no light colored screen is capable of preserving contrast in a bright room. Why? Because a light colored screen will always appear to be light colored in a bright room. So, to show a football game (or something like that) looking good in a bright room really isn't a big deal and is NOT what the Black Diamond is really about. One of the reasons to get a Black Diamond is to display convincing looking blacks in rooms with a lot of light. It can do this because of its dark color. If all you want is a bright image and don't care about blacks, the Black Diamond is not for you. Get any old high gain screen and live with the greys. The Black Diamond is for people who don't want to live with the greys.


----------



## jayn_j

All we have managed to prove in the last ten pages is that images can be doctored to show anything in the best or worst possible light, and that it is still difficult to get a real world perspective on what a screen can do. You certinly can't determine that by reading forum posts.


I guess there is also a sidebar that everyone has a hidden agenda in these wars. When the day is over, you still find yourself taking a giant leap of faith on a very expensive and non-returnable screen.


Sigh.


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jayn_j* /forum/post/19766921
> 
> 
> All we have managed to prove in the last ten pages is that images can be doctored to show anything in the best or worst possible light, and that it is still difficult to get a real world perspective on what a screen can do. You certinly can't determine that by reading forum posts.
> 
> 
> I guess there is also a sidebar that everyone has a hidden agenda in these wars. When the day is over, you still find yourself taking a giant leap of faith on a very expensive and non-returnable screen.
> 
> 
> Sigh.



To quash your theory on doctored images go get a DEMO and see what amazing wonders awaits you.


----------



## jayn_j




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/19767036
> 
> 
> To quash your theory on doctored images go get a DEMO and see what amazing wonders awaits you.



I know this has gotten emotional, and perhaps 'doctoring' was too strong a word, but there is a natural tendency to present material in a way that best supports your case. If you are arguing on the side of good light rejection, you are going to pick the best shot. If you are arguing against, you will pick the worst. In both cases, you will likely adjust lighting to support your cause. Just human nature.


The same is true in showroom demos. I am ready to believe that the screen choice can only be properly demoed in your own room, same as speakers. However, the speakers can usually be borrowed and auditioned at home. The screen cannot due to its complex assembly and size. Best you can do is purchase the small sample swatches and try to guess how that will scale up. Not ideal, but better than nothing.


I'm not scared off by the price of the BD, but there are real compromises in size and lack of AT. That tends to lead me toward screens that cost $1k less and which my best guess says will perform better in my application. Not trying to drag this off topic or hijack this thread, but I am someone who bought too cheap, too soon and am looking at upgrades.


----------



## Kevin 3000

jayn_j

List your room/goals and explore your options - not with me with others.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jayn_j* /forum/post/19766921
> 
> 
> All we have managed to prove in the last ten pages is that images can be doctored to show anything in the best or worst possible light, and that it is still difficult to get a real world perspective on what a screen can do. You certinly can't determine that by reading forum posts.
> 
> 
> I guess there is also a sidebar that everyone has a hidden agenda in these wars. When the day is over, you still find yourself taking a giant leap of faith on a very expensive and non-returnable screen.
> 
> 
> Sigh.



It may be worth noting that at CEDIA, many manufacturers (including JVC and SIM2) displayed their products on the showroom floor on Black Diamond screens. I infer that they did this because they wanted their products to look as good as possible in showroom conditions.


----------



## DigsMovies

Performance with sunlight in room? Here is a link to the latest video posted by S.I., for those who have not seen it yet:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7rey...layer_embedded 


This shows some pretty brutal lighting conditions. Note the several windows just to the right of the screen. Room colors are natural- so no "camera tricks" going on here. I think most screens would be unwatchable in conditions like these, but the BD is very watchable. Perfect? Nope... but good enough to allow a projection installation where it was unworkable before.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19760427
> 
> 
> Can any of us beat a turtle in a swimming race? Who cares? We're not build for water just like screens/projectors aren't built for ambient light.



What must be realized is that there are people who 1) want a larger picture than that from a T.V., and 2) don't have or want a dedicated room. It is for these users that the BD was created.


Kudos to Rich H. for these 2 posts- here is the voice of reason and balance:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...2#post19760192 

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...2#post19761602


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jayn_j* /forum/post/19766921
> 
> 
> All we have managed to prove in the last ten pages is that images can be doctored to show anything in the best or worst possible light, and that it is still difficult to get a real world perspective on what a screen can do. You certinly can't determine that by reading forum posts.
> 
> *I guess there is also a sidebar that everyone has a hidden agenda in these wars.* When the day is over, you still find yourself taking a giant leap of faith on a very expensive and non-returnable screen.
> 
> 
> Sigh.




RANT/


I'm doing my best to suppress the expletives that arise when reading the part I've bolded in your post.


I get soooo sick of this charge of bias and agenda that seems lazily tossed around in forums like these.


Most people who have been on this forum for quite a while have formed their opinions from whatever research and experience they've been able to gather. And, naturally, we come to conclusions based on our investigations.

This is not "bias" or "agenda"...it's basic rationality.


For instance: I can express my findings of what I do and don't like about a screen, e.g. Black Diamond, and explain why I chose to go with a Stewart ST-130 over something like the Black Diamond. To do so is not on some hidden agenda or reality-distorting bias...it's just laying out the rational for why one screen satisfies my specific situation over another type. Again...basic human reasoning, and I don't see how you are going to be able to show it isn't rational and is instead the result of some "agenda" or "bias." (And if "bias" is to be applied to the resulting conclusion of any rational line of inquiry, then that word pretty much loses all it's meaning).


That doesn't just go for me. Most of us are trying to get what we want by comprehending the facts as we can access them. If someone loves their Black Diamond screen, and especially if they've chosen it advisedly with some knowledge of it's strengths and weakness vs other screen types, more power to them. They aren't "biased" or haven an agenda. They are simply expressing the satisfaction they have and the reasons for their choice.


That someone may be extremely enthusiastic about something they have bought, or haven't yet bought, does not in the slightest suggest they are therefore enthusiastic _for unjustified reasons_.


Egads...if there is one meme I would wish to kill it's the lazy accusations of bias and agenda that crop up so often around here.


/RANT


----------



## jayn_j

Wish it was that clear. Throughout this entire site we run across people who make a living by selling this equipment. Their posts are always somewhat over the top for whatever it is they sell/install/manufacture. Not picking on SI particularly. We see it everywhere.


It kind of came to a head here, and I have to admit that, for me, the last tenish pages of this thread have been a real demotivator and has mostly confused me.


----------



## MississippiMan

Hey jayn_j and any/everyone else besides BD owners / reps,



The primary reason I came onto this thread was not to show off...or up the BD products. No, what I have tried to do is encourage a few posters into posting realistic Screen shots that illustrate the "real" performance envelope of the BD line-up.**** Yes, I'm posting shots of similar applications, but I'm not encouraging or even suggesting that someone consider them over BD items. People who are determined to spend/buy Mfg items seldom are swayed by the prospect of another alternative.

*(**.....and initally that was happening but enough people said "That looks horrible" so that kinda quashed all that... ;( )*


My efforts with fraisa and crew is one rooted in showing how to NOT post Screen shots that misinform or mislead, be it by intentional or inadvertent methods. Yeah...after a good start, it's falling into a competition of sorts, but whose really to blame? Mostly, everyone who comes on and calls Foul or BS, because that sort of thing encourages fraisa and others who believe in the BD concept to gird their Loins for battle.


I know that sort of response certainly has done /does likewise to me, because when you steadfastly believe in something, hand made or Mfg, and someone trashes it (...not just take it down a peg...) you either rise to the challenge or let those people destroy all you have worked to accomplish or present.


Whether my presence has helped to keep the Screenies be more honest, or resulted in desperate measures and ineffectual postings, that is in fact for the general Membership to decide.


Certainly, if the hyped sales rhetoric was absent, fewer chagrined Members would be posting. Hey...I advised someone against that as well.


But in the end, how everyone conducts themselves when posting is what makes a Thread useful or not. Having seen too many informative and valuable Threads get *locked* because of purposefully abusive and/or retribution-filled posts, that is about the most lousy thing I think I've encountered. Even when it's unintentional, it's still kinda tragic.


The frequent Posters on here will make it sink or swim. Although some might say it runs counter to my own specific intentions and interests, I did want to toss a Rope to the Posters, one not designed to hang themselves with, or provide such for others to do it for them, but help reasonably show exactly what is...and is not possible.


As stated earlier, a thread that is all sales hype is nothing more than a free ad. That does get people worked up, understandably. One that shows images that are basically bad...or obviously slanted toward showing good results via camera tricks...that's not so good either.


As we continue on, and after I post some examples I hope will set a high standard, everyone should try to judge things on the merit and "good" intentions, and post accordingly....but courteously. Or not bother to post at all, because I'm fairly certain very little more of the sort of discourse we've seen just lately will be tolerated.


Including longish, OT rants. As this post might almost qualify as such...I'll personally remove it tomorrow AM. Everyone who will want to read it will have...most who need to as well.


Lastly, a great gesture for several would be to review one's post and edit/delete them or any unreasonable content. Be your own judge...for it better to do such yourself than have it done for you.


MMan


----------



## MississippiMan

Here are several shots taken in the highest lighting possible with the Theater shown. It's really quite bright, as the light on the Furniture shows, but effective Room Colors (Mid-shade Gray Walls, Ultra Dark Gray Ceiling, Very Dark Maroon w/Gold Trim Draperies.) suppress reflective light beyond the closet perimeter of each fixture.


But there is still the directed light and overall ambient light that the Cans and Sconces provide. You'll see only higher ambient light shots for now, later I will insert the Lower/No Light shots.
































































*Now some TV*






































For those who know...and especially for those who don't, observe the colors both on/off screen. Note the lack of any blooming or suppressed light due to excessive use of Camera technique. Only "Correct" technique is needed to be able to show what the eye sees. Or close enough that no one can acll out BS or deny that the images are extremely well balanced and that most all contrast provided by the PJ has been maintained on-screen.


This is the Dedicated Theater example w/high ambient light.


Next up this PM.....the Fireplace Theater. It will have a much darker SF 4.0 screen, more comparable "Shade-wise" to a BD-II 1.4 or a BD-1 0.8 because of the far more extreme need to combat reflected ambient light.



Hey....somebody pick fraisa up off the floor, will ya?










PJ: Epson 8350 set to "Natural" mode..........NOT Dynamic or Living Room!

Screen: 125" diagonal Silver Fire 2.0

DVD: OPPO BD-83


All DVDs were BluRay Editions.


----------



## dovercat

Since some posters are dealers/installers does anyone have an opinion as to how it compares to other screens designed for light conditions like the DNP Supernova, Planar Xscreen, Sony DynaClear, or earlier SI products like the Mirage and Visage screens.


----------



## fraisa

This is the Dedicated Theater example w/high ambient light.


Next up this PM.....the Fireplace Theater. It will have a much darker SF 4.0 screen, more comparable "Shade-wise" to a BD-II 1.4 or a BD-1 0.8 because of the far more extreme need to combat reflected ambient light.



Hey....somebody pick fraisa up off the floor, will ya?










PJ: Epson 8350 set to "Natural" mode..........NOT Dynamic or Living Room!

Screen: 125" diagonal Silver Fire 2.0

DVD: OPPO BD-83


All DVDs were BluRay Editions.[/quote]


Hey Miss

Great shots but lil dissapointed in the choice for ambient light..,..

Also the light in the above room is away from the screen

Awesome set up and great plaining....


Look at this pic










This is a Very high light setting...


This is a similar light setting to yours....










Again your shots are good but

have not scored the pin fall to win the title...

But we should let K3000 be the Guest Referee....


----------



## MississippiMan

Quote:

Originally Posted by *fraisa* 
Again your shots are good but

have not scored the pin fall to win the title...

But we should let K3000 be the Guest Referee....
K3K? That'll be like having the Prez choose the winner of the next Republican Primary. He's just a little too biased.










The only difference really in my shots are the walls and the ceiling's ability to squash ambient light reflections.


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* 
K3K? That'll be like having the Prez choose the winner of the next Republican Primary. He's just a little too biased.










The only difference really in my shots are the walls and the ceiling's ability to squash ambient light reflections.
Nice....


It does look like your lights are going the other direction than the screen(ceiling pots)

enableing a dark pocket infront of the screen,

where in my room even when i have spots and not floods the spots are still

putting light onto the screen area not letting any dark pocketing to develope infront of the screen...


any way to turn those so they point down?


----------



## pb_maxxx

alright guys...


i'm looking for screenshots of more torture tested daylight conditions such as this.


----------



## msmCutter

Put the screen on that dark wall between the windows and I bet it's not "that" bad.


----------



## pb_maxxx

msm,


room size is 25 x 55 with 18' ceiling height.


these incandescent light screenshots don't come close to 1/2 the daylight hitting the wall between the windows.


the incoming light from the side windows would wreak havoc on most any screen.


plus, i was trying to stay within the realm of possibility.


----------



## R Harkness

Those most recent ambient light shots (from both fellas) show the screen materials do indeed maintain some contrast in ambient light situations, which is an achievment in of itself.


However, while some might deem the images "watchable" under such conditions (you can see what's going on rather than being washed out to oblivion) I personally wouldn't consider any of the results even close to a "satisfying" image. They look like images projected by cheap digital projectors circa 2000 or so. Hardly a level of picture quality I would aspire to. So while kind of neat, the ambient light shots are a bit of an academic exercise, IMO.


----------



## fraisa

Like i posted above ,

there is a resturant in texas that has a SI blackdiamond screen on the patio..

would love to see it on during the day and a screen shot posted of it....



Also it was mentioned above that at Cedia Many Companies where using the SI screen to show there product on...


----------



## pb_maxxx

K3K,


the video is very carefully selected by SI as propaganda to highlight the strengths of the BD.


unfortunately, for them, it is also a very poor choice... a cartoon with basically 3 flat colors.


BD's strongest suit is blue and it is closest to the window. the white area is farthest from the window. and black is placed between the blue and white giving it it's best possible showing.


and even worse selection is that the cartoon is as two dimensionally as possible.


it is by far the least impressive of SI's videos.


----------



## Kevin 3000

*Black Diamond 1.4 110" 200 watts of Halogens on in room look at shadows to confirm - JVC RS10 -Dark Knight*


















*DIY painted screen Epson 8350 set to "Natural" mode 125" diagonal Silver Fire 2.0 - Avatar (i think washedout)*









*Black Diamond 0.8 Epson 9700UB 113" Diagional Film????*









*An outright VICTORY and still the CHAMP of bright room conditions the title is retained by the BLACK DIAMOND 0.8..*





























*A runners-up trophy is awarded to the Black Diamond 1.4 for more bright conditions around screen.*

















The challenge is still open can a Black Diamond be defeated in Btight Room Conditions. Serious contenders only.


----------



## fraisa

Totally Agree...

You need to demo anything before buying it.

I remember a guy who was from out of state

and expressed intrest in an Epson 8350...

I told him to go to his local dealer and get a demo,

when he was there he saw a demo of an

8350,8700 and 9700

On SI and Stewart screens...


He ended up going with the projector and screen that he thought looked best

and he also supported his local dealer and gave him his buisness...


You really need to demo this stuff in person...


----------



## pb_maxxx

i've seen several demo'd.


minus the pricetag... i'm a huge fan of contrast _blackscreens._ but i also think we can give folks some real world strenghs and limitations beyond the carefully selected SI videos.


again, a 200 watts of incandescent light in a room doesn't come close to 1/10th of daylight required to light up a 25'x55' room with 18' ceilings.


try this on for size:

get a lamp stand and place a 100 watt bulb uncovered 30 inches in the front center of your screen.. at screen level.


any takers.


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *pb_maxxx* 
i've seen several demo'd.


minus the pricetag... i'm a huge fan of contrast _blackscreens._ but i also think we can give folks some real world strenghs and limitations beyond the carefully selected SI videos.
Just Go to the right HT Dealer who is

a HT Expert and not a store employee who has no training

and would rather sell you a flat panel...lol


----------



## pb_maxxx

i'm not into flat panels.


beyond 42"... all i can zero in on is the pixelation. and it kills the whole experience for me.


----------



## pb_maxxx

yes,

i'm quite aware that two little 40 watt halogens directly and localized spotlighted as you have on the windows screenshot would not come close to the 100 watt uncovered bulb scenario that i've asked to be presented.


----------



## pb_maxxx

i'm aware what you have presented is something no white screen can do.


but if you're gonna run from a simple presentation to show that one scenerio (yours of _200 halogen watts_) equals the 100watt scenerio that i have posed...


...then you aren't winning the BD any favors.










----


honestly the goal is not show that it's perfect in such situations... but that it faulters less.


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pb_maxxx* /forum/post/19770628
> 
> 
> try this on for size:
> 
> get a lamp stand and place a 100 watt bulb uncovered 30 inches in the front center of your screen.. at screen level.



If you really want to see this I will post pictures (I just took them), although It probably won't help you decide whether you want to buy the screen. Obviously it will look bad. How could it look otherwise on any screen?


Judging by the looks of your room, the pictures I have already posted with light coming from a side window would be more helpful.


----------



## pb_maxxx

karlsch;


sure, i'd like to see them. but do me this one favor, please try to take and post the better pics you have of this situation. and if you could, include a screenshot with a sport and an animation as well.


hopefully you understand, i am a fan of blackscreens and i'm hoping others will get a more balanced viewpoint.


i'd also like to know what you are working with....


pj. what mode is it in. hours used. screen size. projected distance. room dimensions and decor.


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19769991
> 
> 
> Nice....
> 
> 
> It does look like your lights are going the other direction than the screen(ceiling pots)
> 
> enableing a dark pocket infront of the screen,
> 
> where in my room even when i have spots and not floods the spots are still
> 
> putting light onto the screen area not letting any dark pocketing to develope infront of the screen...
> 
> 
> any way to turn those so they point down?



Well, considering that the "Eyeball" shields are "Aftermarket" add ons, and secured by only springy wires that grab the inside of the Can enclosure, and that it took quite a bit of work to get the assemblies to sit flush against the ceiling.....AND I'd need to bring back my Ladder.....I'd say no.


That, and the fact that the Cans are "intended" to illuminated the front seating, which they do to a great extent.


The side Sconces are actually the lights that can most affect the screen, as also can their reflection from off the red carpeted floor.


I gotta point out that the on-screen colors in your ambient light shots are not looking correct by any means, and there appears to be areas where detail is blown out.


But more importantly, note how ALL my shots are taken at a distance. Taking shots from such a close proximity limits the Camera's metering to the predominate light source. I'm fairly certain that if you do not take them so close in, or do not use zoom to frame those shots, things are going to look a LOT different.


But go ahead..., prove me in error. No issues there because that is what we all all looking for. Accurate and illustrative results.


The upcoming shots of the Fireplace installation will more closely match what your asking for.


----------



## msmCutter




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pb_maxxx* /forum/post/19772312
> 
> 
> karlsch;
> 
> 
> sure, i'd like to see them. but do me this one favor, please try to take and post the better pics you have of this situation. and if you could, include a screenshot with a sport and an animation as well.
> 
> 
> hopefully you understand, i am a fan of blackscreens and i'm hoping others will get a more balanced viewpoint.
> 
> 
> i'd also like to know what you are working with....
> 
> 
> pj. what mode is it in. hours used. screen size. projected distance. room dimensions and decor.




Karlsch is a big anti-BD guy dude. His daylight picture on his BD is UGLY - far worse than any 100W bulb. It's the poster child for "any screen would look bad" and my point of light control is important regardless of screen choice (so if you're controlling the light anyway you may as well get a screen suited to a light controlled environment...)


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19775091
> 
> 
> Karlsch is a big anti-BD guy dude.



I’m not an anti-BD guy, I object to way the BD is promoted.


Note that all of the pictures I have posted are intended to show only one thing - how the screen deals with light coming from a side window.


I have a non-dedicated viewing room with a single source of troublesome ambient light - a side window - probably a common light source in any non-dedicated viewing room.


In my case the window had blinds that I always closed with my old HCCV screen. I assumed that I would do the same with a new screen. I never intended to have the blinds open.


After researching the BDII, mostly on the SI Web site, but also by reading a few reviews, I assumed that ambient light from a side window, which is not coming from the same direction as the light from the projector, would somehow be absorbed by a BDII screen.


Since I live far from any SI dealers, I ordered a BDII, paying full retail, from the designated sole online dealer. The person I talked to had seen a demo and he assured me that the screen did amazing things.


I installed the new screen and immediately noticed that it was only slightly better than my old screen at handling ambient light from my side window. It didn’t absorb the light, it only reflected the light (angle of incidence = angle of reflection), mostly back to my viewing area. I ended up solving the problem by installing a blackout shade behind my blinds. Of course, the shade makes the room dark.


In fairness to SI, they appear to want to make me happy. I have received a set of screen material samples from them. Since I have already solved the ambient light problem with a shade, I was hoping that a .8 gain screen would have fewer artifacts (sparklies and a unusual looking hot spot) that I find to be distracting with my 1.4 gain, but I’m not sure that this would be the case.


----------



## msmCutter

Okay... you're a big anti-hype guy







Whatever you wish to call yourself, it's safe to say you're NOT a BD fanboy.


----------



## Kelvin1965S

I'm not interested in viewing with any lights on in my room, but as it's a living room it has a white ceiling and light side walls. I'd need to get the 1.4 gain and I'll also have to wait until the electric roll down version is available, however I'd love to be able to get the same contrast I currently do with my 1.5 gain 112" wide 2.35:1 Matt White screen but without having to setup a 'bat tent' and generally cover most of the room with black cloths before enjoying a film. So I'm going to try to get a demo of the new screen once it's available (in the UK) and I'll be expecting to be able to take ANSI contrast measurements as well given the expected high price over here.


If it meets my expectations then the BD will save me considerable cost of building a separate room so it could be worth it to me...but I'm going to be a hard sell as I don't like any kind of surface texture, hotspoting or poor contrast.


I know they're only for fun, but the screenshots above look washed out to me, but I guess they're more trying to show how it looks with lights on. What I'd like to see is a screenshot with lights off, but in a room with very light coloured walls and ceiling. It's not something I can use the search for, so if anyone knows of a post with such a picture, please let me know on here or via PM if need be.


----------



## fraisa

My Screen is the 113 inch .8 gain

My room from Screen to back wall is 20-22ft

....


FYI

Have more screen shots over at my Epson 9700ub

thread.....


Will say this Was at Buffalo Wild Wing today

It was mid day and not very bright inside..

And wow every Projector screen image was totally washed out..

and the lighting conditions where mid to dim inside the place

if a black diamond screen was put up in there,

it would put the flat panels to shame


.....

Miss Looking forward to the Fireplace Screen shots...


----------



## Future Vision




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kelvin1965S* /forum/post/19777652
> 
> 
> I'm not interested in viewing with any lights on in my room, but as it's a living room it has a white ceiling and light side walls. I'd need to get the 1.4 gain and I'll also have to wait until the electric roll down version is available, however I'd love to be able to get the same contrast I currently do with my 1.5 gain 112" wide 2.35:1 Matt White screen but without having to setup a 'bat tent' and generally cover most of the room with black cloths before enjoying a film. So I'm going to try to get a demo of the new screen once it's available (in the UK) and I'll be expecting to be able to take ANSI contrast measurements as well given the expected high price over here.
> 
> 
> If it meets my expectations then the BD will save me considerable cost of building a separate room so it could be worth it to me...but I'm going to be a hard sell as I don't like any kind of surface texture, hotspoting or poor contrast.
> 
> 
> I know they're only for fun, but the screenshots above look washed out to me, but I guess they're more trying to show how it looks with lights on. What I'd like to see is a screenshot with lights off, but in a room with very light coloured walls and ceiling. It's not something I can use the search for, so if anyone knows of a post with such a picture, please let me know on here or via PM if need be.



Right on spot, the same for me.


I don't intend to usually watch any movies with lots of lights in the room, the windows I have, and I have about 5 meters of them, I can easily cover up. But since I also have white ceiling and walls, my main concern is for the reflections I might get with other screen materials such as Stewart and others.


----------



## rdjam

Ok. Not wanting to wade into a bight fight here, but more to illustrate why this is such a great screen, and why it's strengths are so helpful.


Just moving home theater into a new room, which is not built out and treated yet. Only the front cabinetry is finished, the screen is hung with string because the mounts are not here yet, and the wall treatments are not installed. But that doesn't stop my friends and I from making full use in the meanwhile...


The picture attached is with ALL lights on, and there are two big ceiling lights with naked bulbs at the moment, too.


"Reference" would be the "matte white" wall behind the screen. The difference is clear. And the projected whites will be brighter than a matte white screen to, thanks the 1.4 gain.


I took this shot with my iPhone a couple nights ago before our weekly movie night, while us guys were waiting for the others to show up.


I deliberately submit a picture with 4:3 AR so you can clearly see the difference in black between the screen and the wall behind. Is it as black as the velvet border? Of course not, but the relative blacks sighing the image area itself make for a fantastic CR, considering the lights are on.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Future Vision* /forum/post/19781365
> 
> 
> Right on spot, the same for me.
> 
> 
> I don't intend to usually watch any movies with lots of lights in the room, the windows I have, and I have about 5 meters of them, I can easily cover up. But since I also have white ceiling and walls, my main concern is for the reflections I might get with other screen materials such as Stewart and others.



Other screens, like Stewart's Firehawk, could also help with your situation. You might want to get some samples and see which would do a better job in your room.


The Firehawk has the same general issues as the Black Diamond does: visible texture and restricted viewing angles. My guess is that the more light and reflections that you have, the better the reason to go with a .8 Black Diamond. The 1.4 is probably close to a Firehawk, but there will be differences.


Between the .8 and the 1.4, the .8 is the really special one, in my opinion, because it preserves contrast better because it is darker. But, this is judging the 1.4 solely from a sample and not from a full screen. With a typically bright projector that is calibrated, I would go over 100" on a .8 BD screen. If you are only watching in a dark room, you could probably go with a larger size.


----------



## rdjam

I will stress that when the lights are turned off, this screen still excels. Less light scatter so CR can be really amazing.


About the only question mark I have is how it is going to perform on my 3D setup. I've received one of my two new RS40 units and the other arrives next week. Also, I am receiving the two Optoma 3dXL boxes next week also.


I'll be trying to measure the retained polarization on the BDII and comparing it to other screens, such as maybe Missisipi mans.


Hopefully I'll have my home made RealD theater running by the end of the month!


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rdjam* /forum/post/19781924
> 
> 
> I took this shot with my iPhone a couple nights ago before our weekly movie night, while us guys were waiting for the others to show up.



You must really like those guys. I would never let any friend put their bare feet on my furniture like that.


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rdjam* /forum/post/19781970
> 
> 
> I will stress that when the lights are turned off, this screen still excels. Less light scatter so CR can be really amazing.
> 
> 
> About the only question mark I have is how it is going to perform on my 3D setup. I've received one of my two new RS40 units and the other arrives next week. Also, I am receiving the two Optoma 3dXL boxes next week also.
> 
> 
> I'll be trying to measure the retained polarization on the BDII and comparing it to other screens, such as maybe Missisipi mans.
> 
> 
> Hopefully I'll have my home made RealD theater running by the end of the month!



Since the BD-II has been tested and found (...by LG @ CEDIA w/CF-3D....) to accommodate Passive 3D, with those twin RS40s, and if you get your Polarized Lenses/Glasses matched up correctly, you should be doing very nicely at the smaller size of a BD screen.


If you strike out though...PM me for a solution that beat out BD-Harkness- and several others in a shoot out in the UK. Several 200" Passive 3D screens are currently being built, to be serviced with LF CF-3D PJs


It is a painted solution though...there is that to contend with.


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/19781301
> 
> 
> JVC RS10 612 Hours High Lamp Iris 1 - Camera settings unchanged in all pics.
> 
> Black Diamond 1.4 showing Light Scatter/Reflection of room
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ceiling 5ft Vunyl Matt Black then Vinyl Matt Grey
> 
> 
> Has MissMan seen the Light - I think so.......



I sure have! In fact...a great big glob of it in the center of the Screen called a "Hot Spot".







Just about the worst I have ever seen anyone dare to post too. Congratulations!


















Now I do understand that a very bright screen will drive out the Metering of the Camera under such dark conditions, but really, you cannot effectively show "light Scattering".(...another way to describe having a wider viewing cone...) from a forward position. Nope, it has to be from the side. WAY to the side. And you don't have much "side". I see that as a very good reason though why the BD makes good sense for you, and the room's color scheme certainly helps it perform up to snuff as well.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/19781952
> 
> 
> 
> Between the .8 and the 1.4, the .8 is the really special one, in my opinion, because it preserves contrast better because it is darker. But, this is judging the 1.4 solely from a sample and not from a full screen.



Having seen full screens of both 1.4 and .8 versions I agree: the .8 version is really the one that does a great job dealing with ambient light. The 1.4 version not nearly as much.


----------



## fraisa

Regards to the crown slippin...

you got a 1 count but you need a three to win...lol

So will counter with this....

and not hot spot here....holla holla ...

and regardin your pics,

that old dude is washed out..... but

will admit that what i saw yesturday while Eating

my chicken southwest was simaliar to the da lite shots...(see i am being a good boy getting a chicken wrap)..

but even at side view

BD Diamond Cutters colour is maintained...

So your getting close attempting at a pinfall

but i have kicked out at the 1 count...


----------



## R Harkness

Nice shots fraisa. As always it's very impressive you can get a watchable image in those conditions.


Although, as usual, even in your screen shots the lack of image uniformity jumps out at me. The way the screen image is significantly brighter on one side (the side closer to the camera) and darker on the other is something some people won't notice (or won't notice until it's pointed out to them) and others will. For me it's an artifact that just screams it's attention to me. Sometimes ignorance is bliss ;-)


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/19783195
> 
> 
> Nice shots fraisa. As always it's very impressive you can get a watchable image in those conditions.
> 
> 
> Although, as usual, even in your screen shots the lack of image uniformity jumps out at me. The way the screen image is significantly brighter on one side (the side closer to the camera) and darker on the other is something some people won't notice (or won't notice until it's pointed out to them) and others will. For me it's an artifact that just screams it's attention to me. Sometimes ignorance is bliss ;-)



With your knowledge of screens why not explain whats the reason for this and how it can be avoided?


----------



## fraisa

I do see what you are pointing out as well.

In person that effect is not present.

I too am not a Screen Shot Legand like others on this site,

and am very open to advice on how to improve it and reduce that effect...


Again i am no S.S legand in any way and am open to advice on make my shots better....


Here is an example of me trying to elemenate that effect....

but i still have it present...

Definetly want to work on this...


----------



## Kevin 3000

fraisa


I will try to explain

The screens half-gain angle of 44 degrees, 0 being centre straight on viewing, so the further angle off center you go the reflected light is reduced proportionally to 50% light loss at 44 degrees.


So viewing straight on further back for best results. Zoom out and get a better camera


----------



## fraisa

Will have to do that.,..

btw

SOmebody has to think that those double images are Kool.....


----------



## karlsch

Quote:

Originally Posted by *fraisa* 
SOmebody has to think that those double images are Kool.....
I don't find them to be _Kool_.


Since they don't seem to serve any useful purpose, I find them to be unnecessary Klutter.


You already had 40 images removed.


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *karlsch* 
I don't find them to be _Kool_.


Since they don't seem to serve any useful purpose, I find them to be unnecessary Klutter.


You already had 40 images removed.
The purpose of me reposting the pics is i am trying to

discuss suggestions on how to fix this problem of one side being

more bright than the other


Its much easier to see this problem with a double sided image...



Atleast i am working on making my screens shots better,

and am open to suggestions

Putting my pride aside and asking for help.


----------



## karlsch

Quote:

Originally Posted by *fraisa* 
The purpose of me reposting the pics is i am trying to

discuss suggestions on how to fix this problem of one side being

more bright than the other
Kevin explained why one side is brighter.


To make it easier: one side appears brighter in the pictures under discussion because one side _*IS*_ brighter. It's not a camera problem.


Since you are a dealer for this screen and therefore an expert, you are the one who should be explaining these things.


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *karlsch* 
Kevin explained why one side is brighter.


Too make it easier: one side appears brighter in the pictures under discussion because one side _*IS*_ brighter. It's not a camera problem.


Since you are a dealer for this screen and therefore an expert, you are the one who should be explaining these things.
Tell ya right now,

In person its not that vivid ,

and its the way i am taking the screen shot;


Every demo i do on this screen i make it a point to have people look off at those angles and if it was as vivid as in the screen shot i wouldnt do that...

May be someone else who has demoed the BLack Diamond

can testify to what i am saying as well....


Next screen shots i do will be 1-2 feet off center...


----------



## R Harkness

Quote:

Originally Posted by *fraisa* 
I do see what you are pointing out as well.

In person that effect is not present.
Yes it is. I just came back from yet another viewing of the BD .8 gain screen (about 1 hour ago). The uneven brightness was extremely obvious when moving out of a central seat and even from a centered seat the hotspotting was very visible...the centre of the screen was always brighter, dimming toward the edges.


Again, some people don't notice this; others do.


But, that aside, the screen (with a DLP projector) produced some gorgeous images, with superb contrast and did this in a room that had light ceilings and walls, which an excellent example of the usefulness of such a screen.


----------



## msmCutter

Many won't notice it until you point it out. After you know it's there it's distracting because you can't help but focus on it like every second.


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *R Harkness* 
Yes it is. I just came back from yet another viewing of the BD .8 gain screen (about 1 hour ago). The uneven brightness was extremely obvious when moving out of a central seat and even from a centered seat the hotspotting was very visible...the centre of the screen was always brighter, dimming toward the edges.


Again, some people don't notice this; others do.


But, that aside, the screen (with a DLP projector) produced some gorgeous images, with superb contrast and did this in a room that had light ceilings and walls, which an excellent example of the usefulness of such a screen.
I dont know of any dealer in the gta that has a .8 gain on display...


Also what was the viewing distance?


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/19783506
> 
> 
> With your knowledge of screens why not explain whats the reason for this and how it can be avoided?



I'm certainly not an expert. Like many AVS members when it came to my screen choice I just did tons of research and in my case lots and lots of demoing of material.


Anyway...why do screens like the BD hot-spot? Plain ol' physics. My layman's grasp of this and explanation would go like this:


Take a neutral gain (1.0) white screen, like the newer Stewart ST-100 screen. Such a screen typically exhibits what is known as near perfect lambertian diffusion, which is to say it doesn't reflect all the light hitting it back to the source, but instead reflects/diffuses the light in all directions such that an observer will see the same luminance viewing the screen from any given angle. (That's pretty much what it means to exhibit Lambertian reflectance...not that there is a perfect example of this, but neutral gain screens like the Stewart can get quite close for all intents and purposes, especially in the perceptual realm, where measurable irregularities may not even be perceptible to most people). In other words, a full "white" screen image (no image projected, just the projector light itself on the screen) will appear the same

brightness wherever you sit, and the screen will appear evenly light over the entire surface.


One obvious issue with such diffusion is that by dispersing the light to a wider angle, you lower the apparent brightness (since much of the light is being reflected not back to you, the viewer, but off to the walls, ceiling, floor, etc). This diffusion of light is one reason why the screen image is so much dimmer than the light beam coming out of your projector (easy to stare at your screen image, now try staring right into the light source, the projector beam, and you get an idea of how much brightness is being reduced by the screen size and the diffusion of the projector light by the screen). So a lot of projected light is "lost" by such diffusion.


But if you lose so much brightness by having the screen diffuse it off to the sides, why would you want to have the light diffused in such a way? Well, obviously one benefit is the one just mentioned - wide viewing angles, the same brightness of image to a viewer wherever he happens to sit.


Another way to note the benefits of such diffusion is to realise what happens when you stop diffusing light in this way and, instead of diffusing much of the light away from the source, start reflecting it back to the source. That is, make your reflection extremely focused and directional.


Can you think of a surface that epitomizes such an approach?


That's right: A mirror.


A mirror, at a flat angle to any light source, reflects the light directly back to the source. That's why a good, clean mirror surface will reflect an image of you that is pretty much as bright as the source (you) because pretty much all the light is reflected back to you and not diffused away.


So now imagine you have a room (make it all covered it total black velvet, just so we don't involve room reflections). Place the projector near your head. Projecting the image on to a neutral gain white screen you'll see a standard movie image. Now replace that screen with a mirror the same size.

What are you going to see? You are going to see a mirror image pretty much as if you were looking at the projector. That is, you'll see the projector and it's super bright spot of light beaming right at you (reflection of the mirror). You may as well be looking into the projector beam. Same as shining a flashlight into a mirror. It's just reflecting the narrow beam of light right back to you - so it's now a surface with only a narrow portion of extreme brightness in the center - the projector beam.


This explains the challenge in trying to produce specialty screens like the BD and others that try to re-focus light back to the viewer. Essentially (and especially with angular reflective screens) the optical coatings on a BD screen are used to stop the light diffusion to the sides of the screen and focus some of it back to the viewer. In other words, it is acting more _in the direction_ of a mirror, rather than a diffuser (neutral gain screen).


But of course the more you mimic the light focusing properties of a mirror, the more "mirror-like" the image is going to become: you are going to get

a more mirror-like reflection of the projector beam and hence, like a mirror you are going to have "beaming" or "hot-spotting" since the light is more focused.


If you are sitting in front of a big mirror with a projector shooting it's light to the center, you'll see a tiny bright beam reflected in the center of the mirror, the rest of the mirror not really being illuminated. Similarly, you can spot this effect on the Black Diamond screens, even from the center seat. It's like a much bigger, more diffuse version of this. The center of the screen has a bright spot, the screen getting darker away from that focused light spot.


And of course, like a flashlight pointed at a mirror, your experience of how bright the "hot spot" is and where it appears on the screen will depend on your viewing angle and the angle of the light source to the screen. But it's essential unevenness will always be there, just like a mirror. It's least noticeable from a center seat because the hot spot is central and the darkening of the image is sort of "spread out" in radiating in a circle.


And of course the hot-spotting of the BD screen maintains it's mirror-like qualities as you sit off to one side. Take a flashlight, stand in front of a mirror and point it into the mirror. Now, still holding the flashlight aimed at the center of the mirror, shuffle to one side of the mirror. Notice how the beam of bright light from the flashlight "moves" off center to the side you are standing. Now move to the other side of the mirror and that bright beam moves to that side of the mirror (again, this is keeping the flashlight positioned centrally to the mirror).


Same with the BD screen. You move to the right side and you see the projector light beam move to that side - the side closer to you becomes brighter. Move to the left side of the screen and the beam follows you - the left side near you becomes brighter. Like a big (but much more diffuse) mirror effect.


So that's one of the major challenges involved for anyone trying to increase the reflectivity of a screen by having it focuses light more directly instead of diffusing it: the more gain you apply the more apt you are to have a screen that mimics both the good and bad effects of a mirror.


The Black Diamond screens, especially the .8 version, start with a really, really dark substrate (which is why it almost looks "black" without light shining directly on the screen). But simply leaving it so dark would mean terribly dim images from most projector, especially if it's diffusing light in a lambertian fashion. To get a bright enough image an optical coating (or some reflective property) has to be introduced which will focus light back to the viewer and gain back needed image brightness. So a significant amount of optical coating/focusing of the light occurs with the screen coating to make it more mirror-like, raising brightness to a centrally seated viewer.


It's a great idea to combine the two ideas. The optical coating reflects the light in a more mirror like fashion back toward the viewer to get decent image brightness, and lessens the light radiating in to the rest of the room.

And what light DOES reflect back from peripheral angles to the screen will be "absorbed" by the dark screen substrate and effectively reduce it's contamination of the image.


But, the price to pay is the mirror-effect, hotpspotting, and also a lot of us can see the speckled quality of the optical coating necessary to give the screen it's usable brightness.


So...there are always compromises. We just have to decide which ones will affect us more than others.


Hope that is somehow useful.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19784665
> 
> 
> I dont know of any dealer in the gta that has a .8 gain on display...
> 
> 
> Also what was the viewing distance?



Kromer Radio has the .8 version in one room (I'm guessing about a 94" diagonal 16:9 screen, the one I just viewed) and a large (118" wide?)

2:35:1 1.4 gain BD screen in another room.


Viewing distance varied. I walked around the screen and also sat to watch, so probably between 7 and 14 feet distances I'd guess. Hotspotting was apparent (as was screen texture) at all distances.


Why do you ask? Are you seriously unable to see the hot-spotting?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/19785127
> 
> 
> Kromer Radio has the .8 version in one room (I'm guessing about a 94" diagonal 16:9 screen, the one I just viewed) and a large (118" wide?)
> 
> 2:35:1 1.4 gain BD screen in another room.
> 
> 
> Viewing distance varied. I walked around the screen and also sat to watch, so probably between 7 and 14 feet distances I'd guess. Hotspotting was apparent (as was screen texture) at all distances.
> 
> 
> Why do you ask? Are you seriously unable to see the hot-spotting?



Reason i ask is because I was unaware of a gta dealer with one on show.

Thought i was the only one in ontario..

I wonder how long he has had it,

and what gen it is?


----------



## R Harkness

They are newer gen versions (they haven't had them too long and that is what I was told

by my acquaintance when he worked there).


----------



## dovercat

Da-lite have a short article about hot-spotting
http://www.da-lite.com/education/pdf/AOR_V3_I1.pdf


----------



## karlsch

The hot spot on my BDII 1.4 gain does not appear to be an area with increased brightness. The screen is somewhat grainy when in use. My hot spot manifests itself as a spot where the grain appears to be different - it is larger and with dark edges. It's almost as if someone smeared something on that portion of the screen to change the texture. It's subtle but quite noticeable. I noticed it right away.


I am using an LCD projector. It would be interesting to see if it would look different with a DLP.


----------



## Kevin 3000

Quote:

Originally Posted by *R Harkness* 
They are newer gen versions (they haven't had them too long and that is what I was told

by my acquaintance when he worked there).
Thanks for your Hot Spotting thesis










After 14 months of owning a 1.4 BDII i am still not looking to change it.


----------



## fraisa

If i got my wife in a screen shot...

thats it i would get burnt food for a month....lol


Shots getting better

but the last shot of salt your blacks are a lil washed out....










To make things far will post some screen shots at my THX Setting mode

of the same salt scence.

Miss please give me the scene time when you get a chance ...


----------



## R Harkness

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* 
Thanks for your Hot Spotting thesis










After 14 months of owning a 1.4 BDII i am still not looking to change it.
The last thing I want to do is talk anyone out of liking his screen. The BD screen is an excellent product and I can understand why you'd love it.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/19785281
> 
> 
> They are newer gen versions (they haven't had them too long and that is what I was told
> 
> by my acquaintance when he worked there).



Screen Innovation is now on its 3rd generation Black Diamond. Having compared the second and third generation materials, I can say that the texture issue is definitely much less on the 3rd generation. I think it has only been shipping for a few months.


The off angle issues are probably about the same.


----------



## Audiojan

After a few months and many movies in various conditions with my BDII 0.8, I still can't see hotspotting... yes, I'm certain the screen has compromises, but those I can live with. In my room, this screen works wonders.



... and after this pissing match going on here, obviously I'm not going to publish any screen shots. Too bad this thread became less about BD and more about some personal agendas.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/19785746
> 
> 
> But almost any / all of his look exponentially better than yours do.



Can you not see how poor the contrast is in all of the pictures that you posted? The blacks are all incredibly grey. The key is to have a watchable image in ambient light while at the same time keeping blacks looking black.


We keep going around in circles and avoiding the contrast issue, which is what the Black Diamond is really all about.


----------



## jtsony




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Can you not see how poor the contrast is in all of the pictures that you posted? The blacks are all incredibly grey. The key is to have a watchable image in ambient light while at the same time keeping blacks looking black.
> 
> 
> We keep going around in circles and avoiding the contrast issue, which is what the Black Diamond is really all about.



Isn't the Firehawk just as good on blacks as the BD but with the G3 gray screen (comparing the 1.4 vs 1.25) it is able to show better Whites ?


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jtsony* /forum/post/19789203
> 
> 
> Isn't the Firehawk just as good on blacks as the BD but with the G3 gray screen (comparing the 1.4 vs 1.25) it is able to show better Whites ?



I think that the Firehawk and the BD 1.4 probably perform similarly. My sample of BD 1.4 is a lightish color grey - kind of like a gunmetal grey. The difference between a gain of 1.4 and 1.25 is pretty small. If I place my 1.4 gain sample on the .8 BD, the 1.4 is brighter but not by much.


Get sample of each and check them out.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/19789116
> 
> 
> Can you not see how poor the contrast is in all of the pictures that you posted? The blacks are all incredibly grey. The key is to have a watchable image in ambient light while at the same time keeping blacks looking black.



Also, Lord Almighty, what a brutal place to mount a screen! Look at the viewing angles from the chairs to the height of the screen mounted above the fireplace. It's hard to find such a bad viewing angle even from the front rows of any movie theater so why you'd want to do that to yourself in your home is beyond me.


This trend of mounting displays...any display now it seems...above a fireplace is the ultimate aesthetics-over-ergonomics choice (not that I even think the aesthetics of a display over a fireplace are that good to begin with).


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/19789116
> 
> 
> Can you not see how poor the contrast is in all of the pictures that you posted? The blacks are all incredibly grey. The key is to have a watchable image in ambient light while at the same time keeping blacks looking black.
> 
> 
> We keep going around in circles and avoiding the contrast issue, which is what the Black Diamond is really all about.



You...(and a few others....) continually miss the point.


Leastwise on my images. They are not to be construed as being something I would advice...let alone herald as being either taken in suitable conditions or

acceptable as far as anything remotely as being desirable for critical viewing.


They are "Examples" of how the Screen is performing in "Excessive" ambient light...conditions "No One Really Would Care" to watch content in.


It's what they (...the screens show...) do accomplish under circumstances other surfaces could not even muster up a watchable image image...check that...a image you could even see, that is...or should be the topic of observation / discussion..


Basically, what fraisa has tried to do is push the Screenie envelop and publish images that "ARE" to be considered worthy of "acceptability" under lighting conditions also to be considered excessive.


Well...he's tried hard to do so but the yellow cast seen in most of them says that the light level is not nearly as high as the difference between the Screen and the "as seen ambient room light" surrounding would indicate.


Unless there is equal exposure and accurate color throughout the entire composition, no Photo, be it a portrait or a Screenie can be construed as being remotely "accurate" Even a shot taken in the lowest light levels must adhere to that rule.


I see countless screenies posted with the Screen framing the entire area...or the center content zoomed in on.


Child's play and wholly just eye candy.


I gave fraisia a few tips, and with them and his own supposition, he's posted some good shots. And some not so good. It does seem a bit off to see exclamations of superiority coming from those and a few others when actually, all but 1-2 of the images show the Camera making the screen look better than it is....at the expense of the room around it. Do I condone their quality as being "great"? no. Then again...I never claimed my own samples as being such.


Still, the whole enterprise has fallen into something less than effective because of a decided lack of understanding, somewhat undeserved self-employed praise, and reality based observation.



I've not been the one to attempt to bring up price as relates to quality issues. That would not be politically correct or appropriate for me to do so. fraisia knows where I am, where I have been coming from, and my intentions, and as he is a SI-BD Dealer and has shown a very good level of both understanding and acceptance of my presence, I'm good with that, and feel good about most of the preceding effort.


I simply saw a gross disparity between what was posted, claimed, and seen at CEDIA and other venues, and what real life represents. fraisa, to his credit, felt up to raising the bar of quality and reality.


How high is it...or at least how much higher did it rise? That should be the topic here, and continual commentary that centers around the shots shown as being "Proof of Quality" should cease....on both sides of the fence.


After all, all the complaints started coming from those who disputed what SI itself has advertised, and/or what the poster himself encountered at a store...or at home.


I hope this clarifies things for those who can read and absorb it.


All others need not apply.


----------



## fraisa

Okay did some testing with the 1.4 and .8 gain,

and made some calls to some good friends.

the Off angle issue of the viewing angle is better on the 1.4 vs the .8 gain...


this is the compromise between the 2...

1.4 off viewing angle increased but lower contrast.

.8 off viewing angle decreased but higher contrast.


One thing that would help the .8 off viewing angle would be a curved screen..

if you curved the screen that would increase that viewing angle alot...


Its all what you are looking for per your viewing room...


...

other note.

I was working that Tripod to hard taking screen shots and i broke my handle..lol

had to take it back and exchange it for a new one...

this is too much fun


----------



## fraisa

The one major difference i have found is that the Black Diamond

handles light scatter better than the stewart Firehawk...

Also the Black diamond offered better detail with regards to black levels

One demo test i have done with a Runco Projector few months back

on the Dark Knight there was alot of scenes where the black levels where enhanced and gave more detail to the picture...

But Stewart is still a great product and i respect the results it can give....


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/19789354
> 
> 
> Also, Lord Almighty, what a brutal place to mount a screen! Look at the viewing angles from the chairs to the height of the screen mounted above the fireplace. It's hard to find such a bad viewing angle even from the front rows of any movie theater so why you'd want to do that to yourself in your home is beyond me.
> 
> 
> This trend of mounting displays...any display now it seems...above a fireplace is the ultimate aesthetics-over-ergonomics choice (not that I even think the aesthetics of a display over a fireplace are that good to begin with).



Hee Hee.


They have the one room. They wanted something much larger than their 47" TV. They would not / do not watch content with every drape open, and every light on in the Family Room and the Kitchen area directly behind the PJ. Basically...and for most people, such a situation would require running 110 ac, Video Cabling, a Tilt Mount, and a damn good (...and uber bright...) Direct View monitor to that location. Then the owner would have a but-ugly Black Box staring at him when not in use.


Is it ideal? No. Is it way impressive to the uninitiated who come into that area and see that image up there? You bet! Are the people who have it now Happy?


I'm fairly certain. The image is perfect at every location throughout a very large area, and really great under sensible but normal room light, and of course awe inspiring in controlled lighting.


Why can't people on this thread seem to be able to judge things beyond / past the first thing they see/read?


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/19790147
> 
> 
> I hope this clarifies things for those who can read and absorb it.



To be honest, I read your post and I don't understand most of it.


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/19790863
> 
> 
> To be honest, I read your post and I don't understand most of it.



Read it again...look at the last 3-4 pages of posts (..and some prior to those as well...) You've been hanging around the thread enough that your answer is just too oblique a response.


Now I did say, "...for those who can read and absorb it...." but I'm guessing you *are* in that category.


So please...elaborate on whatever seems to confuse you. Given the circumstances, it should of course be pertinent to the subject at hand.



......or anyone else...please. I'd like to see if at least a few realize and accept the purpose of what is/was trying to be shown, where it has merit, as well as where it has been found to be a bit misdirected.


----------



## Giak

Hi, I am interested in BDII.


I don't care about viewing conditions in ambient light. I have a dark room and I only use VPR with all lights off.

Actually I have a normal white screen 1.2 and I would like to know if I would have any loss in replacing my screen with a BDII 0.8. Only improvements?


I need a fixed frame screen. I want to improve black levels and contrast without any kind of worsen in other image parameters.


Would I regret if I buy a BDII in my situation?


Thanks


----------



## msmCutter

What kind of projector are you rocking?


----------



## Giak

ProjectionDesign AVIELO Spectra. It is a 1000lumen DLP.

I need a 106" image (diagonal).

Thanks


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Giak* /forum/post/19807648
> 
> 
> ProjectionDesign AVIELO Spectra. It is a 1000lumen DLP.
> 
> I need a 106" image (diagonal).
> 
> Thanks



Depending on the actual lumens from that projector, 106" may be too large for a .8 BD screen if you want to do some ambient light viewing. I think you'd be fine in a dark room though.


I don't know what issues your existing screen may have but you may see more texture on a BD and your viewing angle might be more limited.


In a dark room, the benefits would be less light reflection and better on screen contrast.


----------



## msmCutter

Doesn't sound like a good investment to me. A new projector is probably cheaper.


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Giak* /forum/post/19807459
> 
> 
> Hi, I am interested in BDII.
> 
> 
> I don't care about viewing conditions in ambient light. I have a dark room and I only use VPR with all lights off.
> 
> Actually I have a normal white screen 1.2 and I would like to know if I would have any loss in replacing my screen with a BDII 0.8. Only improvements?
> 
> 
> I need a fixed frame screen. I want to improve black levels and contrast without any kind of worsen in other image parameters.
> 
> 
> Would I regret if I buy a BDII in my situation?
> 
> 
> Thanks



I am a BDII owner.


With the BDII *you will see the screen*, graininess/sparklies and a hot spot. Usually, people who go through the effort to have a completely dark room do not want this, they only want to see what is coming from the projector.


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/19807854
> 
> 
> Doesn't sound like a good investment to me. A new projector is probably cheaper.



No...just a correctly matched screen.


Actually (...and if he can even get on that size...) the BD .8 being hit with that PJ at it's closest and most effective positioning would do most of what is desirable. If the Poster is sensitive to "Granularity" or "Sparklies", those might present issues, but much of that is mitigated by positioning the PJ as low/close to screen center as possible.


Price might be the biggest regret if the Poster does not find a good balance between cash outlay and the significance in the gains. In the overall view of justifying such a choice as being an optimal one, using the BD .8 or the 1.4 in the dark is not their most vaunted intended purpose, and when doing so one might expect to encounter both the pluses and negatives of such an application.


Does getting a very expensive screen make sense only on the weight of reducing light scatter (ie: viewing cone) against close-in surfaces?


Well it just might in the worst case, "Dark / Darkened" room scenarios. And those would be...in combination;


a. A bright white or lighter colored room whose adjoining surface are very....VERY close to the sides, top, and / or bottom of the Screen's edges.


b. Offsetting by color change is absolutely out of the question because of WAF. _(...this however seems a bit "off" because if watching in the dark is the prevalent usage, that usually dictates the area as being "Dedicated" and that would normally mean the color scheme would at least be a serviceable one for such...)_


On the flip, Cost really cannot be too strongly a consideration if the Poster / individual is already aware of such. Or becomes aware and still does not blanch. And this then is where the marketing strategy either pays off, or comes back to haunt. One sees a solution as promised....one that graduates some away from the usual purpose, but seems to make sense nonetheless.


1. Such a screen is definitely going to enhance perceived contrast by maintaining a larger distance between the blackest perceived Black and the lightest perceived "light color". (....or White..)


2. The more narrowly defined viewing cone reduces the amount of light sent to each side.


3. The person making the choice must be able to justify the needed expense to acquire a solution to such few issues as described.


So OK, I'll go on record as saying it would be a terrible waste of so much money for simply solving a "Reflected Scattered Light" issue. And unless the PJ is a newer, sub $1k 1080p Light Cannon needing significant Contrast assistance, or even if....that too would not be enough of itself.


Both the latter combined...? Still such expense seems a bit crazed since a $2.5K investment cold get you a Epson 8500 and a Dalite HP. Then move the other PJ into the Bedroom.










Nope....it's when "AMBIENT LIGHT" viewing needs are tossed into the equation that it all gels to a point it can become reasonably palatable.

At that level of performance there are far fewer Screens that can fit the bill, and do each aspect "well".


Good...effective...and straight-forwardly correct Marketing should be what is expected, for in truth any good prouduct should be able to stand on such merit-able performance. But fewer Screens will be sold doing only that type of marketing...and it's no stretch to realize that in the burgeoning new market, there exists far many more people with crappy environments for PJ/Screens to be used in, but that also want that "Jetson's Wall Sized TV" really bad....so there will be hype to attract such attention. In fact, it's exactly those types out there who think they need a better solution (...or know they do...) and if they see it advertised and don't choke on the price point....it's a sure sale.


Now then there is many of us, those who dwell in a more refined, and expectant state. To such, it's not going to make nearly as much sense, and the effort to pursue such business is a bit grating when one sees anything close to hype on a Forum such as this one. Well OK, I'm a Ambient Advocate myself....and I'm nothing if not extremely pragmatic about "cost to performance" ratios.


However what I've tried to do, and encourage fraisa to do is show images that don't tout as much of the "Dark Room" properties as they do the much more needed and "designed for" ambient light ability. And by doing so with examples that are "NOT" intended to look fabulous as much as show how much is possible under dire and excessive lighting conditions.


So instead people complain about how the shown images look bad. What is overlooked is that with any other Screen, there would not be anything to look at...at all, let alone the plainly governable images seen. One then only has to postulate what the screen can/will do under something less intrusive to know that at ANY level of lighting being present, such a Screen *WILL* perform better than almost any other design.


That however seems to be lost in the rush to criticize, not analyze the offered images for what they show....and not for what they do not.


The end result? Well I couldn't blame fraisa & crew for going back to the Status Quo at this point. Myself, I've just tried to keep somewhat neutral and serve in an advisory and comparative capacity, and offer occasional commentary such as this post.


It's been a challenge.













This just in:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *karlsch* /forum/post/19808434
> 
> 
> I am a BDII owner.
> 
> 
> With the BDII *you will see the screen*, graininess/sparklies and a hot spot. Usually, people who go through the effort to have a completely dark room do not want this, they only want to see what is coming from the projector.




Sheesh! I spend 20 minutes "Hunt & Pecking" and karlsch does the "Reader's Digest" version and sez it all so much quicker.


....as I said, it's been a challenge.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *karlsch* /forum/post/19808434
> 
> 
> I am a BDII owner.
> 
> 
> With the BDII *you will see the screen*, graininess/sparklies and a hot spot. Usually, people who go through the effort to have a completely dark room do not want this, they only want to see what is coming from the projector.



I am not sure if you have the most recent version. I have compared the "third generation" .8 gain material to the second. The texture issue is much less in the more recent version. Now, when it appears, it is more like a mild film grain. Texture on the older version stood out much more as if there was a veil over some parts of the image. Even then it was not always present. On the .8 gain material, I never found hotspotting to be very obvious, even with the earlier generation. I think that hotspotting and texture are related issues though.


So, screens shipping now are improved over earlier ones.


If you have a room with a lot of reflections, I think that the BD will help in preserving contrast and in preventing the image from washing out.


I am working on a review of the Black Diamond that will be published in a few weeks on Mark Petersen's website, VideoVantage. I have a few more tests to run but not much free time to do them. In the review, you will see how the Black Diamond performs in a variety of different lighting conditions. You will also see how some other popular screen materials compare when it comes to dealing with ambient light.


The screen that I am reviewing is my own and not a review sample that Screen Innovations provided.


Personally, I am very impressed with the Black Diamond.


----------



## andrios




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> I am not sure if you have the most recent version. I have compared the "third generation" .8 gain material to the second. The texture issue is much less in the more recent version. Now, when it appears, it is more like a mild film grain. Texture on the older version stood out much more as if there was a veil over some parts of the image. Even then it was not always present. On the .8 gain material, I never found hotspotting to be very obvious, even with the earlier generation. I think that hotspotting and texture are related issues though.
> 
> 
> So, screens shipping now are improved over earlier ones.
> 
> 
> If you have a room with a lot of reflections, I think that the BD will help in preserving contrast and in preventing the image from washing out.
> 
> 
> I am working on a review of the Black Diamond that will be published in a few weeks on Mark Petersen's website, VideoVantage. I have a few more tests to run but not much free time to do them. In the review, you will see how the Black Diamond performs in a variety of different lighting conditions. You will also see how some other popular screen materials compare when it comes to dealing with ambient light.
> 
> 
> The screen that I am reviewing is my own and not a review sample that Screen Innovations provided.
> 
> 
> Personally, I am very impressed with the Black Diamond.



How has the 1.4 changed?


----------



## Lawguy

My sample from the 1.4 is the older material. Screen Innovations has posted in this thread that the newer 1.4 material has less visible texture than the older material. I think they call it "sparkles" but I would not use that word to describe what I see.


Whatever they did made a big difference on the .8 gain material but I can't say for sure what it does for the 1.4 gain material.


----------



## fraisa

FYI

..

Testimony of the black Diamond.....
Quote:

Originally Posted by *Alan Gouger* 
I am using this screen as well and love it regardless what projector I throw at it. The specs say it maintains polarization as well.


----------



## fraisa

PM Testimony from fellow avs member


And i Quote......

First off I love your setup. It really is inspiring my future living room setup. I am now looking at getting the epson 8700 and a Black Diamond .8 screen. Thanks and keep all those great pics coming!

.....

Okay why do i mention this,

Because,

People are viewing my screen shots on the blackdiamond screen and they are taking Notice.


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Alan Gouger :
> 
> I am using this screen as well and love it regardless what projector I throw at it. The specs say it maintains polarization as well.



Reading such platitudes coming from Alan always makes for pretty credible testimony.


As far as the .8 gain BD "retaining" Polarity, it does in fact to a degree enough to allow for 3D Stereoscopic images, however it fails to make note what the Extinction rate is...and further tests elsewhere have shown that the amount of lumens required to do an effective job with Passive 3D often results in the adverse aspects of the BD material manifesting themselves to a greater extent than they ever do viewing 2D content. *THAT* kinda amounts to the type of Promotional hype many on this thread have been decrying lately.


The biggest issue against even suggesting such a potential usage is the almost complete lack of Peer use out there due to both size limitations/expense considerations.


It's pretty much well known by those who have experience in 3D...Active & Passive...that the Screen size & gain as relates to available projected Lumens is a limiting factor in FP 3D apps.


Except when it's done the right way, then you can zoom out to 160" to 200" screen sizes with 2k-3K Lumen PJs. That being so, mere trifles of 120" screens present no problem.


But plainly put, as long as the entry level price point for mfg Black Screen technology remains at $2k+ levels, it's going to be hard for ANY mfg of such to rise up out of the niche market those Screens sell to at present.


This little bit of ditty for ya....even in DIY 3D Screen making, the need to use "special" materials and components raises the price of admission to well over $300.00 for a 120" surface...and proportionately more for larger sizes. That's never good news for cheapskate DIY'ers to hear...and so in that respect, 3D suffers from buyer's resistance in both genres.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19816652
> 
> 
> PM Testimony from fellow avs member
> 
> 
> And i Quote......
> 
> First off I love your setup. It really is inspiring my future living room setup. I am now looking at getting the epson 8700 and a Black Diamond .8 screen. Thanks and keep all those great pics coming!
> 
> .....



You cannot "Quote" without listing the name of the person your "quoting" or all your doing is....well, nothing actually.


And fraisa, how can someone saying "I am now *looking at* getting the epson 8700 and a Black Diamond .8 screen." be construed as being "testimony" toward anything other than the poster being impressed enough with your Screenies to wanna shell out some bucks to acquire the Screen your showing that is doing all that?"


It cannot. But then again, that WAS the reason you posted them, so in that....congratulations. I hope it turns out well for both of you.


----------



## andrios

What's the ideal placement of the projector with the black diamond 1.4?


Just put mine up, I really notice hotspotting in center of screen. It's a lot dimmer in the four corners.


My projector is ceiling mounted probably right above the top frame to the right, then using lens shift to get the image. Should I drop the projector so it's more in line with the screen?


The viewing angle is not to good either. I thought that was fixed with ones getting shipped out.


Not only viewing from sides but even when I'm standing up vs sitting down. It's gets darker when I stand up. I must have bad placement of projector.


I have not noticed any sparkles at all.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/19821537
> 
> 
> What's the ideal placement of the projector with the black diamond 1.4?
> 
> 
> Just put mine up, I really notice hotspotting in center of screen. It's a lot dimmer in the four corners.
> 
> 
> My projector is ceiling mounted probably right above the top frame to the right, then using lens shift to get the image. Should I drop the projector so it's more in line with the screen?
> 
> 
> The viewing angle is not to good either. I thought that was fixed with ones getting shipped out.
> 
> 
> I have not noticed any sparkles at all.



I have only seen a sample of the 1.4 material so take this for what it is worth.


I was afraid that the issues that you see would be more pronounced on the 1.4, which is one of the reasons why I went with the .8 version. Both screens use gain techniques. Gain has side effects like hot spotting and restricted viewing angles. I think that the 1.4 uses more gain than the .8 so the issues will be more pronounced on the 1.4.


I have not seen much concrete guidance from SI about mounting - other than that the projector should not be mounted below the screen.


It is an angular reflective screen. I doubt that moving the projector a little up or down will change what you see very much.


As I noted earlier, sparkles is really the wrong word to use. It is more like texture. This will be evident in the hotspot and on light areas like people's faces or the sky. If you focus on a face, you will see that as it moves, it looks like certain things on the skin remain stationary.


I don't think that the viewing angle has changed at all between the current generation and the earlier ones.


What is your seating/throw throw distance?


----------



## andrios

Seating is like 11ft throw is 14.5 ft


For example the start bar of windows 7 is really dim when I'm standing up, right as I sit down it becomes perfectly visible.


I do not notice the texture at all.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/19821816
> 
> 
> Seating is like 11ft throw is 14.5 ft
> 
> 
> For example the start bar of windows 7 is really dim when I'm standing up, right as I sit down it becomes perfectly visible.
> 
> 
> I do not notice the texture at all.



That sounds like a pretty extreme variation in brightness.


I can tell from the 1.4 sample that I have that as I bend it, some parts of the sample appear much brighter than others because the light gets reflected in differnt directions. This is the gain at work, for good and bad.


You might want to call SI or your dealer and see if either have any mounting suggestings.


If you move yourself back to where the projector is, are things better or worse as you move around from side to side and up and down?


----------



## MississippiMan

Ideally, the projector should be mounted with the lens (...not shifted...) as close into the center of the Screen as possible. For most that would entail being at the 40/50% into center location, with the screen & seating being located as to make the screen be placed a bit higher.


The sparklies and texture is seen more predominantly when the projected light's source (...the brightest focal point...) is located at a angle. This causes the "on/off" nature of the screen's reflectivity quotient to both highlight the excessively brighter areas as well as the areas that are less bright due to being at another, less direct angle to the incoming light. Retro Reflectivity means directing light back to it's source, so obviously a PJ located off angle aint gonna be helping things. Also, the nature of the screen's type of reflectivity will make it be less bright with a PJ located too far off center. This is borne out by the fact that now, even slight variations in location are noticeable when you move about. That would be harder to discern if the Screen was at it's maximum level of foot lambert output.


All you can do is to place the PJ as low as possible, and set back further, both to reduce the Vertical viewing angle issue, and increase the Horizontal viewing cone.


One would suppose that your A/V Sales Rep would have made you well aware of these things. *fraisa* has counseled several times how he himself won't sell a Customer a screen without seeing the location and determining what is...and is not possible.


That is both sound advice and wise counsel anytime you mix performance with compromising conditions or installation considerations..


----------



## programmergeek

We just got the 1.4 113" and have it on a Panasonic projector 1500 lumens about 15' from the screen. The older material is much worse with the sparkles and hot spotting. Also if the projector is mounted higher it gets worse. Ours is about even or just above the top of the screen. We have compared several screens and this is the best of the HC screens we have used and the pattern is almost unnoticeable, you really have to look hard under the right conditions to see anything. Our go to screen use to be a da-lite HC cinema vision which most people where fine with the BDII is so much better than that.


The BDII has also helped the colors and the black levels allot, things look more vivid blacks are black and have shades of gray. It really makes a 3k projector look like a 20k projector. Just be careful what you look at and make sure it is the latest version.


----------



## andrios

Actually I think my projector is higher than the top of the frame and little to the right.


I'm gonna try to adjust placement of my projector probably use the extension to bring it down like 6".


----------



## programmergeek

Just courious does it improve when you stand up?


----------



## andrios




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *programmergeek* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Just courious does it improve when you stand up?



Nope it gets better when I sit down.


I am using a lot of lens shift downward.


----------



## fraisa

I have the .8 gain so you dont have the sparkly issue,

And as mentioned before the latest version of the 1.4gain BD has been engineered to reduce the sparkle.

..

People are taking notice to the Black Diamond .......


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *programmergeek* /forum/post/19822309
> 
> 
> Just courious does it improve when you stand up?



He said it gets dim when he stands up.


This suggests he should lower the projector. This is an angular reflective screen. I can see from the picture that the angle between the projector, screen and viewer might be too large. The light is bouncing off the screen toward the floor. I can see how that might make the hot spot more obvious.


----------



## andrios




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/19822449
> 
> 
> He said it gets dim when he stands up.
> 
> 
> This suggests he should lower the projector. This is an angular reflective screen. I can see from the picture that the angle between the projector, screen and viewer might be too large. The light is bouncing off the screen toward the floor. I can see how that might make the hot spot more obvious.



I think this is whats happening. lol it is a little bright on my tile floor...


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/19822915
> 
> 
> I think this is whats happening. lol it is a little bright on my tile floor...



Either moving the projector back or lowering it will reduce the angle. It would probably be easier to lower it.


----------



## andrios




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/19823061
> 
> 
> Either moving the projector back or lowering it will reduce the angle. It would probably be easier to lower it.



I will try that tonight. I have a 6" pipe that came with the mount.


----------



## andrios




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *programmergeek* /forum/post/19822179
> 
> 
> We just got the 1.4 113" and have it on a Panasonic projector 1500 lumens about 15' from the screen. The older material is much worse with the sparkles and hot spotting. Also if the projector is mounted higher it gets worse. Ours is about even or just above the top of the screen. We have compared several screens and this is the best of the HC screens we have used and the pattern is almost unnoticeable, you really have to look hard under the right conditions to see anything. Our go to screen use to be a da-lite HC cinema vision which most people where fine with the BDII is so much better than that.
> 
> 
> The BDII has also helped the colors and the black levels allot, things look more vivid blacks are black and have shades of gray. It really makes a 3k projector look like a 20k projector. Just be careful what you look at and make sure it is the latest version.



The stickers on my box say the screen was made DEC. 31, 2010.


It should be the newest gen.


----------



## fraisa

Check this Out......









The blacks are amazing per this amount of Ambient light

BD 1.4 Gain


Getting closer to what i see in real life. Screen is darker to the eye.

Adjust your monitors brightness/contrast `PLUGE pattern`to get a realistic level of room conditions.

200 watt 6x Halogen lights on in room showing bright room conditions.

Color needs attention due to Halogen/Projector light and camera/WB not compensating, OK for this test.


----------



## R Harkness

Fraisa,


Frankly I don't think "amazing" is the word I'd apply to the black levels, or level of contrast, in that screen shot, in any respect.


I just turned up the lights even higher in my room than you have in that shot and the contrast of the images on my Stewart white 1.3 gain screen/JVC projector combo was even better than what you show above.


In other words, I don't think your screen shots are always showing what you hope.


(Which is one reason selling people on screens via screen shots is always risky).


----------



## Lawguy

If you look at the Playstation and the remote controls, it is clear that there is a lot of light in that room. Those halogen lights next to the screen are also raising the amount of light in the screen area even though they are not shining directly on the screen. That is a very challenging kind of image because it is very dark over all. It is not really a high contrast image because there are no real big light elements. So this image does not, in my mind, test contrast. It is really showing dark scene performance. Doing all dark in a bright room is really hard for front projection. You become limited by the color of the screen. When the lights are on the color of the screen is exposed. I would say from the unmasked areas of the screen that they are maybe a little bit darker than the color of the BD material.


But, it is a watchable image with decent quality. I think that if you masked the bars it would look even better but that defeats the purpose in a way.


I think it would look better on a .8 BD because the material is darker.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/19825639
> 
> 
> Fraisa,
> 
> 
> Frankly I don't think "amazing" is the word I'd apply to the black levels, or level of contrast, in that screen shot, in any respect.
> 
> 
> I just turned up the lights even higher in my room than you have in that shot and the contrast of the images on my Stewart white 1.3 gain screen/JVC projector combo was even better than what you show above.
> 
> 
> In other words, I don't think your screen shots are always showing what you hope.
> 
> 
> (Which is one reason selling people on screens via screen shots is always risky).



Hawkness,


That image in that much ambient light is very amazing,

YOu cant do that with a stewart firehawk i have tried.....

Have you ever heard of a SI BD Mini...

I have one, its a 28 inch mini screen, I also have put it up to the Firehawk and you see the BD can do what the firehawk cant..


Would the blacks be better on the .8 gain,

Yes its better on the .8 gain.

But again you do have a reduced viewing cone with the .8....


Purpose was to show off the 1.4 gain in that extreme condition...


Will say this about SI as a Company.

At any given time you can call them and talk to someone live on the phone for Tech support.

even when CES was on last week and they most of there staff in Vegas,

Someone was still there at SI answering the phones...

Also there Tech staff is very knowledgable when it comes to there product and

technicial questions....


As a dealer i cant even call Stewart and speak to someone without going thru countless hoops,


See below

SI BlackDiamond is the Shark, Other Screen companies are the Seal,,,


----------



## msmCutter

Cone...


----------



## MississippiMan

Quote:

Originally Posted by *msmCutter* 
Cone...
Hot Spot rather......










Blacks look good within the brighter area though......










fraisa, it was all too apparent though how when the BD Screen was subjected to the halogen ambient light, black shades pushed decidedly to "Blue" (...and a bit into Green as well...) . Had the lighting been Incandescent, those Blacks would have instead pushed into Red/Brown-ish shades.


Remember what I mentioned about how a Screen shot must not only show the true representative color of the room, but also show correct color on the Screen? While those colors might be / can be / will be washed out when ambient light is introduced, if they do not show correctly, then the shot itself is also not showing contrast correctly either. A Ambient Light Screen that is truly doing a great job is NOT going to overtly produce such drastically off-base coloration.


Be advised that Colors have contrast differences between the lightest and darkest representations...not just Blacks and Grays


----------



## rdjam

I love my BDII and all that, let's get that out of the way up front, in case no one has seen my previous posts.


But if anyone is considering going with a passive 3D system, hold off on the BDII until we get a few things clarified.


Last night I started doing the optics testing for my "Ultimate 3D System" thread (below) and, based on the tests, the BDII that *I* have, at least, is in NO WAY suitable for polarised 3D projection.


The results were terrible, with massive coating structure inconsistencies being shown up, and very poor polarisation retention. I've included photos of the testing if anyone is interested.


I still love the screen for 2D, great product. But I don't see how SI can produce videos calling this a suitable screen for passive 3D, based on the screen that *I* have, at least.


Now, I've heard rumour of a "3rd Gen" version of this screen - I got mine mid-year last year, so it's possible that I "only" have the 2nd gen version. This is something that I'm looking to clarify. I'm putting in a PM to "send", SI fellow who has been good enough to participate in this thread. Hopefully we'll figure out if there is an update version that doesn't display the significant flaws I saw last night.


----------



## pb_maxxx

*mississippiman*, care to elaborate?

Quote:

3D testing with BDII last night - very poor results...










I love my BDII and all that, let's get that out of the way up front, in case no one has seen my previous posts.


But if anyone is considering going with a passive 3D system, hold off on the BDII until we get a few things clarified.


Last night I started doing the optics testing for my "Ultimate 3D System" thread (below) and, based on the tests, the BDII that *I* have, at least, is in NO WAY suitable for polarised 3D projection.


The results were terrible, with massive coating structure inconsistencies being shown up, and very poor polarisation retention.
seems you were also right about the BDII and passive 3D. however, given that most people will likely go the active 3D route due to cost of such pjs and/or having to double up on pjs... what's the verdict of the BDII and active 3D. are there also coating structure inconsistencies showing up there as well?


----------



## pb_maxxx

rdjam;


excellent work. looking forward to seeing more of your ultimate 3D thread.


----------



## MississippiMan

Quote:

Originally Posted by *pb_maxxx* 
*mississippiman*, care to elaborate?

seems you were also right about the BDII and passive 3D. however, given that most people will likely go the active 3D route due to cost of such pjs and/or having to double up on pjs... what's the verdict of the BDII and active 3D. are there also coating structure inconsistencies showing up there as well?
Active 3D performance is dependent upon Gain/Surface structure. Any screen that exhibits a "graininess" shows it just a dominantly during 3D content as it does in 2D situations.


The need for Gain is slowly being mitigated by consistently brighter PJs that still retain decent Contrast specs. However there is still a ways to go, as the brightest of the current Active 3D DLP units all have terribly low Contrast specs.


Even if a PJ/Content match-up results in spectacular 3D images, "3D wise", if the image is dull, it's not gonna appeal to anyone...even "Normals" who are not as picky as us AVS'ers.


So using a Screen that can both improve the perceived Contrast on the Screen as well as maintain enough reflective foot lamberts to keep a Active 3D looking dynamic...not anemic, THAT is what getting really effective 3D performance is based on.


If "Speck-cu-larity" is added, and people are already looking at 3D-ism with a critical eye, the insertion of "Graininess" when most have become accustomed to the pristine images from 1080p HD content, can really be a "Deal Killer". Or if that is found to be the case "after" purchase and a return is not possible....? Ow.


The suggestion (...or claim...) by SI that the BD was effective for use with Passive 3D seemed strange at the time I first read of it, if for no other reason that even a 1.4 gain screen is sadly deficient for all but the brightest Active 3D PJs. But then again, in a "Marketing" point of view, what better Clientele to sell a pricey specialty Screen to than those who are already committing to spending more than average? Let's be blunt. No one who buys a sub-$800.00 720p / DLP 3D ready PJ is gonna float $2.5K for a Screen. No...I see more people going for DaLite's HP offerings.


But gosh...wouldn't you know it. The HP also shows off it's tendency toward Graininess..










What a world....what a world.....


----------



## andrios

I dropped my projector about 7 inches to be more level with top of screen. Hottspoting is not bad at all anymore but if I try to look for it I can tell my 4 corners are a tiny shade darker.


What I do notice now is the sparkles or texture of the screen(front seating only 10-11 ft). I can only see it in the center area of the screen. There not actual sparkles like you guys have said, it's like smearing windex on a glass or CRT screen surface and letting it dry. I can replicate it everytime with my Disney wow disc. My projector is on cinema mode and even Eco mode should be only 500 lumens.....rear seating it disappears.


----------



## MississippiMan

......and just to be clear about it...I still think that a good match up of a BDII and the proper projector, with the PJ placed optimally will deliver a level of 2D performance in modest ambient light that accomplishes what it's designed to do.


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *msmCutter* 
Cone...
Thats not a cone or a hot spot but the image on film,,,

I have 20 shots of that shark starting at the surface to going straight up then down in a slow motion


But hey a day in paradise wouldnt be complete without my AVS Screen Abuse.....










Febuary 4............They R Coming.......


----------



## Lawguy

Quote:

Originally Posted by *andrios* 
I dropped my projector about 7 inches to be more level with top of screen. Hottspoting is not bad at all anymore but if I try to look for it I can tell my 4 corners are a tiny shade darker.


What I do notice now is the sparkles or texture of the screen(front seating only 10-11 ft). I can only see it in the center area of the screen. There not actual sparkles like you guys have said, it's like smearing windex on a glass or CRT screen surface and letting it dry. I can replicate it everytime with my Disney wow disc. My projector is on cinema mode and even Eco mode should be only 500 lumens.....rear seating it disappears.
That's pretty much exactly what I see. It is very mild for me at least.


----------



## MississippiMan

Quote:

Originally Posted by *andrios* 
I dropped my projector about 7 inches to be more level with top of screen. Hottspoting is not bad at all anymore but if I try to look for it I can tell my 4 corners are a tiny shade darker.


What I do notice now is the sparkles or texture of the screen(front seating only 10-11 ft). I can only see it in the center area of the screen. There not actual sparkles like you guys have said, it's like smearing windex on a glass or CRT screen surface and letting it dry. .....rear seating it disappears.
I knew it would be an improvement.


Screens have been imparting "texture" since Day One. The older Mantra of 1.80 to 2.2 Seating to Screen "width" formula was specifically intended to offset that circumstance.


As screens got better, and as SDE artifacts were reduced, people crowded closer. Spoiled as they / we are nowadays, things that went unnoticed in the past are pretty hard to accept in the present.


Still, it's not fair or correct to judge between a Matte White surface w/180 degree dispersion and any higher reflective Screen with a designed-in 120 degree (...or less...) cone.


----------



## andrios

Also the wall on the left is getting purple light scatter and the tile floor is getting green light scatter. Ceiling and right side wall get almost no light scatter.


The pj is almost dead center, so I'm just using downward lens shift.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/19827707
> 
> 
> Hot Spot rather......



Yep.


We all have our own likes and dislikes in terms of screen issues. But for me hot-spotting - evident in most of fraisa's screen shots as well as in real life viewing of the BD screens - is among the most annoying. It so often pulls me out of the experience, being such an obvious technical artifact. It was the same with Rear Projection televisions especially the old CRTs. The worst of them gave me the impression of someone being behind the image illuminating it with a flashlight, which drove me nuts. I get some of that same sensation looking at the hotspotting in fraisa's shark picture.


Once I experienced owning a plasma (starting in 2001) with it's evenly illuminated image from any angle, it just looked so much more natural and pleasing to me. Removed that "I have to be in just the right spot and try not to notice hot-spotting" bug outta my head, letting me totally enjoy the image. Looking at the hot-spotting and viewing angle issues of RPTVs made me gag.


The same issues arose for front projection and after testing various screens I still gravitate to an evenly illuminated image for the same reasons, and I've been willing to do the work in my room (killing reflections) to get it. (I loved the Carada BW material for it's plasma-like viewing angles but it was a tad dimmer than I wanted).


But of course not everyone can or wants to do this, so other solutions to getting a good image obviously make sense too.


----------



## fraisa

Contrast test shot

1.4 Gain BD

BluRay Sin City

Will edit in the same scene soon from the .8 gain











But hey a day in paradise wouldnt be complete without my AVS daily Screen Abuse.....lol


Febuary 4............They R Coming.......


----------



## R Harkness

fraisa,


1. Hotspotting is always more obvious in bright scenes, especially evenly illuminated scenes. The image you posted is just about the worst for noticing hot-spotting possible. (In other words, if you wanted to direct anyone's attention away from hot-spotting, the type of image you posted is what you'd choose). Also, note that hotspotting does not magically disappear from the characteristic of a screen just because you post another image and declare it so. The laws of physics aren't at your bidding.


2. All that said...your last screen shot DOES indicate hotspotting. Look at the dimness of the lower "screws" in each corner compared to the ones up top which are brighter. Note the uneven brightness of the green portions - the splotch of green ("X") at the top of the screen is distinctly brighter than the other green portions lower down on the screen, which also dims as you go to the edges of the screen. All classic signs of hot-spotting.


Unless of course you just happened to have found an image that, by mere coincidence, mimicked the illumination qualities of hot-spotting. In which case it would still remain silly to use an image that looks like it's hot-spotting to illustrate "no hot-spotting."


Why you continue to be on this reality-denying crusade is starting to mystify me...excepting perhaps the "I'm a dealer" part...


----------



## mark haflich

Guys. I don`t have much time and I need to go back a few pages and read more.



But have angle has really nothing to do with hot spotting. If you move from the center position towards the sides, every screen with a gain higher than one will appear dimmer. The half angle is the angular position from horiozontal screen center (the distance is the sine of that angle times the viewingdistance) oe has to move where thebrightness will be 50% less than at screen center. However, the inage will not look half as bright to your eyes. That point is at a much greater angle and would be called the .25 half angle. Butr neither has anything to do with hot spotting, hotspotting means sitting at one position and looking at the screen from that position some areas of the screen look brighter than other areas. One sees hotspotson the screen. Not a good thing. The higher the gain, the more the hot spotting. But there are other variables. That is the projector throw distance and viewing distance. The longer the throw distance and the viewing distance the less the hot spotting. Now lets look at the Firehawk G3 against the BD1.4 What are the differences? Gain 1.2 about vs 1.4. The firehawk shouldn't hot spot, its gain is below the traditional gain cut off for hot spotting,

The BD1.4 will likely hot spot a little but curable with a throw say above 1.6 or so. I don't have exact numbers. Maybe later. The half angle of the Firehawk G3 is30 degrees. t really keeps light of the walls and ceiling and keeps light from the walls being opicked up by the screen. The BD1.4 has a wider half angle, something like 48 degrees. That means you can pretty much as far off center as you are sittting aay from the screen and get no worse than a .7 gain.



The Studeotec 100 or Snowmat 100 is not a new fabric. New name but its been around for years. And its mane advantage is not that everyone sees the same brightness image.


BTW. Alan G. has a BD1.4 and loves it. I only have a small piece and one can not judge hotspotting with a small piece. One can view half angle though and polarization retention

I would say that it has more texture to it than say my Studeotech 130. But. thats only if you focus on that parameter. It looks much brighter to my eyes than my 130.


More later.


----------



## andrios

Quote:

Originally Posted by *andrios* 
Also the wall on the left is getting purple light scatter and the tile floor is getting green light scatter. Ceiling and right side wall get almost no light scatter.


The pj is almost dead center, so I'm just using downward lens shift.
Anyone know why I get so much light scatter off this screen? Also one of the main reasons I got it was for the self masking....I can see the bars clearly did I make a mistake in not getting the .8?


----------



## R Harkness

Mark, I'm not sure your analysis quite hits the..er...mark. ETA: Not to be lecturing you on the subject since I presume you are actually

aware of these issues...but perhaps for others reading the thread....



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mark haflich* /forum/post/19830237
> 
> 
> But have angle has really nothing to do with hot spotting.





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mark haflich* /forum/post/19830237
> 
> 
> If you move from the center position towards the sides, every screen with a gain higher than one will appear dimmer. The half angle is the angular position from horiozontal screen center (the distance is the sine of that angle times the viewingdistance) oe has to move where thebrightness will be 50% less than at screen center. However, the inage will not look half as bright to your eyes. That point is at a much greater angle and would be called the .25 half angle. Butr neither has anything to do with hot spotting, hotspotting means sitting at one position and looking at the screen from that position some areas of the screen look brighter than other areas.



And the effect changes with angle to the screen of both projector and viewer.

So angles are certainly important to the issue of hot spotting.





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mark haflich* /forum/post/19830237
> 
> 
> One sees hotspotson the screen. Not a good thing. The higher the gain, the more the hot spotting. But there are other variables. That is the projector throw distance and viewing distance. The longer the throw distance and the viewing distance the less the hot spotting. Now lets look at the Firehawk G3 against the BD1.4 What are the differences? Gain 1.2 about vs 1.4. The firehawk shouldn't hot spot, its gain is below the traditional gain cut off for hot spotting,
> 
> The BD1.4 will likely hot spot a little but curable with a throw say above 1.6 or so.



In simply using the gain numbers of the Firehawk and Black Diamond I think you are missing something important, especially when saying the firehawk shouldn't hot spot given it's gain rating.


Hot spotting isn't simply related to gain rating - it's related to what type of measures the screen maker has taken in order to focus light (and how) with his screen material.


What your analysis seems to have missed is that the Firehawk is a _gray screen._ It's not starting at neutral gain white and only adding enough gain to get to 1.2. Given how dark the substrate material is on the Firehawk (chosen for it's effect on OFF-AXIS light contamination back to the screen), Stewart has to apply substantially more gain (optical coating of some sort) in order to get a gray screen brightness to a brighter-than-neutral-white rating of 1.2. So you've got significantly more optical focusing of the light going on with a Firehawk at 1.2 gain than you would with a white screen with 1.2 gain. That is, after all, why the Firehawk's viewing angles are rated significantly narrower than their ST-130 screen material which at 1.3 gain is even higher gain than the Firehawk.


It's because the ST-130, starting with a white substrate (likely 1.0 gain by itself), only needs a tiny bit of extra optical gain applied to get to get to 1.3, whereas the Firehawk needs a lot more. That more aggressive optical coating on the Firehawk means it has narrower viewing angles and hot spots to a greater degree than the ST-130 (as even Stewart Filmscreen will tell you).


And boy the Firehawk really does hotspot! It's one of the main reasons I decided I could never live with one. For instance, a local AV place has a 118" wide 2:35:1 Firehawk in their CIH set up. Not bad from the center seat but choosing a seat off from the center and one side of the screen dims brutally.


My ST-130 which I can make the same AR and size, does not suffer anything remotely that bad. Brightness changes and hot-spotting, though objective measurements dictate it's there to some extent, are as good as imperceptible compared to the Firehawk.


I also see a similar hot-spotting issue with the BD 1.4 gain screen, which is not surprising as it is very similar in design to the Firehawk (gray screen base with optical coating applied).


BTW, if we were to go on the basis of gain ratings one would presume the .8 gain Black Diamond screen would hot-spot less than the 1.4 version, and even hotspot less than the Stewart ST-130. But that would be to miss the fact the .8 BD screen starts with an extremely dark substrate that, if untreated, would result in a ridiculously dim image for most projectors. So BD must apply aggressive optical coating that simultaneously focuses light off the surroundings and back to the viewer, the other benefit being this optical focusing raises image brightness to an acceptable level to people seated on axis to the screen. But the end result is a screen that hot-spots mightily, despite it's lower gain rating.


Cheers,










(BTW, if I'm wrong in my analysis of screen behaviour, I'm happy to be corrected...but it meshes with everything I've learned and experienced so far, as well as with what professionals from Stewart and other manufacturers have explained).


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/19829373
> 
> 
> Contrast and Dark Levels.....



YOu guys are like really missing the awesomeness of this SHot...

I have a White Painted Ceiling......White

With this image on a Matte white screen my ceiling should be totally Bright...


2nd is the White is White and the Black is Black on the Image.

Again the black is not gray but its Black...


Which again means if i have black bars in a dark room ,

I dont need masking...

Even the other screen shot with the DX Tank,

Blacks are black....

That s my point ,


----------



## R Harkness

Actually we weren't missing your point; you (rather sneakily) changed it.


As others following the thread are no doubt aware, you had posted a _different_ screen shot with the claim that it showed "NO HOTSPOT." I pointed out the hotspotting in your image. Instead of simply acknowledging we were correct you _removed the shot, changed it and removed your NO HOTSPOT claim_...and now assert your point was "Blacks are black."


No. I was addressing your now-vanished claim that there was no hot-spot on the Black Diamond screen image. Why such a fishy approach to this conversation?


Frankly I'm tired of hashing out this particular issue on this thread, but it is annoying that misleading claims keep getting made about this screen and your perpetuating the "no hotspotting" falsehood is a disservice to people who come to threads like these looking to be accurately informed in their decisions.


The BD screen is an excellent specialty screen that can serve many people very well; attaching hyperbole or misleading claims to the screen doesn't help anyone.


----------



## R Harkness

No, but as I've said I've evaluated them many times under conditions in which I could play material I know and in which I could control and experiment with lighting conditions (the .8 version especially).


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/19831977
> 
> 
> No, but as I've said I've evaluated them many times under conditions in which I could play material I know and in which I could control and experiment with lighting conditions (the .8 version especially).



What Screen do you Have?


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/19830500
> 
> 
> Also one of the main reasons I got it was for the self masking....I can see the bars clearly did I make a mistake in not getting the .8?



I have an LCD projector and the bars on my 1.4 are dark gray. If I hold something up between the projector and a bar, a shadow is thrown and that portion of the bar appears to be much darker.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/19830500
> 
> 
> Anyone know why I get so much light scatter off this screen? Also one of the main reasons I got it was for the self masking....I can see the bars clearly did I make a mistake in not getting the .8?



Every screen will scatter some light. In my room, the .8 BD scatters much, much less than the Dalite High Power that it replaced. My room is now really dark, even when the scene is bright. Still, some light is visible on my ceiling and walls. The Dalite really lit up my room.


You can see the bars most of the time on the .8 gain version as well. They are usually very dark (this is with a JVC RS20) and I don't feel the need to mask them.


You've only make a mistake if you are unhappy with the screen. What size screen and projector do you have? How is the 1.4 version doing with some light in the room?


----------



## andrios




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> Every screen will scatter some light. In my room, the .8 BD scatters much, much less than the Dalite High Power that it replaced. My room is now really dark, even when the scene is bright. Still, some light is visible on my ceiling and walls. The Dalite really lit up my room.
> 
> 
> You can see the bars most of the time on the .8 gain version as well. They are usually very dark (this is with a JVC RS20) and I don't feel the need to mask them.
> 
> 
> You've only make a mistake if you are unhappy with the screen. What size screen and projector do you have? How is the 1.4 version doing with some light in the room?



I have the 113" and an epson 8350. I'm very happy with the picture in the back seat. With my lights on it's looks pretty damn good too. The blacks obviously get a little grey when watching movies, but when sports are on it's hard to tell a difference with lights on or off.


The front seat I'm seeing the texture. I can see it when I try to look for it. My projector has 700+ hours on it and even in cinema mode it's bright enough to see some texture.


I'm still wondering why my walls are purple and the ground is green lol.


The viewing angle is horrible. I guess I got used to my tan wall but I can't sit at the bar anymore and enjoy the picture. One of the reasons I got the 1.4 over the .8 was the better angle. I can't imagine how bad the .8 is.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/19832443
> 
> 
> I have the 113" and an epson 8350. I'm very happy with the picture in the back seat. With my lights on it's looks pretty damn good too. The blacks obviously get a little grey when watching movies, but when sports are on it's hard to tell a difference with lights on or off.
> 
> 
> The front seat I'm seeing the texture. I can see it when I try to look for it. My projector has 700+ hours on it and even in cinema mode it's bright enough to see some texture.
> 
> 
> I'm still wondering why my walls are purple and the ground is green lol.
> 
> 
> The viewing angle is horrible. I guess I got used to my tan wall but I can't sit at the bar anymore and enjoy the picture. One of the reasons I got the 1.4 over the .8 was the better angle. I can't imagine how bad the .8 is.



I think that they have same viewing angle. The website claims 44 degress for both.


I have no idea what the purple walls and green ground is about,


----------



## letgomyeggo

This was taken with my iPhone 4 at around 8 am-ish (not the best camera). My apartment faces the East looking over downtown Toronto, so it gets a great deal of sun in the morning. The screen is also about maybe 10 inches away from the nearest window (as you can see in the attached pic) and my place has windows and a screen door along the entire left side of the picture -which in short means a TON of ambient light.

The screen is a 100 Black Diamond 1.4 gain and the projector being used is the Mitsubishi HC6800 with the lamp mode on Standard and located about 12-14 feet away from the screen.


I think you'll all agree that even though the projector is intended for a light controlled room and is not a light cannon you get an amazing image with such extreme ambient light conditions thanks to the Black Diamond screen.


So there ya go. The Black Diamond screen can be used in MANY environments that traditional screens won't work. This screen allows front projection to be used in many home and commercial applications - not just the Man Cave.

Enjoy!


----------



## MississippiMan

A good example...and actually a well taken shot.


Obviously you'd always at least pull that shade about 1/2 way closed, and then the image would be even more watchable, especially with HDTV content.


But let's also consider you are using a 1500 lumen LCD (...one that does not claim to be specifically intended for dedicated Theater rooms...) shooting fairly close to (...we'll use a average and say from 13') a relatively small 100" 1.4 gain screen, which gets you a really vibrant 28 foot lamberts off the screen.


It's the darker elements within the BD1.4 that makes it all worthy of note.


As I said though, a good example and a well taken shot, showing a situation few would ever consent to allowing have exist anyway.


----------



## andrios

Quote:

Originally Posted by *letgomyeggo*
This was taken with my iPhone 4 at around 8 am-ish (not the best camera). My apartment faces the East looking over downtown Toronto, so it gets a great deal of sun in the morning. The screen is also about maybe 10 inches away from the nearest window (as you can see in the attached pic) and my place has windows and a screen door along the entire left side of the picture -which in short means a TON of ambient light.

The screen is a 100 Black Diamond 1.4 gain and the projector being used is the Mitsubishi HC6800 with the lamp mode on Standard and located about 12-14 feet away from the screen.


I think you'll all agree that even though the projector is intended for a light controlled room and is not a light cannon you get an amazing image with such extreme ambient light conditions thanks to the Black Diamond screen.


So there ya go. The Black Diamond screen can be used in MANY environments that traditional screens won't work. This screen allows front projection to be used in many home and commercial applications - not just the Man Cave.

Enjoy!
Nice pics man.


Question though. At night when you watch, what color light scatter do you get on the walls and floor/ceiling??


Where is your projector located relative to the screen? (top/middle/bottom of screen?)


Thanks.


----------



## dovercat

Quote:

Originally Posted by *fraisa* 
Contrast test shot

1.4 Gain BD

BluRay Sin City

Will edit in the same scene soon from the .8 gain











But hey a day in paradise wouldnt be complete without my AVS daily Screen Abuse.....lol


Febuary 4............They R Coming.......
fraisa have you noticed HAWK-EYE on the UK AVForum.com has an identical setup. http://www.avforums.com/forums/proje...l#post13867841


----------



## MississippiMan

Should be / could be the same person.


If not....


----------



## andrios

Does anyone else have this issue with their bd2??


These were shot with my iPhone 3GS.


This is suppose to be the 3rd generation of the bd.


----------



## MississippiMan

A smooth tiled Floor is a "worst case" situation for reflection.


The 1.4 BD us not so "Retro" as that it would not cast light upon surfaces within a 30 degree arc from the Screen. To absolve that issue via a Screen's performance, the Gain would have to be above 2.0....probably at least 2.8 (example: DaLite High Power) Above 1.4 most all the desirable properties inherent in a BD screen would deteriorate, and observable Screen granularity would be virtually intolerable.


The primary purpose Gain was increased on the BD screens was so that less powerful PJs could provide a vibrant, bright image along with improved Contrast. Obviously they could not produce a screen with greatly improved Ambient Light ability AND drastically decreased viewing cone. It's a case where design did not take into account the rising Lumen specifications of most newer PJs.


In reality, one attribute does not easily compliment the other, and a End User must choose what attribute is most important, or adjust his Room's own parameters to fit the Display's situation


The only effective solution is a Floor Covering ("Dark" Area Rug) under the Screen and a form of "Black-Out" treatment on the adjoining side walls. Either a darker, "Flat" paint, or a Curtain Treatment.


Bluntly stated, any Promo claim that the BD Screen is really all that effective in reducing Light Scattering is not going to float when the proximity of any side-top-bottom placed reflective surface is within 4' of the edge of the Screen. In fact, few dedicated Retro Screens can make that claim.


All too often effusive claims can oft times come back to haunt both Mfg and end user.


----------



## Lawguy

The BD is not retroreflective. It is angular reflective. Tests that I have done clearly bear this out.


This means that light will bounce off the screen at pretty much the same angle at which it hits the screen.


So, when mounting your projector, to minimize reflections like that (and to maximize brightness in your seating position), calculate the angle to the screen from your seating position and then have your projector drop so that is projecting at close to that same angle. You have two rows of seating? If so, you may want to calculate the angle somewhere in between the two rows. The closer you get to your ideal angle, the better your results will be (better uniformity, better bightness, etc.).


If you do this, you will not get any reflections on your floor. There will be some amount of light scatter that will show up on your wall, but it should not be much.


To calculate the viewing angle: imagine a line running from the center of the screen to your eyes at the ideal seating position (Line "A"); then imagine another line running from the center of the screen and parallel to the ceiling or floor (Line "B"). The angle between those two lines is your ideal angle. Put another way, if you drew another imaginary line that connected Line A and Line B (Line "C"), the length of Line C is the amount of distance that the projector should be mounted above Line B (assuming of course that your projector is mounted right above the ideal seating distance). This is just pythagorean theorem.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/19846054
> 
> 
> A good example...and actually a well taken shot.
> 
> 
> Obviously you'd always at least pull that shade about 1/2 way closed, and then the image would be even more watchable, especially with HDTV content.
> 
> 
> But let's also consider you are using a 1500 lumen LCD (...one that does not claim to be specifically intended for dedicated Theater rooms...) shooting fairly close to (...we'll use a average and say from 13') a relatively small 100" 1.4 gain screen, which gets you a really vibrant 28 foot lamberts off the screen.
> 
> 
> It's the darker elements within the BD1.4 that makes it all worthy of note.
> 
> 
> As I said though, a good example and a well taken shot, showing a situation few would ever consent to allowing have exist anyway.



The HC6800 doesn't approach 1500 lumens. According to projector central, it gets 435 lumens (low lamp) and around 700 in high lamp. So, pretty typical numbers for a HT projector.


----------



## R Harkness

As I understand it angular reflective screens tend to like to have the projector higher rather than lower, typically just above the top of the screen or more. This also helps reduce hot-spotting. (At least these were recommendations from the Stewart Filmscreen company for their angular reflective screens).


----------



## jayn_j

I'm actually impressed with leggomyeggo's shots. That's probably the most honest enviroment I've seen yet, and it really shows off the screen well. No hocus pocus, it just proves that it does what it claims.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/19849614
> 
> 
> As I understand it angular reflective screens tend to like to have the projector higher rather than lower, typically just above the top of the screen or more. This also helps reduce hot-spotting. (At least these were recommendations from the Stewart Filmscreen company for their angular reflective screens).



This recommendation is a good one for the typical set-up (8ft ceilings, longish throw, seating at 1.5X) but it does not hold true for every setup. People will get better results from their screen if they calculate the angles in the way that I described and place their projector accordingly.


----------



## DigsMovies




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/19848973
> 
> 
> Does anyone else have this issue with their bd2??
> 
> 
> These were shot with my iPhone 3GS.
> 
> 
> This is suppose to be the 3rd generation of the bd.



I think the issue in question is not the existence of the reflections, but rather the color of them-



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/19832443
> 
> 
> ...I'm still wondering why my walls are purple and the ground is green lol.



My guess is the coating is acting like a prism, but the mfg. would be the one to ask.....


----------



## MississippiMan

That's a strange reply, since the Poster is much more concerned with the existence of Light Scatter reflections.


The color of the surface doing the reflecting is what will determine the color of the reflection. If the Screen itself was pushing any color so far that it was a predominate one, the images shown as one is looking directly at the Screen would also manifest that push.


BD screens do have a tendency toward a push, but not so bad as all that.


----------



## rdjam

OK - heads up, everyone. Just want to post some news I put up in the Ultimate 3D thread yesterday.


For anyone considering a Black Diamond for passive 3D use, this will be relevant:



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rdjam* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> OK - I got word back from a senior level at Screen Innovations today. Very impressed with their quick response.
> 
> 
> Sadly, the current BDII does not preserve circular polarisation. He says that their testing was fine for linear polarisation, for some reason, but that when they got into testing a new Sony projector with circular polarisation, it all came undone, with much the same results as I have posted here.
> 
> 
> All is not lost though - they are working on a specialised version of the BDII which is designed to retain circular polarisation. This screen will be available very soon, perhaps even within two months. They have identified the coating layer that is breaking the polarisation.
> 
> 
> He indicates it will be a higher gain screen than the 1.4, so you can get a brighter picture in 3D. I will keep you posted on any further news on this new screen as it becomes available. They are going to be in Europe over the next week for the big show.


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/19849375
> 
> 
> The HC6800 doesn't approach 1500 lumens. According to projector central, it gets 435 lumens (low lamp) and around 700 in high lamp. So, pretty typical numbers for a HT projector.



All PJs list higher Lumen outputs than they achieve in a real world setting....and the original listing still musty serve as a benchmark to go on accordingly. If you really want to be precise, then you must list the ANSI lumen outputs of each / any PJ together for direct comparison.


I simply stated that the Mit was NOT so low a lumen PJ as to be delegated as one designed for Controlled lighting...and besides that, 435 lumens on Low Lamp is really quite a respectable figure, and 700 lumens is exceptional in many respects...if it remains close to that under a decent calibration.


Also, I stated that the BD was *NOT* so retro reflective that it *would not* cast light sideways. I suppose you misinterpreted my statement.


As far as your "tests", to be absolutely correct, the BD manifests some of both properties of Angular and Retro Reflective natures.


Edges are almost always dimmer than the center (angular) and this is because of the nature by which the screen's build to achieve a higher gain tends to produce such.


However if this was the case to a fault, the limiting factor as far as PJ placement would make the BD screen a real "One Trick Pony" of a screen. Because "angular" in and of itself would dictate you had better keep the PJ as close to the top of the screen...or below it to get the best results without being forced to adapt your seating locations simply to accommodate a Screen's viewing peculiarities.


Actually the screen is looking to be somewhat a mix of both a Retro Reflective screen and Angular. Gain drop on a retro-reflective screen is usually much greater when changing viewing positions side-to-side than an angular reflective, yet that is exactly what does happen with a BD screen...just to a lessor extent than a screen designed to be purely Retro Reflective.


rdjam,


That's interesting news for many, but one must preface it with some reality based info.

*1.* The Screen will be introduced as a small screen to maximize the gain.

*2.* Visible graininess due to the increase reflectivity will go up as well.

*3.*The real intent and purpose is to create a Screen more ideal for Active 3D and hopefully *Passive*. Should they accomplish both that will be a feat of import for sure!

*4.* However if the Screen's own deficits out weigh it's 3D performance gains, it will be quite a no-go. For one thing, if it does not serve well for 2D content as well, it will be DOA. That is why it will not be solely intended to optimize a Passive viewing circumstance.

*5.* Cost will be sky high, along the order of $3K for 84" to 100".

*6.* It will come out as only available in Fixed Screen mode.


In truth, one must give SI credit for pushing ahead to fill a Market nitch, however the gross pricing will still delegate it to a narrow range of users. It will be interesting to see how far the promotional aspects of such a screen will match up to real world results. Even beyond the BD screens, the territory they are entering into is rife with disappointment for a "majority" of customers, so any claims to performance attributes that do not measure up will come across like acid tossed into someone's eyes.


Yeah...I have been speaking to a few people as well.










We can but hope for the best and wait to see.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/19850618
> 
> 
> Also, I stated that the BD was *NOT* so retro reflective that it *would not* cast light sideways. I suppose you misinterpreted my statement.
> 
> 
> As far as your "tests", to be absolutely correct, the BD manifests some of both properties of Angular and Retro Reflective natures.
> 
> 
> Edges are almost always dimmer than the center (angular) and this is because of the nature by which the screen's build to achieve a higher gain tends to produce such.
> 
> 
> However if this was the case to a fault, the limiting factor as far as PJ placement would make the BD screen a real "One Trick Pony" of a screen. Because "angular" in and of itself would dictate you had better keep the PJ as close to the top of the screen...or below it to get the best results without being forced to adapt your seating locations simply to accommodate a Screen's viewing peculiarities.
> 
> 
> Actually the screen is looking to be somewhat a mix of both a Retro Reflective screen and Angular. Gain drop on a retro-reflective screen is usually much greater when changing viewing positions side-to-side than an angular reflective, yet that is exactly what does happen with a BD screen...just to a lessor extent than a screen designed to be purely Retro Reflective.



The BD isn't even a little bit retroreflective.


Standing off axis and shining a flashlight on the screen does not show much light coming back at the flashlight. If you leave the flashlight where it is and move to the corresponding angle, the screen is lit up. This is angular reflective - pure and simple. What makes a screen retroreflective is the fact that the light bounces back to its source. Again, the BD does not exhibit this characteristic. I am not sure what other qualities that a retroreflective screen has that you refer to.


I don't know what you mean by "one trick pony" Every room has to be set up properly considering the characteristics of the screen, where the seats are and limitations on where the projector can be located. You can dumb the placement rule down to "you had better keep the PJ as close to the top of the screen...or below it to get the best results ." Which is better: at the top of the screen or lower than that? Will they produce the same results? If one is better, why? It is fine to generalize things until you come across the room where the generality no longer works. My method is not difficult to apply and provides better results with angular reflective screens.


----------



## programmergeek

andrious, I would put down a black rug in frount of your screen, the BD will not stop all reflection but it limits it more than any other screen I supect ifyou put a mat white screen there it would be worse.


Also tiles are horrable for reflection and sound. By putting a carpet down it should help with first order reflection points and make the sound less harsh and clearer as well.


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/19848973
> 
> 
> Does anyone else have this issue with their bd2??



This is normal for the screen. I don't know why it happens. It probably doesn't affect the picture in any significant way.


----------



## andrios




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *karlsch* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> This is normal for the screen. I don't know why it happens. It probably doesn't affect the picture in any significant way.



You have the same issue??


----------



## send




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/19852637
> 
> 
> You have the same issue??



Try a white or gray surface compared to your Black Diamond screen and you will notice a 75% increase in light scatter.


Best,


Blake


----------



## dovercat




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/19846860
> 
> 
> Should be / could be the same person.
> 
> 
> If not....



HAWK-EYE is a UK consumer who bought his screen from a UK dealer. He posted on AVForum that he was so happy with it he gave fraisa the screen shots to post.


----------



## Balbolito

i think am getting the 1.4 in a week or so..


----------



## rdjam




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/19850618
> 
> 
> rdjam,
> 
> 
> That's interesting news for many, but one must preface it with some reality based info.
> 
> *1.* The Screen will be introduced as a small screen to maximize the gain.
> 
> *2.* Visible graininess due to the increase reflectivity will go up as well.
> 
> *3.*The real intent and purpose is to create a Screen more ideal for Active 3D and hopefully *Passive*. Should they accomplish both that will be a feat of import for sure!
> 
> *4.* However if the Screen's own deficits out weigh it's 3D performance gains, it will be quite a no-go. For one thing, if it does not serve well for 2D content as well, it will be DOA. That is why it will not be solely intended to optimize a Passive viewing circumstance.
> 
> *5.* Cost will be sky high, along the order of $3K for 84" to 100".
> 
> *6.* It will come out as only available in Fixed Screen mode.
> 
> 
> In truth, one must give SI credit for pushing ahead to fill a Market nitch, however the gross pricing will still delegate it to a narrow range of users. It will be interesting to see how far the promotional aspects of such a screen will match up to real world results. Even beyond the BD screens, the territory they are entering into is rife with disappointment for a "majority" of customers, so any claims to performance attributes that do not measure up will come across like acid tossed into someone's eyes.
> 
> 
> Yeah...I have been speaking to a few people as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We can but hope for the best and wait to see.



Yes, it is promising that they are addressing this. One counterpoint tho, is that the current BDII 1.4 is very well suited to active 3D, no issues there at all. The real issue is the polarisation in passive 3D projection.


It seems like one of the coatings in the current BDII is to breaking up the polarisation, so they will eliminate that layer.


Yes, the new screen could be anywhere up to 2.7 gain, and it is likely that the structure will be more visible (ie sparklies). In my opinion the minimum viewing distance, iff that is the case, may be in excess of 12 to 15 feet, if so.


I'd imagine that cost will be similar to current BDII. I'm hopeful that the light control on the new screen will still be acceptable.


Can't disagree about the limited market thing, as passive 3D setups are indeed a small portion of the home market ...at present. However, I'm hearing about some interesting passive projector solutions in development by various companies. These are higher end, for sure, definitely not RS50 pricing, but the segment may become quite active in a year.


----------



## Mike Lang

Off topic drama removed. Please stay on topic or don't post.


----------



## andrios




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *send* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> Try a white or gray surface compared to your Black Diamond screen and you will notice a 75% increase in light scatter.
> 
> 
> Best,
> 
> 
> Blake



So the bd2 is suppose to scatter green and purple light?


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/19860800
> 
> 
> So the bd2 is suppose to scatter green and purple light?



My BDII scatters some purple light off to the sides. I have a dark rug on the floor in front of the screen and I don't notice green on it. It probably absorbs it.


Edit: I put something shiny white on the floor in front of the screen and greenish light does seem to reflect off of it.


----------



## dovercat




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rdjam* /forum/post/19856662
> 
> 
> Yes, it is promising that they are addressing this. One counterpoint tho, is that the current BDII 1.4 is very well suited to active 3D, no issues there at all. The real issue is the polarisation in passive 3D projection.
> 
> 
> It seems like one of the coatings in the current BDII is to breaking up the polarisation, so they will eliminate that layer.



Aren`t all projector screens suitable for active 3D? As long as the image is bright enough to compensate for the loss of light.


----------



## letgomyeggo




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/19846183
> 
> 
> Nice pics man.
> 
> 
> Question though. At night when you watch, what color light scatter do you get on the walls and floor/ceiling??
> 
> 
> Where is your projector located relative to the screen? (top/middle/bottom of screen?)
> 
> 
> Thanks.




When I watch it at night... there is little to no light scatter. I had a Matt White screen before and while I enjoyed the image, it did light up my entire room. With this screen if I turn off all the lights I really feel sucked into the movie - I would have to say it is 60-80% darker in the room now (when night viewing) then when I used a White screen.


----------



## letgomyeggo




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/19846054
> 
> 
> A good example...and actually a well taken shot.
> 
> 
> Obviously you'd always at least pull that shade about 1/2 way closed, and then the image would be even more watchable, especially with HDTV content.
> 
> 
> But let's also consider you are using a 1500 lumen LCD (...one that does not claim to be specifically intended for dedicated Theater rooms...) shooting fairly close to (...we'll use a average and say from 13') a relatively small 100" 1.4 gain screen, which gets you a really vibrant 28 foot lamberts off the screen.
> 
> 
> It's the darker elements within the BD1.4 that makes it all worthy of note.
> 
> 
> As I said though, a good example and a well taken shot, showing a situation few would ever consent to allowing have exist anyway.





I will have to check the lamberts (SI just launched a light meter iPhone app - lol) and see.

In my convo's with Mitsubishi... they do say this is a projector really intended for a light controlled room/Theater room. I use it in the room you see in the pics and I very rarely close the drapes to watch... but you are right... I could close them only half way and the image just POPS off the screen ( I have tried it). I am sure come the high season of summer time I will have to close them a little bit to maintain a good image. As far as the placement goes I am located in the "sweet spot" for distance to get a 100" viewing image so I am sure that also helps.

But you've hit the nail on the head when you say -this is a situation that few would ever consent to allowing to exist. Pictures speak louder than words as they say... and as you see by my none professional/crappy camera pics... it just screams that it works!


----------



## rdjam




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dovercat* /forum/post/19862180
> 
> 
> Aren`t all projector screens suitable for active 3D? As long as the image is bright enough to compensate for the loss of light.



Yes


----------



## letgomyeggo




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/19846183
> 
> 
> Nice pics man.
> 
> 
> Question though. At night when you watch, what color light scatter do you get on the walls and floor/ceiling??
> 
> 
> Where is your projector located relative to the screen? (top/middle/bottom of screen?)
> 
> 
> Thanks.




Sorry I never answered your questions:


The light scatter (the VERY little I do have) is faint white -but to be fair I really have not sat around and "looked" at the colour of the light in the room.... once it goes dark.. and the movie goes on... I am watching the movie. Heck thats what the sccreen is supposed to do right? Suck you into the movie










Also the projector is on a back shelf unit about 7 feet up from the floor [I have a 8 foot (8'-ish)] ceiling, a little off centre due to room issues -so the lens shift fuction on my HC6800 solves that very well with no keystone set up involved thank god!


----------



## Billybobjimbob

Is there any updates on the electric version of this screen?


----------



## andrios

Hmmm sitting 12-13 feet away the screen texture/sparkle is really showing even on cinema mode with an epson 8350.


Did they really fix the issue with the 3rd gen? It must of been really bad with the 2nd gen, I hope they didnt send my dealer a older version of the screen.....


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *andrios* /forum/post/19879321
> 
> 
> Hmmm sitting 12-13 feet away the screen texture/sparkle is really showing even on cinema mode with an epson 8350.
> 
> 
> Did they really fix the issue with the 3rd gen? It must of been really bad with the 2nd gen, I hope they didnt send my dealer a older version of the screen.....



They improved it. There is no fix. Screens with gain will show texture/sparkles. The High Power doesn't show the same kinds of things but it is a different kind of screen altogether.


----------



## BlakeV

We are shooting now for a summer 2011 release of Black Diamond motorized.


----------



## erwinfrombelgium

Hello folks,


I am still building this house. Do you recommend the Black Diamond for my set-up and if so: 0.8 or 1.4. I was hoping to get away with 5K-ish for PJ, lens & screen. I am prepared to build my own screen but I suppose BD is not avalable as material.


Plan:

*screen diagonal 144" scope (the largest BD is 142" which is close enough)

*viewing distance 11' (I know, close, but I assessed this)

*multipurpose room on ground level with a lot of glass from ceiling to floor, although the south facing windows have solar screens to keep the heat out, so no direct sunlight on the glass.

*all windows have heavy black curtains, but some leakage is inevitable and even desirable for the room's purpose

*all lights are recessed spots, but still, this room has a kitchen and a dining table also, 2nd living room.

*heaving all the windows allows me to paint everything black, the black ceiling has acoustic treatments covered in black cloth. Floor is black PU seamless. Some stainless steel accents in the kitchen etc.

*BenQ W6000 seems a very good projector in my budget (1,750) with ample lumens (2,500)

*Prismasonic has a choice of lenses between 1K (basic) and 3K (new HD-6000F)


Thanks


Erwin


----------



## msmCutter

Those of us that don't dig it will tell you're fine with any good screen. Those that love them will tell you they're SHAMWOW! awesome. You're probably better served having some dealers come over to demo their screens in your space.


----------



## erwinfrombelgium

Quote:

Originally Posted by *msmCutter* 
Those of us that don't dig it will tell you're fine with any good screen. Those that love them will tell you they're SHAMWOW! awesome. You're probably better served having some dealers come over to demo their screens in your space.
That would be the best option unless I use a custom DIY *tower* speaker like the one I designed today to be sonically close with L&R. If I want the BD screen, I need to build a more traditional center speaker layout where the woofers are horizontal to the T+M...


A size like I want, this BD will be around $4K? That's a painfull amount more than the 500 the AT screen material (including shipping, VAT, duties) would cost me.


Speaker tbd:
Attachment 199299 

 

Ronse2010B_HTcustomTQWT.pdf 83.962890625k . file


----------



## RickAVManiac

Do someone know if it is possible to get a bigger sample for test the BD screen? I am very interested in this screen but I found the little sample too small to make good evaluation.



Eric


----------



## Future Vision




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeV* /forum/post/19884612
> 
> 
> We are shooting now for a June 2011 release of Black Diamond motorized.



What have I been missing, I thought it was supposed to arrive Q1 2011.

Can you please tell me what the problem are?

I've been waiting now for a while and was hoping it was on the way.


----------



## programmergeek

There are 28" sample screens I beleve. If you are in the NJ area I can get you one to try. If not try a local dealer or if you don't have one PM me maybe I can help out.


----------



## Toe




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/19880541
> 
> 
> The High Power doesn't show the same kinds of things but it is a different kind of screen altogether.



No........it shows different things







The HP is not perfect in this way either. The visible texture is very minimal especially in light of how much gain you get, but perfect it is not.


----------



## programmergeek




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Toe* /forum/post/19898570
> 
> 
> No........it shows different things
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The HP is not perfect in this way either. The visible texture is very minimal especially in light of how much gain you get, but perfect it is not.



This is a good point I feel every screen is a compromise. Even mat white. But I do aggreee the texture is very minimal compaired to most other gain screens.


----------



## Toe




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *programmergeek* /forum/post/19898840
> 
> 
> This is a good point I feel every screen is a compromise. Even mat white. But I do aggreee the texture is very minimal compaired to most other gain screens.



No doubt, and you need the right kind of scene to even see the characteristic HP screen surface.


----------



## R Harkness

Yep. The HP is excellent in terms of having minimal screen texture, although it's not perfectly invisible. I haven't seen an invisible (in terms of texture) screen yet, but I haven't seen the Stewart ST-100 (which is purported to have the least visible screen structure). I'd just love to "have it all" with a screen but no can do. Although my ST-130 is best suited to my needs, it's not perfect either.


----------



## Toe




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/19901629
> 
> 
> Yep. The HP is excellent in terms of having minimal screen texture, although it's not perfectly invisible. I haven't seen an invisible (in terms of texture) screen yet, but I haven't seen the Stewart ST-100 (which is purported to have the least visible screen structure). I'd just love to "have it all" with a screen but no can do. Although my ST-130 is best suited to my needs, it's not perfect either.



Same here. I have never seen a completely invisible screen yet. The ST130 and HP are the 2 best of the 5 different screens I have owned though. Between those 2, each has slight advantages/disadvantages compared to the other depending on the type of scene.


----------



## R Harkness

The least texture I've seen on a screen I've owned, and the one with the most even viewing angles, was a Carada white screen. But I just needed a little more gain so I moved to the ST-130.


BTW,


I recently demoed the BD .8 and 1.4 gain screens again with a bunch of my Blu-Rays.

It was interesting yet again.


As usual the BD screen did a great job keeping contrast as I turned on an off pot lights around the room, even pot lights pretty close to the screen. It really is an excellent screen for anyone dealing with ambient light/light room decor issues.


As to it's performance in a fully darkened room: At first with the .8 screen I thought maybe I was seeing darker black levels than I get at home with my RS20/ST-130 combo. That was mostly in mixed brightness scenes. But that in itself is impressive given this Mitsubishi projector has a lower contrast ratio than my own projector.


Also, this BD screen was only around 94" diagonal (16:9). And despite it's small size the image was on the dim side compared to what I get at home, and my image sizes (because I vary the image size zooming/masking) go from between 100" diagonal to 135" diagonal and 10 feet wide CinemaScope...and the image is still brighter than what I saw on the tiny BD screen. (The Mitsu projector is rated at having the same brightness as my JVC, and it was new in the room).


Dark scenes, e.g. night and space scenes, weren't terribly impressive as they looked somewhat washed out with "grey" black levels. (In good light controlled conditions) a screen can't circumvent physics by actually raising the contrast ratio of a projector. But given this Mitsu projector doesn't have the contrast ratio of my own projector, the screen helped, if only by dropping the over all light level of the image.


What about the claims made about these types of dark screens and "no more need for masking?" Er...no.


Of course this is going to depend on the specific projector/screen combo and "need" is really subjective. A lot of people have white screens and don't feel they "need" masking, others find it mandatory. So I perhaps the question could be posed "Do the black bars for 2:35:1 movies go so dark you can't see them?"


Nope. The black bars on 2:35:1 films were visibly lighter than the surrounding black velvet bezel of the screen. As in most set ups the black bars are much harder to see in bright scenes, since the contrast against the bright areas of the image make the black bars look much darker...sometime to the point of making the black bars look pitch black. But in other scenes, dimmer scenes, the black bars don't get this help and I could see them easily. Worst case scenarios were night scenes and any sci-fi space stuff, where the whole screen image including the black bars look greyed out compared to the surrounding "true black" screen bezel. I know from experience such scenes look MUCH better with masking applied (which cuts down the amount of visible "grey" in the image).


Again, this is a personal tolerance issue as well. But I would certainly find the need to mask this screen if I owned it.


It's a somewhat different issue with side masking in something like a Constant Image Height set up where you have an extra wide 2:35:1 screen. In that case your 2:35:1 images would fill the whole screen, not needing masking. And your 16:9 images will fill the central portion leaving "black bars" to the sides. But the projector wouldn't be projecting any light on to that side black bar area - unlike on a 16:9 screen where the letterbox 2:35:1 bars DO consist of projected light. So with such a dark screen material those side bars are likely to go extremely dark and then I can imagine not needing masking (possibly).


But the problem there is the .8 gain screen needs a lot of light to get it to a decent brightness level, and people buying into CIH and 2:35:1 screens are usually going to significantly large screens. So I think most of the good quality consumer projectors

would have trouble lighting up a large sized .8 gain BD screen.


There was one movie in particular that I thought looked amazing on the BD .8 screen: The Blu-Ray of Microcosmos. This is killer HD (though shot with film) imagery, close ups of insects (and a great little film, detailing life in a French meadow). The black levels and contrast of the images looked really deep and solid, giving a really satisfying "thereness," believabilty and density to the image. The whole movie looked amazing on the BD screen.


I played the same movie at home when I got back. On my JVC/ST-130 screen combo the image was significantly brighter and more vivid, but with similar contrast, so more of a "wow" factor. But still there was a sort of different, dark/rich quality of those images on the BD screen that was also terrific in it's own way.


What about the 1.4 screen?


That screen (which I've seen several times before) was in a much bigger room. The screen was a 2:35:1 CIH set up, about 118" or so wide. The projector was the same JVC projector I use at home (although it was under the name "Anthem" it's the same RS20 model I have). So a much more apples to apples comparison.


Throwing movies like Star Trek (2009) on this set up I was very impressed with this BD screen. What impressed me right off was the brightness and vividness of the image. That extra gain makes a world of difference as even at 118" wide the image was really bright. Contrast looked excellent, similar to what I get at home. It's really tough to evaluate the black levels without a side by side. Sometimes I thought the black levels might be a touch darker on the BD screen, but then I viewed the same materials at home and found brightness and black levels/contrast to be hard to distinguish from the BD screen. It's possible the BD screen preserved even more contrast but it's a tough call for me to really know. (My white ST-130 screen is in a very light controlled room, with controlled room reflections).


But I felt the image on the BD looked terrific and especially for placing in "real world" rooms - rooms not devoted to combating reflections and ambient light - I think this screen offers terrific performance.


Comparison to the Stewart Firehawk, which is a similar gray-screen-with-gain for combatting ambient light?


I've seen the Firehawk countless times with lots of different projectors and it has always amazed me at how well it preserves contrast with some lights on in a room. I don't know that the BD 1.4 gain screen is any better, frankly. However, one thing perhaps in favor of the BD screen is gain. I've seen a really bright projector on the Firehawk screen (Epson, cranked up) and it looked astonishing - incredible contrast and vividness. But many less heroically-bright projectors, like the JVC RS20, have looked "good" but not spectacular because the image was somewhat dimmer on the Firehawk. (For instance, I get a significantly more vibrant image from the RS20 at home on my ST-130 white screen, vs seeing the same projector on the Firehawk).


But the BD 1.4. struck me as having a really brilliant image with the JVC. That's nice in terms of sheer brightness, and allowing bigger image sizes, and also in regards to projector bulb life.


Issues with the BD 1.4 screen were, as always, hot-spotting and screen texture. Just like the BD 8, and like the Firehawk, the image dims to one side when you aren't sitting in a central seat. Many people are not sensitive to this, though.


As well, it can have a pronounced speckly screen texture in some scenes. It's one of those weird things that you can go along not seeing it, then suddenly it appears (usually in a bright scene, often in shots with sky) and then it's like a scrim is over the image and it's hard for me to "un-see."


This issue again will vary with viewer sensitivity to the issue. My pal as an old Optima graywolf screen, notorious for it's screen texture, and as far as I know he never notices the issue (I don't dare point it out to him...friends don't do that to friends).


So for me the BD 1.4 and .8 screens are a no-go due to hot-spotting/screen texture. But that's me. I think a lot of people would be very happy with these screens, applied appropriately, and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend anyone seeking a screen for "real world" room to check them out.


----------



## Toe




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/19903380
> 
> 
> The least texture I've seen on a screen I've owned, and the one with the most even viewing angles, was a Carada white screen. But I just needed a little more gain so I moved to the ST-130.



AWESOME report on the BD screens Rich!










A bit off topic, but it is funny how we all pick up or dont pick up on certain things with screens. I have owned 3 Carada screens and sent all 3 of them back due to seeing the same material/texture flaw. It was either 2 BW and a CCW or 2 CCW and a BW as I had my first screen replaced due to what I was seeing and the 2nd screen had the same issue. Later I wanted to give Carada another shot since David was extremely nice to me with the first screen issue and tried out either the CCW or BW (whichever I did not have the first time) and it also had the same problem. First off, due to the way Carada packs up the material, ALL 3 had slight wrinkles/creases from shipping that never completely came out in the time I had them stretched on the frame. The 2nd issue and the biggest annoyance was a characteristic vertical uneven type marking pattern across the Carada white screen materials that would present itself in certain type scenes. I could also see this flaw with no projected light on the screen if I stood off to one side and looked at the material. I could not live with it and all 3 screens went back.


Having said all that, I have NEVER read of anyone else seeing this with a Carada screen














I picked up on it for whatever reason and moving from a Carada to a ST130 was a night and day improvement as far as not seeing the screen. The ST130 has the sparklies, but these have never bothered me for whatever reason (I fully respect that this does bother some people, but this was a non issue for me).


Now the HP.................I have found a very, VERY faint uniform vertical banding type pattern in the HP material that spans the entire screen on both my screen and sample (so I know its not a flaw with just my particular piece of material) which can be seen if you look hard in the right type of scene such as a clear light blue sky scene or a all bright white background type scene. The type of scene where you can even see this is very rare and even then, you have to look hard to even see it. Also, if I stand at the right angle, I can see this pattern (again on both my sample and full 2.8 screen) on the screen material with nothing being projected on it. Again, I have never read of anyone seeing this with a HP screen, but its there. VERY, VERY minor annoyance though and a non issue for all practical purposes, but worth mentioning all the same. In ~90%+ of all the movie scenes I have watched though, this HP 2.8 disappears better than any screen I have ever seen or owned which is flat out amazing considering how much gain/punch/brightness this thing is putting out.


Bottom line.............there is no perfect screen as far as texture/screen artifacts go from ALL the screens I have seen. The Stewart 100 might be the one to change all this, but I am betting I would somehow find some flaw even in that screen since I seem to be VERY sensitive to seeing/discovering screen flaws/characteristics. Overall, IMO, the HP 2.8 and ST130 are the 2 best from what I have seen though as far as this goes. Carada for me was the worst (again though, I am in the EXTREME minority with this opinion), followed by Severtsen (hot spotting) and so on.


----------



## R Harkness

Indeedy, interesting Toe.


As for the Carada as I mentioned it wasn't perfect for me either but it was the most benign to my eyes. On brighter scenes I could see the screen material a bit, but it had a different effect from other screens with higher gain/more optical coating (like the gray screens that use more optical coating). When I see the screen texture of the BD and Firehawk and other screens (even including my ST-130) it appears as a speckly scrim of texture overlaying/in front of the image, so I'm having to see "through" that speckly layer to the image. Whereas when I spotted the Carada screen texture it was more like it was "behind" the image; that is it was just like noticing that the image was being projected on a matte white background. So even when I saw it, it seemed less disturbing.


And like you I'm in a minority in noticing some other things too, for instance on the HP screen. Several times I noticed something really weird: detail disappearing, being "blown out" on brighter areas. This happened as I tested various viewing angles, moving from central seats to side seats to the screen. I'd have the image paused on a concert image of a singer who had bright lighting on one side of his face. From the side seats, where the image dimmed, that bright side of his face had visible details of his skin/wrinkles etc. But when I moved to the central seat with the brighter image those details would suddenly disappear! I was so baffled by this I tested it several times and sure enough detail in some bright areas kept disappearing from on-axis.

It's like when you turn up your contrast control, raising your bright areas past clipping so your projector no longer transmits the highest frequency detail. That's exactly what it looked like when moving seating positions viewing the screen image. I don't really have an explanation for why this might happen, but it was certainly there. And of course no one else ever has mentioned it that I know of.


Ah...sometimes I wish we could go back to our original state of ignorance. This hobby would be much cheaper and easier


----------



## Toe




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/19904166
> 
> 
> Indeedy, interesting Toe.
> 
> 
> As for the Carada as I mentioned it wasn't perfect for me either but it was the most benign to my eyes. On brighter scenes I could see the screen material a bit, but it had a different effect from other screens with higher gain/more optical coating (like the gray screens that use more optical coating). When I see the screen texture of the BD and Firehawk and other screens (even including my ST-130) it appears as a speckly scrim of texture overlaying/in front of the image, so I'm having to see "through" that speckly layer to the image. Whereas when I spotted the Carada screen texture it was more like it was "behind" the image; that is it was just like noticing that the image was being projected on a matte white background. So even when I saw it, it seemed less disturbing.
> 
> 
> And like you I'm in a minority in noticing some other things too, for instance on the HP screen. Several times I noticed something really weird: detail disappearing, being "blown out" on brighter areas. This happened as I tested various viewing angles, moving from central seats to side seats to the screen. I'd have the image paused on a concert image of a singer who had bright lighting on one side of his face. From the side seats, where the image dimmed, that bright side of his face had visible details of his skin/wrinkles etc. But when I moved to the central seat with the brighter image those details would suddenly disappear! I was so baffled by this I tested it several times and sure enough detail in some bright areas kept disappearing from on-axis.
> 
> It's like when you turn up your contrast control, raising your bright areas past clipping so your projector no longer transmits the highest frequency detail. That's exactly what it looked like when moving seating positions viewing the screen image. I don't really have an explanation for why this might happen, but it was certainly there. And of course no one else ever has mentioned it that I know of.
> 
> 
> Ah...sometimes I wish we could go back to our original state of ignorance. This hobby would be much cheaper and easier




It sounds like you and me should get together and create the perfect screen!







Both of us seem to be unusually sensitive to certain screen issues/artifacts. Maybe this is our calling!










As far as returning to the original state of ignorance, I could not agree more! I think the most happy I have EVER been with my HT setup is when I knew the least and my speakers were sitting on milk crates and I was watching a 230 pound 36" tube tv with only 1 small sub, etc............everything seemed perfect. Ignorance was bliss!







Now that I know every detail of my room and every little flaw with my video/audio, sometimes it does not seem as satisfying. This is strange since I know my system has improved incredibly since those tube tv days, but the more you know, the more critical you get in a sense. Not saying I would go back to those days of course, but it is all very interesting.


Having said all that, all it takes is one of those amazing overall HT experiences like I had with HTTYD in 3d the two times I have watched it in the last few weeks to make me realize it is all paying off


----------



## newfmp3




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Toe* /forum/post/19904328
> 
> 
> It sounds like you and me should get together and create the perfect screen!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Both of us seem to be unusually sensitive to certain screen issues/artifacts. Maybe this is our calling!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As far as returning to the original state of ignorance, I could not agree more! I think the most happy I have EVER been with my HT setup is when I knew the least and my speakers were sitting on milk crates and I was watching a 230 pound 36" tube tv with only 1 small sub, etc............everything seemed perfect. Ignorance was bliss!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now that I know every detail of my room and every little flaw with my video/audio, sometimes it does not seem as satisfying. This is strange since I know my system has improved incredibly since those tube tv days, but the more you know, the more critical you get in a sense. Not saying I would go back to those days of course, but it is all very interesting.
> 
> 
> Having said all that, all it takes is one of those amazing overall HT experiences like I had with HTTYD in 3d the two times I have watched it in the last few weeks to make me realize it is all paying off



this is why, once you buy your gear you should NEVER come back to this forum....



....that being said, why am I here again?


----------



## Gregory

Quote:

Originally Posted by *R Harkness* 
And like you I'm in a minority in noticing some other things too, for instance on the HP screen. Several times I noticed something really weird: detail disappearing, being "blown out" on brighter areas. This happened as I tested various viewing angles, moving from central seats to side seats to the screen. I'd have the image paused on a concert image of a singer who had bright lighting on one side of his face. From the side seats, where the image dimmed, that bright side of his face had visible details of his skin/wrinkles etc. But when I moved to the central seat with the brighter image those details would suddenly disappear! I was so baffled by this I tested it several times and sure enough detail in some bright areas kept disappearing from on-axis.

It's like when you turn up your contrast control, raising your bright areas past clipping so your projector no longer transmits the highest frequency detail. That's exactly what it looked like when moving seating positions viewing the screen image. I don't really have an explanation for why this might happen, but it was certainly there. And of course no one else ever has mentioned it that I know of.
Rich, do you think that the reason the details disappeared was due to the image being too bright? As you move off axis the image dims, restoring the detail. Possibly, if the image is very bright I wonder if the light is blooming or scattering across the image slightly, lighting up other portions of the image, reducing contrast and muting the details..........I don't know, just thinking.


I read a review on this forum by Jeff Meier (umr) from Accu Cal of many different screens. Here is an exerpt from the review on the High Power.

_High Power - This material was the least color neutral of those tested. It appeared to be a very smooth surface. The color shifts induced by this

material may be strong enough to bother some people. This is a retroreflective material that works best when the projector is mounted near the viewers head. The ceiling mounting in this theater is more common and shows the reduction in performance from this orientation. This product did

contain some sparkling elements that are visible when viewed at closer distances. The gain of this material would aid in increasing the image

brightness for projectors with lower light output than the screen size desired._


Have you observed any of the issues mentioned? Would calibrating the projector with the HP screen eliminate the color neutrality and shifting issues?


I hate the sparklies. I remember years ago I was getting a demo of the Sony VPL400Q with the Stewart ST-130. It was the reference screen for Home Theater Magazine. I believe this screen was relatively new at the time. The screen shimmered with these sparklies (not the entire screen, just areas, as I remember)......it really ruined the image for me...........all I could do was to focus on them. It was amazing that projector was $5k, but it was quite smooth!


Thanks,

Greg


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Gregory* /forum/post/19908032
> 
> 
> Rich, do you think that the reason the details disappeared was due to the image being too bright? As you move off axis the image dims, restoring the detail. Possibly, if the image is very bright I wonder if the light is blooming or scattering across the image slightly, lighting up other portions of the image, reducing contrast and muting the details..........I don't know, just thinking.



Yeah, I'm not sure. It's not like the image was eye-blazingly bright, as if it were "too much for my eyes" or something. The surface does have an interesting sparkly sheen up close and pixels aren't quite as tightly defined as on a nuetral gain screen. But none of that has much effect from the typical viewing distance (the image looks very sharp from my viewing sofa, 10.5 feet away). It's just weird.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Gregory* /forum/post/19908032
> 
> 
> I hate the sparklies. I remember years ago I was getting a demo of the Sony VPL400Q with the Stewart ST-130. It was the reference screen for Home Theater Magazine. I believe this screen was relatively new at the time. The screen shimmered with these sparklies (not the entire screen, just areas, as I remember)......it really ruined the image for me...........all I could do was to focus on them. It was amazing that projector was $5k, but it was quite smooth!
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Greg



It's possible you saw the older version of the ST-130. Stewart has updated the screen material with a finer coating to reduce visible sparklies (I have the latest version). It's still not perfect. I personally hate seeing any screen artifacts like sparklies but I needed that bit of extra gain from the ST-130 vs a neutral gain screen. Luckily I find it a pretty good compromise as it's pretty rare the sparklies are visible and interfere with the image.


----------



## funwid

I am looking forward to hearing about this baby as the time draws near and hope that it can reasonably deliver on it's promises.


----------



## funwid

yes there is!


----------



## N.Wil




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/19903380
> 
> 
> 
> So for me the BD 1.4 and .8 screens are a no-go due to hot-spotting/screen texture. But that's me. I think a lot of people would be very happy with these screens, applied appropriately, and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend anyone seeking a screen for "real world" room to check them out.



If you were to have to pick between the 1.4 and the .8 which one would you choose or recommend?


Is the texture details less pronounce on one screen vs the other ?


----------



## IconBycon




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/19903380
> 
> 
> But the BD 1.4. struck me as having a really brilliant image with the JVC. That's nice in terms of sheer brightness, and allowing bigger image sizes, and also in regards to projector bulb life.
> 
> 
> Issues with the BD 1.4 screen were, as always, hot-spotting and screen texture. Just like the BD 8, and like the Firehawk, the image dims to one side when you aren't sitting in a central seat. Many people are not sensitive to this, though.
> 
> 
> As well, it can have a pronounced speckly screen texture in some scenes. It's one of those weird things that you can go along not seeing it, then suddenly it appears (usually in a bright scene, often in shots with sky) and then it's like a scrim is over the image and it's hard for me to "un-see."
> 
> 
> This issue again will vary with viewer sensitivity to the issue. My pal as an old Optima graywolf screen, notorious for it's screen texture, and as far as I know he never notices the issue (I don't dare point it out to him...friends don't do that to friends).
> 
> 
> So for me the BD 1.4 and .8 screens are a no-go due to hot-spotting/screen texture. But that's me. I think a lot of people would be very happy with these screens, applied appropriately, and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend anyone seeking a screen for "real world" room to check them out.




Very nice report on the BD!


I'm interested in the BD1.4, and I wonder how does it compare in brightness to the st-130.

Also, since they both exhibit screen texture, can you elaborate on the differences between them.


What was the throw ratio when you tested the BD 1.4, and what is it at your home (this can have an effect on the hot spotting)?


----------



## IconBycon




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *N.Wil* /forum/post/19918158
> 
> 
> If you were to have to pick between the 1.4 and the .8 which one would you choose or recommend?
> 
> 
> Is the texture details less pronounce on one screen vs the other ?




I would also like to ask, how far off center you need to be, to start seeing

the sides as less bright?


In other words, for a screen that is 16:9 113" diag (~100" wide), suppose you

are sitting at the the extreme left (in front of it), but not off the screen width, would the right side look dimmer?


----------



## programmergeek

no it doesn't for 10+ ft normal viewing distance you need to be pretty far off to the side, distance also matters so I can't totally answer your question.


----------



## kee68




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/19903380
> 
> 
> The least texture I've seen on a screen I've owned, and the one with the most even viewing angles, was a Carada white screen. But I just needed a little more gain so I moved to the ST-130.
> 
> 
> BTW,
> 
> 
> I recently demoed the BD .8 and 1.4 gain screens again with a bunch of my Blu-Rays.
> 
> It was interesting yet again.
> 
> 
> As usual the BD screen did a great job keeping contrast as I turned on an off pot lights around the room, even pot lights pretty close to the screen. It really is an excellent screen for anyone dealing with ambient light/light room decor issues.
> 
> 
> As to it's performance in a fully darkened room: At first with the .8 screen I thought maybe I was seeing darker black levels than I get at home with my RS20/ST-130 combo. That was mostly in mixed brightness scenes. But that in itself is impressive given this Mitsubishi projector has a lower contrast ratio than my own projector.
> 
> 
> Also, this BD screen was only around 94" diagonal (16:9). And despite it's small size the image was on the dim side compared to what I get at home, and my image sizes (because I vary the image size zooming/masking) go from between 100" diagonal to 135" diagonal and 10 feet wide CinemaScope...and the image is still brighter than what I saw on the tiny BD screen. (The Mitsu projector is rated at having the same brightness as my JVC, and it was new in the room).
> 
> 
> Dark scenes, e.g. night and space scenes, weren't terribly impressive as they looked somewhat washed out with "grey" black levels. (In good light controlled conditions) a screen can't circumvent physics by actually raising the contrast ratio of a projector. But given this Mitsu projector doesn't have the contrast ratio of my own projector, the screen helped, if only by dropping the over all light level of the image.
> 
> 
> What about the claims made about these types of dark screens and "no more need for masking?" Er...no.
> 
> 
> Of course this is going to depend on the specific projector/screen combo and "need" is really subjective. A lot of people have white screens and don't feel they "need" masking, others find it mandatory. So I perhaps the question could be posed "Do the black bars for 2:35:1 movies go so dark you can't see them?"
> 
> 
> Nope. The black bars on 2:35:1 films were visibly lighter than the surrounding black velvet bezel of the screen. As in most set ups the black bars are much harder to see in bright scenes, since the contrast against the bright areas of the image make the black bars look much darker...sometime to the point of making the black bars look pitch black. But in other scenes, dimmer scenes, the black bars don't get this help and I could see them easily. Worst case scenarios were night scenes and any sci-fi space stuff, where the whole screen image including the black bars look greyed out compared to the surrounding "true black" screen bezel. I know from experience such scenes look MUCH better with masking applied (which cuts down the amount of visible "grey" in the image).
> 
> 
> Again, this is a personal tolerance issue as well. But I would certainly find the need to mask this screen if I owned it.
> 
> 
> It's a somewhat different issue with side masking in something like a Constant Image Height set up where you have an extra wide 2:35:1 screen. In that case your 2:35:1 images would fill the whole screen, not needing masking. And your 16:9 images will fill the central portion leaving "black bars" to the sides. But the projector wouldn't be projecting any light on to that side black bar area - unlike on a 16:9 screen where the letterbox 2:35:1 bars DO consist of projected light. So with such a dark screen material those side bars are likely to go extremely dark and then I can imagine not needing masking (possibly).
> 
> 
> But the problem there is the .8 gain screen needs a lot of light to get it to a decent brightness level, and people buying into CIH and 2:35:1 screens are usually going to significantly large screens. So I think most of the good quality consumer projectors
> 
> would have trouble lighting up a large sized .8 gain BD screen.
> 
> 
> There was one movie in particular that I thought looked amazing on the BD .8 screen: The Blu-Ray of Microcosmos. This is killer HD (though shot with film) imagery, close ups of insects (and a great little film, detailing life in a French meadow). The black levels and contrast of the images looked really deep and solid, giving a really satisfying "thereness," believabilty and density to the image. The whole movie looked amazing on the BD screen.
> 
> 
> I played the same movie at home when I got back. On my JVC/ST-130 screen combo the image was significantly brighter and more vivid, but with similar contrast, so more of a "wow" factor. But still there was a sort of different, dark/rich quality of those images on the BD screen that was also terrific in it's own way.
> 
> 
> What about the 1.4 screen?
> 
> 
> That screen (which I've seen several times before) was in a much bigger room. The screen was a 2:35:1 CIH set up, about 118" or so wide. The projector was the same JVC projector I use at home (although it was under the name "Anthem" it's the same RS20 model I have). So a much more apples to apples comparison.
> 
> 
> Throwing movies like Star Trek (2009) on this set up I was very impressed with this BD screen. What impressed me right off was the brightness and vividness of the image. That extra gain makes a world of difference as even at 118" wide the image was really bright. Contrast looked excellent, similar to what I get at home. It's really tough to evaluate the black levels without a side by side. Sometimes I thought the black levels might be a touch darker on the BD screen, but then I viewed the same materials at home and found brightness and black levels/contrast to be hard to distinguish from the BD screen. It's possible the BD screen preserved even more contrast but it's a tough call for me to really know. (My white ST-130 screen is in a very light controlled room, with controlled room reflections).
> 
> 
> But I felt the image on the BD looked terrific and especially for placing in "real world" rooms - rooms not devoted to combating reflections and ambient light - I think this screen offers terrific performance.
> 
> 
> Comparison to the Stewart Firehawk, which is a similar gray-screen-with-gain for combatting ambient light?
> 
> 
> I've seen the Firehawk countless times with lots of different projectors and it has always amazed me at how well it preserves contrast with some lights on in a room. I don't know that the BD 1.4 gain screen is any better, frankly. However, one thing perhaps in favor of the BD screen is gain. I've seen a really bright projector on the Firehawk screen (Epson, cranked up) and it looked astonishing - incredible contrast and vividness. But many less heroically-bright projectors, like the JVC RS20, have looked "good" but not spectacular because the image was somewhat dimmer on the Firehawk. (For instance, I get a significantly more vibrant image from the RS20 at home on my ST-130 white screen, vs seeing the same projector on the Firehawk).
> 
> 
> But the BD 1.4. struck me as having a really brilliant image with the JVC. That's nice in terms of sheer brightness, and allowing bigger image sizes, and also in regards to projector bulb life.
> 
> 
> Issues with the BD 1.4 screen were, as always, hot-spotting and screen texture. Just like the BD 8, and like the Firehawk, the image dims to one side when you aren't sitting in a central seat. Many people are not sensitive to this, though.
> 
> 
> As well, it can have a pronounced speckly screen texture in some scenes. It's one of those weird things that you can go along not seeing it, then suddenly it appears (usually in a bright scene, often in shots with sky) and then it's like a scrim is over the image and it's hard for me to "un-see."
> 
> 
> This issue again will vary with viewer sensitivity to the issue. My pal as an old Optima graywolf screen, notorious for it's screen texture, and as far as I know he never notices the issue (I don't dare point it out to him...friends don't do that to friends).
> 
> 
> So for me the BD 1.4 and .8 screens are a no-go due to hot-spotting/screen texture. But that's me. I think a lot of people would be very happy with these screens, applied appropriately, and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend anyone seeking a screen for "real world" room to check them out.





This is my first attempt in going with a PJ and I have a similar problem with size and drop down. I can go up to 90" wide but only have 48" for the height. can a screen be made with almost no black boarder or drop down on the top (another thread stated Semore made with no black boarder on top) ? I don't know much about the HT set ups but I am looking at the Paasonic AE-4000u as it seems to be the brightest with good reviews. I have very little light control as this will be in my living room. I have 14' cathredal ceilings but where I have to put the screen I have two trapazoid windows up in the gable end right above where the screen needs to go. So I wanted to make a cedar valance box to hide the electric roller but thats 48" above my center speaker or I get into the windows. Does any other manufacturers make screens to fit my needs other than seymore as I'm not sure if is the best choice for ambient light being present.another post mentioned a seymore screen that you can put in front of speakers and a wall mounted TV? I read your excellent post about Black Diamond screens but I need to really research as I don't want to up-grade and would much rather pop for a tensioned electric and be done with it. I don't know much about picking out gain either but I do know I need lens shift or keystone. My PJ will be very close to 13 feet away from the screen. So I'm looking for a screen around 47-48 high by 90" wide Any help would be greatly appreciated

Thanks Bob


----------



## FerretHunter

I was in the market for a new screen. My Da-Lite High Contrast Cinema Vision screen was in need of replacing.


I have a JVC RS20 as a projector, and was looking at a Black Diamond as a strong candidate. I never did see one in person, but had two dealers that could get them for me.


One of the dealers steered me towards the Supernova from DNP. As I researched this company and screen (and there isn't a lot of information out there), I decided to go with the Supernova. The reasons were that based on what I could find out there, it had less hot spotting, better viewing angles, and no screen texture issues than the Black Diamond. It was also a shade less in terms of $.


Apparantly, DNP had a working relationship with Screen Inovations. At some point, they went their seperate ways. DNP is a huge European (Dutch?) company. They even have an electric version of their Supernova screen. Screen Inovations is smaller, and looks like they went a different direction with their product.


I can confirm now that I've had the screen for over a month, that there are no hotspotting issues (my Da-Lite screen had developed this over time due to my fault in cleaning procedures). The screen viewing angles are fine, I notice no obvious dimming issues when looking from the sides. And the screen is very smooth. There is absolutely no texture to this screen.


So anyone looking at a product with Black Diamond qualities, but none (or less severe) of the disadvantages, might want to consider the Supernova from DNP. Mind you, finding a dealer with product will be next to impossible, at least in the Toronto area.


Keep in mind I never got to demo a Black Diamond. But I can tell you that the image I'm getting with the RS20 and Supernova has me very happy. It is almost, almost equal to my Elite Kuro 60" setup. Certainly it is a world of difference compared to the Da-Lite screen, and has me enjoying my projector setup once again.


----------



## DigsMovies




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *FerretHunter* /forum/post/19939040
> 
> 
> One of the dealers steered me towards the Supernova from DNP. As I researched this company and screen (and there isn't a lot of information out there), I decided to go with the Supernova...



Which screen material did you decide to go with? This is a very interesting screen, and I agree that you don't read a lot of reports about it (yet?). Additional thoughts on this screen would be appreciated- if not here, then in a separate thread.


----------



## FerretHunter

I went with the Supernova Core screen, with the 08-85 material, 0.8 gain. It is ISF certified. I think the "core" nomenclature signifies the screen construction and frame.


For my room (completely darkened basement with full light control), and screen size (100"), I didn't think I needed the extra gain of the 1.4 material).


With the Da-Lite screen, light reflected off the screen and lit up the room a fair bit. This is drastically reduced with the DNP screen (it was very noticeable). It certainly does as advertised with respect to preventing reflected light in directions other than straight back to the viewer. The screen is brighter when watching the projector than the Da-Lite screen too. Black levels are such that the black bars during 2.35 movies are no more noticeable or lighter than other black areas of the projected image. With a scene containing a lot of bright colors, the black bars are not noticeable at all. With the Da-Lite screen, this was not the case. You knew you were watching a 2.35 movie.


----------



## R Harkness

As to questions about the Black Diamond screens:


1. Speckly screen structure: Both the .8 and the 1.4 material have a lot of gain coating added to them. The .8 has a much darker substrate, looks coal gray and almost black without an image projected on it. So it had a fair amount of gain added to it in order to get decent brightness for the viewing position. The 1.4 starts with a lighter gray substrate, but also has a lot of gain added via coatin to get it up to 1.4 gain.


So they are very similar in having a speckled structure, if you notice it. I would say however that the speckly structure is more likely to be noticed on the 1.4 version since it produces a brighter image (all other things being equal) and the brighter the image the more visible screen structure tends to become.


But it's a great screen though.


2. Which would I choose? For my situation I like to be able to have a big image so the 1.4 gain would better allow for that, with my JVC RS20 projector.


3. How far off-axis do you have to go before you notice hot-spotting? Even though you can measure objective numbers for various screen angles to show the drop off, viewer sensitivity to this issue varies widely. I can see hotspotting easily even from the center seat (for each screen, especially the .8 version). At 10 or 20 degrees off axis, say a set or two to the side of a center seat, I can start seeing one side dimming. At 30 to 50 degrees, seats that start getting toward "side seats" (I have a large sectional sofa, so being on either side of the sofa puts you in that relationship) I find the dimmed side of the image very, very noticeable.


However, others report not seeing a thing. If you are fortunate enough not to notice hotspotting (or not care much) that's a big plus for getting something like the Black Diamond screen.


Anyone considering the .8 version should make sure they do the calculations for brightness, for the projector you own. Most good-grade projectors, especially LCD and LCOS projectors, could light up a 94" to 100" diagonal 16:9 version of this screen, but I think will struggle somewhat beyond those sizes so be careful. (And, best to see one in person of course).


----------



## N.Wil

Thanks rich for your feedback










Has anyone seen one of their curved screens?


----------



## BlakeV




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *FerretHunter* /forum/post/19939040
> 
> 
> I was in the market for a new screen. My Da-Lite High Contrast Cinema Vision screen was in need of replacing.
> 
> 
> I have a JVC RS20 as a projector, and was looking at a Black Diamond as a strong candidate. I never did see one in person, but had two dealers that could get them for me.
> 
> 
> One of the dealers steered me towards the Supernova from DNP. As I researched this company and screen (and there isn't a lot of information out there), I decided to go with the Supernova. The reasons were that based on what I could find out there, it had less hot spotting, better viewing angles, and no screen texture issues than the Black Diamond. It was also a shade less in terms of $.
> 
> 
> Apparantly, DNP had a working relationship with Screen Inovations. At some point, they went their seperate ways. DNP is a huge European (Dutch?) company. They even have an electric version of their Supernova screen. Screen Inovations is smaller, and looks like they went a different direction with their product.
> 
> 
> I can confirm now that I've had the screen for over a month, that there are no hotspotting issues (my Da-Lite screen had developed this over time due to my fault in cleaning procedures). The screen viewing angles are fine, I notice no obvious dimming issues when looking from the sides. And the screen is very smooth. There is absolutely no texture to this screen.
> 
> 
> So anyone looking at a product with Black Diamond qualities, but none (or less severe) of the disadvantages, might want to consider the Supernova from DNP. Mind you, finding a dealer with product will be next to impossible, at least in the Toronto area.
> 
> 
> Keep in mind I never got to demo a Black Diamond. But I can tell you that the image I'm getting with the RS20 and Supernova has me very happy. It is almost, almost equal to my Elite Kuro 60" setup. Certainly it is a world of difference compared to the Da-Lite screen, and has me enjoying my projector setup once again.



So to be clear. You recommend DNP Super Nova over Screen Innovations Black Diamond even though you have never actually seen a Black Diamond or done a side by side comparison?


----------



## Lawguy

My review of the Black Diamond, which compares it with screens like: Dalite High Power, Stewart Firehawk, Stewart Studiotek 130, Stewart Ultramatte 150 and Vutec Silverstar will be on line in the next few days. It has plently of pictures from which you can draw conclusions. It will be posted on VideoVantage .


I have been using this screen for two months now and am very happy with it with the lights on and off. Everyone has different rooms and different goals so one screen will not make everyone happy.


----------



## Kevin Snyder

Looking forward to this, Lawguy. Please update when available!


Kevin


----------



## programmergeek

I have several screens here and have shown them to several people, most people are preferring the BD but the cost is higher. I was going to post pics but they don't really do justice and the colors don't come out 100% accurate so I just assume not. This is a screen you really have to just go see.

Now with that being said I have 113” 1.4, here are the key points:


Pros:

Compared to a matt white colors are much more saturated and lively, something I didn’t expect.

Much more 3D looking Image

Blacks are awesome with no loss of detail in the gray. This has always been an issue with most gray screens I have used.

When watching non 16x9 content the bars are almost black and non distracting, no need for a masking system, not to say a masking system would not be nice.

Almost no pattern or hot spots, that being said I am probably not as sensitive as some but compared to other gain screens this has been the best.

Very limited light reflected onto the ceiling.

Quality and border is top notch, great looking with the lights on, my wife tells me how much better the room looks with that screen than the light gray or white ones with the lights on.


Cons:

Corners can get dim if you are off to the side, but you have to be pretty far off to the side, most rooms this is not an issue.

Screen has a very slight pattern but I really have to look.

I have not tried this but I have a feeling you can scratch this screen easier than some.


----------



## Kevin 3000

100% agree with the above 110" BDII 1.4 owner.


----------



## rdjam




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 100% agree with the above 110" BDII 1.4 owner.



+1


Have just loved this screen. Great contrast across the spectrum ad good with lights on - watching the news on it right now.


Re: the possibility of a scratch the main risk is the silver coating on the back. Like any screen of this type, you should treat it carefully.


----------



## FerretHunter




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeV* /forum/post/19982309
> 
> 
> So to be clear. You recommend DNP Super Nova over Screen Innovations Black Diamond even though you have never actually seen a Black Diamond or done a side by side comparison?



I was merely bringing another screen into the discussion, one that might be a viable alternative to the Black Diamond, for a little bit less.


Don't take my word for it. The literature on both websites is fairly similar.


With the DNP, I'm seeing a marked improvement over my previous Da-Lite screen, and none of the disadvantages often talked about with the Black Diamond.


I may have never seen a Black Diamond, but you've probably never seen a DNP. So that makes us even?


----------



## Kevin Snyder




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *FerretHunter* /forum/post/20004326
> 
> 
> 
> With the DNP, I'm seeing a marked improvement over my previous Da-Lite screen, and none of the disadvantages often talked about with the Black Diamond.
> 
> 
> I may have never seen a Black Diamond, but you've probably never seen a DNP. So that makes us even?



His point being you cannot say the disadvantages don't exist with your DNP without comparision with the Black Diamond. Perhaps you just don't see or are not sensitive to them?


In response to your final statement, I don't recall him recommending one over the other. It is thus irrelevant if he has seen the DNP.


----------



## Kevin Snyder

Quote:

Originally Posted by *N.Wil* 
Thanks rich for your feedback










Has anyone seen one of their curved screens?
Just ordered a 125" diagonal, 2.35:1, 1.4 gain BD curved screen.


Will hopefully help with any hotspotting. Also, while the BD excels in rejecting vertical reflections, the curve should also help with the horizontal reflections.


Will give more info when received and installed.


Pricey!!


----------



## FerretHunter

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kevin Snyder* 
His point being you cannot say the disadvantages don't exist with your DNP without comparision with the Black Diamond. Perhaps you just don't see or are not sensitive to them?
Ok. Anythings possible I guess. I don't know if he really is "Screen Innovations Director of Sales", but that might influence his perspective.

Quote:

In response to your final statement, I don't recall him recommending one over the other. It is thus irrelevant if he has seen the DNP.
I don't think I was recommending one over the other either.


Again, I was just putting another screen out there to consider when looking for this type/class of screen.


----------



## samj97j

I need some input on choosing the right gain for my room/pj. Light controll but not total at all times. Some dim can lighting for ambiance(bride). I will be shining a JVC HD250 on a 106" BD 16:9.


----------



## rdjam




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *samj97j* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I need some input on choosing the right gain for my room/pj. Light controll but not total at all times. Some dim can lighting for ambiance(bride). I will be shining a JVC HD250 on a 106" BD 16:9.



I personally like the 1.4 as the beat compromise. The .8 really requires a pretty strong beamer, and is more subject to a narrower viewing cone.


----------



## Gregory




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *programmergeek* /forum/post/19999930
> 
> 
> I have several screens here and have shown them to several people, most people are preferring the BD but the cost is higher. I was going to post pics but they don't really do justice and the colors don't come out 100% accurate so I just assume not. This is a screen you really have to just go see.
> 
> Now with that being said I have 113 1.4, here are the key points:
> 
> 
> Pros:
> 
> Compared to a matt white colors are much more saturated and lively, something I didn't expect.
> 
> Much more 3D looking Image
> 
> Blacks are awesome with no loss of detail in the gray. This has always been an issue with most gray screens I have used.
> 
> When watching non 16x9 content the bars are almost black and non distracting, no need for a masking system, not to say a masking system would not be nice.
> 
> Almost no pattern or hot spots, that being said I am probably not as sensitive as some but compared to other gain screens this has been the best.
> 
> Very limited light reflected onto the ceiling.
> 
> Quality and border is top notch, great looking with the lights on, my wife tells me how much better the room looks with that screen than the light gray or white ones with the lights on.
> 
> 
> Cons:
> 
> Corners can get dim if you are off to the side, but you have to be pretty far off to the side, most rooms this is not an issue.
> 
> Screen has a very slight pattern but I really have to look.
> 
> I have not tried this but I have a feeling you can scratch this screen easier than some.





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20001747
> 
> 
> 100% agree with the above 110" BDII 1.4 owner.



Do you see any sparklies?


I've heard that this isn't the best screen to use with no ambient light........apparently the screen performs better with some light in the room. Is this true and if so, what are the differences?


Thanks,

Greg


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *samj97j* /forum/post/20006342
> 
> 
> I need some input on choosing the right gain for my room/pj. Light controll but not total at all times. Some dim can lighting for ambiance(bride). I will be shining a JVC HD250 on a 106" BD 16:9.



I would not go larger than 100" with a .8 BD with that projector.


----------



## rdjam




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Gregory* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> Do you see any sparklies?
> 
> 
> I've heard that this isn't the best screen to use with no ambient light........apparently the screen performs better with some light in the room. Is this true and if so, what are the differences?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Greg



No, that's not accurate. The BD is just as amazing in a fully blacked out room. In fact, even more so, as it has way less light backscatter than the other screens.


Yes, you may notice some sparklies at less than 12 feet distance, in brighter patches of the image, such as skies. It's a tradeoff of high gain screens, on which this is based. But your mind will end up tuning it out. I don't notice it most of the time.


----------



## rdjam




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> I would not go larger than 100" with a .8 BD with that projector.



I agree. That's why I'd recommend the 1.4.


I'm running 133 inches 2.4 AR with the 1.4 and it is plenty bright. Could have gone bigger without penalty.


----------



## msmCutter




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rdjam* /forum/post/20007346
> 
> 
> No, that's not accurate. The BD is just as amazing in a fully blacked out room. In fact, even more so, as it has way less light backscatter than the other screens.
> 
> 
> Yes, you may notice some sparklies at less than 12 feet distance, in brighter patches of the image, such as skies. It's a tradeoff of high gain screens, on which this is based. But your mind will end up tuning it out. I don't notice it most of the time.



You're nuts if you think it'll perform better than any matte white screen in a blacked out room.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/20007757
> 
> 
> You're nuts if you think it'll perform better than any matte white screen in a blacked out room.



Hi msmCutter,


Do you have experience with both a BDII screen and a matte white screen? Can you share the reasons for your strong remark, based upon your experience?


Thanks,


Dave


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/20007757
> 
> 
> You're nuts if you think it'll perform better than any matte white screen in a blacked out room.




White screens are vulnerable to washout from reflections, even in perfectly dark rooms. You can combat these reflections by turning your room into a bat cave but not many people want to do that.


----------



## rdjam




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> You're nuts if you think it'll perform better than any matte white screen in a blacked out room.



A matte white screen lights up the whole room with backscatter even with the lights out. It's difficult to control that even if you paint everything black.


I've had many types of screens, including matte white. You'll have to take my word for it until you see them both together. The only downside with the BDII is that you may choose to color correct for the slight tint it can cast.


----------



## msmCutter

And it hotspots and it suffers from sparklies and it's not AT and it's expensive. If you can control the room there's nothing better than a matte white screen.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/20009261
> 
> 
> If you can control the room there's nothing better than a matte white screen.



Agreed.


----------



## programmergeek

Disaggree, Depends on the projector and the person that why this is such a hard topic. Almost every projector I have found especally under 10k could use some help. Some people like bright coloers some people like perfect colors, some peoople want really good black levels. But with that being said lets just aggree to disaggree it goes with my theory there is no perfect screen.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin Snyder* /forum/post/19997783
> 
> 
> Looking forward to this, Lawguy. Please update when available!
> 
> 
> Kevin



Soon!


----------



## Kevin 3000

With all the screens outstanding traits, often overlooked is the screens less understood invidiousness properties.


----------



## dovercat




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20009927
> 
> 
> With all the screens outstanding traits, often overlooked is the screens less understood invidiousness properties.



All criticisms are unfounded the result of envy? Even those of the odd unhappy customer?


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msmCutter* /forum/post/20009261
> 
> 
> And it hotspots and it suffers from sparklies and it's not AT and it's expensive. If you can control the room there's nothing better than a matte white screen.




I think that, even taking the room out of the equation, projector/screen interactions make the type of statement you just made somewhat dicey.


For instance, there are various screens with significant gain, both gray based and white based, that many people would prefer over a matte white screen.

People might prefer the added brightness, or need it for a dimmer projector or they may desire a larger screen size and need lots of gain, etc.


And darker, below-neutral gain screens can be beneficial for some people who really like darker black levels and don't have a projector with an adjustable iris.


----------



## BlakeV




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *FerretHunter* /forum/post/20004326
> 
> 
> I was merely bringing another screen into the discussion, one that might be a viable alternative to the Black Diamond, for a little bit less.
> 
> 
> Don't take my word for it. The literature on both websites is fairly similar.
> 
> 
> With the DNP, I'm seeing a marked improvement over my previous Da-Lite screen, and none of the disadvantages often talked about with the Black Diamond.
> 
> 
> I may have never seen a Black Diamond, but you've probably never seen a DNP. So that makes us even?



And you would be mistaken. As director of sales for screen Innovations i have enjoyed to opportunity to view DNP screens, Stewart screens, SMX, Elite, Draper, Da-Lite and just about every other screen available. This way when I speak to the advantages and disadvantages of Black Diamond compared to any other screen technology I can do so from first hand experience. And that is always the best way to judge a screens performance, by viewing an image on the actual screen before comparing it to another screen.


----------



## BlakeV

Quote:

Originally Posted by *programmergeek* 
I have several screens here and have shown them to several people, most people are preferring the BD but the cost is higher. I was going to post pics but they don't really do justice and the colors don't come out 100% accurate so I just assume not. This is a screen you really have to just go see.

Now with that being said I have 113 1.4, here are the key points:


Pros:

Compared to a matt white colors are much more saturated and lively, something I didn't expect.

Much more 3D looking Image

Blacks are awesome with no loss of detail in the gray. This has always been an issue with most gray screens I have used.

When watching non 16x9 content the bars are almost black and non distracting, no need for a masking system, not to say a masking system would not be nice.

Almost no pattern or hot spots, that being said I am probably not as sensitive as some but compared to other gain screens this has been the best.

Very limited light reflected onto the ceiling.

Quality and border is top notch, great looking with the lights on, my wife tells me how much better the room looks with that screen than the light gray or white ones with the lights on.


Cons:

Corners can get dim if you are off to the side, but you have to be pretty far off to the side, most rooms this is not an issue.

Screen has a very slight pattern but I really have to look.

I have not tried this but I have a feeling you can scratch this screen easier than some.
Corners getting dim is due to the screens light rejection properties kicking in when you get off angle. It was also keeps the light scatter down.

You can also scratch the front of a BD screen. The first layer is a laminate so it can be scratched by a sharp surface. It can however be easily cleaned, in fact I have hosed one off before. We have also started shipping with a screen cleaner included.


----------



## barrelbelly

BlakeV:

Wonderful, thoughtful responses! I will be in the market for a projection system this year. I currently have a big 65" Hitachi 65F59 CRT RPTV in a dedicated, built in, shelf surround cave in my 32'x24' HT room, which makes it look like a flat panel. They will have to pry my lovable Hitachi from my "cold dead hands' to get me to part with it. In fact, I may ask the wife to convert it into a casket and bury me in it, if I beat her to the Pearly Gates.


To the point. After viewing Alice in Wonderland and Avatar during a recent trip to indianapolis, on a big 200" DLP HT projection system in their theater style dark room, I was floored and sold! This is the only way to watch Blu-Ray and HD-DVD movies! I don't know whether their screen was a BD, but the projector was actually an Epson 720p, the room was theater dark and the imaging was awesome. So my plan is to go 1080p DLP projector and install a screen that drops down in front of the Hitachi. I will still use the venerable Hitachi CRT for 75% of my TV viewing and streaming of all types. While using the DLP projection system for Disk based movies and games. I have good ceiling height in that room (10" vaulted style). And the projector will sit on a custom made shelf, about 4' high behind the main viewing position (center of room lengthwise). Distance to the screen will be about 16'-18'. The room is over my garage and there are 4 windows that have black color blinds for shading purposes.


Couple of questions:

1 which of your screens seem to meet the size spc for the room

2 do your screens come with the housing for drop screen viewing or is this added cost

3 where can I observe your screens in the Boston area (Center-SW)

4 are there any projectors that are less compatible for viewing on your screens

5 was that your screen in Fry's HT room (Fishers Indiana)


----------



## Leffe67

I thought I would just drop in a note to say that I'm still very pleased with my BD 1.4 screen. It works very well for my application and SI has great customer service. My only complaint would be the sparklies. I see them occasionally, but the benefits, to me, offset any complaints I have about them.


----------



## Lawguy

My review is up on VideoVantage .


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20015210
> 
> 
> My review is up on VideoVantage .



THanks for taking the time to post this review,

..................


----------



## BlakeV




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *barrelbelly* /forum/post/20014192
> 
> 
> BlakeV:
> 
> Wonderful, thoughtful responses! I will be in the market for a projection system this year. I currently have a big 65" Hitachi 65F59 CRT RPTV in a dedicated, built in, shelf surround cave in my 32'x24' HT room, which makes it look like a flat panel. They will have to pry my lovable Hitachi from my "cold dead hands' to get me to part with it. In fact, I may ask the wife to convert it into a casket and bury me in it, if I beat her to the Pearly Gates.
> 
> 
> To the point. After viewing Alice in Wonderland and Avatar during a recent trip to indianapolis, on a big 200" DLP HT projection system in their theater style dark room, I was floored and sold! This is the only way to watch Blu-Ray and HD-DVD movies! I don't know whether their screen was a BD, but the projector was actually an Epson 720p, the room was theater dark and the imaging was awesome. So my plan is to go 1080p DLP projector and install a screen that drops down in front of the Hitachi. I will still use the venerable Hitachi CRT for 75% of my TV viewing and streaming of all types. While using the DLP projection system for Disk based movies and games. I have good ceiling height in that room (10" vaulted style). And the projector will sit on a custom made shelf, about 4' high behind the main viewing position (center of room lengthwise). Distance to the screen will be about 16'-18'. The room is over my garage and there are 4 windows that have black color blinds for shading purposes.
> 
> 
> Couple of questions:
> 
> 1 which of your screens seem to meet the size spc for the room
> 
> 2 do your screens come with the housing for drop screen viewing or is this added cost
> 
> 3 where can I observe your screens in the Boston area (Center-SW)
> 
> 4 are there any projectors that are less compatible for viewing on your screens
> 
> 5 was that your screen in Fry's HT room (Fishers Indiana)



I hear what you are saying about your Hitachi, i used to love selling the 65 and the 55 (or was it 52') years ago in a galaxy far far away.

As to your questions, AVS Forum has some pretty strict rules governing selling from the forum so I will have to decline answering your questions in the forum. You may feel free to contact me directly if you wish. My contact information is in my public profile.


----------



## fraisa

did anyone take any screen shots of the superbowl on there black diamond screen?


----------



## DigsMovies




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20015210
> 
> 
> My review is up on VideoVantage .



I enjoyed reading that- nicely done!


----------



## RickAVManiac




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20015210
> 
> 
> My review is up on VideoVantage .



Thanks for the review!


----------



## Jrunr

Looking at the pictures, I didnt see any real difference in the picture between the .08 and the 1.4 screens. Was there more a difference than was shown in the pics?


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jrunr* /forum/post/20017510
> 
> 
> Looking at the pictures, I didnt see any real difference in the picture between the .08 and the 1.4 screens. Was there more a difference than was shown in the pics?



There is a difference but I was surprised that there was not more of one.


The materials are obviously different colors. The 1.4 is a lighter color than the .8. I'll try rechecking this with a 100% stim pattern to see what is going on. The 1.4 sample is old but I don't think that would affect the gain.


----------



## dovercat




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeV* /forum/post/20013776
> 
> 
> And you would be mistaken. As director of sales for screen Innovations i have enjoyed to opportunity to view DNP screens, Stewart screens, SMX, Elite, Draper, Da-Lite and just about every other screen available. This way when I speak to the advantages and disadvantages of Black Diamond compared to any other screen technology I can do so from first hand experience. And that is always the best way to judge a screens performance, by viewing an image on the actual screen before comparing it to another screen.



So would you care to speak of the advantages and disadvantages of Black Diamond compared to other screens. Especially those that attempt to do the same thing like the DNP Supernova.


----------



## BlakeV




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20015210
> 
> 
> My review is up on VideoVantage .



Great Review, very well written and very thorough.

You are correct in that we should say BD reflects light back from the "direction" of the projector and not say BD only reflects the light back from the projector.


----------



## BlakeV




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dovercat* /forum/post/20020208
> 
> 
> So would you care to speak of the advantages and disadvantages of Black Diamond compared to other screens. Especially those that attempt to do the same thing like the DNP Supernova.



I would say the biggest difference between DND Supernova and SI Black Diamond is that the Black Diamond has both vertical AND horizontal ambient light rejection were the supernova only has vertical ambient light rejection. This means Black Diamond can handle light coming from the left or right side of the screen as well as light from above or below. It also means the BD will not scatter light from the top, bottom, left or right.


----------



## BlakeV




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20019193
> 
> 
> There is a difference but I was surprised that there was not more of one.
> 
> 
> The materials are obviously different colors. The 1.4 is a lighter color than the .8. I'll try rechecking this with a 100% stim pattern to see what is going on. The 1.4 sample is old but I don't think that would affect the gain.



The new 1.4 is almost as dark as the .8. In fact unless the two materials are side by side it is often hard for me to tell if I am looking at a 1.4 or a .8 if the screen is not labeled. We have also improved the color accuracy, greatly reduced the sparkle effect and added another layer of optics for better light ambient light rejection.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeV* /forum/post/20020555
> 
> 
> Great Review, very well written and very thorough.
> 
> You are correct in that we should say BD reflects light back from the "direction" of the projector and not say BD only reflects the light back from the projector.



Thanks.


I really enjoy the screen and I hope that it comes across. For me and my room, it was a major upgrade. The on-screen contrast and black levels really have to be seen. You can look at a lot of pictures but they do not do it justice. I can say that blacks look black but until you see the quality of black that you get, you can't really appreciate it.


One thing that I did not write was that Screen Innovation's customer service is amazing. Everyone was extremely responsive and concerned about my happiness as a customer, even with no review.


The BD is also American made. I like that. Open up a factory in New York and I'll rummage through the trash for the stuff you throw away.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeV* /forum/post/20020618
> 
> 
> The new 1.4 is almost as dark as the .8. In fact unless the two materials are side by side it is often hard for me to tell if I am looking at a 1.4 or a .8 if the screen is not labeled. We have also improved the color accuracy, greatly reduced the sparkle effect and added another layer of optics for better light ambient light rejection.



Interesting. I already have an idea for a second review.


----------



## BlakeV




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20016421
> 
> 
> did anyone take any screen shots of the superbowl on there black diamond screen?



No, but I can recommend using the saints season review from last years super bowl when the Who played the halftime show. Killer HD demo, great Blacks with awesome contrast and you can see every detail on stage including Pete Townsend belly button hair.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeV* /forum/post/20020618
> 
> 
> The new 1.4 is almost as dark as the .8. In fact unless the two materials are side by side it is often hard for me to tell if I am looking at a 1.4 or a .8 if the screen is not labeled. We have also improved the color accuracy, greatly reduced the sparkle effect and added another layer of optics for better light ambient light rejection.



Hmm..I thought I'd seen the most recent 1.4 version and it certainly was lighter gray than the .8 version.


If there is a newer 1.4 version that has a substrate that is darker than the older version, and nearly as dark as the .8, that means even more aggressive gain coating would have to be employed to keep it at 1.4 gain. Which would imply even greater tendency toward hot-spotting and screen artifacts in the newest 1.4 material.


----------



## Jrunr

I am currently using an 110" SI Reference motorized screed in Gama 1.1HD material and would like something works better in a living room environment with "some" light management. I still have a white ceiling (10ft high) and I am using a BenQ W6000 projector from 14 feet away.


I would really like something that works best in my room. But I am very confused is the black Diamond is the best option, and if it is, do I go with the .8 or the 1.4?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jrunr* /forum/post/20022133
> 
> 
> I am currently using an 110" SI Reference motorized screed in Gama 1.1HD material and would like something works better in a living room environment with "some" light management. I still have a white ceiling (10ft high) and I am using a BenQ W6000 projector from 14 feet away.
> 
> 
> I would really like something that works best in my room. But I am very confused is the black Diamond is the best option, and if it is, do I go with the .8 or the 1.4?



look hear at blake's comment regarding the two screens


Quote

The new 1.4 is almost as dark as the .8. In fact unless the two materials are side by side it is often hard for me to tell if I am looking at a 1.4 or a .8 if the screen is not labeled. We have also improved the color accuracy, greatly reduced the sparkle effect and added another layer of optics for better light ambient light rejection.Quote.


From this comment the answer would be the new 1.4 gain..


----------



## Jrunr

Did they ever come out with the Black Diamond retractable screen?


----------



## fraisa

Whats the best way to dust a blackdiamond Screen?


----------



## Jrunr

Ha anyone else compared the Black diamond screen to the Stewart Firehawk screen? I am VERY curious as to how much of a difference they make in a less than ideal room (white ceilings, 10ft high). I know I have seen the same online demos from screen innovations, but i am looking more for "real world" results. Fraisa's review is awesome and exactly what i am looking for. Now I am just trying to see if anyone else has had the same, or different, experiences...


----------



## Kevin Snyder

I found this to be a good discussion:

http://www.projectorreviews.com/scre...mond/index.php 


Kevin


----------



## nola 07

Jrunr,


My comparison of the two screen materials, which resulted in my purchase of the BD 1.4 for my application, is on page 35 of this thread. I considered the Firehawk, and both of the BD screens.


I made the choice based off of screen sample comparisons that I eyeballed from all angles and in all light conditions, and not full-screen side-by-sides. I've been quite happy with the BD 1.4.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jrunr* /forum/post/20022133
> 
> 
> I am currently using an 110" SI Reference motorized screed in Gama 1.1HD material and would like something works better in a living room environment with "some" light management. I still have a white ceiling (10ft high) and I am using a BenQ W6000 projector from 14 feet away.
> 
> 
> I would really like something that works best in my room. But I am very confused is the black Diamond is the best option, and if it is, do I go with the .8 or the 1.4?



I would not go over 100" with the .8 BD (I assume that the BenQ's light output is similar to the JVC's).


The 1.4 BDs that are shipping now are different than the sample of the one I used in my review. So, I have not seen it. I can assume that SI has improved the current generation 1.4 just as it has improved the current generation .8. So, I would guess that the 1.4 would be a good choice. Again, as I point out in my review, you should be prepared to take some reasonable steps to control the light in your room with window treatments of some sort if the light shines directly on the screen. If you do these things, I think that you would be very pleased with a 1.4 BD.


----------



## Psolar




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Billybobjimbob* /forum/post/19868791
> 
> 
> Is there any updates on the electric version of this screen?





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jrunr* /forum/post/20022577
> 
> 
> Did they ever come out with the Black Diamond retractable screen?



I called today and they said 2-4 months. They also said no promises since they refuse to release it until it is fault free. It will be tab tensioned and it will be part of the next generation of reference series and fit in those boxes. No clues on pricing, but there was hinting of higher than current reference series pricing.


If they miss this time frame, I might have to look elsewhere. The NFL pre season starts in August and I am looking forward to watching the upcoming season in 3D. Of course this room is more like a bar than a theater so the black diamond might be just the ticket.


----------



## greg1292

I have an Acer 5360 how will the 1.4 help or hinder my projector for

2D and 3D playback on 113". I know it is a cheap projector but throws

a great image. I currently use the da-lite HP2.4 but have the projector

ceiling mounted.


Thanks Greg


----------



## wpgcabby

That makes me think of the guys rolling around in $500 Honda Civics with $5000 stereo's in them


----------



## greg1292




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wpgcabby* /forum/post/20063159
> 
> 
> That makes me think of the guys rolling around in $500 Honda Civics with $5000 stereo's in them



Great insight but hard not to like champagne on a beer budget!


----------



## IconBycon




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeV* /forum/post/20020618
> 
> 
> The new 1.4 is almost as dark as the .8. In fact unless the two materials are side by side it is often hard for me to tell if I am looking at a 1.4 or a .8 if the screen is not labeled. We have also improved the color accuracy, greatly reduced the sparkle effect and added another layer of optics for better light ambient light rejection.



What generation is the current material?


When (date) did it start shipping?


I'm asking so if I see one demoed at a store or friend, I can better know

what I'm seeing.


----------



## greg1292

I just tried the 1.4 sample at my home and will be buying the 1.4 screen.

Blacks are improved over the HP screen and colors look more accurate

with better shadow detail. Guess you can make a 500.00 Acer look

better. I wasn't expecting much difference but in a bat cave there was

no contest. 1.4 is what I am looking for. Reminds me of how the glasses

work 3d on the projector nice screen indeed.


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeV* /forum/post/20020595
> 
> 
> I would say the biggest difference between DND Supernova and SI Black Diamond is that the Black Diamond has both vertical AND horizontal ambient light rejection were the supernova only has vertical ambient light rejection. This means Black Diamond can handle light coming from the left or right side of the screen as well as light from above or below. It also means the BD will not scatter light from the top, bottom, left or right.



Does this mean that the BD gain drops off faster with off angle viewing in the horizontal direction and/or faster drop off of gain toward the left and right edges of the screen for a viewer sitting in the center (assuming flat screens for both)? If not, do you have numbers for gain at different horizontal angles to back that up?


While each way could have advantages in different situations I have assumed that one reason DNP would go with the differences between horizontal and vertical is that in the real world angles that you want reflections from vary more in the horizontal than vertical once things are setup because screens are generally wider than they are tall and in home setups with multiple viewers the viewers tend to be spread out horizontally more than vertically.


If there is a specific horizontal angle where the gain for the BD drops off quickly I wonder if there are any realistic viewing ratios where that would be a problem with a 2.35:1 version.


Thanks,

Darin


----------



## Lawguy

In response to those of you who have asked me about off-axis viewing, I snapped this picture this morning. This is a pretty extreme angle but still very nice looking, in my opinion.


If someone wants to see some other shot, let me know.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20065727
> 
> 
> In response to those of you who have asked me about off-axis viewing, I snapped this picture this morning. This is a pretty extreme angle but still very nice looking, in my opinion.
> 
> 
> If someone wants to see some other shot, let me know.



Hey Lawguy i am thinking your camera iso is at either auto or high,

can you take another shot at iso 50

that would eliminate the noise in your shot...

thanks


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20065802
> 
> 
> Hey Lawguy i am thinking your camera iso is at either auto or high,
> 
> can you take another shot at iso 50
> 
> that would eliminate the noise in your shot...
> 
> thanks



This picture was taken with my Blackberry. Point and Click. It is not meant to be a beauty shot. I don't have the skills. I am simply trying to show off-axis performance. I think it does that.


I would never want to watch at that angle. But, there is no obstacle to someone who has a room where someone might want to. There is some visible brightness difference in different areas of the screen and I think that shot captures it. But, the viewing angle is so poor that this would be the least of someone's problems watching from that spot.


----------



## jae3cpamd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *greg1292* /forum/post/20064475
> 
> 
> I just tried the 1.4 sample at my home and will be buying the 1.4 screen.
> 
> Blacks are improved over the HP screen and colors look more accurate
> 
> with better shadow detail. Guess you can make a 500.00 Acer look
> 
> better. I wasn't expecting much difference but in a bat cave there was
> 
> no contest. 1.4 is what I am looking for. Reminds me of how the glasses
> 
> work 3d on the projector nice screen indeed.



So will this screen work well with the JVC rs250 and Rs40. Im lookimng for that plasma pop !


----------



## Lawguy

Quote:

Originally Posted by *jae3cpamd* 
So will this screen work well with the JVC rs250 and Rs40. Im lookimng for that plasma pop !
See my review at http://www.videovantage.com .


I tested a .8 gain version with a 100" BD.


The answer is "yes" it will work well with either of those projectors.


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *jae3cpamd* 
So will this screen work well with the JVC rs250 and Rs40. Im lookimng for that plasma pop !
There are alot of screen shots in this thread that show a plasma type pop with no plasma Glare....


----------



## jae3cpamd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dovercat* /forum/post/19846457
> 
> 
> fraisa have you noticed HAWK-EYE on the UK AVForum.com has an identical setup. http://www.avforums.com/forums/proje...l#post13867841



what size screen is this ?


----------



## dukeav




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20024173
> 
> 
> Whats the best way to dust a blackdiamond Screen?



Any answers on this?


I am recently seeing grid patterns on the screen in some scenes and wonder whether its due to dust.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dukeav* /forum/post/20081283
> 
> 
> Any answers on this?
> 
> 
> I am recently seeing grid patterns on the screen in some scenes and wonder whether its due to dust.



I would use a soft damp rag and not apply too much pressure. The softer the rag the better.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dukeav* /forum/post/20081283
> 
> 
> Any answers on this?
> 
> 
> I am recently seeing grid patterns on the screen in some scenes and wonder whether its due to dust.



Ya i didn't get an answer,

so i went to WMart and did some looking in the broom and dust section,,,

I did find a solution..

Swiffer has an duster that extends to 9ft-10Ft if needed.

Its feathered and soft,,

and it collects all the dust that stays on the duster and doesn't fall off.


You just gently glide it across the screen no worries at all,

Its Awesome.

Perfect solution for dust for under 15 bucks...


I myself don't like wiping the screen with ANYTHING...

Especially for dust there is just no need to...


----------



## jae3cpamd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20081766
> 
> 
> Ya i didn't get an answer,
> 
> so i went to WMart and did some looking in the broom and dust section,,,
> 
> I did find a solution..
> 
> Swiffer has an duster that extends to 9ft-10Ft if needed.
> 
> Its feathered and soft,,
> 
> and it collects all the dust that stays on the duster and doesn't fall off.
> 
> 
> You just gently glide it across the screen no worries at all,
> 
> Its Awesome.
> 
> Perfect solution for dust for under 15 bucks...
> 
> 
> I myself don't like wiping the screen with ANYTHING...
> 
> Especially for dust there is just no need to...



What size screen do you have? Im thi nking of hooking the blakc diamind up with the jvc rs40...do u think that would give me the plasma pop?


----------



## rdjam




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dukeav* /forum/post/20081283
> 
> 
> Any answers on this?
> 
> 
> I am recently seeing grid patterns on the screen in some scenes and wonder whether its due to dust.



feather duster, maybe - you shouldn't have to use water unless something splashed on the screen previously, but you can. No soap tho. And do not get water on the back of the screen, where the silver is.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20065727
> 
> 
> In response to those of you who have asked me about off-axis viewing, I snapped this picture this morning. This is a pretty extreme angle but still very nice looking, in my opinion.
> 
> 
> If someone wants to see some other shot, let me know.



Well...part of the screen looks ok. The closer, brighter top 1/3 of the screen.










The hotspotting (visible in that shot and in my experience viewing the screen off axis) would drive me nuts, personally.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rdjam* /forum/post/20081925
> 
> 
> feather duster, maybe - you shouldn't have to use water unless something splashed on the screen previously, but you can. No soap tho. And do not get water on the back of the screen, where the silver is.



Actually you would be suprised with that Swiffer Duster...

A normal feathered duster would just push dust around,

but the swiffer version actual makes the dust stay on the duster..

I am so glad i found a solution to my screen dust...

Again I would not want to use a damp cloth for dust.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jae3cpamd* /forum/post/20081872
> 
> 
> What size screen do you have? Im thi nking of hooking the blakc diamind up with the jvc rs40...do u think that would give me the plasma pop?



I have a 113 inch screen,

I actually am the last person down in the media room when i comes to

watching stuff with the family,

and i usually get the dad chair which is about the far right corner of the screen.

At that viewing angle there is some minor dimming in the far left corner but because of my screen size its a non issue.(For Me at least)

I do have a .8 gain screen...


Actually on the weekend When watching the Leafs play the Penguins it totally felt like i was in the stands at the game...

I do have my projector in a Vivid mode when watching sports and it gives me the plasma feel...

I actually had a 50 inch sammy plasma in my room before putting up the black diamond screen and my Epson 9700ub...


But that JVC Model you are looking at is a really good Projector..

it goes very well with a black diamond...


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20081966
> 
> 
> Well...part of the screen looks ok. The closer, brighter top 1/3 of the screen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The hotspotting (visible in that shot and in my experience viewing the screen off axis) would drive me nuts, personally.



That's why I posted that pic. People should know what it looks like off axis.


To me, I think it looks okay, not that I would ever watch from that angle, which is around 70 degrees.


I should take a pic of a 100 ire field. That really shows the differences because it is supposed to look uniform.


----------



## R Harkness

Believe me, Lawguy, I'm certainly not declaring "it looks bad" because as you know people

concentrate on different things. I'd never pretend my preferences ought to be shared by everyone else, which is why I think the BD screens are a terrific product. Most people won't be bothered by things that bug me.


I've also got this bug about wanting everyone in the room to see essentially the same image, which is one reason I couldn't get along with the Da Lite HP screen either. Yet sometimes I envy both the BD and the HP screen owners who are fine with the screen issues and benefit greatly from what those screens do so well.


----------



## jae3cpamd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20082884
> 
> 
> That's why I posted that pic. People should know what it looks like off axis.
> 
> 
> To me, I think it looks okay, not that I would ever watch from that angle, which is around 70 degrees.
> 
> 
> I should take a pic of a 100 ire field. That really shows the differences because it is supposed to look uniform.



Very close to pulling the trigger on this screen. I have an open space between 2 windows that is 101.5 inches wide. The BD 1.4 gain 110 inch screen is 103 inches wide.Just how is this screen mounted...where exactly are the clips/clamps...any way I can make this work? Im not exactly the Bob Villa type!


----------



## Lawguy

Quote:

Originally Posted by *R Harkness* 
Believe me, Lawguy, I'm certainly not declaring "it looks bad" because as you know people

concentrate on different things. I'd never pretend my preferences ought to be shared by everyone else, which is why I think the BD screens are a terrific product. Most people won't be bothered by things that bug me.


I've also got this bug about wanting everyone in the room to see essentially the same image, which is one reason I couldn't get along with the Da Lite HP screen either. Yet sometimes I envy both the BD and the HP screen owners who are fine with the screen issues and benefit greatly from what those screens do so well.
I have a single row of four seats. The seat with the worst angle is probably 30 degrees. I can't see much of a difference between that seat and the best one. There are times when I might bring some extra chairs in and those seats will be off to the side and have a compromised picture.


Like you said, different things bother different people so know what you are buying. I like this screen a lot and the advantages for me far outweigh the compromises. Even so, I would never say that it is for everyone or for every room.


----------



## Lawguy

Quote:

Originally Posted by *jae3cpamd* 
Very close to pulling the trigger on this screen. I have an open space between 2 windows that is 101.5 inches wide. The BD 1.4 gain 110 inch screen is 10. inches wide.Just how is this screen mounted...where exactly are the clips/clamps...any way I can make this work? Im not exactly the Bob Villa type!
If you can turn a screw, you should be okay. There are two mounting brackets that you should probably drill in to studs. Make sure that they are level to each other, The screen slips on top of the two brackets. It is easily removed. They don't need to be any set distance apart - just wide enough so that the screen has a good base. So, you can make it work.


Just make sure that you do something about those two windows.


----------



## fraisa

American Idol

Just watched Idol tonight,and when Ryan Seacrest said time to dim the lights i also dimmed mine.

And when i did again i was reminded why i picked a Black Diamond Screen.

Hardly any light scatter..

Those that have a black diamond screen can take this benefit for granted.


----------



## inky blacks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pottscb* /forum/post/12931429
> 
> 
> I can't squeeze the image any smaller than 92".



I can't understand why anyone would want front projection for a screen smaller than 100". Otherwise, why not get a Mitsubishi 92" dlp rear projection TV?


----------



## BlakeV




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20015210
> 
> 
> My review is up on VideoVantage .



Great review. Thank you for taking the time to write, I found it to be very fair and balanced.


----------



## BlakeV




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *inky blacks* /forum/post/20114595
> 
> 
> I can't understand why anyone would want front projection for a screen smaller than 100". Otherwise, why not get a Mitsubishi 92" dlp rear projection TV?



I have been surprised to find, being from Texas were everyone has a big house, an oil rig and a cow that those in the big cities have very small living spaces. We actually sell a lot of 80" Black Diamonds and 72" Black Diamonds to condo owners, apartment and small home owner who are looking to save a few inches of depth by hanging a big screen rather than buying a rear projection system. Ya haw!


----------



## tr6

Does anyone know if the Black Diamond screen material can be bought separately for DIY construction and how thick is it?


----------



## BlakeV




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *darinp2* /forum/post/20065454
> 
> 
> Does this mean that the BD gain drops off faster with off angle viewing in the horizontal direction and/or faster drop off of gain toward the left and right edges of the screen for a viewer sitting in the center (assuming flat screens for both)? If not, do you have numbers for gain at different horizontal angles to back that up?
> 
> 
> While each way could have advantages in different situations I have assumed that one reason DNP would go with the differences between horizontal and vertical is that in the real world angles that you want reflections from vary more in the horizontal than vertical once things are setup because screens are generally wider than they are tall and in home setups with multiple viewers the viewers tend to be spread out horizontally more than vertically.
> 
> 
> If there is a specific horizontal angle where the gain for the BD drops off quickly I wonder if there are any realistic viewing ratios where that would be a problem with a 2.35:1 version.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Darin



Here is a link to an article by Brent Butterworth from Sound and Vision magazine. Brent measured the half gain for both materials as well as color accuracy.
http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/tes...ection-screens


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeV* /forum/post/20127692
> 
> 
> Here is a link to an article by Brent Butterworth from Sound and Vision magazine. Brent measured the half gain for both materials as well as color accuracy.
> http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/tes...ection-screens



I forgot about that review from last yr..

They did a good job on that article....


----------



## tr6

Interesting article, Brent's contrast readings with the lights on definetely shows a major improvement with the Black Diamond over standard white screens with the lights on, then he goes on & says "On the RS-3 with the lights off, the JVC projector’s native contrast measured 16,690:1." (the RS-3 is a Photo Research white screen) but he did not give a reading with lights off on the Black Diamond. So my question is with the lights off would the Black Diamond's contrast be higher or lower than a white screen?


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tr6* /forum/post/20131119
> 
> 
> So my question is with the lights off would the Black Diamond's contrast be higher or lower than a white screen?



It depends on how much light scatter is present. If there is none, the CR would be about the same. A neutral gain white screen is a better choice if this is your priority and your situation. But, if you have light scatter issues, the Black Diamond is a better choice in a dark room. If you watch with the lights both on and off, the BD is the clear choice.


----------



## JustmeF

Hi,

I'm new to screens with a higer gain, and is considering a Black Diamond 2 1.4or some other screen with gain around 1.3 - 1.4.


But I'm not sure how well my room and Projector is suited for an angular reflective screen.

My projector is a Sharpvision xv-z17000, and the reason for the screen change is the need for more light.

The screen is going to be 92" diagonal.

height of the room is 2.1m (6.89 ft)

distance screen to position where the eyes are aprox. 4.5m. (14.76ft)

lower edge of screen will be 0.76m above the floor (2.49ft)

Width of the room is 3m (9.84ft)


The Projector can't be moved due to fixed lens offset, and very llittle zoom.


I've added a drawing of my room from the side, with the angels that I believe the light will bounce of the screen, degrees marked Top is from top of screen, and bottom is from the bottom of the screen.

0: is the direct reflection of the screen

0-22,5: how much of senter, mesured from the direct line of reflection (0 degrees)



Again, I have no idea if this is the right way to calculate this, but you experts would probably know.


Will this setup work?

if not, any recomendations how to make it work? diferent screen maybe?

how will the diffrence in viewing angles top vs bottom affect the image? (5.6 degrees from top, and 22.5 degrees from bottom)


Daniel


----------



## fraisa

For those who want to see the black diamond in action

here is the link to a black diamond paired with Epson 9700

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...282483&page=12


----------



## goneten

Just a question. It was said that the Black Diamond would or rather should give similar or same contrast performance to a white screen in a fully darkened room (provided no light scatter). But I would have thought that the black screen material would still provide better overall blacks. For the ultimate screen, even in a fully darkened room, wouldn't you want a screen like a Black Diamond because it's nearly black ? That's my assumption.


If I am someone who watches movies with lights off, in a room that is painted black, the impression I'm getting from some is that a white screen would be preferable which I don't quite understand. I've watched movies in fully darkened theaters and white screens tend to give relatively poor shadow detail and black depth. Granted, even in a HT room that is painted black, the light scatter from the screen does mar the picture. But I've always found a grey screen to provide better blacks than a white, all things being equal in identical conditons (re totally darkened room).


So naturally, my assumption is that a black screen (or close to it) would be the ultimate in terms of giving black depth and shadow detail. Obviously I am working on a bunch of assumptions here and I admit I could be wrong, but I just assumed the best results would be from a dark screen for blacks.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *goneten* /forum/post/20199170
> 
> 
> Just a question. It was said that the Black Diamond would or rather should give similar or same contrast performance to a white screen in a fully darkened room (provided no light scatter). But I would have thought that the black screen material would still provide better overall blacks. For the ultimate screen, even in a fully darkened room, wouldn't you want a screen like a Black Diamond because it's nearly black ? That's my assumption.
> 
> 
> If I am someone who watches movies with lights off, in a room that is painted black, the impression I'm getting from some is that a white screen would be preferable which I don't quite understand. I've watched movies in fully darkened theaters and white screens tend to give relatively poor shadow detail and black depth. Granted, even in a HT room that is painted black, the light scatter from the screen does mar the picture. But I've always found a grey screen to provide better blacks than a white, all things being equal in identical conditons (re totally darkened room).
> 
> 
> So naturally, my assumption is that a black screen (or close to it) would be the ultimate in terms of giving black depth and shadow detail. Obviously I am working on a bunch of assumptions here and I admit I could be wrong, but I just assumed the best results would be from a dark screen for blacks.



A white screen in a well treated room would have some advantages: better viewing angles, no texture and would be brighter (at least as compared to the .8 BD).


In my experience, rooms that are actually well treated are rare so I think that a lot of rooms can benefit from a BD if your priority is to preserve contrast. Plus, you get to turn the lights on, which you can't do with a white screen.


After living with a BD for three months now, I have to say that I am completely satisfied. Contrast and picture depth is simply amazing. Blacks are incredible.


----------



## goneten

Thanks Lawguy. I'm glad you're happy with your screen. I just wonder what kind of improvement the new screen offers vs the one you currently have (assuming your screen isn't the latest version).


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *goneten* /forum/post/20199317
> 
> 
> Thanks Lawguy. I'm glad you're happy with your screen. I just wonder what kind of improvement the new screen offers vs the one you currently have (assuming your screen isn't the latest version).



Mine is the latest version. Check out my full review here if you have not already.


----------



## fraisa

It been awhile since i have done some ambient light playing with the black Diamond...


Here is a test screen shot from idol shocker last night...

Enjoy


----------



## klpham71

This is not a review of the SI Black Diamond quality. After drop money on the screen at Bestbuy/Magnolia on Thanksgiving 2010, I still have not got the screen.


Delayed shipment. Delayed this. Delayed that.


Finally, a shipment came to my house a month ago after a series of indescribably irritating missed communication among Best buys store on who had what.


Wrong screen!!


The waiting game continues...Best buy has not heard the confirmation from SI as of today.


To Best buy credit, they have tried many attempts to make things right, discount this and that, even gift card offers. The communication from SI is horrendous.



If you want to drop money on a screen that does not come after 4 months. Oops, 5 month deadline is approaching...


[For the people who knows my story, it's not that hard to know who I am, right ? M?]


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *klpham71* /forum/post/20280725
> 
> 
> This is not a review of the SI Black Diamond quality. After drop money on the screen at Bestbuy/Magnolia on Thanksgiving 2010, I still have not got the screen.
> 
> 
> Delayed shipment. Delayed this. Delayed that.
> 
> 
> Finally, a shipment came to my house a month ago after a series of indescribably irritating missed communication among Best buys store on who had what.
> 
> 
> Wrong screen!!
> 
> 
> The waiting game continues...Best buy has not heard the confirmation from SI as of today.
> 
> 
> To Best buy credit, they have tried many attempts to make things right, discount this and that, even gift card offers. The communication from SI is horrendous.
> 
> 
> 
> If you want to drop money on a screen that does not come after 4 months. Oops, 5 month deadline is approaching...
> 
> 
> [For the people who knows my story, it's not that hard to know who I am, right ? M?]



Quote.......Best buy has not heard the confirmation from SI as of today...........................

I have a hard time with this statement....

and

Well i can only speak of the experiances i have had with SI.

I can pick up the phone Right now and as long as its during there buisness hours i can speak to a live person who can answer all my questions.


As far as delivery goes i had a .8 gain Screen made early nov 2010 and it was ordered on a thru and it was at my house the following Wed and i am in Canada.


Is your situation because of maybe your dealing with a big box store?,

Could very much be.

Its situations like this where people second guess a purchase from a place like Walmart or Best Buy and really miss there local independants who offered personlized customer service which both of our countrys were use to for many many yrs.


I think putting the blame on just SI is not right

When Most of it needs to go to Best Buy...!


----------



## fraisa

Noticed on SI Website today they have a live Chat Feature.

I used and spoke with someone immediately.


----------



## fraisa

SI has a new added gain material to the black diamond Family
http://www.screeninnovations.com/scr...reen-material/ 


2.7 Gain of Black Diamond


•All-new 2.7 gain for commercial and 3D applications. Black Diamond 2.7 is polarization preserving for passive 3D and increases projector brightness by 2.7 times compared to a 1.0 gain screen. Black Diamond is counter intuitive when it comes to viewing angle. The new high gain 2.7 Black Diamond has one of the widest viewing cones available making it the perfect solution for wide audience viewing.


----------



## Ranger




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20020895
> 
> 
> Hmm..I thought I'd seen the most recent 1.4 version and it certainly was lighter gray than the .8 version.
> 
> 
> If there is a newer 1.4 version that has a substrate that is darker than the older version, and nearly as dark as the .8, that means even more aggressive gain coating would have to be employed to keep it at 1.4 gain. Which would imply even greater tendency toward hot-spotting and screen artifacts in the newest 1.4 material.



I am interested in buying the BD 1.4 but I didn't see this question answered. If SI is using a darker substrate for 1.4 wouldn't the more aggressive gain coating introduce more hot-spotting and screen sparkles ? Perhaps BlakeV can answer the question.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Ranger* /forum/post/20309736
> 
> 
> I am interested in buying the BD 1.4 but I didn't see this question answered. If SI is using a darker substrate for 1.4 wouldn't the more aggressive gain coating introduce more hot-spotting and screen sparkles ? Perhaps BlakeV can answer the question.



In the Gen 3 of the 1.4 gain the sparkles are almost at zero...


----------



## R Harkness

Ranger,


Be very cautious of claims about screen uniformity ("I don't see any hotspotting") and lack of sparkly texture ("almost zero" etc).


Sensitivity to these things varies greatly among viewers. I can't count how many times people have posted about various screens making screen artifacts negligible, only to see the screens in action and find it's not remotely the case.


That's why it's always best to see screens or at least samples yourself.


I find the BD 1.4 to be an excellent screen! Particularly if you want that type of gain and need a bit of help combating room reflections or modest bits of ambient lighting. I do see sparklies on that screen, but again, viewer sensitivity varies.


BTW, that's great news that SI is adding that higher gain screen to their line up. It's terrific for us consumers to have more choices, especially with the newer brightness demands of 3D.


----------



## R Harkness

I had something of a puzzling experience with the BD .8 gain screen today at my local AV Palace.


This is part of my quest to keep investigating different screen materials. Mostly I have the AVSer curse of "wondering if my image could be even better."


I've described it before: it's in a fairly small room and does a great job keeping contrast in the room which has some lighter walls.


Today I discovered they'd moved a JVC HD250 projector into the room. I have the JVC RS20 and have often wondered what it might look like on the BD screen. It has great black levels, and it seems at least intuitively the case the BD screen would tend to lower the black levels (it's lower gain anyway, .8 vs the 1.3 gain of my Stewart ST-130 screen).


The HD250 has the same (slightly higher, actually) brightness rating as my RS20, and people who had compared the contrast between the HD250 and RS20 had reported black level differences to be fairly negligible, subjectively.


So in essence I figured I could get a good idea of how my RS20 would look in the BD .8 screen.


Turns out I was pretty disappointed by what I saw. Maybe my expectations were too high. I don't know.


Basically the image seemed significantly duller than what I get at home, with less contrast in every way. I had the projector remote, played with all the projector settings. Even "DYNAMIC"...which pushes contrast settings to extremes...didn't jump off the screen. I played with gamma settings. Nothing got much better. I wondered if maybe the bulb was old. Checked the hours: nope, it only had 52 hours on the bulb.


I put it into "high bulb" mode. This did of course brighten the image somewhat, but it still never got into "wow" territory, which I regularly get at home in low bulb mode, even with the iris turned down.


And the screen itself is quite small...maybe 86" or 92" diag at best. SI typically sends out these small screens to reviewers, no doubt because they would be easier to light up with a typical consumer projector. Don't want reviewers to be commenting on a dim picture.


But this seems to be a screen that many projectors struggle to light up...given I've now seen something like 4 different projectors in that same room on the same BD screen.


Anyway, the image I'm getting on my ST-130 1.3 gain white screen in a room that is very controlled for ambient light and room reflections is just in a different league in terms of image punch, brightness, apparent contrast...and the availability of all that at many different image sizes (I go up to almost 120" wide in my set up...it's a variable image size system).


I'm not sure what to make of this. I had the lights completely off. Perhaps the fact the room does not have dark decor is a big enough factor in terms of room reflections. The BD screen certainly does keep the room from lighting up much at all and does maintain good contrast. So maybe this is a case of "don't expect miracles" and that even a BD screen can't keep the same kind of contrast in an untreated room that you can get with a white screen in a treated room.


I dunno. I feel like I have to keep mentioning that I think the SI products are generally terrific and most welcome in the HT marketplace. But, at the same time, I'm just reporting my experience FWIW.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20314541
> 
> 
> I had something of a puzzling experience with the BD .8 gain screen today at my local AV Palace.
> 
> 
> So in essence I figured I could get a good idea of how my RS20 would look in the BD .8 screen.
> 
> 
> Turns out I was pretty disappointed by what I saw. Maybe my expectations were too high. I don't know.
> 
> 
> Basically the image seemed significantly duller than what I get at home, with less contrast in every way. I had the projector remote, played with all the projector settings. Even "DYNAMIC"...which pushes contrast settings to extremes...didn't jump off the screen. I played with gamma settings. Nothing got much better. I wondered if maybe the bulb was old. Checked the hours: nope, it only had 52 hours on the bulb.
> 
> 
> I put it into "high bulb" mode. This did of course brighten the image somewhat, but it still never got into "wow" territory, which I regularly get at home in low bulb mode, even with the iris turned down.
> 
> 
> And the screen itself is quite small...maybe 86" or 92" diag at best. SI typically sends out these small screens to reviewers, no doubt because they would be easier to light up with a typical consumer projector. Don't want reviewers to be commenting on a dim picture.
> 
> 
> But this seems to be a screen that many projectors struggle to light up...given I've now seen something like 4 different projectors in that same room on the same BD screen.
> 
> 
> .



Hey Hawkness,

As an owner of a Gen 3 Black Diamond i am not experiancing this dimming dull effect.

Do you know what Gen that .8 gain screen Was?

I currently have almost a 1000 Hrs on my Epson 9700

here is a link to my current HDTV Settings from my Epson 9700 Thread.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...282483&page=14 


In these settings i have my brightness higher than my contrast,

I actually find to get true whites without clipping i have to dial down my contrast it for most of my settings is at -9 to -6 while my brightness is at 3.

And that just to give detail to the blacks.


Here is two shots recently taken with those settings.


----------



## Screen Innovatio

What was your projector throw ratio? Was the projector above or below the screen?


Blake



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20314541
> 
> 
> I had something of a puzzling experience with the BD .8 gain screen today at my local AV Palace.
> 
> 
> This is part of my quest to keep investigating different screen materials. Mostly I have the AVSer curse of "wondering if my image could be even better."
> 
> 
> I've described it before: it's in a fairly small room and does a great job keeping contrast in the room which has some lighter walls.
> 
> 
> Today I discovered they'd moved a JVC HD250 projector into the room. I have the JVC RS20 and have often wondered what it might look like on the BD screen. It has great black levels, and it seems at least intuitively the case the BD screen would tend to lower the black levels (it's lower gain anyway, .8 vs the 1.3 gain of my Stewart ST-130 screen).
> 
> 
> The HD250 has the same (slightly higher, actually) brightness rating as my RS20, and people who had compared the contrast between the HD250 and RS20 had reported black level differences to be fairly negligible, subjectively.
> 
> 
> So in essence I figured I could get a good idea of how my RS20 would look in the BD .8 screen.
> 
> 
> Turns out I was pretty disappointed by what I saw. Maybe my expectations were too high. I don't know.
> 
> 
> Basically the image seemed significantly duller than what I get at home, with less contrast in every way. I had the projector remote, played with all the projector settings. Even "DYNAMIC"...which pushes contrast settings to extremes...didn't jump off the screen. I played with gamma settings. Nothing got much better. I wondered if maybe the bulb was old. Checked the hours: nope, it only had 52 hours on the bulb.
> 
> 
> I put it into "high bulb" mode. This did of course brighten the image somewhat, but it still never got into "wow" territory, which I regularly get at home in low bulb mode, even with the iris turned down.
> 
> 
> And the screen itself is quite small...maybe 86" or 92" diag at best. SI typically sends out these small screens to reviewers, no doubt because they would be easier to light up with a typical consumer projector. Don't want reviewers to be commenting on a dim picture.
> 
> 
> But this seems to be a screen that many projectors struggle to light up...given I've now seen something like 4 different projectors in that same room on the same BD screen.
> 
> 
> Anyway, the image I'm getting on my ST-130 1.3 gain white screen in a room that is very controlled for ambient light and room reflections is just in a different league in terms of image punch, brightness, apparent contrast...and the availability of all that at many different image sizes (I go up to almost 120" wide in my set up...it's a variable image size system).
> 
> 
> I'm not sure what to make of this. I had the lights completely off. Perhaps the fact the room does not have dark decor is a big enough factor in terms of room reflections. The BD screen certainly does keep the room from lighting up much at all and does maintain good contrast. So maybe this is a case of "don't expect miracles" and that even a BD screen can't keep the same kind of contrast in an untreated room that you can get with a white screen in a treated room.
> 
> 
> I dunno. I feel like I have to keep mentioning that I think the SI products are generally terrific and most welcome in the HT marketplace. But, at the same time, I'm just reporting my experience FWIW.


----------



## Kevin 3000

Lets see....Black Diamond screen in ambient room conditions for family, friends to enjoy or a White screen in a totally blacked out treated room......decisions decisions.....NOT.


Keep perspective to why these BD`s are special.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Screen Innovatio* /forum/post/20320384
> 
> 
> What was your projector throw ratio? Was the projector above or below the screen?
> 
> 
> Blake



I don't know the exact throw ratio. As I mentioned the screen was pretty small, guessing 92" diagonal or so. The JVC projector was probably around

15 feet from the screen.


The projector was ceiling mounted, but the screen was mounted fairly high as well. However, the projector would have been somewhat higher than the top of the screen, I believe.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20321026
> 
> 
> Lets see....Black Diamond screen in ambient room conditions for family, friends to enjoy or a White screen in a totally blacked out treated room......decisions decisions.....NOT.



The BD screen is purported to look terrific in both conditions: ambient light and in total darkness. Even in total darkness many rooms can have challenges in terms of untreated, lighter decor, so a specialty screen like the BD can help out. SI promotes the BD has producing benefits over a white screen in dark conditions as well, preserving contrast better. So the "lights on with a BD screen" or "lights off with a white screen" aren't the only choices or issues.


The BD should potentially have preserved similar contrast to what I get at home, so I was a bit puzzled why it did not seem the case in my particular demo.


BTW,


1. Your comment implies friends and family would only be enjoying a screen in ambient light conditions. That's obviously false as family and friends love

viewing movies in my home theater with lights down. Most prefer the lights off for the more immersive experience.


2. A totally blacked out room is not necessary with a white screen, if you've been wise about how you do your lighting and decor. My room isn't a bat cave, it's a living room converted to home theater. Yet I can leave the lights on over the viewing area easily and still have a plasma-like image on the projection screen, with lots of contrast.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20321026
> 
> 
> Keep perspective to why these BD`s are special.



I do, which is why I praise the availability of SI products as a viable solution for some issues (I just recommended the BD screen in another thread).


But I suggest issues are more nuanced than you observe.


Cheers,


----------



## Kevin 3000

R Harkness

Your AVSer curse of "wondering if my image could be even better" combined with your unique observational skills have you checked out the DIY screen section? Reportedly as good as anything available.


Something to consider in your quest for a better image or pehaps you have already scrutinized the section and found it to be wanting?


Learn to get in touch with the silence within yourself and know that everything in this life has a purpose. ~Elisabeth Kubler-Ross


----------



## R Harkness

Thanks Kevin.


I did indeed check out DIY options...or at least spent a lot of time in the DIY AVSforum...when trying to decide on my screen and home theater set up. I ultimately decided DIY wasn't' for me.


As to the "AVS curse" I mentioned, it actually has been alleviated to a great degree recently. For quite a while now I've been getting a better image than I've been able to find in any store set up, no matter how controlled or professional or high end the HT room. Recently I added some "final" room treatment options that, when lights are down, makes my room as bat-cave-like as it will likely ever get, and the results were even better. The image is so good in terms of clarity and contrast I now have a hard time thinking it could get appreciably better, with my projector.


Seeing the JVC with the BD screen at this point was somewhat academic...(I do tons of business with this AV store and they are more than happy to let me play with equipment) more a chance to finally see "my" projector on a BD screen as it were. And also to see if my inferences so far about screen choice/room interactions are on the right track.


At least in theory a BD screen could reap benefits even in my room, because while I have it treated to be super low in reflectivity, it would take a fully black velvet-lined room to produce virtually nil room effects on the image. A BD screen would in theory minimize even what tiny room effects I currently have. However, as I indicate, at this stage my hunch is that any benefits in that regard would be difficult to detect, and that other issues (hot-spotting/screen artifacts/screen brightness) would undermine any such negligible benefits. (For my criteria).


I thought perhaps that seeing the JVC projector on the BD screen could be enlightening and undermine such thinking (that maybe I'd actually notice some better contrast), but it didn't turn out to be the case at least with this demo.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20322102
> 
> 
> 
> I thought perhaps that seeing the JVC projector on the BD screen could be enlightening and undermine such thinking (that maybe I'd actually notice some better contrast), but it didn't turn out to be the case at least with this demo.



Again with regards to that demo,

you need to see if they actually have a Gen 3 .8 BD.


As mentioned i am not experiancing any diming on my .8 Gen 3 and my

epson has almost 1000 hrs on it.

I am going to be getting a Mits 9000 in 6 weeks and will be mounting it next to my 9700.

Just need to run an extra Hdmi line to my outlet from my Rec.


Curious does that dealer also carry Mits Projectors or is it just JVC...?


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20314541
> 
> 
> I had something of a puzzling experience with the BD .8 gain screen today at my local AV Palace.



I don't know how to explain what you are seeing. I believe that you are seeing it though.


As you know, I have a 100" .8 BD paired with an RS20. Even when I had a lamp that had over 3000 hours on it, I got what I consider great image quality and excellent contrast.


So, I'm stumped. If pushed to guess I would say that the problem lies in the HD250 somewhere. Maybe a really old lamp. Maybe a setting. I just don't know. Even though I have a 3rd generation BD, I had the 2nd gen one for some time. I don't think this would explain the lack of pop. They were about the same in this way. The 3rd has fewer/different texture issues. Those still don't bother me.










I use my Projector like a TV now. It is a very different kind of experience. I am putting tons of hours on my lamp. When I turn the lights off, I still get get wowed by the contrast. It is the best investment I made in my theater and will be there long after the RS20 is gone (provided something comes along that merits replacing it).


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20322383
> 
> 
> I don't know how to explain what you are seeing. I believe that you are seeing it though.
> 
> 
> As you know, I have a 100" .8 BD paired with an RS20. Even when I had a lamp that had over 3000 hours on it, I got what I consider great image quality and excellent contrast.
> 
> 
> So, I'm stumped. If pushed to guess I would say that the problem lies in the HD250 somewhere. Maybe a really old lamp. Maybe a setting. I just don't know. Even though I have a 3rd generation BD, I had the 2nd gen one for some time. I don't think this would explain the lack of pop. They were about the same in this way. The 3rd has fewer/different texture issues. Those still don't bother me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I use my Projector like a TV now. It is a very different kind of experience. I am putting tons of hours on my lamp. When I turn the lights off, I still get get wowed by the contrast. It is the best investment I made in my theater and will be there long after the RS20 is gone (provided something comes along that merits replacing it).



I also wondered if its the lamp in the JVC,

If you had a lamp with alot of hours on it you can get a dimming effect.


It is hard to tell with so many different varibles you cant just blame the screen.

and it is a jvc hd250,

If it was a Brand Spanking New Projector that is this yrs model less than 100 hrs then could you could go after the screen for fault.


I can also testify to amazing pop coming off of my screen Bluray or HDTV...

Heck even Facebook off of my Popcorn Hour...


----------



## R Harkness

As I mentioned the bulb was quite new - 52 hours.


Anyway, that's fascinating Lawguy, how the BD screen has actually changed some of your viewing habits, expanding your projector use. As I've said before when I got into projection one of the bigger surprises was that choosing the projector was fairly easy; choosing a screen, with all the issues of projector/room/screen surface issues was the hard part. Once you find a screen you like it should be a keeper.


Personally I'm not big on watching lots of TV on my projection screen. I'm a film-guy so I like to keep it feeling a bit more special, mostly for movies. But I have friends who use their projectors as their TV and I can understand that desire as well.


I have samples of another specialty screen at the moment from DNP. It's pretty wild.


Lawguy, I hope you get to see the new BD high gain screen. I'd love to read what you think of it.


----------



## fraisa




R Harkness said:


> As I mentioned the bulb was quite new - 52 hours.
> 
> 
> {QUOTE]
> 
> 
> New Bulb still doenst say its the screen.
> 
> Dealers in showrooms shouldnt keep 2nd yr equipment as demo's.
> 
> If he carries BD and JVC , If it was me i would put this yrs demo piece on that screen and it would look just as good as any flat panel on the market and if it didnt i would let people know why.
> 
> 
> In my room i have the 9700 Epson and like i have mentioned above i will be getting in the Mits 9000 putting it right beside the epson.
> 
> In the fall Epson will come out with there new units of which at that time i will replace the 9700 with the newest product.
> 
> Always keeping the latest and greatest up to date.
> 
> 
> I hate going into dealers showrooms whose equipment is 2 yrs out dated.
> 
> If they want people to spend top dollar then they also should invest in demo products that Shine keeping the latest and greatest on display for all to see....
> 
> 
> Back to your orignal comment,
> 
> think there is other varibles to consider. what you should do is ask the dealer to put a newer projector on that screen and see if there is a difference.
> 
> 
> If he is in toronto and carries the BD he also can get a Mits 9000....


----------



## R Harkness

I've seen pretty recent Mits on the BD .8 screen. Looked good, but a bit dim.


As I think I've mentioned earlier in the thread, I've seen "my" projector (same model JVC) on the 1.4 gain BD screen and it looked fantastic. But it's significantly higher gain than the .8 version, obviously.


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *R Harkness* 
I've seen pretty recent Mits on the BD .8 screen. Looked good, but a bit dim.


As I think I've mentioned earlier in the thread, I've seen "my" projector (same model JVC) on the 1.4 gain BD screen and it looked fantastic. But it's significantly higher gain than the .8 version, obviously.
What model of mits was it?

The 6800 is two yrs old, and not that bright is not recommended on a .8 gain screen.

The 7000 mits is even older and discontinued.


There is a projector brightness wizard on SI website on how much lumens is needed with a .8 gain screen.


It all depends on what someone wants.

I am really looking forward to getting my 2.7 BD Mini next month


----------



## fraisa

Screen Innovations Black Diamond Screen is Featured in this May Edition.

They Feature the BD in there Test Bench Section and have it Reviewed against the Stewart StudioTek.

Its is featured on Pg 42 in the magizine.

I have looked on HT site to link the article but i cant find it yet.

When i do i will post the link.


Also on page 30 of the same issue they have an article called Screen it up.

In the article they show the SI Black Diamond Next to the Epson 9700 Pro cinema....

hmmm may be someone has read thru my Epson 9700 Thread and seen the amazing Screen shots of that Combo....


Glad to see this amazing Screen featured in this mag...


Edit,

This article will go live on there site By late next week

When it does i will post the link to it.


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20331129
> 
> 
> Screen Innovations Black Diamond Screen is Featured in this May Edition.
> 
> They Feature the BD in there Test Bench Section and have it Reviewed against the Stewart StudioTek.
> 
> Its is featured on Pg 42 in the magizine.
> 
> I have looked on HT site to link the article but i cant find it yet.
> 
> When i do i will post the link.
> 
> 
> Also on page 30 of the same issue they have an article called Screen it up.
> 
> In the article they show the SI Black Diamond Next to the Epson 9700 Pro cinema....
> 
> hmmm may be someone has read thru my Epson 9700 Thread and seen the amazing Screen shots of that Combo....
> 
> 
> Glad to see this amazing Screen featured in this mag...
> 
> 
> Edit,
> 
> This article will go live on there site By late next week
> 
> When it does i will post the link to it.



Were they comparing the two in a dedicated application? Otherwise, i have no idea why they would compare the two.


Benito


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20332473
> 
> 
> Were they comparing the two in a dedicated application? Otherwise, i have no idea why they would compare the two.
> 
> 
> Benito



Again the article is from pg 42-44

May Edition of Home Theatre Mag


----------



## BobL

I seen the article and it is really not an apples to apples comparison. Both were designed for different applications so comparing them only confuses consumers. The Firehawk is really the screen to compare it against and amonst those two there are tradeoffs.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BobL* /forum/post/20333448
> 
> 
> I seen the article and it is really not an apples to apples comparison. Both were designed for different applications so comparing them only confuses consumers. The Firehawk is really the screen to compare it against and amonst those two there are tradeoffs.



The true story is not the comparision trade off,

but the fact that in this Mag Home theatre 2 pcs projection edition the beloved Stewart is not the one taking center stage but its the black diamond.

Yrs Past in an mag issue dedicated to 2 pcs Projection it would be a stewart screen grabbing the spot light getting the attention,

but this yr that spot light and attention is going to the black diamond

thats the true headliner...


Thats what this screen has accomplished.


----------



## BobL

Do you have something against Stewart? The Firehawk is less expensive and outperforms the BD II in many aspects, but not all. Is the FH better than the BD? The answer is it depends on application. Both are very good screens!


Showing how a high contrast screen can outperform a white screen in ambient light is fine, but one isn't better than the other. It is like saying I'm going to be driving in the Baja and would prefer a Hummer over a Corvette. We carry at least a half dozen different manufacturers of screens and like to use the one that best fits the client's application. There is no perfect screen for all conditions.


BTW, what movie is that? I don't think I have seen it yet.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BobL* /forum/post/20335283
> 
> 
> Do you have something against Stewart? The Firehawk is less expensive and outperforms the BD II in many aspects, but not all. Is the FH better than the BD? The answer is it depends on application. Both are very good screens!
> 
> 
> Showing how a high contrast screen can outperform a white screen in ambient light is fine, but one isn't better than the other. It is like saying I'm going to be driving in the Baja and would prefer a Hummer over a Corvette. We carry at least a half dozen different manufacturers of screens and like to use the one that best fits the client's application. There is no perfect screen for all conditions.
> 
> 
> BTW, what movie is that? I don't think I have seen it yet.



Ya I actually am a Stewart fan and think they have a great Product.

I was just highlighting that how things have changed in the screen market where Stewart has dominated for so many yrs.


Its just intresting how the market and the Market media is noticing other products like the Black Diamond.

In the Screen it Article they even had a Pic of an Elite Screens Lunette Series Curved Fix Frame Screen.


So the Media Market is responding as the Screen Market develops new product targeting the Traditional and Non Traditional Media/ Theatre Room's


I actually Spoke with the editor of Home Theater Mag yesturday thanking him for putting together an Edition Mag that has some much of its content Dedicated to Front 2 pcs Projection.


...

That Movie is the Dark Knight...

Hospital Blow Up Scene..

Sure you have seen this shot before its been used many times by others...


----------



## Benito Joaquin

I had also got the impression and it seemed clear to me that fraisa had something against Stewart....thanks fraisa for taking the time to clear things up.


As BobL said, all screens are application driven. I've had the luck of being able to see both side by side in a controlled environment and both are simply amazing!! They both serve a purpose and get high praise for what they can each do in any given setting.


benito


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20335555
> 
> 
> both are simply amazing!! They both serve a purpose and get high praise for what they can each do in any given setting.
> 
> 
> benito



Amen.....


Its really Kwl that we are getting Wow popping images Today with 2 pcs Projection with these types of screens in such high ambient lighting conditions....

I am really excited how the screen companys are daily changing this industry and pushing the bar.

Its awesome.....


So glad there is a world outside of Flat Panel...

Thank you thank you Thank you Screen Gods.....lol


----------



## greg1292

In our showroom we have the 1.4 BD setup with a Anthem LTX-300 same as

HD-250 for the most part and looks extremely good but the surprising part

hooked up the Acer 7531D and wow 899.00 DLP more pop







. Thought the Lcos would be better but preferred the dlp and higher lumens.


Screen is amazing. BD the new white?


----------



## BobL

I agree! With screen and projector options today it is possible to have a quality large projection system in environments we would never consider in the CRT days and for a reasonable cost. And I'm surprised more people don't consider projection systems for the Living/ family rooms.


Today there is a lot more competition with screens, which is terrific! The media has always had its flavor of the month for equipment. With high contrast screens you see a lot of publicity on the Black Diamond at the moment, but before that is was DNP, Silverstar, Firehawk, etc. All good screens each with its own attributes and every one of them has had its hype at one time or another.


Once someone comes out with a 2-3 gain screen, with excellent uniformity, no color shift, excellent ambient light rejection, no hot spots, 180 degree viewing, retains black levels, and is available in AT and retractable versions for under $1000 MSRP then it will be game over for the other screens. I'm not holding my breathe though


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BobL* /forum/post/20336494
> 
> 
> I agree! With screen and projector options today it is possible to have a quality large projection system in environments we would never consider in the CRT days and for a reasonable cost. And I'm surprised more people don't consider projection systems for the Living/ family rooms.
> 
> 
> Today there is a lot more competition with screens, which is terrific! The media has always had its flavor of the month for equipment. With high contrast screens you see a lot of publicity on the Black Diamond at the moment, but before that is was DNP, Silverstar, Firehawk, etc. All good screens each with its own attributes and every one of them has had its hype at one time or another.
> 
> 
> Once someone comes out with a 2-3 gain screen, with excellent uniformity, no color shift, excellent ambient light rejection, no hot spots, 180 degree viewing, retains black levels, and is available in AT and retractable versions for under $1000 MSRP then it will be game over for the other screens. I'm not holding my breathe though



hey Bob, i don't think you're asking for too much, your request seems quite reasonable


----------



## BlakeV

Great idea, I will pass your specs down to the elves down in the Black Diamond mine and see what they can come up with.


----------



## fraisa

Here is the link as promised to the screen it article from home theater mag that shows the black diamond...


Once the Test Bench article comes online will also post that Link....


http://www.hometheater.com/content/h...ection-screens


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20354871
> 
> 
> Here is the link as promised to the screen it article from home theater mag that shows the black diamond...
> 
> 
> Once the Test Bench article comes online will also post that Link....
> 
> 
> http://www.hometheater.com/content/h...ection-screens



cool...thanks Fraisa, i'll read this in a bit!


Benito


----------



## fraisa

Okay here is the link for the black Diamond from the Test Bench Article

in Home Theater Mag May Edition...

http://www.hometheater.com/content/s...n-screen 


ST 130 Vs Black Diamond Screen Shots... From Article











ST-130










SI Black Diamond


----------



## Kevin 3000

fraisa


Thanks for the link. They tested the 1.4 gain version in above pics


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20362198
> 
> 
> fraisa
> 
> 
> Thanks for the link. They tested the 1.4 gain version in above pics



Ya,

I was really pleased to see this Article.

I actually spoke with the Editor on the phone Latest week and he informed me when they would go live on the site.


From this article i now understand the difference between the 2 screens.


It was very well done.


----------



## Benito Joaquin

read both articles and saw all the pics. Very....um...interesting article.....


Benito


----------



## Josh Z




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20314541
> 
> 
> Today I discovered they'd moved a JVC HD250 projector into the room. I have the JVC RS20 and have often wondered what it might look like on the BD screen. It has great black levels, and it seems at least intuitively the case the BD screen would tend to lower the black levels (it's lower gain anyway, .8 vs the 1.3 gain of my Stewart ST-130 screen).
> 
> 
> The HD250 has the same (slightly higher, actually) brightness rating as my RS20, and people who had compared the contrast between the HD250 and RS20 had reported black level differences to be fairly negligible, subjectively.
> 
> 
> So in essence I figured I could get a good idea of how my RS20 would look in the BD .8 screen.
> 
> 
> Turns out I was pretty disappointed by what I saw. Maybe my expectations were too high. I don't know.
> 
> 
> Basically the image seemed significantly duller than what I get at home, with less contrast in every way. I had the projector remote, played with all the projector settings. Even "DYNAMIC"...which pushes contrast settings to extremes...didn't jump off the screen. I played with gamma settings. Nothing got much better. I wondered if maybe the bulb was old. Checked the hours: nope, it only had 52 hours on the bulb.
> 
> 
> I put it into "high bulb" mode. This did of course brighten the image somewhat, but it still never got into "wow" territory, which I regularly get at home in low bulb mode, even with the iris turned down.



Maybe I'm pointing out the obvious here, but if you're comparing a 1.3 gain screen to a .8 gain screen, doesn't it stand to reason that the negative gain screen _should_ have a dimmer picture with less "pop"?


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Josh Z* /forum/post/20363319
> 
> 
> Maybe I'm pointing out the obvious here, but if you're comparing a 1.3 gain screen to a .8 gain screen, doesn't it stand to reason that the negative gain screen _should_ have a dimmer picture with less "pop"?



In one sense, absolutely, which is something I've pointed out about the low gain .8 screen several times.


But on a wider view: The BD screen is often heralded as not only increasing the sense of contrast (or better preserving contrast) in bright conditions, but in lights off conditions as well. People tend to presume...and even report...that the black levels look "much better" on the .8 BD screen than what they'd achieved before in the dark. And it's also reported that this increases the sense of contrast, in it's own way giving the image more "pop" and looking more plasma-like to some degree.


So I was just reporting that I have not thus far found this to be the case, from my own experience checking out the BD screen. That's why I mentioned that the image wasn't simply dimmer, but that I was surprised it also looked like it had _less_ contrast than I get on a white screen at home. Also note the other factors I mentioned:


1. The BD screen was much smaller than my white screen, hence would not need as much lumens to light up.


2. The bulb in the JVC projector with the BD screen was much newer than the bulb in my home JVC projector - 52 hours vs many hundreds on my bulb, hence would likely be putting out more light.


3. I put the bulb into "High" mode on the BD screen, iris fully open, vs my projector on low bulb with iris down to between -9 and -12 on my larger white screen.


So there were a number of factors that should have gone some way to compensate for it's lower gain in terms of brightness.


Yet nothing fully helped.


I'm not in any way putting my experience as definitive. Other people report excellent results with the BD screen and are quite happy with the brightness (although they are typically using screens on the smaller side, if they have the .8 version).


So I'm just reporting what I saw, with as many pertinent details as I can muster. If I were someone else looking at this thread, I certainly wouldn't rule out the BD screen just on what "Rich H" said he saw: I'd want to check out the BD screen myself.


Cheers,


----------



## newfmp3

I live in an Area where I will never see this screen ever. I wish I was rich so I could just try it and see for myself.


----------



## fraisa

Screens are application driven.

What do you want , and how do you watch...


Do you want the lights on, Wider viewing angle, what about light scatter,

Do you want to eliminate or not want to have a Masking system.


All things to consider,

Will say this if i had rich's Screen i could watch at a wider viewing angle but my room would be so bright i could land a plane and i would need a masking system because i want 16x9....


Again Application driven.

I dont want to Paint my room Black and do i want to keep a light shade of flooring....

So because I dont the BD is Ideal

Also i dont want to spend money on masking system nor do i want to put one in....


Is Rich screen a Piece of junk,,, Heck no

Its a great screen that has its purpose for a certain room application.

Just like the Black Diamond...


Screens are Application Driven.....


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *newfmp3* /forum/post/20364540
> 
> 
> I live in an Area where I will never see this screen ever. I wish I was rich so I could just try it and see for myself.



Vote NDP and you will be .....










At least til the bill comes in the mail.....lol


----------



## Josh Z

Anyway, I'm late to this thread and have only looked back a couple of pages. Has anyone used the 1.4 gain version with 3D projection, and what were the results?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Josh Z* /forum/post/20364713
> 
> 
> Anyway, I'm late to this thread and have only looked back a couple of pages. Has anyone used the 1.4 gain version with 3D projection, and what were the results?



SI has introduced a New Gain of Blackdiamond 2.7 Gain.

Designed for 3D.

If you had a 3d Projector Like the Awesome Mits HC9000 then you would want to go with the 2.7 Gain BD.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20365556
> 
> 
> SI has introduced a New Gain of Blackdiamond 2.7 Gain.
> 
> Designed for 3D.
> 
> If you had a 3d Projector Like the Awesome Mits HC9000 then you would want to go with the 2.7 Gain BD.



It would be interesting to find out how this screen does with 2D as well. I'm guessing the black levels won't be as good. It would also be interesting to find out how this screen does with ambient light, in comparison to the 1.4 and .8.


Dave


----------



## BlakeV

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Josh Z* 
Anyway, I'm late to this thread and have only looked back a couple of pages. Has anyone used the 1.4 gain version with 3D projection, and what were the results?
If you are doing an active 3D projector like JVC, Sony, Mits, Optoma, Sharp and many others then the BD 1.4 gain. If you are doing passive 3D like the dual engine LG, or stacked Sim2 or Runco then the 2.7 gain is polarized preserving.


----------



## newfmp3




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20364555
> 
> 
> Vote NDP and you will be .....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At least til the bill comes in the mail.....lol



No problem there. Sadly NDP is the lesser of the 3 evils. The other two are crooks.


----------



## pers1

I`ve just ordered a BD G3 0.8 Gain 80" screen and it`s going to be used with an JVC X3 (RS40) projector.

I wanted a THX/ISF certified friend to calibrate my setup.


But I just heard when he came home from a THX calibration course were they had a BD 1.4gain and that the BD 1.4 version was useless that it shifted the hole colure space counter clockwise - this made it almost impossible to calibrate perfect!


Has anybody calibrated the new BD 0.8 Gain G3 version with either the JVC X2 or RS40.


Please advise I need help, my friend said that after what he saw he would just

write it of as none calibratable.


My throwing distance from lens to screen is: 3 meters


----------



## Maison

Is there a way to get a sample of this material or screen? Thanks!


----------



## R Harkness

I was just at another AV store and they were pushing the BD screen. In some important ways it's an installer's dream: The BD screens are going to preserve contrast, with a great looking image, in so many different customer scenarios! It's probably as close as you get for "plug and play" for everyday projection. (And most customers won't notice or care about some of the picky stuff like hot-spotting etc).


No wonder this screen has become so popular.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20377472
> 
> 
> I was just at another AV store and they were pushing the BD screen. In some important ways it's an installer's dream: The BD screens are going to preserve contrast, with a great looking image, in so many different customer scenarios! It's probably as close as you get for "plug and play" for everyday projection. (And most customers won't notice or care about some of the picky stuff like hot-spotting etc).
> 
> 
> No wonder this screen has become so popular.



Did they have one on display?

Where you able to demo it like you did before?


----------



## R Harkness

At first I was wondering what screen they were using as it appeared to be a gray screen, but I couldn't notice any hotspotting or dimming when viewing from off-axis. So I thought "This couldn't be a BD or a Stewart Firehawk material."


Turns out it was the Stewart Grayhawk, which explains things - it's just a gray screen without gain (I believe), hence low screen artifacts, wide viewing angles. (The BD and Firehawk would have hotspotted). The Sony projector looked great on that 92" 16:9 screen.


The salesman then produced a big sample of the BD 1.4 gain screen and held it up over the Grayhawk. It preserved contrast even better and had more "pop" which makes sense given the extra gain. He said they use the BD screen a lot these days.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20377841
> 
> 
> At first I was wondering what screen they were using as it appeared to be a gray screen, but I couldn't notice any hotspotting or dimming when viewing from off-axis. So I thought "This couldn't be a BD or a Stewart Firehawk material."
> 
> 
> Turns out it was the Stewart Grayhawk, which explains things - it's just a gray screen without gain (I believe), hence low screen artifacts, wide viewing angles. (The BD and Firehawk would have hotspotted). The Sony projector looked great on that 92" 16:9 screen.
> 
> 
> The salesman then produced a big sample of the BD 1.4 gain screen and held it up over the Grayhawk. It preserved contrast even better and had more "pop" which makes sense given the extra gain. He said they use the BD screen a lot these days.



Was the sample in a Frame?


----------



## Benito Joaquin

I agree with Harkness comments on the BD screen. It seems like a great solution mainly because many consumers are not picking an image apart.


My experiences with BD are simple. One of the best images in a room with ambient light but with many drawbacks. Hotspotting, color shifting, bad viewing angle. But none of that matters under certain conditions. If you have a room with a lot of light, i've seen it produce a better image than a Firehawk screen. But in a room with ambient light but controlled ambient light, i still prefer the Firehawk.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20379079
> 
> 
> I agree with Harkness comments on the BD screen. It seems like a great solution mainly because many consumers are not picking an image apart.
> 
> 
> My experiences with BD are simple. One of the best images in a room with ambient light but with many drawbacks. Hotspotting, color shifting, bad viewing angle. But none of that matters under certain conditions. If you have a room with a lot of light, i've seen it produce a better image than a Firehawk screen. But in a room with ambient light but controlled ambient light, i still prefer the Firehawk.



I also have seen both and one of the Firehawks weakness is the ability to reject light scatter

The firehawk does an okay job while the BD does an amazing job at this...


The bd handles light scatter alot better.


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20379522
> 
> 
> I also have seen both and one of the Firehawks weakness is the ability to reject light scatter
> 
> The firehawk does an okay job while the BD does an amazing job at this...
> 
> 
> The bd handles light scatter alot better.




What you call "amazing" is what most call a "disadvantage". Your chosen use of the term "light scatter" is at best humerous, because it shows both a lack of knowledge as to what such things should be called, and a determined effort to put a better lean to a off balanced situation.


What your calling "light scatter" is in fact "Increased viewing cone"...something more desiable for most to aspire to have. But in the case of the screen in questio , without it's having a grossly restricted angle of returned light, it would not perform anywhere nearly as well as it should be hoped to.


The FireHawk is a screen that serves multiple conditions with fewer detrimental aspects to contend with than does a BD.


I know it's counter productive to think you'd suggest that walls / ceilings be painted in a manner to absolve excesive reflections from a screen...but that's a better solution than suggesting a screen that adds more issues than it resolves.


But you really need to correct your usage of terminology when trying so hard to convince people that performance concerns can be generously called "advantages" and considered to be something to be held up as superior to other, more well versed and adjustable screen options.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/20379755
> 
> 
> What you call "amazing" is what most call a "disadvantage". Your chosen use of the term "light scatter" is at best humerous, because it shows both a lack of knowledge as to what such things should be called, and a determined effort to put a better lean to a off balanced situation.
> 
> 
> What your calling "light scatter" is in fact "Increased viewing cone"...something more desiable for most to aspire to have.



This post doesn't strike me as quite fair.


The laws of physics being what they are, combined with the variety of ways in which people want to use screens, every single type of screen is going to have a minus that balances it's positive aspects.


The directional coating of the BD screen doesn't escape hot-spotting of course. But that very hotspotting behaviour does have a strong upside and Fraisa's term "light scattering" captures it just fine, I think.


Making the area around a screen dark has two advantages:


1. It cuts down on reflections back to the screen, preserving contrast.


2. It helps the mood/experience of watching the movie. An image surrounded by darkness gives better focus to the image, allowing you to "forget" the room better and get into the content.


The whole point of the BD screen is to bring these types of advantages to those situations in which people do not want to start darkening their room, or who can't for whatever reason. It does indeed preserve contrast very well

in challenging rooms, and it really DOES significantly limit "light scatter" if by that we mean light scattering from the screen on to the ceiling/walls/floor.

Hence it also significantly helps with issue #2.


I've been going to a local AV store for years and their small projector room is horrible: bright walls and ceiling in a really small room, so very reflective.

They'd been using a standard white screen for years and light spreading off the screen in every direction made the entire room light up, like turning on a lamp. Very distracting.


Once they put the BD .8 screen in there the difference is amazing. Now the room barely lights up (or lights up way, way less) and the lack of the room igniting with light in every bright scene means it's much more conducive to simply enjoying the on screen image.


So, while there are disadvantages to the directionality of the BD screen (ones I personally can't get past), I think fraisa is quite right to mention the

advantage that comes with it as well.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20379959
> 
> 
> This post doesn't strike me as quite fair.
> 
> 
> The laws of physics being what they are, combined with the variety of ways in which people want to use screens, every single type of screen is going to have a minus that balances it's positive aspects.
> 
> 
> The directional coating of the BD screen doesn't escape hot-spotting of course. But that very hotspotting behaviour does have a strong upside and Fraisa's term "light scattering" captures it just fine, I think.
> 
> 
> Making the area around a screen dark has two advantages:
> 
> 
> 1. It cuts down on reflections back to the screen, preserving contrast.
> 
> 
> 2. It helps the mood/experience of watching the movie. An image surrounded by darkness gives better focus to the image, allowing you to "forget" the room better and get into the content.
> 
> 
> The whole point of the BD screen is to bring these types of advantages to those situations in which people do not want to start darkening their room, or who can't for whatever reason. It does indeed preserve contrast very well
> 
> in challenging rooms, and it really DOES significantly limit "light scatter" if by that we mean light scattering from the screen on to the ceiling/walls/floor.
> 
> Hence it also significantly helps with issue #2.
> 
> 
> I've been going to a local AV store for years and their small projector room is horrible: bright walls and ceiling in a really small room, so very reflective.
> 
> They'd been using a standard white screen for years and light spreading off the screen in every direction made the entire room light up, like turning on a lamp. Very distracting.
> 
> 
> Once they put the BD .8 screen in there the difference is amazing. Now the room barely lights up (or lights up way, way less) and the lack of the room igniting with light in every bright scene means it's much more conducive to simply enjoying the on screen image.
> 
> 
> So, while there are disadvantages to the directionality of the BD screen (ones I personally can't get past), I think fraisa is quite right to mention the
> 
> advantage that comes with it as well.



Harkness that is a very fair statment.


I could use a different term for Light Scatter ,

The Term used by Stewart is Ambient Light Reflectance. But is it really needed

i think everyone knows what i mean.


I dont have a Normal Theatre Dark Room so for me that Ambient Light Reflectance or Light scatter is a selling point.

Also viewing lights on is another feature that i enjoy when playing video games or watching sports and a movie with a lower light setting...


Harkness,

I have seen your pics of the ST 130 in your Paint Treated room and they where also very good ...


----------



## kbar3870




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20377841
> 
> 
> At first I was wondering what screen they were using as it appeared to be a gray screen, but I couldn't notice any hotspotting or dimming when viewing from off-axis. So I thought "This couldn't be a BD or a Stewart Firehawk material."
> 
> 
> Turns out it was the Stewart Grayhawk, which explains things - it's just a gray screen without gain (I believe), hence low screen artifacts, wide viewing angles. (The BD and Firehawk would have hotspotted). The Sony projector looked great on that 92" 16:9 screen.
> 
> 
> The salesman then produced a big sample of the BD 1.4 gain screen and held it up over the Grayhawk. It preserved contrast even better and had more "pop" which makes sense given the extra gain. He said they use the BD screen a lot these days.



Did you see artifacts with the BD 1.4? How about viewing angle? About how far away would you say you were? I'm getting ready to pull the trigger on a room with an Epson 9700 but can't finalize the screen option. You've seen the two main players for ambient light together. Can you provide some more detail on the comparison?


Thank you,

Kbar


----------



## JackstrawWichita

Great conversation but now I'm even more confused

My theater will be 16' wide and 23' deep. A multi use room 1/2 movies (room completely dark), 1/2 sports, etc with ambient light (wall sconces)

I can paint the room dark not not necessarily black

I had essentially decided on a BD 133" 1.4 gain 2.4 aspect thinking this would enable me to have the sconces fairly bright while watching sports or when the kids play video games. I am also considering a firehawk with acoustic perforation.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## BobL

If you are doing a perforated screen the Firehawk is your only option as the BD does not have an AT option at his time. SI does have a woven gray screen. From an acoustic standpoint this is a BIG upgrade to get your speakers at the same height behind the screen. To get the best performance from an AT screen the speakers should be 8" or more behind it. They can be placed closer but it does degrade the audio somewhat. A woven screen has less audio degradation than the perforated screen if the speakers are directly behind the screen, such as in wall speakers with the screen mounted on the wall. A woven screen may be a better option in that scenario. However, most woven screens do not have much gain nor light rejecting properties.


For light rejection the FH does a better job with lights on the sides where the BD does a better job with lights above. It sounds like the FH might be a better solution in your situation, AT or not.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *kbar3870* /forum/post/20380652
> 
> 
> Did you see artifacts with the BD 1.4? How about viewing angle? About how far away would you say you were? I'm getting ready to pull the trigger on a room with an Epson 9700 but can't finalize the screen option. You've seen the two main players for ambient light together. Can you provide some more detail on the comparison?
> 
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> Kbar



Harkness has not seen the Gen 3 Version of the 1.4 Gain Screen.

The Change to the 1.4 gain Gen 3 they have really focused on reducing the Sparklies.

also the screen color of the new 1.4 Gen 3 is very close to the .8 gain.


The Viewing angle is better with a 1.4gain vs the .8..


Will say this i have seen the Firehawk and BD Side by side and i prefer the BD.


You should check out my Epson 9700 Thread there is alot of info over there with the 9700/BD combo.


----------



## Benito Joaquin

I have seen both side by side in a controlled environment. Testing purposes.

Depends on what you are looking for. Both materials are unbelievable at what they do.


It's not whether one is better than the other. There is no clear winner if you are trying to see which one is better.


Here were my basic results. If you had a room with a ton of ambient light, the BD screen would be a better choice simply because it holds up to ambient light better than a Firehawk. If you had better control of ambient light and depending on where it was coming from, the Firehawk would be clearly a better choice. Again, it all depends on the application.


Benito


----------



## kbar3870




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20382349
> 
> 
> I have seen both side by side in a controlled environment. Testing purposes.
> 
> Depends on what you are looking for. Both materials are unbelievable at what they do.
> 
> 
> It's not whether one is better than the other. There is no clear winner if you are trying to see which one is better.
> 
> 
> Here were my basic results. If you had a room with a ton of ambient light, the BD screen would be a better choice simply because it holds up to ambient light better than a Firehawk. If you had better control of ambient light and depending on where it was coming from, the Firehawk would be clearly a better choice. Again, it all depends on the application.
> 
> 
> Benito



Does the Firehawk do as well as the BD at reudicing light scatter? There has been some symantic argument as to this term earlier so please let me clarify that I am referring to light illuminating the floor, walls, and ceiling near the screen. Also, how about viewing angles for both?


Thanks

Kbar3870


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *kbar3870* /forum/post/20382653
> 
> 
> Does the Firehawk do as well as the BD at reudicing light scatter? There has been some symantic argument as to this term earlier so please let me clarify that I am referring to light illuminating the floor, walls, and ceiling near the screen. Also, how about viewing angles for both?
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Kbar3870



The Viewing angle is better on the 1.4 Gain vs .8 gain of the black diamond.

The firehawk viewing angle is 50 degrees,

The BD Viewing Angle is 55 degrees


As for the light scatter the bd is better at handleing that...

But you need to go view these screens live and in person,

Therefore you can see the benifit for yourself...


Benito have you seen a full size G3 1.4 Gain yet of the BD?


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20379079
> 
> 
> I agree with Harkness comments on the BD screen. It seems like a great solution mainly because many consumers are not picking an image apart.
> 
> 
> My experiences with BD are simple. One of the best images in a room with ambient light but with many drawbacks. Hotspotting, color shifting, bad viewing angle. But none of that matters under certain conditions. If you have a room with a lot of light, i've seen it produce a better image than a Firehawk screen. But in a room with ambient light but controlled ambient light, i still prefer the Firehawk.



The Firehawk shares those drawbacks to one extent or another.


If you have not already, check out the latest iteration of the BD. SI keeps improving the screen. The Firehawk is nice also.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/20379755
> 
> 
> What you call "amazing" is what most call a "disadvantage". Your chosen use of the term "light scatter" is at best humerous, because it shows both a lack of knowledge as to what such things should be called, and a determined effort to put a better lean to a off balanced situation.
> 
> 
> What your calling "light scatter" is in fact "Increased viewing cone"...something more desiable for most to aspire to have. But in the case of the screen in questio , without it's having a grossly restricted angle of returned light, it would not perform anywhere nearly as well as it should be hoped to.



One size does not fit all. A reduced viewing angle is a good trade off for many people and in many rooms. What you give up in viewing angle, you get in increased on screen contrast.


There is too much conjecture here and not enough real life observation. People should see the screen and see what it does. I can stand way off to the side of my BD and the image is still very nice. Your post has the tone as if you are revealing something that the manufacturer keeps hidden. Not true. Viewing angles are part of the screen's spec.


It is hard to make the choice about which compromises are acceptable. Going the safe route and choosing a white screen even though a room is less than ideal is probably almost always the wrong decision. Screens like the BD or even the Firehawk are almost always better choices for real world rooms. I am, of course, more partial to the BD.


----------



## ccotenj

question from a lurker who reads much and knows little...


does the new g3 material improve upon ambient light rejection from the sides? if anyone has seen one, is it catching up to the firehawk in that respect?


----------



## Benito Joaquin

fraisa, i've had the opportunity to see it in either a 92" or 100", i can't recall what size it was. Unfortunately I have yet to put it side by side with a Firehawk in a controlled environment.

The G3 is a huge improvement and when I made my screen purchase, i wish it would have been available! It is truly amazing at what it can do.


I agree with fraisa and ccotenj to answer your question, it is a bit better but for ambient light from the sides, firehawk is still the clear winner.


Lawguy, you are correct in that the Firehawk carries the similar drawbacks, the difference is that they were way more noticeable on the BD screen. Especially when you got off axis which was one of my main requirements and the reason I ended up with a Firehawk.


When i set up my room, it was a difficult choice. The BD screen was a clear winner because of the way it handled ambient light compared to the Firehawk and if it wasn't for my off axis viewing, i would have a BD screen now. That's why I say that both screens are amazing and depending on your application, one might be better for you than the other. It's not a black and white one being a better screen than the other.


I'll talk to my local connections to see if i can set one up next to a FHG3.


Benny


----------



## ccotenj

^^^


thanks benito, that's good to know... i'm stuck in research hell right now...







you also have a couple of emails from me...










viewing angles aren't really an issue for me, i have 2 seats...


i WANT to talk myself out of a fh and into a bd, because the cool factor of that big black screen is pretty huge... but it keeps coming back to the side vs. above ambient lighting, and since i don't have to deal with overhead lighting (light would be from windows/artificial from the sides), the fh keeps sounding like the correct choice... fwiw, i am going to make my walls be dark in color, they won't stay white...


darnit... why can't this be as easy as selecting a plasma was????


----------



## Josh Z




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeV* /forum/post/20368278
> 
> 
> If you are doing an active 3D projector like JVC, Sony, Mits, Optoma, Sharp and many others then the BD 1.4 gain. If you are doing passive 3D like the dual engine LG, or stacked Sim2 or Runco then the 2.7 gain is polarized preserving.



I have an active 3D projector (JVC RS40). I was hoping for feedback from people who have actually used the screen with 3D.


----------



## evenchaos

Does SI give out material samples like Da-Lite or sell them for a nominal cost ? Did anyone here (who is not a dealer) manage to get them to send one out ?


----------



## ccotenj

i'm sure this is buried in the thread somewhere, but apparently, my search skills aren't good enough to find a definitive comparison...


i'm trying to wrap my head around this. what is the main advantage of the lower gain screen? better ambient light rejection? better blacks? i think i understand the disadvantages (will take a lot of lumens to light it up, narrow viewing angle)...


projector is a vivitek h5080... throw will be 13 feet (give or take), can be made shorter, but not longer... seating position is a reclining sofa 12 feet away, only 2 people watching... screen size 100-110 inches (have a 106 inch manual 1.1 da-lite screen now as a temp)... room will be improved over the disaster it is now, but will never be a cave... since i'm posting in this thread, obviously ambient light performance is my number 1 priority...


fwiw, i'm a "plasma guy" when it comes to flat panel displays... so i'm not as concerned about screaming whites (realistic whites are good though







) as someone who is used to watching a lcd...


IF the .8 gain is really better at the objective (i.e. better overall ambient light rejection, better blacks) than the 1.4, it's possible that my pj could produce enough lumens to light up a 100" .8 screen, if everything was mounted correctly...


the tradeoff of choosing a 100" screen over a 110" screen to go with the .8 gain over the 1.4 gain can be easily mitigated by moving my sofa closer to the screen...


opinions on the above? i'm a big boy, i can take constructive criticism...


----------



## JackstrawWichita

Quote:

Originally Posted by *BobL*
If you are doing a perforated screen the Firehawk is your only option as the BD does not have an AT option at his time. SI does have a woven gray screen. From an acoustic standpoint this is a BIG upgrade to get your speakers at the same height behind the screen. To get the best performance from an AT screen the speakers should be 8" or more behind it. They can be placed closer but it does degrade the audio somewhat. A woven screen has less audio degradation than the perforated screen if the speakers are directly behind the screen, such as in wall speakers with the screen mounted on the wall. A woven screen may be a better option in that scenario. However, most woven screens do not have much gain nor light rejecting properties.


For light rejection the FH does a better job with lights on the sides where the BD does a better job with lights above. It sounds like the FH might be a better solution in your situation, AT or not.
Thanks Bob

The lights I am concerned about will all be on the side walls so I will definitely look further into the firehawk for the AT advantage. Are there any issues with perforating a grey screen (as opposed to white) that would cause significant image issues


----------



## BobL

There are no issues with perforating a gray screen.


----------



## JustmeF

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Josh Z* 
I have an active 3D projector (JVC RS40). I was hoping for feedback from people who have actually used the screen with 3D.


I have a Sharp xv-z17000,

I'm not yet sure if I'm going to keep the my BD1,4 due to Hotspot and dark corners.....


But 3D is amazing, and you should actually experience an 25% increase in light due to the fabrics ability to retain polarization.(depends on your current setup off cource)


I have a 92" screen, and I have plenty of light for 3D.


But I'm not sure how the light output from RS40 compare to the superior Sharp..... well, atleast the 3D is superior ;-)


ta ta


----------



## JackstrawWichita

Quote:

Originally Posted by *BobL* 
There are no issues with perforating a gray screen.
Would there be an advantage to the BD over the FH if I every move to 3D?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *JackstrawWichita* /forum/post/20385142
> 
> 
> Would there be an advantage to the BD over the FH if I every move to 3D?



Yes because of both the 1.4 and 2.7 gain

Blake did a description of where you apply the different types of 3d active or passive to the different gains...


Even the .8 gain is 3d ready but has limited viewing angle


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/20384279
> 
> 
> 
> i'm trying to wrap my head around this. what is the main advantage of the lower gain screen? better ambient light rejection? better blacks?



Ok, for you and for others (especially newbies) who may be interested in this subject, I'm going to distill as best I can what I think I've learned about screens over the years. I invite any member to point out any inaccuracies.


That said....


Screen/projector/room interactions are complicated...so many variables.


First let's talk about gray screens that are simply "gray" (darker than neutral gain white screens) but without significant gain added via optical coating.


The first thing is there seems to me to be a very wide spread misunderstanding about why a gray screen would "make black levels better."

Some people seem to have this idea that simply making a screen gray means better black levels. It doesn't. It's more complicated than that.


Some people, who haven't thought this through, have this idea that a gray screen has a sort of magical quality of affecting only the dark areas of the image, "making the blacks way better!" while not dimming the bright areas.

But that's not the case: a gray screen will dim the entire image, not just the dark areas. As Scotty says: Ye canna break the laws o' physics.


Let's start with using the exact same projector, projecting the same image on to 2 screens: a neutral gain *white screen* and a darker, lower gain (e.g. .8) *"gray" screen*. The projector is sending out exactly the same brightness of image to each, but of course each screen will reflect that light differently due to the difference in screen gain/reflectivity.


The gray screen will simply reflect less light than the white, making the image darker.


That will make the black levels somewhat darker, but since it is reducing the brightness of the entire image, it is also making the entire image darker, including the brightest parts. It's just a dimmer image.


Simple gray screens were very useful for dimming the image of previous generations of digital projectors, which were very bright but which produced

lower contrast/higher black levels. Dimming the image of those projectors via a darker screen lowered the black levels and made them look less washed out (at the expense of a dimmer image overall).


These days we have projectors with much better contrast and black levels so gray screens are no longer strictly necessary for the appearance of deeper, solid black levels.


However...there's more to it. The gray screen will also have some advantage over the white screen in terms of preserving contrast in some ambient light situations, and in lights out situations in rooms that are more reflective (brighter ceiling, walls etc).


So now let's presume we are projecting in a super dark, reflection controlled room - a "bat cave" that will not reflect light back to either screen. And say we have a projector, like a JVC, that has an adjustable iris so you can precisely change the brightness output. **


To make both screens have an image with the same brightness, each time you switch from projecting on the white screen to the gray screen, you will have to open the iris to raise the projector brightness enough so that the gray screen image is now exactly as bright as the white screen. At this point, the image should be pretty much exactly the same. A screen can't in of itself change a projector's native contrast or make it better than it is. A screen can only do better or worse at preserving the projector's contrast.

In a non-reflective room, the black levels and contrast on each screen are the same because each is simply reflecting back exactly the contrast it is receiving from the projector. The gray screen is not "needed" to preserve the contrast because little light is reflecting back to the screens. No magic reduction in black levels will be occurring on the gray screen.


But now let's simply change the room condition to a room that has lighter, more reflective paint color on the ceilings and walls, which will tend to reflect light back to the screen and wash out the contrast to some degree.

The larger and brighter an object you have on the screen image, the more light is hitting the light colored room, the more light is reflecting back to wash out the black levels and reduce contrast.


In THIS type of scenario the gray screen has an advantage not in PRODUCING deeper black levels/contrast but in PRESERVING the black levels/contrast. The fact the screen is darker helps here, because the darker screen is going to dim ANY and ALL light that hits it vs the white screen, whether we are talking projected or ambient light. So when light bounces off a light wall and back to the screen, the fact the gray screen is darker means it will also dim the light reflected back on to the screen.

Whereas the white screen is going to reflect ANY and ALL light that hits it at a brighter level, including any lights reflected back from the walls. So the gray screen will keep reflected light at a lower level, keeping the darker areas darker and preserving contrast.


If that is odd to get your head around, remember that no physics are being broken here: You DO have to raise the brightness of the projector to get get the gray-screen image to match the white screen image. But once you've done so, both gray and white screen are showing an image of the same brightness. So the same amount of light is also bouncing on to the light walls and back to the screen. But this reflected-off-the-walls light is unlike the projector's light: that's because you are fooling with your projector's light output, raising it when switching from the white to the gray screen. But since the image brightness of both gray and white screen ends up the same, the reflected light in the room is NOT changing (you aren't raising it) and so the darker gray screen is naturally going to reflect a lower level of that ambient light back to you, and hence the black levels aren't going to rise as much (wash out) and contrast will be preserved better.


So in more challenging room conditions, simply having a darker-than-white screen surface can indeed preserve contrast/black levels better.

*Downsides of the gray screen?* The trade off is generally that it takes more light to light up a gray screen, which in many cases - e.g. given the modest brightness of most good quality consumer projectors - this can mean practical limits on your screen size (you can go bigger with a white screen since it will reflect the light more brightly at larger sizes).

*So with that out of the way, we move on to "beyond a simple gray screen" to "specialty gray screens" like a Stewart Firehawk or Black Diamond screen.*


These employ the benefits of a darker screen substrate, as explained above, while trying to augment those benefits and also in some instances off-set the negatives (that is, try to ensure the image on the dark screen is not too dimmed).


Take the BD .8 screen. It starts with a really dark, charcoal gray screen surface. That in itself would lower any reflected ambient light back to the screen, helping combat ambient/reflected light just like any gray screen as describe above, but doing so to a much greater degree because the screen is even darker and less reflective than the average gray screen.


The problem is, if the screen were simply left that dark, it would also mean the projected image would be very, very dim. Like trying to project on to an almost black wall instead of a white wall. What to do about this? *The solution is to add an optical coating on the screen that adds "gain" or image reflectivity/brightness. So how in essence does optical gain work? What is it doing to make the image brighter?
*


In a typical neutral gain white screen, light is reflected at all angles up to the ceiling, walls, floor as well as to the viewer.

So a fair amount of light energy is "lost" in terms of what the viewer sees. But that's ok because being a white surface it still is reflective enough back to the viewer to make for suitable image brightness. And one of the benefits of the screen reflecting light in this even fashion is wide viewing angles: it means even if you are sitting at a side angle to the screen, a lot of the light is also being sent your way, so the image brightness looks pretty constant no matter where you sit.


The downside to this wide angled reflectivity is that the light is also hitting the walls/ceiling/floor a lot, so if you have a light-painted room, it's going to reflect more back to the screen to wash the image out.


Without an optical coating applied, a super dark screen like the BD would likely be spreading light in the same wide-angled fashion on to the floor/ceiling/walls. But it would be much dimmer light (so the room wouldn't light up as much). But of course the same goes for the projected image on to such a dark screen - _it would dim the image of most consumer projectors to an unacceptable degree_.


So an optical coating is applied to the BD screen. The optical coating works by focusing light hitting the screen back toward the projector/viewer, so less light is reflected to the ceiling/wall/floors, and more of it back to the viewer.

That is, if you are sitting directly on axis, in front of the screen, it's focusing more of the light back to you.


This raises the image brightness for the viewer. And it's a double-win situation because you not only get a bright enough image due to the optical focusing, but the fact more light is focused back to the vewer means it's also being kept from scattering on to the ceiling/walls/floors. So less is likely to be reflected back to the screen. Add to that: the very dark substrate itself being so dark further dims any light reflected back to it from the ceiling/walls. So the tag-team of the really dark screen substrate dimming any room reflections PLUS the focusing of the projector light back to the viewer, means this screen will be significantly less affected by being put in a brighter room, vs a white screen, thus preserving contrast much better.


Another bonus is that, since the BD screen is restricting light reflected at angles toward the ceiling/wall/floor (especially the vertical angles), that means reflections from the screen isn't going to light up the rest of the room as visibly as a typical white screen w/o gain. The less the room lights up, the less distractions there are around the image, the better the viewing experience.


Which is why screens like the BD find such favor in a wide variety of situations.


But even with the optical coating applied, the screen gain at the viewer location is still a below-neutral .8, hence it produces a dimmer image than a white screen and needs more projector light. This tends to relegate it to smaller screen status.


For those who need/want a brighter image and/or a bigger screen, Screen Innovations (like Stewart and other companies) make screens that start with a lighter gray substrate - though still darker than a white screen - and also apply optical coating to focus the light to the viewer location, to get the gain up to *a fairly bright 1.4 gain* at the viewer location. The same physics apply, of course, in terms of how it combats room light.

*The take home point about screen gain is that the optical coating raises the brightness of the ENTIRE LIGHT SPECTRUM, not just the "bright" areas of the image.* *So*...assuming for the moment accurate screen gain numbers... i*f you take a dark gray screen and add enough optical gain coating to get it up to a reflectance level of a neutral 1.0 screen gain, the black levels are going to be the same brightness as a white screen of the same 1.0 gain.* However dark the underlying gray screen is, the optical coating is going to make it a brighter reflector.


(The only difference being hot-spotting of the gray optical coated screen means the brightness rating will be the same more in the center of the image, but it will drop screen brightness away from the screen center).


The downside of the optical coating is that the more you reflect light back to the viewer location, the more the screen takes on a "mirror-like" quality. Think of what it's like to stand in front of a mirror with a flashlight. You see your reflection, you aim the flashlight at the mirror, and you see a "perfect" focused image of the flashlight you are holding. In other words, a narrow beam of light. The mirror doesn't suddenly all light up like some opaque screen surface. The light is narrow and focused.


Same thing happens with most types of screen gain (especially the typical angular reflective coatings). The more gain you apply, the more you focus the light like a mirror, the more the brightness of the projector beam is focused on the central portion of the screen, like a flashlight beam. And this means the brightness drops in the portions of the screen further away from the center beam portion. This is known as "hot-spotting" for obvious reasons. It also means that you have to be careful with stated screen gain for such screens: Typically the stated gain is for the brightest portion of the image, which if you are sitting on axis, is the center of the screen. Much of the screen is actually darker due to the brightness drop off, so OVERALL screen brightness is typically lower than the stated screen gain.


The hot-spotting behaviour is mirror like in behaviour, so if you move to the side of the screen, the hot spot will appear to move to that same side of the screen near you (a flashlight into a mirror would do the same). So hot-spotting tends to be more obvious (at least I find) from off-axis angles, because what happens is the screen portion near you stays bright, but the rest of the screen drops in brightness, so you get a sort of "half bright screen/half dimmer screen" look.


Another is that aggressive levels of optical coating on screens, typically needed when you start with a dark gray substrate like the BD screens, can become visible as a sort of speckly sheen over the image. Particularly in images with large bright areas, like a sky or hockey game rink.


How bad are these downsides? It really, really depends. It can depend on the throw ratio of the projector (I believe the further the projector is from the screen, the less chance of hot-spotting. Also I think angular reflective screens like the projector higher than the screen top for even screen brightness).


People vary in their sensitivity to these things. I find the hot-spotting of screens like the Black Diamond, and Stewart Firehawk gray screens to be very obvious and distracting. However, it seems MOST people don't notice, or care, about this factor. I also find myself distracted by the speckled screen artifacts of the optical coating. But, again, probably a majority of people either do not notice, or are not bothered by such issues.


Personally, I've chosen to go with a white screen with low gain, to minimise screen artifacts and preserve even screen illumination (subjectively at least) from wherever we sit. However, to make sure I'm preserving contrast I have to go to more heroic efforts in treating the room - making sure I have dark surfaces that don't reflect back to the screen - than if I'd bought a black diamond screen. So there are always trade-offs.


From what I observe, most people benefit from the pluses of a specialty gray screen, and will tend not to notice the screen artifacts involved. That's one reason why these screens are popular here, and a reason why AV installers love these type of products. A lot of them use a Black Diamond or Stewart Firehawk screen virtually by default because such screens tend to preserve good contrast in a much wider variety of room situations, making for happy customers.


But this is the AVS science forum, and since in general people here tend to be more picky than the average Joe, these issues may be more pertinent for some.


Hope that was useful to someone.


Cheers,


**(Projectors like the JVC actually change contrast ratio to some degree as you open or close the iris for a brighter or darker image. So even simply opening up the iris to make the gray screen image brighter can, in of itself, slightly alter the contrast ratio. Given that opening the iris brighter on the JVC reduces the projector's contrast ratio, opening the iris to make the gray screen as bright as the white screen...in a bat cave room...could result in slightly decreased contrast ratio on the gray screen. Which is just more reason to point out that the variables involved make it unwise to simply assume things like "Gray screens mean better contrast/black levels").


----------



## newfmp3




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *evenchaos* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Does SI give out material samples like Da-Lite or sell them for a nominal cost ? Did anyone here (who is not a dealer) manage to get them to send one out ?



Anyone?


----------



## JackstrawWichita




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, for you and for others (especially newbies) who may be interested in this subject, I'm going to distill as best I can what I think I've learned about screens over the years. I invite any member to point out any inaccuracies.
> 
> 
> That said....
> 
> 
> Screen/projector/room interactions are complicated...so many variables.
> 
> 
> First let's talk about gray screens that are simply "gray" (darker than neutral gain white screens) but without significant gain added via optical coating.
> 
> 
> The first thing is there seems to me to be a very wide spread misunderstanding about why a gray screen would "make black levels better."
> 
> Some people seem to have this idea that simply making a screen gray means better black levels. It doesn't. It's more complicated than that.
> 
> 
> Some people, who haven't thought this through, have this idea that a gray screen has a sort of magical quality of affecting only the dark areas of the image, "making the blacks way better!" while not dimming the bright areas.
> 
> But that's not the case: a gray screen will dim the entire image, not just the dark areas. As Scotty says: Ye canna break the laws o' physics.
> 
> 
> Let's start with using the exact same projector, projecting the same image on to 2 screens: a neutral gain white screen and a darker, lower gain (e.g. .8) "gray" screen. The projector is sending out exactly the same brightness of image to each, but of course each screen will reflect that light differently due to the difference in screen gain/reflectivity.
> 
> 
> The gray screen will simply reflect less light than the white, making the image darker.
> 
> 
> That will make the black levels somewhat darker, but since it is reducing the brightness of the entire image, it is also making the entire image darker, including the brightest parts. It's just a dimmer image.
> 
> 
> Simple gray screens were very useful for dimming the image of previous generations of digital projectors, which were very bright but which produced
> 
> lower contrast/higher black levels. Dimming the image of those projectors via a darker screen lowered the black levels and made them look less washed out (at the expense of a dimmer image overall).
> 
> 
> These days we have projectors with much better contrast and black levels so gray screens are no longer strictly necessary for the appearance of deeper, solid black levels.
> 
> 
> However...there's more to it. The gray screen will also have some advantage over the white screen in terms of preserving contrast in some ambient light situations, and in lights out situations in rooms that are more reflective (brighter ceiling, walls etc).
> 
> 
> So now let's presume we are projecting in a super dark, reflection controlled room - a "bat cave" that will not reflect light back to either screen. And say we have a projector, like a JVC, that has an adjustable iris so you can precisely change the brightness output. **
> 
> 
> To make both screens have an image with the same brightness, each time you switch from projecting on the white screen to the gray screen, you will have to open the iris to raise the projector brightness enough so that the gray screen image is now exactly as bright as the white screen. At this point, the image should be pretty much exactly the same. A screen can't in of itself change a projector's native contrast or make it better than it is. A screen can only do better or worse at preserving the projector's contrast.
> 
> In a non-reflective room, the black levels and contrast on each screen are the same because each is simply reflecting back exactly the contrast it is receiving from the projector. The gray screen is not "needed" to preserve the contrast because little light is reflecting back to the screens. No magic reduction in black levels will be occurring on the gray screen.
> 
> 
> But now let's simply change the room condition to a room that has lighter, more reflective paint color on the ceilings and walls, which will tend to reflect light back to the screen and wash out the contrast to some degree.
> 
> The larger and brighter an object you have on the screen image, the more light is hitting the light colored room, the more light is reflecting back to wash out the black levels and reduce contrast.
> 
> 
> In THIS type of scenario the gray screen has an advantage not in PRODUCING deeper black levels/contrast but in PRESERVING the black levels/contrast. The fact the screen is darker helps here, because the darker screen is going to dim ANY and ALL light that hits it vs the white screen, whether we are talking projected or ambient light. So when light bounces off a light wall and back to the screen, the fact the gray screen is darker means it will also dim the light reflected back on to the screen.
> 
> Whereas the white screen is going to reflect ANY and ALL light that hits it at a brighter level, including any lights reflected back from the walls. So the gray screen will keep reflected light at a lower level, keeping the darker areas darker and preserving contrast.
> 
> 
> If that is odd to get your head around, remember that no physics are being broken here: You DO have to raise the brightness of the projector to get get the gray-screen image to match the white screen image. But once you've done so, both gray and white screen are showing an image of the same brightness. So the same amount of light is also bouncing on to the light walls and back to the screen. But this reflected-off-the-walls light is unlike the projector's light: that's because you are fooling with your projector's light output, raising it when switching from the white to the gray screen. But since the image brightness of both gray and white screen ends up the same, the reflected light in the room is NOT changing (you aren't raising it) and so the darker gray screen is naturally going to reflect a lower level of that ambient light back to you, and hence the black levels aren't going to rise as much (wash out) and contrast will be preserved better.
> 
> 
> So in more challenging room conditions, simply having a darker-than-white screen surface can indeed preserve contrast/black levels better.
> 
> 
> Downsides of the gray screen? The trade off is generally that it takes more light to light up a gray screen, which in many cases - e.g. given the modest brightness of most good quality consumer projectors - this can mean practical limits on your screen size (you can go bigger with a white screen since it will reflect the light more brightly at larger sizes).
> 
> 
> So with that out of the way, we move on to "beyond a simple gray screen" to "specialty gray screens" like a Stewart Firehawk or Black Diamond screen.
> 
> 
> These employ the benefits of a darker screen substrate, as explained above, while trying to augment those benefits and also in some instances off-set the negatives (that is, try to ensure the image on the dark screen is not too dimmed).
> 
> 
> Take the BD .8 screen. It starts with a really dark, charcoal gray screen surface. That in itself would lower any reflected ambient light back to the screen, helping combat ambient/reflected light just like any gray screen as describe above, but doing so to a much greater degree because the screen is even darker and less reflective than the average gray screen.
> 
> 
> The problem is, if the screen were simply left that dark, it would also mean the projected image would be very, very dim. Like trying to project on to an almost black wall instead of a white wall. What to do about this? The solution is to add an optical coating on the screen that adds "gain" or image reflectivity/brightness. So how in essence does optical gain work? What is it doing to make the image brighter?
> 
> 
> 
> In a typical neutral gain white screen, light is reflected at all angles up to the ceiling, walls, floor as well as to the viewer.
> 
> So a fair amount of light energy is "lost" in terms of what the viewer sees. But that's ok because being a white surface it still is reflective enough back to the viewer to make for suitable image brightness. And one of the benefits of the screen reflecting light in this even fashion is wide viewing angles: it means even if you are sitting at a side angle to the screen, a lot of the light is also being sent your way, so the image brightness looks pretty constant no matter where you sit.
> 
> 
> The downside to this wide angled reflectivity is that the light is also hitting the walls/ceiling/floor a lot, so if you have a light-painted room, it's going to reflect more back to the screen to wash the image out.
> 
> 
> Without an optical coating applied, a super dark screen like the BD would likely be spreading light in the same wide-angled fashion on to the floor/ceiling/walls. But it would be much dimmer light (so the room wouldn't light up as much). But of course the same goes for the projected image on to such a dark screen - it would dim the image of most consumer projectors to an unacceptable degree.
> 
> 
> So an optical coating is applied to the BD screen. The optical coating works by focusing light hitting the screen back toward the projector/viewer, so less light is reflected to the ceiling/wall/floors, and more of it back to the viewer.
> 
> That is, if you are sitting directly on axis, in front of the screen, it's focusing more of the light back to you.
> 
> 
> This raises the image brightness for the viewer. And it's a double-win situation because you not only get a bright enough image due to the optical focusing, but the fact more light is focused back to the vewer means it's also being kept from scattering on to the ceiling/walls/floors. So less is likely to be reflected back to the screen. Add to that: the very dark substrate itself being so dark further dims any light reflected back to it from the ceiling/walls. So the tag-team of the really dark screen substrate dimming any room reflections PLUS the focusing of the projector light back to the viewer, means this screen will be significantly less affected by being put in a brighter room, vs a white screen, thus preserving contrast much better.
> 
> 
> Another bonus is that, since the BD screen is restricting light reflected at angles toward the ceiling/wall/floor (especially the vertical angles), that means reflections from the screen isn't going to light up the rest of the room as visibly as a typical white screen w/o gain. The less the room lights up, the less distractions there are around the image, the better the viewing experience.
> 
> 
> Which is why screens like the BD find such favor in a wide variety of situations.
> 
> 
> But even with the optical coating applied, the screen gain at the viewer location is still a below-neutral .8, hence it produces a dimmer image than a white screen and needs more projector light. This tends to relegate it to smaller screen status.
> 
> 
> For those who need/want a brighter image and/or a bigger screen, Screen Innovations (like Stewart and other companies) make screens that start with a lighter gray substrate - though still darker than a white screen - and also apply optical coating to focus the light to the viewer location, to get the gain up to a fairly bright 1.4 gain at the viewer location. The same physics apply, of course, in terms of how it combats room light.
> 
> 
> The take home point about screen gain is that the optical coating raises the brightness of the ENTIRE LIGHT SPECTRUM, not just the "bright" areas of the image. So...assuming for the moment accurate screen gain numbers... if you take a dark gray screen and add enough optical gain coating to get it up to a reflectance level of a neutral 1.0 screen gain, the black levels are going to be the same brightness as a white screen of the same 1.0 gain. However dark the underlying gray screen is, the optical coating is going to make it a brighter reflector.
> 
> 
> (The only difference being hot-spotting of the gray optical coated screen means the brightness rating will be the same more in the center of the image, but it will drop screen brightness away from the screen center).
> 
> 
> The downside of the optical coating is that the more you reflect light back to the viewer location, the more the screen takes on a "mirror-like" quality. Think of what it's like to stand in front of a mirror with a flashlight. You see your reflection, you aim the flashlight at the mirror, and you see a "perfect" focused image of the flashlight you are holding. In other words, a narrow beam of light. The mirror doesn't suddenly all light up like some opaque screen surface. The light is narrow and focused.
> 
> 
> Same thing happens with most types of screen gain (especially the typical angular reflective coatings). The more gain you apply, the more you focus the light like a mirror, the more the brightness of the projector beam is focused on the central portion of the screen, like a flashlight beam. And this means the brightness drops in the portions of the screen further away from the center beam portion. This is known as "hot-spotting" for obvious reasons. It also means that you have to be careful with stated screen gain for such screens: Typically the stated gain is for the brightest portion of the image, which if you are sitting on axis, is the center of the screen. Much of the screen is actually darker due to the brightness drop off, so OVERALL screen brightness is typically lower than the stated screen gain.
> 
> 
> The hot-spotting behaviour is mirror like in behaviour, so if you move to the side of the screen, the hot spot will appear to move to that same side of the screen near you (a flashlight into a mirror would do the same). So hot-spotting tends to be more obvious (at least I find) from off-axis angles, because what happens is the screen portion near you stays bright, but the rest of the screen drops in brightness, so you get a sort of "half bright screen/half dimmer screen" look.
> 
> 
> Another is that aggressive levels of optical coating on screens, typically needed when you start with a dark gray substrate like the BD screens, can become visible as a sort of speckly sheen over the image. Particularly in images with large bright areas, like a sky or hockey game rink.
> 
> 
> How bad are these downsides? It really, really depends. It can depend on the throw ratio of the projector (I believe the further the projector is from the screen, the less chance of hot-spotting. Also I think angular reflective screens like the projector higher than the screen top for even screen brightness).
> 
> 
> People vary in their sensitivity to these things. I find the hot-spotting of screens like the Black Diamond, and Stewart Firehawk gray screens to be very obvious and distracting. However, it seems MOST people don't notice, or care, about this factor. I also find myself distracted by the speckled screen artifacts of the optical coating. But, again, probably a majority of people either do not notice, or are not bothered by such issues.
> 
> 
> Personally, I've chosen to go with a white screen with low gain, to minimise screen artifacts and preserve even screen illumination (subjectively at least) from wherever we sit. However, to make sure I'm preserving contrast I have to go to more heroic efforts in treating the room - making sure I have dark surfaces that don't reflect back to the screen - than if I'd bought a black diamond screen. So there are always trade-offs.
> 
> 
> From what I observe, most people benefit from the pluses of a specialty gray screen, and will tend not to notice the screen artifacts involved. That's one reason why these screens are popular here, and a reason why AV installers love these type of products. A lot of them use a Black Diamond or Stewart Firehawk screen virtually by default because such screens tend to preserve good contrast in a much wider variety of room situations, making for happy customers.
> 
> 
> But this is the AVS science forum, and since in general people here tend to be more picky than the average Joe, these issues may be more pertinent for some.
> 
> 
> Hope that was useful to someone.
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> 
> **(Projectors like the JVC actually change contrast ratio to some degree as you open or close the iris for a brighter or darker image. So even simply opening up the iris to make the gray screen image brighter can, in of itself, slightly alter the contrast ratio. Given that opening the iris brighter on the JVC reduces the projector's contrast ratio, opening the iris to make the gray screen as bright as the white screen...in a bat cave room...could result in slightly decreased contrast ratio on the gray screen. Which is just more reason to point out that the variables involved make it unwise to simply assume things like "Gray screens mean better contrast/black levels").



Fantastic explanation

Thanks for taking the time.

I had been deciding between BD 1.4 and a FH (mainly so I could get the AT) Now I'm wondering if I should go with a white screen like the Stewart tech 130, also AT

I would like a 133" or larger 2.4 screen. Would a 1600 lumen projector light this adequately. I will paint the walls dark, if not black and would be fine for movies but would like to have wall sconces on when watching sports, etc. (why I was looking at a black/grey screen in the first place)

Thanks again


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *JackstrawWichita* /forum/post/20385863
> 
> 
> Fantastic explanation
> 
> Thanks for taking the time.



No problem.




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *JackstrawWichita* /forum/post/20385863
> 
> 
> I had been deciding between BD 1.4 and a FH (mainly so I could get the AT) Now I'm wondering if I should go with a white screen like the Stewart tech 130, also AT
> 
> I would like a 133" or larger 2.4 screen. Would a 1600 lumen projector light this adequately.



This is a very big screen.


I believe the BD 1.4 gain screen is a bit higher in real-world gain performance over the Firehawk. I've viewed a JVC projector on a 118" wide BD 1.4 and it looked beautiful and vibrant.


But 133" wide is pushing it significantly. In fact depending on your taste in image brightness, it may limit your choice of projectors to brighter-than-normal models. There are screen gain calculators on line to help you find out if your image will be bright enough with your chosen projector. Always remember your bulb will dim quickly toward 1/2 brightness, so don't go just by manufacturer brightness claims.


I wonder if the 1600 lumen projector you mention is an Epson. The Epsons are known for having one of the brighter "Dynamic" modes. The only issue there is when put into the super bright modes, you lose color accuracy, FWIW.




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *JackstrawWichita* /forum/post/20385863
> 
> 
> I will paint the walls dark, if not black and would be fine for movies but would like to have wall sconces on when watching sports, etc. (why I was looking at a black/grey screen in the first place)
> 
> Thanks again



Warning! Warning! Warning!...on the sconces!


To me, one of the most common "mistakes" I see in home theaters is the use of wall sconces, ESPECIALLY if you ever like to watch with some lights on.


The problem with sconce-style lights is that, like the typical floor lamp, they tend to spread light in a much wider pattern than something like pot lights. Even those aimed up at the ceiling. This means that whenever you turn up the lights you getting some light directly on the screen. So it leaves you with a choice of having the lights up somewhat and a more washed out image, or keeping the lights down.


If you go with more focused lights, e.g. pot lights especially with narrow beams, you can make sure the light is not aiming at the screen and you can have your lighting in "zones." So you could have focused pot lights on over the seating area, without the light going on to the screen. In this way you can have significant lighting over the seated area while maintaining good image contrast. If you plan your lighting beforehand, intelligently, you can keep image contrast quite well with lights on even with a white screen.


A Black Diamond screen will certainly allow you some more latitude if you are absolutely set on using sconces, as it will not be as affected as a white screen. But there really isn't a true free ride. No projected image looks it's best with light falling on to the screen. A BD screen just looks "less bad" if you have sconce light falling on to it. So you really should be planning your light direction to minimise light on the screen no matter what screen you buy.


I've seen several people who said if they had to do certain things over, they wouldn't have used sconce lights, especially near the screen, due to having discovered these issues.


Of course you can also use a combination of pot lights and sconces - have the sconces when the projector isn't on yet (e.g. hanging out in the room, or before the movie starts) and then if you need lights on during the movie, turn the sconces off and use your pot lights.


But if you really think you are going to want sconce lights on while watching a movie, I'd re-consider that plan, Black Diamond screen or not.


----------



## fraisa

Future Project.....

Thinking of doing an outdoor project and will be putting a BD on the Deck...

Yes i said it Deck ..

Screen will be facing South and Projector will be shooting 18ft Throw distance..

Will be going with the 2.7 Gain BD

and a epson 9350...it has a higher lumens than the 9700...

I have to go with at least a 100 inch size screen but may do 110.


So here is a situation where the bd will shine and i will be enjoying 2 pcs projection outdoors...

During the day....


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20386145
> 
> 
> Future Project.....
> 
> Thinking of doing an outdoor project and will be putting a BD on the Deck...
> 
> Yes i said it Deck ..
> 
> Screen will be facing South and Projector will be shooting 18ft Throw distance..
> 
> Will be going with the 2.7 Gain BD
> 
> and a epson 9350...it has a higher lumens than the 9700...
> 
> I have to go with at least a 100 inch size screen but may do 110.
> 
> 
> So here is a situation where the bd will shine and i will be enjoying 2 pcs projection outdoors...
> 
> During the day....



Any chance of doing rear projection?


----------



## charlievoviii




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *newfmp3* /forum/post/20385816
> 
> 
> Anyone?



yes, give them a call. They will sent you a booklet of different screens to test. After you done you have to sent it back. All detail will explain to you when you call.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20386643
> 
> 
> Any chance of doing rear projection?



No its hanging against a wall....

Cant be done.


----------



## bud16415




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20385604
> 
> 
> Ok, for you and for others (especially newbies) who may be interested in this subject, I'm going to distill as best I can what I think I've learned about screens over the years. I invite any member to point out any inaccuracies.
> 
> 
> That said....
> 
> 
> Screen/projector/room interactions are complicated...so many variables.
> 
> 
> First let's talk about gray screens that are simply "gray" (darker than neutral gain white screens) but without significant gain added via optical coating.
> 
> 
> The first thing is there seems to me to be a very wide spread misunderstanding about why a gray screen would "make black levels better."
> 
> Some people seem to have this idea that simply making a screen gray means better black levels. It doesn't. It's more complicated than that.
> 
> 
> Some people, who haven't thought this through, have this idea that a gray screen has a sort of magical quality of affecting only the dark areas of the image, "making the blacks way better!" while not dimming the bright areas.
> 
> But that's not the case: a gray screen will dim the entire image, not just the dark areas. As Scotty says: Ye canna break the laws o' physics.
> 
> 
> Let's start with using the exact same projector, projecting the same image on to 2 screens: a neutral gain *white screen* and a darker, lower gain (e.g. .8) *"gray" screen*. The projector is sending out exactly the same brightness of image to each, but of course each screen will reflect that light differently due to the difference in screen gain/reflectivity.
> 
> 
> The gray screen will simply reflect less light than the white, making the image darker.
> 
> 
> That will make the black levels somewhat darker, but since it is reducing the brightness of the entire image, it is also making the entire image darker, including the brightest parts. It's just a dimmer image.
> 
> 
> Simple gray screens were very useful for dimming the image of previous generations of digital projectors, which were very bright but which produced
> 
> lower contrast/higher black levels. Dimming the image of those projectors via a darker screen lowered the black levels and made them look less washed out (at the expense of a dimmer image overall).
> 
> 
> These days we have projectors with much better contrast and black levels so gray screens are no longer strictly necessary for the appearance of deeper, solid black levels.
> 
> 
> However...there's more to it. The gray screen will also have some advantage over the white screen in terms of preserving contrast in some ambient light situations, and in lights out situations in rooms that are more reflective (brighter ceiling, walls etc).
> 
> 
> So now let's presume we are projecting in a super dark, reflection controlled room - a "bat cave" that will not reflect light back to either screen. And say we have a projector, like a JVC, that has an adjustable iris so you can precisely change the brightness output. **
> 
> 
> To make both screens have an image with the same brightness, each time you switch from projecting on the white screen to the gray screen, you will have to open the iris to raise the projector brightness enough so that the gray screen image is now exactly as bright as the white screen. At this point, the image should be pretty much exactly the same. A screen can't in of itself change a projector's native contrast or make it better than it is. A screen can only do better or worse at preserving the projector's contrast.
> 
> In a non-reflective room, the black levels and contrast on each screen are the same because each is simply reflecting back exactly the contrast it is receiving from the projector. The gray screen is not "needed" to preserve the contrast because little light is reflecting back to the screens. No magic reduction in black levels will be occurring on the gray screen.
> 
> 
> But now let's simply change the room condition to a room that has lighter, more reflective paint color on the ceilings and walls, which will tend to reflect light back to the screen and wash out the contrast to some degree.
> 
> The larger and brighter an object you have on the screen image, the more light is hitting the light colored room, the more light is reflecting back to wash out the black levels and reduce contrast.
> 
> 
> In THIS type of scenario the gray screen has an advantage not in PRODUCING deeper black levels/contrast but in PRESERVING the black levels/contrast. The fact the screen is darker helps here, because the darker screen is going to dim ANY and ALL light that hits it vs the white screen, whether we are talking projected or ambient light. So when light bounces off a light wall and back to the screen, the fact the gray screen is darker means it will also dim the light reflected back on to the screen.
> 
> Whereas the white screen is going to reflect ANY and ALL light that hits it at a brighter level, including any lights reflected back from the walls. So the gray screen will keep reflected light at a lower level, keeping the darker areas darker and preserving contrast.
> 
> 
> If that is odd to get your head around, remember that no physics are being broken here: You DO have to raise the brightness of the projector to get get the gray-screen image to match the white screen image. But once you've done so, both gray and white screen are showing an image of the same brightness. So the same amount of light is also bouncing on to the light walls and back to the screen. But this reflected-off-the-walls light is unlike the projector's light: that's because you are fooling with your projector's light output, raising it when switching from the white to the gray screen. But since the image brightness of both gray and white screen ends up the same, the reflected light in the room is NOT changing (you aren't raising it) and so the darker gray screen is naturally going to reflect a lower level of that ambient light back to you, and hence the black levels aren't going to rise as much (wash out) and contrast will be preserved better.
> 
> 
> So in more challenging room conditions, simply having a darker-than-white screen surface can indeed preserve contrast/black levels better.
> 
> *Downsides of the gray screen?* The trade off is generally that it takes more light to light up a gray screen, which in many cases - e.g. given the modest brightness of most good quality consumer projectors - this can mean practical limits on your screen size (you can go bigger with a white screen since it will reflect the light more brightly at larger sizes).
> 
> *So with that out of the way, we move on to "beyond a simple gray screen" to "specialty gray screens" like a Stewart Firehawk or Black Diamond screen.*
> 
> 
> These employ the benefits of a darker screen substrate, as explained above, while trying to augment those benefits and also in some instances off-set the negatives (that is, try to ensure the image on the dark screen is not too dimmed).
> 
> 
> Take the BD .8 screen. It starts with a really dark, charcoal gray screen surface. That in itself would lower any reflected ambient light back to the screen, helping combat ambient/reflected light just like any gray screen as describe above, but doing so to a much greater degree because the screen is even darker and less reflective than the average gray screen.
> 
> 
> The problem is, if the screen were simply left that dark, it would also mean the projected image would be very, very dim. Like trying to project on to an almost black wall instead of a white wall. What to do about this? *The solution is to add an optical coating on the screen that adds "gain" or image reflectivity/brightness. So how in essence does optical gain work? What is it doing to make the image brighter?
> *
> 
> 
> In a typical neutral gain white screen, light is reflected at all angles up to the ceiling, walls, floor as well as to the viewer.
> 
> So a fair amount of light energy is "lost" in terms of what the viewer sees. But that's ok because being a white surface it still is reflective enough back to the viewer to make for suitable image brightness. And one of the benefits of the screen reflecting light in this even fashion is wide viewing angles: it means even if you are sitting at a side angle to the screen, a lot of the light is also being sent your way, so the image brightness looks pretty constant no matter where you sit.
> 
> 
> The downside to this wide angled reflectivity is that the light is also hitting the walls/ceiling/floor a lot, so if you have a light-painted room, it's going to reflect more back to the screen to wash the image out.
> 
> 
> Without an optical coating applied, a super dark screen like the BD would likely be spreading light in the same wide-angled fashion on to the floor/ceiling/walls. But it would be much dimmer light (so the room wouldn't light up as much). But of course the same goes for the projected image on to such a dark screen - _it would dim the image of most consumer projectors to an unacceptable degree_.
> 
> 
> So an optical coating is applied to the BD screen. The optical coating works by focusing light hitting the screen back toward the projector/viewer, so less light is reflected to the ceiling/wall/floors, and more of it back to the viewer.
> 
> That is, if you are sitting directly on axis, in front of the screen, it's focusing more of the light back to you.
> 
> 
> This raises the image brightness for the viewer. And it's a double-win situation because you not only get a bright enough image due to the optical focusing, but the fact more light is focused back to the vewer means it's also being kept from scattering on to the ceiling/walls/floors. So less is likely to be reflected back to the screen. Add to that: the very dark substrate itself being so dark further dims any light reflected back to it from the ceiling/walls. So the tag-team of the really dark screen substrate dimming any room reflections PLUS the focusing of the projector light back to the viewer, means this screen will be significantly less affected by being put in a brighter room, vs a white screen, thus preserving contrast much better.
> 
> 
> Another bonus is that, since the BD screen is restricting light reflected at angles toward the ceiling/wall/floor (especially the vertical angles), that means reflections from the screen isn't going to light up the rest of the room as visibly as a typical white screen w/o gain. The less the room lights up, the less distractions there are around the image, the better the viewing experience.
> 
> 
> Which is why screens like the BD find such favor in a wide variety of situations.
> 
> 
> But even with the optical coating applied, the screen gain at the viewer location is still a below-neutral .8, hence it produces a dimmer image than a white screen and needs more projector light. This tends to relegate it to smaller screen status.
> 
> 
> For those who need/want a brighter image and/or a bigger screen, Screen Innovations (like Stewart and other companies) make screens that start with a lighter gray substrate - though still darker than a white screen - and also apply optical coating to focus the light to the viewer location, to get the gain up to *a fairly bright 1.4 gain* at the viewer location. The same physics apply, of course, in terms of how it combats room light.
> 
> *The take home point about screen gain is that the optical coating raises the brightness of the ENTIRE LIGHT SPECTRUM, not just the "bright" areas of the image.* *So*...assuming for the moment accurate screen gain numbers... i*f you take a dark gray screen and add enough optical gain coating to get it up to a reflectance level of a neutral 1.0 screen gain, the black levels are going to be the same brightness as a white screen of the same 1.0 gain.* However dark the underlying gray screen is, the optical coating is going to make it a brighter reflector.
> 
> 
> (The only difference being hot-spotting of the gray optical coated screen means the brightness rating will be the same more in the center of the image, but it will drop screen brightness away from the screen center).
> 
> 
> The downside of the optical coating is that the more you reflect light back to the viewer location, the more the screen takes on a "mirror-like" quality. Think of what it's like to stand in front of a mirror with a flashlight. You see your reflection, you aim the flashlight at the mirror, and you see a "perfect" focused image of the flashlight you are holding. In other words, a narrow beam of light. The mirror doesn't suddenly all light up like some opaque screen surface. The light is narrow and focused.
> 
> 
> Same thing happens with most types of screen gain (especially the typical angular reflective coatings). The more gain you apply, the more you focus the light like a mirror, the more the brightness of the projector beam is focused on the central portion of the screen, like a flashlight beam. And this means the brightness drops in the portions of the screen further away from the center beam portion. This is known as "hot-spotting" for obvious reasons. It also means that you have to be careful with stated screen gain for such screens: Typically the stated gain is for the brightest portion of the image, which if you are sitting on axis, is the center of the screen. Much of the screen is actually darker due to the brightness drop off, so OVERALL screen brightness is typically lower than the stated screen gain.
> 
> 
> The hot-spotting behaviour is mirror like in behaviour, so if you move to the side of the screen, the hot spot will appear to move to that same side of the screen near you (a flashlight into a mirror would do the same). So hot-spotting tends to be more obvious (at least I find) from off-axis angles, because what happens is the screen portion near you stays bright, but the rest of the screen drops in brightness, so you get a sort of "half bright screen/half dimmer screen" look.
> 
> 
> Another is that aggressive levels of optical coating on screens, typically needed when you start with a dark gray substrate like the BD screens, can become visible as a sort of speckly sheen over the image. Particularly in images with large bright areas, like a sky or hockey game rink.
> 
> 
> How bad are these downsides? It really, really depends. It can depend on the throw ratio of the projector (I believe the further the projector is from the screen, the less chance of hot-spotting. Also I think angular reflective screens like the projector higher than the screen top for even screen brightness).
> 
> 
> People vary in their sensitivity to these things. I find the hot-spotting of screens like the Black Diamond, and Stewart Firehawk gray screens to be very obvious and distracting. However, it seems MOST people don't notice, or care, about this factor. I also find myself distracted by the speckled screen artifacts of the optical coating. But, again, probably a majority of people either do not notice, or are not bothered by such issues.
> 
> 
> Personally, I've chosen to go with a white screen with low gain, to minimise screen artifacts and preserve even screen illumination (subjectively at least) from wherever we sit. However, to make sure I'm preserving contrast I have to go to more heroic efforts in treating the room - making sure I have dark surfaces that don't reflect back to the screen - than if I'd bought a black diamond screen. So there are always trade-offs.
> 
> 
> From what I observe, most people benefit from the pluses of a specialty gray screen, and will tend not to notice the screen artifacts involved. That's one reason why these screens are popular here, and a reason why AV installers love these type of products. A lot of them use a Black Diamond or Stewart Firehawk screen virtually by default because such screens tend to preserve good contrast in a much wider variety of room situations, making for happy customers.
> 
> 
> But this is the AVS science forum, and since in general people here tend to be more picky than the average Joe, these issues may be more pertinent for some.
> 
> 
> Hope that was useful to someone.
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> 
> **(Projectors like the JVC actually change contrast ratio to some degree as you open or close the iris for a brighter or darker image. So even simply opening up the iris to make the gray screen image brighter can, in of itself, slightly alter the contrast ratio. Given that opening the iris brighter on the JVC reduces the projector's contrast ratio, opening the iris to make the gray screen as bright as the white screen...in a bat cave room...could result in slightly decreased contrast ratio on the gray screen. Which is just more reason to point out that the variables involved make it unwise to simply assume things like "Gray screens mean better contrast/black levels").



Rich

Great write up. I have written at least a dozen similar explanations, mostly on the DIY forum and you are right it’s a tough concept for many to get their minds around at first, (preservation of contrast). you asked for additional comments and I only have a few and none contradicting what you have explained.

When there is a desire for controlled ambient lighting, the projector, room and screen must be selected as a unit and the issue of rebound lighting has to be dealt with in one of two ways, at the screen with the gain producing surface. Thus directing more light to the viewer less to side walls and also skipping any side ambient off the screen and onto the opposite wall, (another benefit of angular gain). These screens have the drawback you mentioned of a brighter center as mentioned. The other method is to deal with it by over driving a simple neutral gray higher dispersion surface and collecting the overspill by dividing the room into two halves (viewer end and screen end). The screen end should be a black box to absorb all but what is heading to the viewers and the viewer end can be lighter colors to promote the feeling of a non bat cave, work well with well thought out lighting and aid the eyes in perception. Light spreads out as it rebounds by the square of the distance traveled and is much easier to deal with on the viewing end than the screen end.

It is the idea of perception that is the very hardest for people to wrap their minds around and also the majority of the black we see as black. I won't go into a lot of depth on the subject as there is much written, but we must understand the state of the eyes iris during viewing. The iris on the projector may double or triple the available lumens on the screen but the eye has the ability to adjust about 22f stops or change the relative brightness we see hundreds if not thousands of times. In doing this when watching a image of mixed brightness ANSI like, (sports, many movies, TV etc) contrast is formulated by the interaction of eye and brain and perception of contrast is formulated. The exact same black will look vastly different depending on what brightness it is contrasted with.

It has been my findings that as ambient viewing is desired darker screens are needed the darker screens require more lumens and the brighter setting require more lumens again. The conventional wisdom around foot lambert levels is out when you design an ambient desired viewing theater.

I wrote a while back about how I thought the BD demos were a little unfair where they roll down a BD screen in front of a white screen and show the stark comparisons. The overdriving required for the dark screen and the location of the ambient sources make for a WOW experience though.


----------



## ccotenj

@rich...


thanks for the great writeup! that should be stickied. i pretty much understood all of what you posted already (mostly from reading your other posts in the various threads here







, you are a great resource), but seeing it all put together like that made it really "click" in my mind...


had that been a sticky post, it would have saved me literally hundreds of hours of research and thought... all of that info in one post is REALLY great...


thanks again for taking the time to post that mate...


----------



## fraisa

Edit.....


In that recent Screen it article of home theater mag that normally would have been dominated by past screen giants Now others have been highted in the screen game.


But this is one thing that is changing and that is what people want, where before it was a bat cave painted black room with black carpet,

Now the market is saying we want accurate colors and want to watch it in a normal family room.


The market is now not just thinking 2pc projection in a theater designed room

they are wanting a typical room like mine with light carpet , Ceiling and Walls.


This is where the market has to go to compete against flat panel and do what flat panel cant do.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20387250
> 
> 
> While Writing Theory style messages with jab undertones at these types of screens is the way of the past,




So becoming educated on how screens actually work is "the way of the past?"


Don't tell me: rotely praising a screen over and over or swallowing misunderstanding on screen behaviour must be the "way of the future?"


Stop sounding like a salesman.


Specialty screens can be terrific. Understanding how screens work is ALWAYS better for someone trying to figure out how to achieve his home theater goal.


----------



## ccotenj

@fraisa...


actually, i thought that rich's post was very balanced and informative... it pretty much confirmed for me everything i had thought i had learned (i.e. what are the positives/negatives, and how does it really work)...


knowing the positives of something, but not knowing the drawbacks, can be dangerous to one's wallet...


and fwiw, i ordered a bd screen today... if anything, reading rich's post hastened that order...


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20387429
> 
> 
> So becoming educated on how screens actually work is "the way of the past?"



Yes. What were you thinking?










Seriously, I don't see that there were any jabs in what you wrote.


I would simply supplement what you wrote by simply clarifying that what you see on the screen is a combination of the the projector's placement with respect to the screen, where you are viewing from and where other light is coming from. Also, the BD is an angular reflective screen. As a general rule for the most common kinds of room (ceiling height, viewing distance, throw distance, etc.) good (but not necessarily the best) results are obtained by mounting above the screen. This is not always true. It is all about the angles - as you say, think like a mirror.


Further, for some pics of how light from different angles impacts the image, see here .


----------



## ccotenj

^^^


glad you posted that, because it's a question i have...


the common advice for these (and other angular reflective screens), is mount the pj at the top of the screen or above...


but when i run flboy's calculator, the numbers would seem to suggest that isn't true in my case...


it seems like to me that if we look at this "like a mirror", the pj really wants to be mounted at the same distance above the centerline of the screen as the viewer's eyes are... and since my eyes fall about 1/4 of the way up the screen, that would be 1/4 of the way down from the top of the screen for the pj...


what am i missing here? i'm a bit confused...


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20387429
> 
> 
> So becoming educated on how screens actually work is "the way of the past?"
> 
> 
> Don't tell me: rotely praising a screen over and over or swallowing misunderstanding on screen behaviour must be the "way of the future?"
> 
> 
> Stop sounding like a salesman.
> 
> 
> Specialty screens can be terrific. Understanding how screens work is ALWAYS better for someone trying to figure out how to achieve his home theater goal.



Totally came out the wrong way and i have edited my comment..



I was referring just to how the market is changing and how the rooms are starting to evolve around ambient light watching.


And that ambient light screens are really starting to come to the forth front.

Again there was alot of info in your detailed outline that many can learn from...


Ambient light screens are application based per ones room.

And there are many that are getting into the 2pcs projection realm because of this viewing option..


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/20387521
> 
> 
> @fraisa...
> 
> 
> actually, i thought that rich's post was very balanced and informative... it pretty much confirmed for me everything i had thought i had learned (i.e. what are the positives/negatives, and how does it really work)...
> 
> 
> knowing the positives of something, but not knowing the drawbacks, can be dangerous to one's wallet...
> 
> 
> and fwiw, i ordered a bd screen today... if anything, reading rich's post hastened that order...



So are you glad you ordered it ?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20387884
> 
> 
> Yes. What were you thinking?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously, I don't see that there were any jabs in what you wrote.
> 
> 
> I would simply supplement what you wrote by simply clarifying that what you see on the screen is a combination of the the projector's placement with respect to the screen, where you are viewing from and where other light is coming from. Also, the BD is an angular reflective screen. As a general rule for the most common kinds of room (ceiling height, viewing distance, throw distance, etc.) good (but not necessarily the best) results are obtained by mounting above the screen. This is not always true. It is all about the angles - as you say, think like a mirror.
> 
> 
> Further, for some pics of how light from different angles impacts the image, see here .



Read thru that article,

Which was full of alot of info and does confirm that these screens are application based and that there must be plaining involved to maximize any screens full potential.


IE. In my room i have Spot lights instead of floods...

This keeps the direction of my lights toward the carpet and not over flooding the room...

By doing this you can direct the light to certain areas of the room than just flooding it..

I also can have lights on and read a book while the wife watches the Big Screen...


But at the same time i can open up my side windows blinds and i still have a very watchable image.

Thats 7 Spot lights on... Flood light on bottom of my stairway and Side window blind open....

As in that article review pointed out,

you cant do that with some of the other screens

but my viewing angle is reduced to 44-45%...


So its a give and take relationship...

Thanks for posting that link very Helpful


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/20379755
> 
> 
> ...Your chosen use of the term "light scatter" is at best humerous, because it shows both a lack of knowledge as to what such things should be called, and a determined effort to put a better lean to a off balanced situation.
> 
> 
> But you really need to correct your usage of terminology when trying so hard to convince people that performance concerns can be generously called "advantages" and considered to be something to be held up as superior to other, more well versed and adjustable screen options.



All I know is that when you shine that thing-a-ma-jig onto that thing-a-ma-bobber, it produces some sort of doo-hickey thing on the whatcha-ma call-it.
























The Term "light scatter" has been used very generously in this thread. It may or may not be the correct term, but it's one that is commonly being used. I'm glad you want to share what you believe is the correct term, but you might consider just a little more kindness in your approach.


Thanks, Dave


----------



## ccotenj




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20388453
> 
> 
> So are you glad you ordered it ?



heck yea!!!!! it can't get here soon enough...










will i still be glad i ordered it after i have it _in my room, using it the way i plan on using it_? we'll see... obviously, i'm anticipating i will...


note: i am not immune to the "wow, that is just SO cool" effect, and from the first time i read about one of these, i WANTED one...


basically, it came down to this or the firehawk... i could have spent weeks obsessing about it, going back and forth agonizing, getting screen samples and wasting heaven knows how many hours...


either screen will require some planning/room change on my part, so there was no significant advantage to either on that standpoint...


neither is "perfect"... both have their strengths and weaknesses...


so i went with the "want"...


worst case, it doesn't work out and i sell it and take the loss... it wouldn't be the first time i've done that, and it wouldn't be the last...


life is way to short to kill yourself over a few hundred bucks... to be honest, if you are shopping in this price range anyway, you should be willing to pay a bit of a price just in order to satisfy your curiosity...


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/20389354
> 
> 
> heck yea!!!!! it can't get here soon enough...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> will i still be glad i ordered it after i have it _in my room, using it the way i plan on using it_? we'll see... obviously, i'm anticipating i will...
> 
> 
> note: i am not immune to the "wow, that is just SO cool" effect, and from the first time i read about one of these, i WANTED one...
> 
> 
> basically, it came down to this or the firehawk... i could have spent weeks obsessing about it, going back and forth agonizing, getting screen samples and wasting heaven knows how many hours...
> 
> 
> either screen will require some planning/room change on my part, so there was no significant advantage to either on that standpoint...
> 
> 
> neither is "perfect"... both have their strengths and weaknesses...
> 
> 
> so i went with the "want"...
> 
> 
> worst case, it doesn't work out and i sell it and take the loss... it wouldn't be the first time i've done that, and it wouldn't be the last...
> 
> 
> life is way to short to kill yourself over a few hundred bucks... to be honest, if you are shopping in this price range anyway, you should be willing to pay a bit of a price just in order to satisfy your curiosity...



This is what you will be getting......


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/20389354
> 
> 
> heck yea!!!!!
> 
> 
> either screen will require some planning/room change on my part, so there was no significant advantage to either on that standpoint...
> 
> 
> neither is "perfect"... both have their strengths and weaknesses...
> 
> 
> so i went with the "want"...
> 
> 
> worst case, it doesn't work out and i sell it and take the loss... it wouldn't be the first time i've done that, and it wouldn't be the last...
> 
> 
> life is way to short to kill yourself over a few hundred bucks... to be honest, if you are shopping in this price range anyway, you should be willing to pay a bit of a price just in order to satisfy your curiosity...




Exactly my way of thinking and i still have my OLD 1.4 gain BDII 15 months on and still not wanting to change it. Plasmas get upgraded more than this although this latest Panny 3D looks like a keeper.







GOOD DECISION.


----------



## kbar3870

Fraisa,


I'm close to going for the BD 1.4 Do me/us all a favor and take some screen shots of a scene that is not focused on an individual in the center. The screen does seem brighter in the center, but I'm not sure if that's hot spotting, your camera, or because the source material is focused on the image in the center and highlighting it/him/her/them, etc.


So, please try to get a shot from about 13 feet back (my seating area for a 110" proposed screen) on a screen shot(s) that has more of a balance to the content vs. center action.


Thanks,

Kbar


PS: Some off-angle of the same shots would go a long way too if don't mind. If there was some place in Orlando I could check one out I would.


----------



## Benito Joaquin

If off axis viewing is a concern of yours. Try hard to get a demo of the unit. That was the one main factor that pushed me away from the unit. Otherwise, the way it holds up to ambient light is amazing!!


Benito


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *kbar3870* /forum/post/20389516
> 
> 
> Fraisa,
> 
> 
> I'm close to going for the BD 1.4 Do me/us all a favor and take some screen shots of a scene that is not focused on an individual in the center. The screen does seem brighter in the center, but I'm not sure if that's hot spotting, your camera, or because the source material is focused on the image in the center and highlighting it/him/her/them, etc.
> 
> 
> So, please try to get a shot from about 13 feet back (my seating area for a 110" proposed screen) on a screen shot(s) that has more of a balance to the content vs. center action.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Kbar
> 
> 
> PS: Some off-angle of the same shots would go a long way too if don't mind. If there was some place in Orlando I could check one out I would.



Ya i have a Calibration disc that has a full image of Strawberry's , Tomatoes,

peppers and grapes..


In the next couple of days i will take some shots of that...


----------



## kbar3870




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20389550
> 
> 
> If off axis viewing is a concern of yours. Try hard to get a demo of the unit. That was the one main factor that pushed me away from the unit. Otherwise, the way it holds up to ambient light is amazing!!
> 
> 
> Benito



I think I need about 40-50 degress to either side off center (at zero degrees for this example) to be in good shape. I know the image wont be as good, but is it that bad on a BD at 40-50 degress off center? Something in the realm of decent is fine for those stragglers in the side areas.


Kbar


----------



## kbar3870




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20389663
> 
> 
> Ya i have a Calibration disc that has a full image of Strawberry's , Tomatoes,
> 
> peppers and grapes..
> 
> 
> In the next couple of days i will take some shots of that...



Sorry to pester, but how about something with people or scenery? Especially a screen shot from some known movie. Again, sorry to pester, but I don't tend to view vegetation on the screen and would have no reference as a result.


Thanks again for anything you or anyone else can do to help out the curious masses yearing for optional ambient light.


-Kbar.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *kbar3870* /forum/post/20389765
> 
> 
> Sorry to pester, but how about something with people or scenery? Especially a screen shot from some known movie. Again, sorry to pester, but I don't tend to view vegetation on the screen and would have no reference as a result.
> 
> 
> Thanks again for anything you or anyone else can do to help out the curious masses yearing for optional ambient light.
> 
> 
> -Kbar.



Pick a couple of movies and Scenes that i can take a shot of...


Also viewing angles of BD..... ,8 gain is 44 degrees....1.4 is 55 degrees


----------



## ccotenj




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20389507
> 
> 
> Exactly my way of thinking and i still have my OLD 1.4 gain BDII 15 months on and still not wanting to change it. Plasmas get upgraded more than this although this latest Panny 3D looks like a keeper.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GOOD DECISION.



lol... a man who has the same disease as i...







i hate to admit this, but the only thing i've got in here that i've had for as long as 15 months is the kuro and one of the submersives...














although i think i'm at least seeing the end of the "upgrade" road now...







i hope so anyway, as much as i like buying stuff, it can occasionally be a pita to flip it...


i'm keeping the 150fd though... i got away with selling the 111fd, but swmbo informed me that i will not be selling her tv... so into the bedroom it goes...


on topic for a minute... benito just posted the two reasons why (other than the "want" factor) i believe i made the correct choice ("believe" isn't "opinion" yet, i have to use it first and have some true basis to form an "opinion")... viewing angle is a non-issue for me (i have 2 seats), and seemingly "best" overall ambient light performance (given the correct setup) was the primary goal...


to be honest, screenshots are pretty, but they don't tell me a lot (other than the comparative ones in a review like art's, those helped a certain amount)... they tell me what the screen looks like _in someone else's room, with someone else's pj (with unknown calibration), and so on (not to mention my crappy macbook monitor)_.... i DO like screenshot eye candy, and it can potentially highlight the positives of something, but all the screenshots in the world won't tell me what it'll look like when i'm parked on my butt in front of it in my room...


ymmv... bluntly put, i don't like to obsess over non-life threatening decisions, and for us, time is more important than money... but i also understand that other people's situations are different, and they (rightfully so) make their decisions in a different way...


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/20388291
> 
> 
> ^^^
> 
> 
> glad you posted that, because it's a question i have...
> 
> 
> the common advice for these (and other angular reflective screens), is mount the pj at the top of the screen or above...
> 
> 
> but when i run flboy's calculator, the numbers would seem to suggest that isn't true in my case...
> 
> 
> it seems like to me that if we look at this "like a mirror", the pj really wants to be mounted at the same distance above the centerline of the screen as the viewer's eyes are... and since my eyes fall about 1/4 of the way up the screen, that would be 1/4 of the way down from the top of the screen for the pj...
> 
> 
> what am i missing here? i'm a bit confused...



You're not missing anything. You've got it.

Look at the angle from the viewers's eyes to the center of the screen and try to make it the same as the angle from the lens to the center of the screen.


----------



## ccotenj

^^^


thanks mate...







some of this may be sinking into my thick head after all...


----------



## BobL




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *JackstrawWichita* /forum/post/20385142
> 
> 
> Would there be an advantage to the BD over the FH if I every move to 3D?



It depends on the type of 3D. 3D with active glasses (like the current Sharp or JVCs) either screen would be fine because the screen doesn't have to hold polarization, it is done in the glasses.


3d with passive glasses and I'd look at either the New BD 2.7 which I haven't seen yet so I can't comment but was designed for passive 3D. Or I'd consider the Stewart 5D material which is 2.0 gain.


I don't know the pricing yet of the BD 2.7 yet but Stewart's new 5D material in considerably more expensive than the FH especially with the micro-perf for AT applications. For passive 3D another screen to consider for non-AT applications is the Vutec Silverstar and it is less expensive than either the 5D and probably the BD 2.7. One downside to consider with a Silverstar is will it fit in your home. it is a SOLID screen and assembled so keep that in mind if you consider a Silverstar.


For 3D I currently prefer passive systems as I find them easier on the eyes with better picture quality. Most 3D screens have tradeoffs similar to the FH or BD but more pronounced. So you have to consider viewing habits and tradeoffs again. For instance in a multipurpose room with ambient light the 5D material would be great. In a light controlled dedicated theater I'd look at a white screen and active glasses unless I watched mostly 3D or I would use 2 screens. Passive 3D systems are currently pretty pricey so a second screen is a good solution in that price range.


Bob


----------



## charlievoviii

i recent purchase a 113" BD 1.4. I notice on the screen surface I can see a lot of consistence white dots thorough the screen. Can Someone tell me whats the point of it ?


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *charlievoviii* /forum/post/20400601
> 
> 
> i recent purchase a 120" black diamond screen. I notice on the screen surface I can see a lot of consistence white dots thorough the screen. Can Someone tell me whats the point of it ?



What do you mean by "consistence white dots?" I don't understand . . .


----------



## charlievoviii




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20400615
> 
> 
> What do you mean by "consistence white dots?" I don't understand . . .



if you have a BD 1.4 screen, go up close to it and u will see very very small white sparkly dots thorough the screen and when the projector is on you can see sparkly in white or high contrast scenes it very annoying. To be honest im very disappointing in this purchase. MY Fire Hawk G3 picture was way better anyway. Since i dont have ambient issue.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *charlievoviii* /forum/post/20400691
> 
> 
> if you have a BD II 1.4 screen, go up close to it and u will see very very small white sparkly dots thorough the screen and when the projector is on you can see sparkly in white or high contrast scenes it very annoying. To be honest im very disappointing in this purchase. MY Fire Hawk G3 picture was way better. Since i dont have ambient issue.



You should have got the BD III 1.4 Gain screen that is the lastest Gen...

For a 120 inch that means you dont have a 16x9 correct?


----------



## charlievoviii




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20400719
> 
> 
> You should have got the BD III 1.4 Gain screen that is the lastest Gen...
> 
> For a 120 inch that means you dont have a 16x9 correct?



ups, typo im thinking of my fire hawk screen. sorry my BD III 1.4 is 113"


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *charlievoviii* /forum/post/20400768
> 
> 
> ups, typo im thinking of my fire hawk screen. sorry my BD III 1.4 is 113"



what projector are you using?

Is it calibrated?


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *charlievoviii* /forum/post/20400691
> 
> 
> if you have a BD 1.4 screen, go up close to it and u will see very very small white sparkly dots thorough the screen and when the projector is on you can see sparkly in white or high contrast scenes it very annoying. To be honest im very disappointing in this purchase. MY Fire Hawk G3 picture was way better anyway. Since i dont have ambient issue.



Interesting. I have never seen sparkly dots. I do see a kind of texture at times though. I bet if you tried to see your screen you could get more than enough to get a firehawk.


----------



## Benito Joaquin

I've seen this before but it's very rare. More often i see the image a bit....muddy. Can't think of another way to explain it.


But white dots, that's really weird!


Benito


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20401652
> 
> 
> More often i see the image a bit....muddy.



That's one way to describe what I see.


----------



## charlievoviii




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20401652
> 
> 
> I've seen this before but it's very rare. More often i see the image a bit....muddy. Can't think of another way to explain it.
> 
> 
> But white dots, that's really weird!
> 
> 
> Benito



thanks for your help. Anyway i called up SI and ask them about my issues. They told me its normal with their optical screen. Which BD is a optical screen.


Looking like the firehawk g3 is going back on my home theater and the BD is going to my sister house


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *charlievoviii* /forum/post/20402430
> 
> 
> thanks for your help. Anyway i called up SI and ask them about my issues. They told me its normal with their optical screen. Which BD is a optical screen.
> 
> 
> Looking like the firehawk g3 is going back on my home theater and the BD is going to my sister house



If you have your contrast cranked up that would magnify it to be an issue.

I have my contrast at a Minus value and my Brightness at a positive value on my Epson 9700 paired with the BD III .8 Gain ..


For my room and set up thats the proper value

Blacks have detail and whites are not clipping...


----------



## R Harkness

Some people are just more sensitive to, or bothered by, the artifacts of optical coating on a screen. Generally it seems the more aggressive the gain of the coating the harder it is to reduce it's visibility.


It's essentially the passive screen version of the "Silk Screen Effect" that bedeviled the rear projection TVs, which used a high gain screen material to ensure adequate brightness.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20402647
> 
> 
> Some people are just more sensitive to, or bothered by, the artifacts of optical coating on a screen. Generally it seems the more aggressive the gain of the coating the harder it is to reduce it's visibility.
> 
> 
> It's essentially the passive screen version of the "Silk Screen Effect" that bedeviled the rear projection TVs, which used a high gain screen material to ensure adequate brightness.



I see more Sparkle on a Firehawk than i do on my .8 BD Screen..

I use Casino Royal Crain scene for that test and the clouds had more sparkle on the firehawk.


If you are intrested in The BD you should go to a showroom and see it for your own Eyes on display.

And you really need to see a full screen 80 inch and up in action.

then you will know what your getting.

And if your local showroom sells BD but doesnt have one on display , if it was me i would go somewhere else to buy one.

You really need to take this screen for a test drive and let your eyes test it out.


And make sure they have the Current Version and not a screen thats 2yrs old.


----------



## charlievoviii

Quote:

Originally Posted by *fraisa* 
If you have your contrast cranked up that would magnify it to be an issue.

I have my contrast at a Minus value and my Brightness at a positive value on my Epson 9700 paired with the BD III .8 Gain ..


For my room and set up thats the proper value

Blacks have detail and whites are not clipping...
thanks Fraisa, my projector is calibrate by a PRO.


----------



## charlievoviii

hey fraisa, is there a reason why you pick BD .8 gain over 1.4 gain? Since you are the expert, your explanation would be highly appreciated. thanks


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *charlievoviii* /forum/post/20404585
> 
> 
> hey fraisa, is there a reason why you pick BD .8 gain over 1.4 gain? Since you are the expert, your explanation would be highly appreciated. thanks



The .8 gain for me gives better black levels than the 1.4...

I have it on an Epson 9700 that puts out a 200,000 to 1 contrast ratio so I already have the contrast pushing from the projector...


The 1.4 has more contrast Push to it but since i had a Epson 9700 the .8 gain seemed to make sense..

Now if i was going for a projector that had under 100,000 to 1 Contrast than i would go 1.4...



As for being the expert on BD , Not at all I am learning Everyday...

Just a Big Fan of this product...

There is not a day that goes by when i get the time to watch on my BD and Epson that i am not amazed at the colour Detail that i am seeing ...

And i do love how my room stays pretty dark when watching...

My 50 inch plasma put out more reflective ambient light scatter than this screen....


----------



## charlievoviii




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20404723
> 
> 
> The .8 gain for me gives better black levels than the 1.4...
> 
> I have it on an Epson 9700 that puts out a 200,000 to 1 contrast ratio so I already have the contrast pushing from the projector...
> 
> 
> The 1.4 has more contrast Push to it but since i had a Epson 9700 the .8 gain seemed to make sense..
> 
> Now if i was going for a projector that had under 100,000 to 1 Contrast than i would go 1.4...
> 
> 
> 
> As for being the expert on BD , Not at all I am learning Everyday...
> 
> Just a Big Fan of this product...
> 
> There is not a day that goes by when i get the time to watch on my BD and Epson that i am not amazed at the colour Detail that i am seeing ...
> 
> And i do love how my room stays pretty dark when watching...
> 
> My 50 inch plasma put out more reflective ambient light scatter than this screen....



thank you for your knowledge. Well to me you are an expert, since yo uknow more about it than me. Which make you an expert to me. ROFL. Thanks again. Damn should of went with the .8 gain, I have the Epson 8700UB which pretty much the same as yours.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *charlievoviii* /forum/post/20405080
> 
> 
> thank you for your knowledge. Well to me you are an expert, since yo uknow more about it than me. Which make you an expert to me. ROFL. Thanks again. Damn should of went with the .8 gain, I have the Epson 8700UB which pretty much the same as yours.



If i had a 1.4 Gain My Contrast Setting would be Around -12


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20404723
> 
> 
> As for being the expert on BD , Not at all I am learning Everyday...
> 
> Just a Big Fan of this product...



There was a time when you admitted to being a BD dealer, not just a Big Fan:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...8#post19603438 


Are you still a dealer? If you are, the people who are reading your unbounded praise for this screen might want to know.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *charlievoviii* /forum/post/20405080
> 
> 
> thank you for your knowledge. Well to me you are an expert, since yo uknow more about it than me. Which make you an expert to me. ROFL. Thanks again. Damn should of went with the .8 gain, I have the Epson 8700UB which pretty much the same as yours.





kbar3870 said:


> Sorry to pester, but how about something with people or scenery? Especially a screen shot from some known movie. Again, sorry to pester, but I don't tend to view vegetation on the screen and would have no reference as a result.
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a link to my Facebook page Album that has all my ambient light shots
> 
> taken at different angles.
> 
> Thought it would be better to post the link instead of flooding the thread with shots.
> 
> 
> this will give you an idea of what your 8700 on a .8 gain would look like.
> 
> The newest shots are done with my latest calibration settings...
> 
> http://www.facebook.com/pages/Presti...closeTheater=1
Click to expand...


----------



## charlievoviii




fraisa said:


> kbar3870 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry to pester, but how about something with people or scenery? Especially a screen shot from some known movie. Again, sorry to pester, but I don't tend to view vegetation on the screen and would have no reference as a result.
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> Here is a link to my Facebook page Album that has all my ambient light shots
> 
> taken at different angles.
> 
> Thought it would be better to post the link instead of flooding the thread with shots.
> 
> 
> this will give you an idea of what your 8700 on a .8 gain would look like.
> 
> The newest shots are done with my latest calibration settings...
> 
> http://www.facebook.com/pages/Presti...closeTheater=1
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wow its like a TV. Im very impressive how nice the color looks especially with all the ambient lights.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## fraisa




charlievoviii said:


> fraisa said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *kbar3870* /forum/post/20389765
> 
> 
> Sorry to pester, but how about something with people or scenery? Especially a screen shot from some known movie. Again, sorry to pester, but I don't tend to view vegetation on the screen and would have no reference as a result.
> 
> 
> wow its like a TV. Im very impressive how nice the color looks especially with all the ambient lights.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> And i have settings dialed back ,
> 
> I think the key is lower contrast and higher brightness and also the colors are adjusted,
> 
> When paired with the right projector its a killer combo..
> 
> 
> Edit
> 
> Settings for HDTV
> 
> Vivid or Dynamic mode
> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...282483&page=14
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## Benito Joaquin

Nice shots fraisa, those shots are the reason why it was on my very short list of screens when i purchased for my own setup.

Off axis viewing is what took the BD screen off my list. Great shots though!!


Benito


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20409084
> 
> 
> Nice shots fraisa, those shots are the reason why it was on my very short list of screens when i purchased for my own setup.
> 
> Off axis viewing is what took the BD screen off my list. Great shots though!!
> 
> 
> Benito



Thanks

Again the viewing angle is better with the 1.4 gain screen. vs the .8 gain bd.

For me its a non issue and i love my .8 gain...



Also i really enjoy the look of the BD Screen on the wall ( when people are over they think i have a 113 inch lcd on the wall)

as it has darker screen undertones and with the new BD Gen III 1.4 Gain looks

very close to the .8 gain...

I agree with blake that its almost hard to now tell the difference between the two different materials ...


Here is my American Idol Shot album
http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?s...04003626295737


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20409187
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Again the viewing angle is better with the 1.4 gain screen. vs the .8 gain bd.
> 
> For me its a non issue and i love my .8 gain...
> 
> 
> 
> Also i really enjoy the look of the BD Screen on the wall ( when people are over they think i have a 113 inch lcd on the wall)
> 
> as it has darker screen undertones and with the new BD Gen III 1.4 Gain looks
> 
> very close to the .8 gain...
> 
> I agree with blake that its almost hard to now tell the difference between the two different materials ...
> 
> 
> Here is my American Idol Shot album
> http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?s...04003626295737



I've seen the third gen and it's not all that much better. Definitely improved in other areas but they are still very limited on the viewing angle. For certain applications, it doesn't get much better than the BD material.


Benito


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20409954
> 
> 
> I've seen the third gen and it's not all that much better. Definitely improved in other areas but they are still very limited on the viewing angle.
> 
> Benito



Limited viewing angle compared to what other ambient light Screen....?


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20410021
> 
> 
> Limited viewing angle compared to what other ambient light Screen....?



Comparable to a Firehawk. You could even say Grayhawk.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20410164
> 
> 
> Comparable to a Firehawk. You could even say Grayhawk.



The Firehawk has a posted Viewing angle of 60% percent but they dont get that,

The Viewing angle of the 1.4 BD is 55%...


But I dont consider the Grayhawk an Ambient light screen..


And the black levels in ambient light are faded on a GrayHawk..

So the grayhawk claims a better viewing angle but if the pic is faded in high ambient light then whats the point...


I think you can compare the Stewart ambient light screens to the La Lakers and the BD to the Dallas Mavs....

Time for a New King....he he


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20410322
> 
> 
> The Firehawk has a posted Viewing angle of 60% percent but they dont get that,
> 
> The Viewing angle of the 1.4 BD is 55%...
> 
> 
> But I dont consider the Grayhawk an Ambient light screen..
> 
> 
> And the black levels in ambient light are faded on a GrayHawk..
> 
> So the grayhawk claims a better viewing angle but if the pic is faded in high ambient light then whats the point...
> 
> 
> I think you can compare the Stewart ambient light screens to the La Lakers and the BD to the Dallas Mavs....
> 
> Time for a New King....he he



These numbers you post mean absolutely nothing. As mentioned in many other posts, it's all application driven.


It's a fact and widely noted that the viewing angles on the BD screen are simply not good. Get off axis and half your image is entirely gone!! That's with the old and new version. and that's the huge difference between the BD screen and the Firehawk screen. Firehawk works exceptionally well when off axis simply because it drops in brightness but it still provides a very uniform image. That's the main difference.


There's nothing wrong with a BD screen. In fact, if it weren't for the bad off axis image, i'd have it in my living room now. For some applications, the BD screen is better. For others, it's the Firehawk.


To say one is better than the other is just wrong!!



.....and i hate the Lakers!!! Clippers in 2011-2012!!!


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20410453
> 
> 
> These numbers you post mean absolutely nothing. As mentioned in many other posts, it's all application driven.
> 
> 
> It's a fact and widely noted that the viewing angles on the BD screen are simply not good. Get off axis and half your image is entirely gone!! That's with the old and new version. and that's the huge difference between the BD screen and the Firehawk screen. Firehawk works exceptionally well when off axis simply because it drops in brightness but it still provides a very uniform image. That's the main difference.
> 
> 
> There's nothing wrong with a BD screen. In fact, if it weren't for the bad off axis image, i'd have it in my living room now. For some applications, the BD screen is better. For others, it's the Firehawk.
> 
> 
> To say one is better than the other is just wrong!!
> 
> 
> 
> .....and i hate the Lakers!!! Clippers in 2011-2012!!!



You compared the BD to the Firehawk and Greyhawk

Yet you didnt comment on the Greyhawks performance in An Ambient light setting.


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20410510
> 
> 
> You compared the BD to the Firehawk and Greyhawk
> 
> Yet you didnt comment on the Greyhawks performance in An Ambient light setting.



Because we were not talking about it's performance in ambient light. We were talking about grey screens and off axis viewing. You then introduced other factors into the equation. Sticking to what we were talking about, the Grayhawk is better than both Firehawk and BD combined!!! But when you introduce other factors into it such as black levels and other things, yes the grayhawk shouldn't even be considered.


----------



## R Harkness

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* 
Firehawk works exceptionally well when off axis simply because it drops in brightness but it still provides a very uniform image.
Just to add another opinion: I can't agree the Firehawk exhibits a uniform looking image off axis. I've examined the Firehawk performance (newest versions) many times and one of the main reasons I went for the ST-130 over the Firehawk is just how visible the hot-spotting is on the Firehawk, especially off-axis. Just like the BD screens as I move off axis the far side of the Firehawk starts going darker. A local store even has a 2:35:1 Firehawk with the JVC projector, the screen being around 118"wide or so. From the center seats it looked fairly uniform (although I could still see central hotspotting on brighter scenes, sky shots etc), but if I simply sat in one of the seats to one side...by that I mean within the width of the screen, but directly in front of one side of the screen...the other side was going dark. I felt there was no way I could live with that type of screen behaviour.


Having seen the BD 1.4 gain screen I noticed similar behaviour, but I can't recall precisely enough whether I thought it any better or worse than the Firehawk. The worst I've ever seen, by far, for this issue has been the BD .8 gain screen in which, to my eyes, you essentially "lose" 1/2 the picture to dimness when moving off-axis.


As always, viewer sensitivity to these issue varies and hot-spotting doesn't seem to bother many people. It can be one of those DLP "rainbow" like issues, where a viewer doesn't notice it until it's pointed out. Then it either drives him crazy (a minority) or they can see it, then forget about it and it doesn't interfere with their viewing (a majority, it seems). For me, hot-spotting is typically so obvious and visible it blows my mind that even otherwise picky AV members (and even some reviewers) don't see it as obvious or objectionable. But, that's the nature of individual sensitivities and criteria.


So as we all say, this is why it's best to see screen material for yourself. Although once you know the type of artifacts that bother you, especially viewing angle issues, then viewing angle measurements for screens can at least tip you off that a screen is likely, or not likely, to exhibit bothersome non-uniformity.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20412495
> 
> 
> Just to add another opinion: I can't agree the Firehawk exhibits a uniform looking image off axis. I've examined the Firehawk performance (newest versions) many times and one of the main reasons I went for the ST-130 over the Firehawk is just how visible the hot-spotting is on the Firehawk, especially off-axis. Just like the BD screens as I move off axis the far side of the Firehawk starts going darker. A local store even has a 2:35:1 Firehawk with the JVC projector, the screen being around 118"wide or so. From the center seats it looked fairly uniform (although I could still see central hotspotting on brighter scenes, sky shots etc), but if I simply sat in one of the seats to one side...by that I mean within the width of the screen, but directly in front of one side of the screen...the other side was going dark. I felt there was no way I could live with that type of screen behaviour.
> 
> 
> Having seen the BD 1.4 gain screen I noticed similar behaviour, but I can't recall precisely enough whether I thought it any better or worse than the Firehawk. The worst I've ever seen, by far, for this issue has been the BD .8 gain screen in which, to my eyes, you essentially "lose" 1/2 the picture to dimness when moving off-axis.
> 
> 
> As always, viewer sensitivity to these issue varies and hot-spotting doesn't seem to bother many people. It can be one of those DLP "rainbow" like issues, where a viewer doesn't notice it until it's pointed out. Then it either drives him crazy (a minority) or they can see it, then forget about it and it doesn't interfere with their viewing (a majority, it seems). For me, hot-spotting is typically so obvious and visible it blows my mind that even otherwise picky AV members (and even some reviewers) don't see it as obvious or objectionable. But, that's the nature of individual sensitivities and criteria.
> 
> 
> So as we all say, this is why it's best to see screen material for yourself. Although once you know the type of artifacts that bother you, especially viewing angle issues, then viewing angle measurements for screens can at least tip you off that a screen is likely, or not likely, to exhibit bothersome non-uniformity.




FYI,

SI does have other Screeen product....

That are Similiar to the ST 130...

Screen Materials Link

http://www.screeninnovations.com/screen-materials/ 


Also the Lunar HD .85 Gain Screen Material is another screen option for Ambient Light...

also has Double the viewing angle as a .8 Gain BD..

From my Testing the black levels on the bd are much better than the Lunar.

but you can watch the lunar in a Medium Light Setting if you have the Lumens and contrast in a Projector Like the epson 9350...


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20410453
> 
> 
> It's a fact and widely noted that the viewing angles on the BD screen are simply not good. Get off axis and half your image is entirely gone!!



Please point out which half of the image is missing in this picture.











Exaggerations don't help anyone make a decision about which screen is best.


I'll try to take some other (better) off-axis pictures to further demonstrate the extent to which off-axis performance is, in my opinion, quite good with the BD. Nothing at all against the Firehawk. It is a good screen. When you worked for Stewart, I am sure that you sold a ton of them.


----------



## Benito Joaquin

That actually looks pretty good Lawguy, my experience with off axis on the BD have been the total opposite. With the testing I did, it just wasn't to my satisfaction. But of course just like everything else, it's all personal preference. Can you give details on which BD screen that is?


Benny


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20415603
> 
> 
> Please point out which half of the image is missing in this picture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll try to take some other (better) off-axis pictures to further demonstrate the extent to which off-axis performance is, in my opinion, quite good with the BD.



I hope your kidding.







The image above shows a deplorable loss of luminosity at the furthest edge.)

And the image noise labels the shot as having been taken at a high ISO so it could even catch what light output the Screen could muster.


Here's a shot of a "older model" FireHawk being hit with a JVC X3 in HIGH ambient light. Taken from 20' away and to the side at approx 30+ degrees off-axis. While that's not quite the severe angle your shot is taken at, the screen I show has to suffer from many times the amount of ambient light the BD screen is facing In fact, yours appears to have been taken in complete darkness. One can see a slight drop off in reflected Fls on the right side of the Screen, but that is what one must expect from such designs.











Now next is an image also taken with a X3 employed, but the screen in use is a 122" Silver Fire v.2 4.0 that sports a minimum of 1.3 gain. In the photo shown, the viewing angle is just as extreme as the BDs, and lookee at that ambient light level.











How dark is the screen above? below is a representation of a bright white material laying directly against the SF screen in a partially darkened environment











.......and a few more examples.....































To my reasoning, there is just too much "make do" as far as performance is concerned regarding the BD line-up. And when one considers the expense of such screens as relates to performance, it just gets silly.


But that's my opinion, and it's based on my having not had to deal with such compromises.


----------



## bud16415




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20415603
> 
> 
> I'll try to take some other (better) off-axis pictures to further demonstrate the extent to which off-axis performance is, in my opinion, quite good with the BD.



If you want to do any type of off axis comparisons to show center weighted brightness or anything else take a look at this thread.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=997266 

Download some of these photo slides to a CD and project them to photograph. You can then at least use a eyedropper tool to measure color or brightness and compare within the photo.
http://s94.photobucket.com/albums/l8...des/?start=all 


The thing I have learned about this is there is a quality to front projection no one talks about and it's hard to measure. Movies are about motion and not still shots. When any illusion travels across a screen and any aspect of the screen doesn't allow for the image to remain unchanged as it moves the unchanged appears to break the illusion of three dimensions. Once the illusion is broken the image still remains but it is all too apparent that it is 2D. All screens are warmer in the center and it's a matter of degree of dispersion that each of us can tolerate. All movies except old cartoons have depth of field playing a big part in the cinematography. This 3D quality is so much more real when captured than the eye tricking 3D with the glasses we think of as 3D today. The immersive quality of a high dispersive screen (white or gray) is hard to explain until you see it. Best explained as looking thru a open window.


----------



## MississippiMan

Bud has provided an excellent Thread for over viewing. Even though it does revolve around DIY Screen surfaces, it's premise holds just as true to Mfg Screens and their own attributes...or lack thereof.


Some screen Mfg, to their credit...have worked to mitigate some of the worst cases of why many have resolved to pass on Front Projection. Most of which center around the ability to see a decent image in normally lit rooms. Sadly, what they consider "normal' is usually pretty dim by many people's standards.


Designing darker Gray Screens that purposefully direct a majority of light back toward the source seems to be the only real solution they have embraced. That's just fine if one views content within a limited range of seating that is confined to the general width of the Screen.


Trouble is, as FP systems become all the more desirable, there are all the more individual End users that cannot...or will not restrict themselves to sitting dead center in the room.


Anyone who thinks that a screen with anything close to having a limited viewing cone area is going find acceptance with any grouping of individuals who do not have such a confined approach to seating is grossly mistaken. Even among PJ enthusiasts, that is born out by the preponderance of postings to that effect on this and similar threads.


Still, many can and do exist with such limitations, and if in those instances they must also deal with ambient or reflective light issues, that then is where such screens find a purpose. For a price, though.










And what Bud lastly mentioned...the "Open window effect", that is conspicuously absent in such Mfg Screens as described above.


----------



## Fat Dave












Fantastic post, MississippiMan!


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/20416448
> 
> 
> .



With regards to your Ambient screen shots the blacks are washed out.

And Your Colours are Faded....( ya i spelled Colour the Canadian Way...)


Dont know why you think your painted Diy Screen paint can compete with a Black Diamond or Firehawk.


To come into this thread and Place a Judgemental Comment on This screens price vs your DIY Paint Is just Wrong..

And really those Viewing angle shots,,

If anyone plans a Home Theatre Room with seats that far out they need to fire the guy for not putting in a bigger screen.

Who sits that far out...

Waste of time.


As you see in these Shots Below...

I want Black Blacks in Ambient Light...































With Regards to the Firehawk ,

I have done some testing with the 8x10 samples that i got from Stewart.

I find that the Blacks on the BD are better than the Stewart Fire Hawk.

Darker colours like Grey, Blue, Purple, Blacks are a couple tones lighter on the Firehawk vs the BD 1.4 or .8 gain screens


For me I want Black Blacks... and i want them in Ambient Light.

I dont sit outside of my viewing screens width so the Viewing angle is Not an issue.

Again i want a vivid Pic in Ambient Light ...

I will post the shots of the testing later you will find them very intresting.


----------



## MississippiMan

Sorry to say but your images are also washed out, the Blacks are "GRAY", and show a decided red cast. Flesh tones are faded and "off". While there is no doubt that the BD is performing better than many other screens would under similar circumstances, when one also stops and considers that the screen you tout as being so superior to virtually all others costs upwards of $3K, (...for a small one...) your comments become purely non-nonsensical when viewed in light of it's actual performance. Does you room really look "orange"? No...your Camera is giving preference to the Screen at center. The last shot is an improvement but only because the lights have been lowered.


The difference is I DID not try to make my shots look good...I did NOT zoom in to fill the Camera's view so to increase the "perception" of having better contrast that is really there.


Step back to as far as you can then take some shots. You already know what will happen...don't you?


Just remember who told you how to take screen shots that even look as good as they do. Remember who helped you present your screenies in a manner that was not nearly a laughable as they were earlier on.


And do try to remember you sell these screens, and do so for considerable profit. You use this Thread for your own purposes...to promote the BD product line. Everyone else does...and mostly do not begrudge you the opportunity. But when you wax forth with so much superlative commentary it can seem quite self serving.


And lastly, be absolutely certain to remember that I helped you because you needed help, not because I was trying to promote any DIY Screen application...and that in fact I never once mentioned any competition between the two. That was left to someone else, and frankly, you did nothing to dissuade him, but rather embraced his cause once the quality of your Screen Shots improved exponentially.


One very real thing you still have yet to learn...something you cannot yet seem to grasp, is that it's easy to make a Camera take "Eye Candy". After all, you mastered it. But to have a screen that outputs a balanced image, one that shows to a Camera's metering system a bright and balanced image with contrast and "correct color" when such is taken from a distance" while surrounded by ambient light....that represents something akin to "Real World" performance.


Those on this Forum with any degree of understanding and experience with such matters know exactly what I'm speaking of. You would do well to tone down the hype, and accept the reasoning the the BD products serve a limited market of needful End Users who have the budget and desire to own such a Screen because they actually need one, not because it's touted as being the best choice available out of hand above all others.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20415603
> 
> 
> Please point out which half of the image is missing in this picture.



Easy: The left side.


Obviously no one really means it's "gone." However, the difference in brightness between the closer and further side is so obvious I'm at a loss to understand how it's not jumping out to you. Just cover with your hand the far side 1/2 of the image and you see a decent image brightness in the closer part. Now cover the close side 1/2 and all you see is a rather unacceptably (to me) dim image of the far half of the screen. Just look at the brightness of the central Father and Son's face compared to the dimness of the two females, especially the blond woman nearer the far side. (Even better, use your hands to block out everyone but the father's face and the blond woman's face, and look how big the brightness difference is). How is this hot-spotting not excruciatingly obvious?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/20417658
> 
> 
> Sorry to say but your images are also washed out, the Blacks are "GRAY", and show a decided red cast. Flesh tones are faded and "off". While there is no doubt that the BD is performing better than many other screens would under similar circumstances, when one also stops and considers that the screen you tout as being so superior to virtually all others costs upwards of $3K, .



Again my blacks in the Dark knight pic are black.


I refuse to go back n forth with you as it takes away from the purpose of this thread.

If a Stewart Firehawk cant produce better or as good blacks in ambient light how in the world do you think a DIY Screen can?


I have just did an ambient light test with a Firehawk sample and you can tell the difference in the tones of the darker colours between the 2 fabrics..


The Diy Ambient light screen Paint is like comparing BMW to a Kia...

is not in this ambient light screen league and it never will be....


----------



## Fat Dave




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20417825
> 
> 
> Again my blacks in the Dark knight pic are black.



Comparing the screen frame to the projected blacks show a substantial difference. You can't claim that's black. It's clearly elevated to ~10%.


[edit]


Here's your screenshot with cut-and-paste pieces of your screen frame overlayed on the image:


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20417747
> 
> 
> Easy: The left side.
> 
> 
> Obviously no one really means it's "gone." However, the difference in brightness between the closer and further side is so obvious I'm at a loss to understand how it's not jumping out to you. Just cover with your hand the far side 1/2 of the image and you see a decent image brightness in the closer part. Now cover the close side 1/2 and all you see is a rather unacceptably (to me) dim image of the far half of the screen. Just look at the brightness of the central Father and Son's face compared to the dimness of the two females, especially the blond woman nearer the far side. (Even better, use your hands to block out everyone but the father's face and the blond woman's face, and look how big the brightness difference is). How is this hot-spotting not excruciatingly obvious?



With regards to the Viewing angle issue..

you go back to that win/fail segment..

To gain viewing angle you loose on ambient light viewing


With the BD you gain on Ambient light viewing and you loose on Wide viewing cone...


----------



## ccotenj

@mm....


nice post...







i agree with all of it, especially the "toning down" part... if someone is a dealer, they should put it in their profile, and they should be a bit more balanced in their assessment of the product... the constant "this screen is the best thing since sliced bread, and everything else is moldy bread" gets a bit old...


and i say that as one of those people who do fall into the limited market you described, and have one of these on order... i expect no miracles...


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Fat Dave* /forum/post/20417865
> 
> 
> Comparing the screen frame to the projected blacks show a substantial difference. You can't claim that's black. It's clearly elevated to ~10%.



With that much light it is a very impressive and watchable image..


----------



## Fat Dave




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20417914
> 
> 
> Fat Dave what projector and screen do you Have?



What difference would that make? I'm not making any claims or statements in this thread about my own setup and it's performance.


I have an RS40 and a 168" cinemascope HP 2.8 screen in a dark theatre environment.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bud16415* /forum/post/20416469
> 
> 
> 
> The thing I have learned about this is there is a quality to front projection no one talks about and it's hard to measure.



Hey...I've been talking about the high dispersion/viewing angle effect since I joined in 2001.

















I find that an evenly illuminated image, that looks stable from essentially wherever I sit, greatly enhances the naturalness, beauty and reality of an image. Which is why I always favored plasma and it's super wide viewing angles over LCDs and RPTVs, whose uneven illumination and "shifty" quality depending on where I sat intruded upon the illusion. A stable screen image really does enhance the general beauty of any image on screen, and for "high reality" type content a lack of screen texture and even illumination enhances a looking-upon-reality-through-a-window effect, which can be thrilling.


The uneven illumination of gray screens with gain, even obvious from screen shots here, would be so obvious to me as to drive me nuts and constantly intrude on the viewing experience.


Little did I know before getting into projection that the same choice of characteristics bedevil screen choice!


But, the thing is, as I keep pointing out, we tend to be sensitive to different aspects of picture quality. What intrudes on the beauty of an image FOR ME may not FOR YOU. If you have two screen images, one of which is evenly illuminated, but another which hot-spots somewhat but has deeper black levels, one person may see the first as more beautiful and/or convincing, and the other may feel that way about the second, feeling deeper black levels enhance the beauty/realism of an image more than even illumination.


I like to talk about the objective qualities of an image...what is actually visible....but also note that our subjective reactions are certainly going to be personal/subjective to any image.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Fat Dave* /forum/post/20417958
> 
> 
> What difference would that make? I'm not making any claims or statements in this thread about my own setup and it's performance.
> 
> 
> I have an RS40 and a 168" cinemascope HP 2.8 screen in a dark theatre environment.



The reason i asked that was I wanted to understand your Regular viewing enviroment.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20417996
> 
> 
> Hey...I've been talking about the high dispersion/viewing angle effect since I joined in 2001.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But, the thing is, as I keep pointing out, we tend to be sensitive to different aspects of picture quality. What intrudes on the beauty of an image FOR ME may not FOR YOU. If you have two screen images, one of which is evenly illuminated, but another which hot-spots somewhat but has deeper black levels, one person may see the first as more beautiful and/or convincing, and the other may feel that way about the second, feeling deeper black levels enhance the beauty/realism of an image more than even illumination.




Everyone's veiwing habits are very different ...


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20417914
> 
> 
> With that much light it is a very impressive and watchable image..




"Watchable" in that you can see what's going on in the image? Yes.

"Impressive?" Well, yes in terms of the fact the image is even "watchable"

in that ambient light.


But..."Good" image? No. Those ambient light BD images have less contrast than even the worst LCD flat screens of, like, 9 years ago. Or, it's like your projector has suddenly become an ancient generation digital projector, with their low contrast.


That's the "dancing bear" aspect of these screens for me: it's not that the bear dances well (the image is not actually _excellent_ in ambient light) but that the bear can dance at all (the very fact you can still get a viewable image in ambient light is impressive). I understand fully that these screens fulfill the desire of some people to be able to watch with lights on, but for me I'm just watching a big but not terribly nice looking image, which takes away half the positives of the projection experience in the first place.


Now the BD will not look as washed out in every ambient light condition, of course. If you have some better controlled lighting it can look pretty impressive with some lights on that aren't hitting the screen. But, as noted in the recent HT mag review, all screens will look their best without ambient light.


----------



## MississippiMan

Tell ya what Frasia,


Show one single image of your screen where the room's wall color, ceiling color, floor color looks natural, and where the screen's colors don't look skewered, dull, and basically....."edit".


You KNOW you cannot do that. You have never showed such an image.


Be real about it, and stop trying to turn this back toward me and my supposed "claims", none of which I have made in any case.


This is where you were several months ago, having to answer for your screen shot's lack of quality. Only now, having improved them somewhat, your making some very myopic observations and expecting everyone to agree with you.


R Harkness nailed the whole subject down in his post above (#2214) You cannot judge a "One Trick Pony" as being a Thoroughbred just because it can bolt out of the Gate first. It has to carry it's weight around the Track and make a respectable overall showing. Win/Place/Show...all are representative of a winner....something that can perform well at several tasks.


If you start comparing a BD screen against other examples that can perform across a wider scope of viewing conditions, as well as perform almost just as good as a BD under identical conditions, your "Horse" will fail to finish anywhere in the money.


I actually tried to advise you several moths ago to stop trying to prove something and just post well composed images that show "exactly" what the BD screens can do. Such would be enough, and garner you far more respect and amiable responses. You could just let the naysayers spout off, then fade away.


Many wrote to me via PM and asked why I was bothering to do so. The reasons were obvious, and at the time you agreed wholeheartedly. But over time you've gotten swept up by your own idea of what constitutes a "excellent" screen application. Few agree with what you ascertain as being such, and for good reason.


BTW, had I simply muted the sunlight that was coming into the room in my shots, and moved to center, you would have had a real challenge to face. But just as in the past, that was not my intent. I'm simply am trying to show the fallacy behind the shots you publish. Note in my shots the natural color of the Walls, the Flooring, the White Drywall patches, the Tile on the Fireplace. Then look to the screen to see the colors there. Muted because of ambient light? Certainly. Looking better at that angle than a BD screen would/ could. Most assuredly.


Just do what you must, but do it with temperance, and good things will follow. Make exclamatory statements and claims, and you WILL get rebuttals if they cannot hold up under the scrutiny of your Peers on this Forum.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Fat Dave* /forum/post/20417865
> 
> 
> Comparing the screen frame to the projected blacks show a substantial difference. You can't claim that's black. It's clearly elevated to ~10%.
> 
> 
> [edit]
> 
> 
> Here's your screenshot with cut-and-paste pieces of your screen frame overlayed on the image:



I agree that the blacks in the picture are not as black as the frame. I wonder what the specs are on the BD in this picture (version, gain, size)?? I'll also point out that when you modified the picture with pieces of the screen frame overlayed on the image, it seemed to do a "little" something to the picture. It does not have the clarity or the punch or the contrast of the original, and it seems to be slightly lighter overall. I put two IE windows side by side to compare both images. Still, I agree that even the original does not have really deep blacks.


Still, I think, for a projector and a very large image, it's amazing that it can look that good with that much light.


When I look at the West Coast Customs photo from MississipiMan, it looks much more faded with even less ambient light. I think it was mentioned that it was the older FireHawk screen.


It would be interesting to put a 50"-65" flat panel next to the BD or FireHawk (or any others) and compare in ambient light. I'm sure the projector/screens might look more faded, but the advantage would be the size. Are some of you looking at this or already using this as a replacement for a TV?


I might consider a screen like this some day, but I don't have a brand name preference. I think it's good to have folks pointing out the pros and the cons - makes it a good thread, as long as it doesn't get personal.


Dave


----------



## ccotenj




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks* /forum/post/20418617
> 
> 
> It would be interesting to put a 50"-65" flat panel next to the BD or FireHawk (or any others) and compare in ambient light. I'm sure the projector/screens might look more faded, but the advantage would be the size. Are some of you looking at this or already using this as a replacement for a TV?



i plan on it... my kuro has already been moved into the bedroom...


even on the da-lite screen i was using, i pretty much came quickly to the conclusion that even with a washed out picture, the overwhelming size advantage of the pj would cause me to never watch the tv...


as posted earlier, i don't expect miracles... but since my desired usage seems to be pretty much in the sweet spot for this screen, i think it'll work out ok...


if it doesn't, i sell it... c'est la vie... it's an inanimate object... no need to get emotionally attached to it...


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20417747
> 
> 
> Obviously no one really means it's "gone." However, the difference in brightness between the closer and further side is so obvious I'm at a loss to understand how it's not jumping out to you. Just cover with your hand the far side 1/2 of the image and you see a decent image brightness in the closer part. Now cover the close side 1/2 and all you see is a rather unacceptably (to me) dim image of the far half of the screen. Just look at the brightness of the central Father and Son's face compared to the dimness of the two females, especially the blond woman nearer the far side. (Even better, use your hands to block out everyone but the father's face and the blond woman's face, and look how big the brightness difference is). How is this hot-spotting not excruciatingly obvious?



I tend to interpret words according to their common meanings. If someone says that off axis performance was so bad that half the screen was gone, I think they probably mean it or at least that someone might read it and believe it to be true.


I am not a photographer and I don't cherry pick my shots. I wanted to demonstrate what I see from that extreme angle. An angle, I might add that noone has ever watched anything from in my theater. I did not offer it to prove that off axis performance is as good as a plain white screen. Clearly it is not. When I originally posted that pic, I stated something like that.



That pic is a rough approximation of what you can expect from a .8 BD at a bad angle. Me? I don't think its bad and I would not mind watching something from there if I had to for some reason. Is it one of the best seats in the house? Far from it. Maybe I should learn to take a picture and about ISOs and all that. Then I could present a pretty picture but then no one would know what they should expect to see off angle. I could also post gratuitous shots of the screen looking good under controlled conditions but that wouldn't help either.


If anything, the pic overstates the dropoff in brightness. I guess I could work on this some more.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks* /forum/post/20418617
> 
> 
> I agree that the blacks in the picture are not as black as the frame.



To be fair, it's unreasonable to request that almost any (usable) screen material produce black levels as black as the surrounding frame. A screen frame is truly pitch black and no projector can do that yet. Watching a BD screen with a 2:35:1 movie (black bars) when you get certain scenes, especially bright scenes, the "black bars" can appear almost as dark as the screen frame, which is impressive. But that can be true of other screens.


The real test is low APL (dark, without bright area) images and then you'll see that virtually no screen will come very close to the blackness of the screen frame, with digital projectors. Especially once your eyes are adjusted to the dark.




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks* /forum/post/20418617
> 
> 
> Still, I think, for a projector and a very large image, it's amazing that it can look that good with that much light.



I agree. The BD screen can be simply amazing in that regard.




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks* /forum/post/20418617
> 
> 
> 
> I might consider a screen like this some day, but I don't have a brand name preference.
> 
> 
> Dave



The BD screens are absolutely terrific for their purpose, as are some other screens like the Stewart Firehawk.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20418830
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree. The BD screen can be simply amazing in that regard.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The BD screens are absolutely terrific for their purpose, as are some other screens like the Stewart Firehawk.




With regards to performance do I or You really need to go over the differences between the BD, Stewart Firehawk/Grayhawk/ST 130...


We have covered this all in the last 2-3 pages..

the DIY Corre are just late to our party..


Bottom Line you and me both know our screens Wins & Fails.....


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20419160
> 
> 
> With regards to performance do I or You really need to go over the differences between the BD, Stewart Firehawk/Grayhawk/ST 130...
> 
> 
> We have covered this all in the last 2-3 pages..
> 
> the DIY Corre are just late to our party..
> 
> 
> Bottom Line you and me both know our screens Wins & Fails.....



Actually, your the newcomer, and you have a steep learning curve to climb.


Problem is, you don't think you need to learn much if anything. Shame that.


So tell us all fraisa, why don't / won't you post some images in the manner previously suggested?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/20419218
> 
> 
> Actually, your the newcomer, and you have a steep learning curve to climb.
> 
> 
> Problem is, you don't think you need to learn much if anything. Shame that.
> 
> 
> So tell us all fraisa, why don't / won't you post some images in the manner previously suggested?



I dont think we need more screen shots from my 60$ BB Insignia camera..


The bottom line is simply this,

A diy paint mixed screen cant produce equal black levels in ambient light.


Even the stewart Firehawk G3 cant produce equal black levels in Ambient light....


----------



## Drexler




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20419276
> 
> 
> Even the stewart Firehawk G3 cant produce equal black levels in Ambient light....



Well, it depends where the ambient light is coming from. The BD is better at rejecting light from above/below whereas the FH is better at taking care of light from the sides. At least according to Art at projectorreviews...

http://www.projectorreviews.com/scre...mond/index.php


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Drexler* /forum/post/20419387
> 
> 
> Well, it depends where the ambient light is coming from. The BD is better at rejecting light from above/below whereas the FH is better at taking care of light from the sides. At least according to Art at projectorreviews...
> 
> http://www.projectorreviews.com/scre...mond/index.php



My Comments are based on my eyes review comparing the BD to the stewart Firehawk ,,

I see better darker tones from the BD based on the Stewart Samples when put up against the BD .8 and 1.4 Screen in My Room...


Again there are Wins & Fails with both Products...


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20419276
> 
> 
> I dont think we need more screen shots from my 60$ BB Insignia camera..



But what about everyone else? If your Camera is good enough to take zoomed shots that allow you to reason out remarks like the ones below? The answer is this....the BD Screen will NOT show even close to the level of Blacks you claim unless you create a situation where the Camera favors the screen's own light, and attenuates everything else. And even then, it's never going to produce ANY Black that is of a deeper hue than the surface of the Screen itself. "Perceived" contrast is not the same thing as "real' contrast. Only hitting the Screen with a PJ'd image that has a significantly deeper level of "Native Contrast" can hope to do the screen better.


But that's concerning the images you take with a camera, and how they present your case. When your watching a Movie in the dark or in a lighted room, sitting dead center in front of the screen, your eyes certainly can render the projected image just fine, I'm sure. Just don't get up to go across the room when something good is on the screen.



> Quote:
> The bottom line is simply this,
> 
> A diy paint mixed screen cant produce equal black levels in ambient light.



You certainly are fixated on a point no one has tried to make on this Thread. Your wrong too...but that also is not on the agenda here.



> Quote:
> Even the stewart Firehawk G3 cant produce equal black levels in Ambient light....



I wouldn't venture to say....and most likely you shouldn't either considering your own primary level knowledge base and testing abilities...all that without even considering your own position as a Retailer of BD screens and the subsequent need to convince others of such a point.


What I would say though is that the G3, when hit with sufficient lumens and decent contrasty imagery, can do a better job across a wider variety of uses than can the BD, and therein satisfy the needs of a much larger slice of the Consumer pie. They still gotta pay a bundle, but at least they get more value for the money.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20419427
> 
> 
> My Comments are based on my eyes review comparing the BD to the stewart Firehawk ,,
> 
> I see better darker tones from the BD based on the Stewart Samples when put up against the BD .8 and 1.4 Screen in My Room...



Well gee whiz. Let's consider that for a moment. The BD 1.4 is a 'darker Gray' screen than the Stewart FH. The BD .8 is darker still. That's a distinct advantage there. But delivering deeper Blacks are not everything a Screen needs to do. Consider this, any Pj with sufficient lumens can plaster a image on a nearly black surface and wipe the floor with the BD screens as far as Black levels are concerned. but as previously stated....Blacks are not the only aspect of an viable, watchable image.


It's plain enough you have no vested interest to consider such points, let alone agree with any of them. So I leave you to the more willing hands about you. You'd do well to read things they relate more carefully and glean some real understanding about things. I believe that amounts to the same advice I've given you in the past, with only the best of intentions.


----------



## Kevin 3000

Thanks for the info guys which reinforces not just my findings, comparisons but magazine reviews YET AGAIN (search this thread for samo samo ramblings) that no other screen can match the ambient light room levels of the Black Diamond .8 gain.


If i had a brighter PJ i would upgrade from my 1.4 gain BD to a (DIY paint mix/firehawkG3 IN YOUR DREAMS)

BLACK DIAMOND .8 gain nothing else comes close to the ambient viewing levels especially in a room like mine with no off axis viewing.


Yes other screens do a good job in their given DARKER environments but this BD can not be beaten for what its designed to do and please be aware this thread is full of people with other agendas so get a DEMO of the screens and see for yourselves only YOU can decide whats best for YOUR circumstances i did and purchased a Black Diamond... IMO owner of a 1.4 for 16months not a dealer.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/20419663
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well gee whiz. Let's consider that for a moment. The BD 1.4 is a 'darker Gray' screen than the Stewart FH. The BD .8 is darker still. That's a distinct advantage there. But delivering deeper Blacks are not everything a Screen needs to do. Consider this, any Pj with sufficient lumens can plaster a image on a nearly black surface and wipe the floor with the BD screens as far as Black levels are concerned. but as previously stated....Blacks are not the only aspect of an viable, watchable image.
> 
> 
> .



Again this above statement shows how late to the party you are..


The new 1.4 Gen III is now a darker shade and is almost just as dark as the .8 Gen III Screen,

its very hard by eye to tell the 2 apart...

But here is the Real issue,

In the recent screen it article , that discusses how to choose a screen for your room, They show an Elite Screen and A Black Diamond.

http://www.hometheater.com/content/h...ection-screens 


They mention stewart but dont show a picture.

This is how the Market is changing..

No longer dominated by 1 Screen Company..

DIY Screens are not even mentioned and Why?

If one is serious about doing a screen they dont consider a Diy Screen and its not because of Pricing but because of Performance.


the Black diamond shines in Ambient Light conditions, Producing awesome Black Levels and Gets a Big A+ at Reducing Light Scatter.....

but again there is Win & Fail ...

The fail to the Win is Reduced Viewing Cone on the .8 Gain ..

But if one plans there room right and goes with a Proper size screen for there room that can reduce Side angle viewing..


I have actually put a Light at 2 Feet infront of my black diamond and had it go across the Front of the screen and the image was not effected...

Then take that shined light thats going across the front of the screen and put it to a full side wall and it still wont be effected by the side light coming back...


----------



## Lawguy

All of this banter back and forth about whether the Firehawk or the BD does a better job is futile. A simple picture tells more. This picture is taken from my full BD review here . It was taken with the lights on. It is a .8 BD screen with a swatch of Firehawk on a part of the image. To me, if better black levels with the lights on is your goal, the BD is definitely the better solution. I think this picture demonstrates this.












Also, I am so tired of seeing screen shots of DIY screens with no black areas or areas where the blacks are completely washed out. If you want to watch sports or the news with the lights on, buy the brightest projector you can find and a plain white screen and you can easily accomplish this. You'll save a lot of money too. If you want decent CONTRAST, meaning good black levels with the lights on, that is what the BD and other ambient light screens are about. "Look! its a picture of an almost entirely blue screen and the lights are on." Big deal.


I am cranky this morning.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20420237
> 
> 
> I can actually put a Light at 2 Feet infront of my black diamond and shine it across the Front of the screen and the image is not effected...



That must be a dim light.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20420256
> 
> 
> That must be a dim light.



Actually it was a Projector


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20420247
> 
> 
> All of this banter back and forth about whether the Firehawk or the BD does a better job is futile. A simple picture tells more. This picture is taken from my full BD review here . It was taken with the lights on. It is a .8 BD screen with a swatch of Firehawk on a part of the image. To me, if better black levels with the lights on is your goal, the BD is definitely the better solution. I think this picture demonstrates this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, I am so tired of seeing screen shots of DIY screens with no black areas or areas where the blacks are completely washed out. If you want to watch sports or the news with the lights on, buy the brightest projector you can find and a plain white screen and you can easily accomplish this. You'll save a lot of money too. If you want decent CONTRAST, meaning good black levels with the lights on, that is what the BD and other ambient light screens are about. "Look! its a picture of an almost entirely blue screen and the lights are on." Big deal.
> 
> 
> I am cranky this morning.



I actually did that test yesturday and found the same results.

I put a 8x10 sample of the fire hawk then put the 1.4 gain BD smaller size on top of that then put them to the bd .8 screen....

will edit in the pics..




























As you can see in these shots that the 1.4 and the .8 gain blend and are hard to make out the difference,

but the Firehawk is easliy noticable...


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20418830
> 
> 
> The real test is low APL (dark, without bright area) . . .



This is true because this kind of scene is actually low contrast. So, you are testing both the quality of the filmed image, how black the projector's blackest black can be and what effect the screen has on black levels.


My BD is paired with a JVC RS20, which has good black levels. With the right content, low APL scenes look really outstanding.


I say "with the right content." Last week I was watching a film called Let Me In. It opens with a low APL scene but it didn't look right. I wondered if I had somehow screwed up my video levels or something. It turns out that that scene was just not filmed very well. Blacks were not black to begin with. I don't know if it was the cameras that were used or the lighting or something else. So, the source is always a limiting factor.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20420281
> 
> 
> Actually it was a Projector



Okay, I see what you mean.


The light from that other projector isn't shining on the BD. Of course there will be some stray light coming from the other projector but I don't think that a white screen would get washed out much in that circumstance either. Also, I am not sure how many people out there are trying to manage that kind of ambient light situation . . .


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20420299
> 
> 
> Okay, I see what you mean.
> 
> 
> The light from that other projector isn't shining on the BD. Of course there will be some stray light coming from the other projector but I don't think that a white screen would get washed out much in that circumstance either. Also, I am not sure how many people out there are trying to manage that kind of ambient light situation . . .



The big thing that i was amazed with was how the BD handled the Side reflected wall light

Thats alot of light coming back into the room off that wall and the bd ignored it....


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20420352
> 
> 
> The big thing that i was amazed with was how the BD handled the Side reflected wall light
> 
> Thats alot of light coming back into the room off that wall and the bd ignored it....



I agree that the BD does a very good job with those kinds of reflections.


----------



## R Harkness

That shot from fraisa of the two movie images, one on the wall the other on the BD screen, does a good job of showing how the BD screen cuts down room reflections - not only reflections back to the image but the way it decreases light spread on to the surroundings (e.g. ceiling). That's a type of benefit that, I think, is underappreciated until you experience it. The less the environment around the screen lights up the better, and that to me is a *big* plus for the BD screens, particularly the .8 gain.


I'd guess that if you lived with a BD screen for a while, especially in a room with lighter decor, it could be fairly annoying to go back to a white screen, at least for that issue.


----------



## bud16415




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20420247
> 
> 
> All of this banter back and forth about whether the Firehawk or the BD does a better job is futile. A simple picture tells more. This picture is taken from my full BD review here . It was taken with the lights on. It is a .8 BD screen with a swatch of Firehawk on a part of the image. To me, if better black levels with the lights on is your goal, the BD is definitely the better solution. I think this picture demonstrates this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, I am so tired of seeing screen shots of DIY screens with no black areas or areas where the blacks are completely washed out. If you want to watch sports or the news with the lights on, buy the brightest projector you can find and a plain white screen and you can easily accomplish this. You'll save a lot of money too. If you want decent CONTRAST, meaning good black levels with the lights on, that is what the BD and other ambient light screens are about. "Look! its a picture of an almost entirely blue screen and the lights are on." Big deal.
> 
> 
> I am cranky this morning.



If you view the above photo or any comparison screen shots perception plays a role in what the eye sees. To remove that variable and try and be more subjective use a color picker tool and measure closely similar areas each side of the sample line. In doing this I measure the dark band thru the middle as such. FH RGB 65,37,33 or avg of 45 / BD RGB 63,34,36 or avg of 44 measuring a close spot on the ceiling bright area, I get FH RGB 248,254,254 or avg 252 / BD RGB 235,250,253 or avg 246.

Well within any margin of error you could say they both have the same CR. But to visual perception the brighter area of one could well be altering the perception of the other not to mention the surrounding frame and room you sit in. Side by sides looked at this way are almost useless to draw any conclusions from without control areas put into the image being projected. One observation that can be made when zooming in on the image and it is a very small one at that is when testing the colors within that black band (back wall) in the photo there is more variances in the FH sample while making small steps than the BD sample. This might be a clue to what screen does better with what some call shadow detail, or it could be the projector was actually in better calibration with the ambient on the FH sample.

IMHO there is little to learn in split screen comparisons (within the same photo) done without controls and nothing to learn in comparisons photo to photo.


As to DIY efforts (Gray + Gain) There are people evaluating things and making claims based around feelings and desires and others doing their best to apply science and test fairly. Same there as here.

If there is a plus to DIY in terms of learning it would be most that have experimented with 100's of samples where the variables changed are just one at a time. It's a great way to figure out what and how things work and then you can take that knowledge and apply it to a commercial screen selection.

I will disagree with the part "if you want to watch sports and news with lights on" Yes buy a projector as bright as you can get maybe 10 times brighter than needed, but not a white screen, go neutral gray and one that will attenuate about 6 times of that surplus light. Then treat the walls and ceiling close to the screen with black, put on your sunglasses, sit back and enjoy.










Just my opinion and I could be wrong.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bud16415* /forum/post/20420918
> 
> 
> If you view the above photo or any comparison screen shots perception plays a role in what the eye sees. To remove that variable and try and be more subjective use a color picker tool and measure closely similar areas each side of the sample line. In doing this I measure the dark band thru the middle as such. FH RGB 65,37,33 or avg of 45 / BD RGB 63,34,36 or avg of 44 measuring a close spot on the ceiling bright area, I get FH RGB 248,254,254 or avg 252 / BD RGB 235,250,253 or avg 246.



I understand what you are saying and I thought about doing this kind of test. I rejected the idea because the best way to do something like that is with test patterns. If I took an ANSI contrast test pattern and did the kind of analysis that you suggest, I could get cold numbers. I was not interested in doing something like that because test patterns are not real material. I chose the scene that I did for the reasons that I spelled out in the article: it has significant areas of bright and dark. Note that the blackest areas in that image are not video black. They are above that level. Still, this is the real world, not a pattern.


Also, we tend to use the terms black level and contrast interchangably. But, they are not really interchangable. A higher contrast usually equates with a lower black level but that is not always so. What we really need is a good black level with an acceptable level of brightness. A higher contrast image may be subjectively less pleasing if it has a black level that is higher.


So, since, so much of this is subjective and cannot reduced to pure numbers, I went with the picture approach. Believe me, of the samples that I looked at, the Firehawk was one of my favorites overall.


I have become a big fan of these kinds of ambient light driven screens because I think they generally produce big benefits with acceptable compromises to image quality. If better black levels are your goals, the .8 BD is king, in my opinion.


I have nothing against DIY efforts at all. I am generally a DIY kind of guy myself. I kind of feel that the same few people keep posting the same kinds of shots and that they are not understanding that there is more to picture quality than a bright picture. I don't think that there is anything magical about the BD or the FH or any other ambient light rejecting screen. But, there is probably a great deal of good design and engineering to get things the way that they are. I am sure that a DIYer with the right motivation and materials could do something similar. The magic here, if you want to call it that, is how to get a bright image with such a dark substrate yet preserve decent viewing angles in the process. I had a Sony Dynaclear screen, a Black screen. Half of the image from that screen really did disappear when you were off axis and it really back speckling. So, Sony could not crack that nut. You have to really give Screen Innovations credit for what they have pulled off.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bud16415* /forum/post/20420918
> 
> 
> I will disagree with the part "if you want to watch sports and news with lights on" Yes buy a projector as bright as you can get maybe 10 times brighter than needed, but not a white screen, go neutral gray and one that will attenuate about 6 times of that surplus light. Then treat the walls and ceiling close to the screen with black, put on your sunglasses, sit back and enjoy.



A valid approach! But, probably more expensive because I would imagine that a projector with the kind of lumens that you are talking abouy would be really expensive.


I have not priced it.


----------



## bud16415




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20421191
> 
> 
> A valid approach! But, probably more expensive because I would imagine that a projector with the kind of lumens that you are talking abouy would be really expensive.
> 
> 
> I have not priced it.



I totally understand the tradeoffs one makes when writing a article for general public consumption. Get all technical with ANSI checkerboards and 99% of your readers get lost with no desire to look at data.


Thanks for pointing out that black level and contrast are not one in the same and in general a gray screen works no different than a ND filter in lowering what is white and black equally. when you are in a light diminished room it's our eyes that adjust and reset what is the white threshold, thus changing the perception of contrast. And in a ANSI like image the bright areas constrict the eyes iris and thus allow us to perceive a deeper black.


The test images that were designed over on the DIY side were made to have some be real life images only symmetrical about the screen centerline others were designed to be ANSI patterns or gray bars etc. they all are still .jpg images that have designed into them two white 255 or clear windows to let pure projector light thru. Those windows were used to attach ether color samples to the screen or a calibration known gray sample card. The idea being when photos are taken the card being illuminated by the 6500 light would allow a reference in the photo to what the camera was changing. Not a perfect system but the best that could be had that people anywhere could contribute date to a collective method without buying lots of expensive light measuring equipment. It didn’t work to bad and was vastly better than the this looked better than that method of comparing two different peoples photos. Even this simple method wasn’t widely embraced.


As to the light canon approach to ambient light, Sports bars to living rooms, I proposed. those projectors are some of the least expensive as they fall into the forbidden business projector category. What good is a million to one native CR if even a couple of candles in the room reduce it to half that and enough light on the viewing end to call it a living room takes it to 300:1. If you know you have that problem or desire for ambient and you understand that 400:1 or 500:1 CR is going to allow fantastic perceived contrast and not so bad real life contrast in dark images when the lights are down. Go for that 3000 or 4000 lumen canon with a spec like 2000:1 CR, look around for one that has half way good reviews as to color balance, know you might not have perfect color calibration and get a huge screen dark screen maybe a BD.8 or something that eats some lumens. The more lumens the darker the screen the more the ambient tolerance IMO.


Watch some football and don’t sit in the dark with your buddies.










Like you the surprise aspect is how well that same setup is going to work when you want to go lights out. It won't be as film like as the million to one machine in the bat cave, but it will remind you more of a 150 inch plasma.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20420724
> 
> 
> That shot from fraisa of the two movie images, one on the wall the other on the BD screen, does a good job of showing how the BD screen cuts down room reflections - not only reflections back to the image but the way it decreases light spread on to the surroundings (e.g. ceiling). That's a type of benefit that, I think, is underappreciated until you experience it. The less the environment around the screen lights up the better, and that to me is a *big* plus for the BD screens, particularly the .8 gain.
> 
> 
> I'd guess that if you lived with a BD screen for a while, especially in a room with lighter decor, it could be fairly annoying to go back to a white screen, at least for that issue.



Ya that shot is an awesome display of what the BD can do..

Of which alot of other screens Cant do....


Again this is one major benifit that i really enjoy in my room because of my rooms lighter paint and Carpet...


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20421191
> 
> 
> A valid approach! But, probably more expensive because I would imagine that a projector with the kind of lumens that you are talking abouy would be really expensive.
> 
> 
> I have not priced it.



I have priced out a 10,000 lumens projector ...

Panny would set you back 100,000 Big Ones....


I would rather get a proper screen ....


----------



## newfmp3

Let me ask this, what's msrp on a 110" or 120" bd? Not asking where to just an idea as to cost and value of this "miracle" screen....which I admit has me intrigued.


----------



## Sherardp




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *newfmp3* /forum/post/20423978
> 
> 
> Let me ask this, what's msrp on a 110" or 120" bd? Not asking where to just an idea as to cost and value of this "miracle" screen....which I admit has me intrigued.



I'm a bit interested myself, I would need this in 126" though. Is that even available, if not the 120" would work. Can someone chime in on this.


----------



## ccotenj

^^^


here ya go...

clicky 


113" is the biggest you can get in a 16X9...


----------



## Drexler

People are different, this picture shows why I couldn't live with this screen or any other high contrast angular reflective screen for that matter (e.g. the FH). To me the hotspotting is glaringly obvious. Look at the sky on the left and the right side respectively. It's much darker on the right. Now take a look at the image projected on the wall and the sky looks evenly illuminated.


I had a firehawk type screen before (Euroscreen ReAct) and the uneven illumination just screamed out to me so I eventually had to get rid of it. Horrible to watch soccer when it looks like the lights are off on the other half of the field. I'd trade black levels for even illumination any day. Unlike Rich H I'm OK with the HP since as long as I sit in one spot the screen looks perfectly even - and I don't normally walk around while watching. I don't really notice any brightness shift while shifting in my seat either - maybe it's because I have the 2.4 version?


Anyways, it shows how differently people prioritize an why one cannot recommend a screen to others based on ones owns experiences. Go look for yourself! You might not think as me!










It's easy for a newbie to miss these kind of issues though as it takes some experience before you notice them. In my case it came creeping up on me after I got the screen and in the end I couldn't do anything but to stare at the flaws... Not the way to enjoy your projector.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20420281


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Drexler* /forum/post/20424168
> 
> 
> People are different, this picture shows why I couldn't live with this screen or any other high contrast angular reflective screen for that matter (e.g. the FH).
> 
> 
> Anyways, it shows how differently people prioritize an why one cannot recommend a screen to others based on ones owns experiences. Go look for yourself! You might not think as me!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .



Totally missing the Point...

But first let me back up.. Again.

Win / Fail....

What we gain in Ambient light viewing, Amazing Black Levels and Reduced Light scatter it comes

at a Cost ..

With the .8 gain its Viewing Angle...


This shot shows the Viewing Angle Limits but thats not the point of the shot..

The point is all that light coming off the side wall doesnt Effect the BD...










Good luck doing this with any other screen...

In this 2 images in one Room,

i have raised the bar really high..

There is alot of light comeing off the wall plus we got 2 projectors shoting at different angles in different directions...


Again Blacks ,, Side Light Rejection , Reduced Light scatter All BD's Wins...

....

Regarding the Firehawk that sample shot of the FH mixed with the bd 1.4 onto the .8 gain speaks the silent words....

I also have shots of the same type of test with the Grayhawk and ST 130...

Saving those for the right moment....










Yes the Largest BD Size is 113...

Unless you go 2.35 or 2.40 then its 142 inches....

Go big or Go home is what i like to say...

Cheers


----------



## Drexler




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20424287
> 
> 
> Totally missing the Point...
> 
> But first let me back up.. Again.
> 
> Win / Fail....
> 
> What we gain in Ambient light viewing, Amazing Black Levels and Reduced Light scatter it comes
> 
> at a Cost ..
> 
> With the .8 gain its Viewing Angle...
> 
> 
> This shot shows the Viewing Angle Limits but thats not the point of the shot..
> 
> The point is all that light coming off the side wall doesnt Effect the BD...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good luck doing this with any other screen...
> 
> In this 2 images in one Room,
> 
> i have raised the bar really high..
> 
> There is alot of light comeing off the wall plus we got 2 projectors shoting at different angles in different directions...
> 
> 
> Again Blacks ,, Side Light Rejection , Reduced Light scatter All BD's Wins...
> 
> ....
> 
> Regarding the Firehawk that sample shot of the FH mixed with the bd 1.4 onto the .8 gain speaks the silent words....
> 
> I also have shots of the same type of test with the Grayhawk and ST 130...
> 
> Saving those for the right moment....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes the Largest BD Size is 113...
> 
> Unless you go 2.35 or 2.40 then its 142 inches....
> 
> Go big or Go home is what i like to say...
> 
> Cheers



That wasn't my point. Yes I know it's very impressive in the way it not scattering any light and how it preserves contrast compared to other screens. However, to me the hotspotting issue makes it a no go from the start no matter how good its other properties are. I can't live with it and I'd rather have lower contrast than hotspotting. I just used your screenshot to illustrate my point of view (yes I know you posted it for another purpose).


My point was that we have different priorities. What's totally unaccepteble to me is acceptable to someone else and vice versa. Therefore one can never say that "this screen is best for this application - period". All screens have drawbacks and which is best for you in a particular environment depends on which drawback you can live with, and that my friend, is totally subjective.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Drexler* /forum/post/20424635
> 
> 
> That wasn't my point. Yes I know it's very impressive in the way it not scattering any light and how it preserves contrast compared to other screens. However, to me the hotspotting issue makes it a no go from the start no matter how good its other properties are. I can't live with it and I'd rather have lower contrast than hotspotting. I just used your screenshot to illustrate my point of view (yes I know you posted it for another purpose).
> 
> 
> My point was that we have different priorities. What's totally unaccepteble to me is acceptable to someone else and vice versa. Therefore one can never say that "this screen is best for this application - period". All screens have drawbacks and which is best for you in a particular environment depends on which drawback you can live with, and that my friend, is totally subjective.



One reason why people need to see Screens in person and view for there own eyes...

I will agree that everyone has different viewing Priorities..


For one Ambient light viewing could be the Driver, Others it could be Black levels or Reducing of Light scatter...


You really need to view the last page and see those screen testing comparisions of the bd and Firehawk,

I believe it has huge importance since others have compared it to the BD.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Drexler* /forum/post/20424168
> 
> 
> People are different, this picture shows why I couldn't live with this screen or any other high contrast angular reflective screen for that matter (e.g. the FH).



What kind of room do you have? There can be some people who would be very bothered by the limited viewing angles but who have rooms in which every seat in the house has a good viewing angle and is not affected.


There is definitely value to torture testing screens to see how they work and to understand their limitations. In fact, it is necessary and there is not enough of this being done, in my opinion. Part of learning about a screen is to understand that, although a screen may be limited in some way, that that particular limitation may not present itself in your room, or that it presents itself in a limited or acceptable way. At a certain point, we all sit down and watch movies (or something else). To me, the question is, what will my family or guests see when they plant their butts in the seats. I am much less interested in what someone would see when standing at a 75 degree angle to the screen.


Again, it is all about the compromises someone is willing to accept. Most people with white screens are accepting poorer on-screen contrast and are throwing away a good portion of what they paid extra money for with that higher end projector. I was very surprised at how much the picture quality improved for me with the BD even though I have many walls and ceiling treated with black velvet. To me having experienced both, I know what compromises I am willing to make. I don't feel like I am sacrificing much in exchange for what I am getting.


----------



## Kevin 3000

*Set your display distinguishing all squares A to Z altering brightness/contrast

then realize the magic of a BLACK DIAMOND 1.4 in BIGHT room conditions.

More contrast on screen in real life....*


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20425221
> 
> 
> Most people with white screens are accepting poorer on-screen contrast and are throwing away a good portion of what they paid extra money for with that higher end projector. I was very surprised at how much the picture quality improved for me with the BD even though I have many walls and ceiling treated with black velvet.



Given I'm a contrast/black level fiend, I find those types of observations intriguing. How close to a "bat cave" have you been able to make your room? (I know that real-world truly non-reflective rooms are very, very rare, hence the value of BD-type screens).


I've been able to make my room quite close to a bat cave for movie viewing. However, it's still possible that my room is influencing the picture, though I don't know if I've got it down to a visually negligible amount or not. I do know that I'm seeing the most dynamic contrast I've personally seen from projected images (RS20 projector on my ST-130 white screen). And that includes seeing the BD screens many times.


The real proof in the pudding for me would be to have an actual full size BD screen in my room, to see if black levels/contrast actually improved to any visible degree. Unfortunately screen samples never tell the full tale and can be misleading in doing direct comparisons. I have the DNP samples and they do a pretty crazy job of rejecting light vertically, though I can only infer from their behavior that a full screen of DNP material would hot-spot like crazy.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20425491
> 
> *Set your display distinguishing all squares A to Z altering brightness/contrast
> 
> then realize the magic of a BLACK DIAMOND 1.4 in BIGHT room conditions.
> 
> More contrast on screen in real life....*



Those black levels are amazing...

I never get tried of seeing your Room...


----------



## Drexler




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20427238
> 
> 
> Those black levels are amazing...
> 
> I never get tried of seeing your Room...



Ehmm, am I missing something here? To me those blacks looks a medium to light grey.


----------



## Drexler




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20425221
> 
> 
> What kind of room do you have? There can be some people who would be very bothered by the limited viewing angles but who have rooms in which every seat in the house has a good viewing angle and is not affected.



At the moment I have a light coloured living room, but I'm moving to Europe in about a month. Anyways, I will have all seating positions within the width of the screen which will be a 110-120'' wide cinemascope screen, approx. 1.2 screen width seating distance. Since it will be in a rented apartment I can't really paint the walls, but I will try to cover up all surfaces in the direct vicinity to the screen with dark curtains/black fabric or something of the sort. The room will not be a batcave however.


I have an HP at the moment and I'm leaning towards getting another one. I can say I'm absolutely allergic to hotspotting, which I easily could see on my old Firehawk type screen even when sitting dead center. I was thinking that a curved screen might mitigate the hotspotting though. Has anyone had any experience with that???







(I have an ISCO II, VW85 combo)


A curved FH might do the trick, but they are really steep...







I don't know how long I will stay in this place and if the screen will fit my next apartment either. Doesn't make a lot of sense to spend too much on something I might have to get rid of in two years or so either.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Drexler* /forum/post/20427983
> 
> 
> Ehmm, am I missing something here? To me those blacks looks a medium to light grey.



No, you aren't missing anything. Still not sure what we are supposed to get out of such screen shots. The fact you can see an image with some lights on? Cool. Is it a good image with good contrast? Er...no...not remotely.


This is a comment on the screen shot(s), since they are posted for our admiration, not necessarily on the screen itself.


----------



## ccotenj

since my screen comes tomorrow, it's time to ask this question...


i have cats... it WILL get cat fur on it... what's the best way to clean stuff like that off these things?


the assembly directions make it pretty clear that i should keep my grubby paws off of it... so brushing with my hands would seem to be out...


ideas/comments?


----------



## Lawguy

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Drexler* 
At the moment I have a light coloured living room, but I'm moving to Europe in about a month. Anyways, I will have all seating positions within the width of the screen which will be a 110-120'' wide cinemascope screen, approx. 1.2 screen width seating distance. Since it will be in a rented apartment I can't really paint the walls, but I will try to cover up all surfaces in the direct vicinity to the screen with dark curtains/black fabric or something of the sort. The room will not be a batcave however.


I have an HP at the moment and I'm leaning towards getting another one. I can say I'm absolutely allergic to hotspotting, which I easily could see on my old Firehawk type screen even when sitting dead center. I was thinking that a curved screen might mitigate the hotspotting though. Has anyone had any experience with that???







(I have an ISCO II, VW85 combo)


A curved FH might do the trick, but they are really steep...







I don't know how long I will stay in this place and if the screen will fit my next apartment either. Doesn't make a lot of sense to spend too much on something I might have to get rid of in two years or so either.
It's too bad because I think the BD would work very well for you in that room. What kind of screen was this firehawk "type" that you had?


I was/still am a fan of the high power. I had one before the BD. It is obviously a completely different kind of screen. It definitely has its merits but preserving contrast really isn't among them.


You can see some comparison shots of the BD with the HP in my review.


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *ccotenj* 
since my screen comes tomorrow, it's time to ask this question...


i have cats... it WILL get cat fur on it... what's the best way to clean stuff like that off these things?


the assembly directions make it pretty clear that i should keep my grubby paws off of it... so brushing with my hands would seem to be out...


ideas/comments?
I use a Rolling Lint Brush... borrowed it from my wifes closet and Works Awesome....

I also use a Swiffer Duster to Dust the screen 1 use only ...

Always use brand new just to be safe


----------



## Drexler

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Lawguy* 
It's too bad because I think the BD would work very well for you in that room. What kind of screen was this firehawk "type" that you had?


I was/still am a fan of the high power. I had one before the BD. It is obviously a completely different kind of screen. It definitely has its merits but preserving contrast really isn't among them.


You can see some comparison shots of the BD with the HP in my review.
It was a Euroscreen React, a grey screen with 1.2 gain ( http://www.bjurab.se/news/newsarticle.asp?id=68 ). I have seen the FH in many occasions and the difference is mostly a less grainy structure and higher brightness on the FH. (The React doesn't really reach its advertised gain).


I see clear hotspotting on the FH at my dealers when I view from my preferred seating position as well and I just can't accept it. Curving might fix it, but I have never seen a curved FH, nor do I know where I can.


Anyhow, just read in the HP thread that Da-Lite has released a new High Contrast High Power material. That might just be the ticket!


----------



## dovercat

bud16415 "I proposed. those projectors are some of the least expensive as they fall into the forbidden business projector category. What good is a million to one native CR if even a couple of candles in the room reduce it to half that and enough light on the viewing end to call it a living room takes it to 300:1." "Go for that 3000 or 4000 lumen canon with a spec like 2000:1 CR, look around for one that has half way good reviews as to color balance, know you might not have perfect color calibration and get a huge screen dark screen"


fraisa "I have priced out a 10,000 lumens projector ... Panny would set you back 100,000 Big Ones...." "I would rather get a proper screen...."


Cine4home.de did some experiments using 6000 Lumen, and 3000 Lumen projectors with very dark screens. These projectors did not cost much more than a Epson 9700UB and Black diamond screen combined in the case of the 6000 Lumen, or the Epson 9700UB on its own for the 3000 Lumen. Second hand high lumen projectors can also be had for peanuts, I have bought 3000 lumen 2500:1 projectors for


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *dovercat* 
bud16415


fraisa "I have priced out a 10,000 lumens projector ... Panny would set you back 100,000 Big Ones...." "I would rather get a proper screen...."


Cine4home.de did some experiments using 6000 Lumen, and 3000 Lumen projectors with very dark screens. These projectors did not cost much more than a Epson 9700UB and Black diamond screen combined in the case of the 6000 Lumen, or the Epson 9700UB on its own for the 3000 Lumen. Second hand high lumen projectors can be had for peanuts.


.



I would rather keep it simple and call it a day.

Sexy Black Diamond and Sexy Projector equals Sexy Image...


----------



## BobL

Drexler,


A curved screen does help wit hot spotting and is a good solution but pricey. Angular reflective screens do not reflect as much light to the viewing area from the sides of the screens as the center of the screen. The center area is brighter than the sides and as you get off angle the hot spotting shifts. Curving the screen helps bring more of that light from the sides towards the viewing area. Retro-reflective screens such as the Da-lite High power do a better job of reflecting more light to the viewing area but have their own trade offs.


If you can do a curved screen I think you will enjoy it! IMHO, I think they just look cool too!


Bob


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BobL* /forum/post/20429707
> 
> 
> Drexler,
> 
> 
> A curved screen does help wit hot spotting and is a good solution but pricey. Angular reflective screens do not reflect as much light to the viewing area from the sides of the screens as the center of the screen. The center area is brighter than the sides and as you get off angle the hot spotting shifts. Curving the screen helps bring more of that light from the sides towards the viewing area. Retro-reflective screens such as the Da-lite High power do a better job of reflecting more light to the viewing area but have their own trade offs.
> 
> 
> If you can do a curved screen I think you will enjoy it! IMHO, I think they just look cool too!
> 
> 
> Bob



Also since this is a Black Diamond thread ,

The BD is availible in the Curved Style..

link to the video....

http://www.screeninnovations.com/vid...install-video/


----------



## BobL

If you do a curved screen I would highly recommend a dealer with experience in this area. Because the radius of the curve needs to be calculated for the PJ, lens, and throw. Just buying a stock curved screen could turn into a nightmare during set up if this is not all correct and calculated. You'll end up with pincushion or barrel distortion.


----------



## dovercat




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20429175
> 
> 
> I would rather keep it simple and call it a day.
> 
> Sexy Black Diamond and Sexy Projector equals Sexy Image...



A pity as you offer calibration services, and seem so willing to spend your time taking photos showing off the screen.


So I can only speculate.

Screen Innovations claim it increases projector contrast over 900%, enabling viewing with the lights on, and even improves contrast by 900% with the lights off. I guess that would mean Black Diamond rejects at the least favorable angles at most 9 x more ambient light than it accepts from its most favored angle. So 0.8 gain at its most favored angle, 0.8/9 = 0.089 at the least favored angle. Alternatively it could mean it is 9x less gain than a matt white 1 gain screen at the least favored angle, 0.111 gain.


That is maybe 28% or 3% better light rejection than my example 0.114 gain screen with 6000 lumen projector, but only at its least favored angle, while the 0.114 gain is for all light no matter what the angle. So I doubt it is going to perform much better unless light angles are optimized.


But my example was only 23fL white level 100" screen. If you wanted 35fL 100" then the 6000 lumen projector needs a 0.173 gain screen and I would hope a 100" 0.8 gain Black Diamond out performs it using a 1300 lumen projector. If you wanted 50fL the 6000 lumen projector now needs a 0.247 gain screen and a 1700 lumen projector with a Black Diamond would again hopefully out perform it.


Other review blurbs on Black Diamond claim a more modest 300% or more improvement in contrast, 3 x less gain than 0.8 is 0.267 gain, 3 x less gain than matt white is 0.333 gain, at less favored angles. Less light rejection than my example 23fL 100" 0.228 gain screen with 3000 lumen projector gets at all angles.


But again as you up screen white level, the limited viewing angle of the Black Diamond should produce an advantage. 35ftL is 3000 lumens with a 0.346 gain 100" screen, 50ftL is 3000 lumens with a 0.494 gain 100" screen.


However if the latter 300% example is more true to Black Diamond performance I doubt a 100" Black Diamond screen it is going to outperform a 6000 lumen projector with a darker matt screen, and for 23fL or 35fL 100" screen it might not be much better than a 3000 lumen projector and a dark matt screen.


I agree the Black Diamond has the advantage of a limited viewing angle enabling it to use lower lumen projectors in ambient light conditions while hopefully maintaing decent ambient light rejection. In light controlled rooms it also reduces the amount of projector screen light bouncing around the room and reducing contrast by bouncing back on to screen.


But my examples using very high lumen projectors and very dark screens produced very low on screen contrast figures with even relatively dim ambient light, let alone a normally lit living room. So it would be nice to know how much better a Black Diamond would perform in such front projector unfreindly environments.


Amazingly low contrast ratios produce watchable images. According to a projector total environment dynamic range calculator you only need 10-20:1 for a conference room rear or front screen, 15-30:1 for home media and entertainment rear screen, 30-50:1 for home media and entertainment front screen, 30-50:1 for staged events, at least 500-1,000:1 for a theater or screening room.


Maybe I am being too pessimistic about front projector performance in ambient light and too cynical of Screen Innovations marketing claims.

At the moment I would not pay several thousands of dollars for a 200,000:1 contrast projector and several thousands for a contrast enhancing by 900% screen, and expect to get "no loss of picture quality with the lights on" due to a screen "that absorbs all unwanted ambient light in a room. Ambient light is absorbed above, below, and even in the path of the projector, allowing the screen to maintain and preserve the projectors contrast. Only the projectors light is reflected back into the viewers eyes"

I would only hope to get a watchable image from a front projector with the lights on.


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20428319
> 
> 
> No, you aren't missing anything. Still not sure what we are supposed to get out of such screen shots. The fact you can see an image with some lights on? Cool. Is it a good image with good contrast? Er...no...not remotely.
> 
> 
> This is a comment on the screen shot(s), since they are posted for our admiration, not necessarily on the screen itself.



R Harkness

This screen being .6 gain higher than its .8 gain brother in this extream (contrast test not HDTV bright colourful images ) conditions, i photographed it to show just how much light in a room can be achieved and still be able to enjoy the image, if i were in the market for a screen these photos in these conditions would push me to get a DEMO, the main reason for posting mine not admiration purposes. i am sure others realized this.


fraisa/Lawguy

I understand the reasons for your enthusiasm (dealers or not) and are doing an outstanding job in promoting the attributes of these screens getting people to take notice and see how the benefits outweigh the negatives.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20430256
> 
> 
> fraisa/Lawguy
> 
> I understand the reasons for your enthusiasm (dealers or not) and are doing an outstanding job in promoting the attributes of these screens getting people to take notice and see how the benefits outweigh the negatives.



I am not a dealer, just a fan.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Drexler* /forum/post/20428784
> 
> 
> Anyhow, just read in the HP thread that Da-Lite has released a new High Contrast High Power material. That might just be the ticket!



I am trying to get a review sample. I have been hoping that Da-Lite would do something like this.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dovercat* /forum/post/20429041
> 
> 
> fraisa and lawguy I believe both have the ability to measure and calibrate their displays. So how about measuring the ambient light level hitting the middle of the screen using a 1 gain material or a piece of xerox white paper which is about 0.92 so you can give the level of ambient light hitting the screen. Then turning on the projector and taking measurements at the middle of the screen for white and black levels, so you can give white level, black level and contrast measurements in the ambient light condition. I realize it is going to be very dependent on where the ambient light sources are in the room as the screen rejects light based on its angle. But it would be interesting to see how much better a expensive super high contrast home cinema projector and a expensive state of the art Black Diamond screen performs than just using a cheap super bright projector and a matt very dark screen.



As I mentioned in an earlier post, I had though about doing something like this. I think that pictures do a better job of explaining these things than numbers do. There are lots of statistically significant numbers that don't mean much in the real world. You would think that a 50k:1 CR would be a huge improvement over a 25k:1 CR, right? Twice as much. In the real world, it hardly matters.


----------



## bud16415




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dovercat* /forum/post/20429041
> 
> 
> bud16415 "I proposed. those projectors are some of the least expensive as they fall into the forbidden business projector category. What good is a million to one native CR if even a couple of candles in the room reduce it to half that and enough light on the viewing end to call it a living room takes it to 300:1." "Go for that 3000 or 4000 lumen canon with a spec like 2000:1 CR, look around for one that has half way good reviews as to color balance, know you might not have perfect color calibration and get a huge screen dark screen"



dovercat

I don't disagree with you at all and posted a few times as you did that the numbers and claims didn't add up in my mind. I also took objection to not the screen (as I don't have firsthand experience with BD) but to the marketing claims and the videos showing it roll down in front of a high dispersing white screen with carefully placed ambient sources and the projector calibrated to the darker screen. The concept I wholeheartedly agree with of a gain gray screen. I think they are maximizing every part of this concept, and that may or may not introduce PQ issues for some.

To your direct question I will agree with you 100%. I can only speak to my efforts and they were quite different than what others were doing trying to make a front projection system work in a uncontrolled sun lit ambient environment compounded by light color walls and ceiling. My goal in my ongoing experiment was first starting with a 100% light controlled space construct a FP room that gave every impression of a lighted space when needed but to use all the things I had learned to do it in a very controlled way. I really wanted a dual purpose room a lights out theater and a media room that could be used for sporting events where the light level would give the people the freedom to interact and move around while still be blown away by the picture quality. I wanted extreme off axis viewing something like 45 degrees off center. In movie mode I was quite critical of warm spotting and any quality to the screen that spoiled the illusion of 3D in movies.

For me it was understanding the concept of perception and how the eyes work that I built around lots of raw power in lumens and an attenuating gray screen with a little gain improvement (mild) and a room designed around a dark screen end and a light viewer end. Perception also works in photographing such images as seen in a lot of the photos posted here. Digital cameras adjust to ANSI images much the way the eye does.


I would agree with you and your assumptions of FL levels of ambient in most sunlight filled living rooms and the diluting effect they will have on FP and nothing passive as a screen is will compete with a much smaller display that actually produces light. The human eye can adjust about 22 f stops so what we see as ambient and appears to be about the same level could be easily a 100 times more with sunlight entering a room. In my room you enter and your eyes adjust and within one second you feel you are in a fairly well lit room. something like 95% of the brightness you see is because of your eyes adjusting and placement of the lights. The screen then can handle mitigating the rest.


----------



## bud16415




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20430438
> 
> 
> As I mentioned in an earlier post, I had though about doing something like this. I think that pictures do a better job of explaining these things than numbers do. There are lots of statistically significant numbers that don't mean much in the real world. You would think that a 50k:1 CR would be a huge improvement over a 25k:1 CR, right? Twice as much. In the real world, it hardly matters.



IMO, I would go a step more and say there is no difference between 50k:1 and 25K:1 in almost every home theater ever designed. The degree of light control that would have to be in place to visually see a difference would be very extreme. I have read a lot of studies on how much CR the eye brain interaction can capture and figures vary but most say something like 400:1 to 1000:1 is about the best the eye can do on instantaneous CR. That would be with the eyes iris in a fixed state. Somewhat like the difference between ANSI and On Off contrast in projectors. The eye using the adjustment of the iris can do on off contrast of over a million to one. Our eyes are adapted to suit early man that needed to see at night with just a few stars in the sky to bright daylight. In movie viewing, in some movies, they make movies that use a lot of that range, and that's the times our eyes are trying to sort fly specks out of pepper in search of detail in the image, and the times the CRT guys used to boast the absolute pitch black levels they could get in fade to black images. Light canons and gray screens won't do that well. On the other side sports and TV and many movies are shot at fairly even light levels and the eye / iris interaction isn't really working much and that instantaneous CR is what we watch.

The brighter the room the more returning FL's from the screen we need to adjust our eyes. The grayer the screen the more FL's we need (or gain) to make up for the attenuation of both projected light and ambient light. At least that's how I view this.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bud16415* /forum/post/20430635
> 
> 
> IMO, I would go a step more and say there is no difference between 50k:1 and 25K:1 in almost every home theater ever designed. The degree of light control that would have to be in place to visually see a difference would be very extreme. I have read a lot of studies on how much CR the eye brain interaction can capture and figures vary but most say something like 400:1 to 1000:1 is about the best the eye can do on instantaneous CR. That would be with the eyes iris in a fixed state. Somewhat like the difference between ANSI and On Off contrast in projectors. The eye using the adjustment of the iris can do on off contrast of over a million to one. Our eyes are adapted to suit early man that needed to see at night with just a few stars in the sky to bright daylight. In movie viewing, in some movies, they make movies that use a lot of that range, and that's the times our eyes are trying to sort fly specks out of pepper in search of detail in the image, and the times the CRT guys used to boast the absolute pitch black levels they could get in fade to black images. Light canons and gray screens won't do that well. On the other side sports and TV and many movies are shot at fairly even light levels and the eye / iris interaction isn't really working much and that instantaneous CR is what we watch.
> 
> The brighter the room the more returning FL's from the screen we need to adjust our eyes. The grayer the screen the more FL's we need (or gain) to make up for the attenuation of both projected light and ambient light. At least that's how I view this.



For the reasons that you mention, back when I was using a High Power Screen, I found that blacks appeared blacker when I kept a small amount of light on in the room. The darker and blacker the room, the more noticable a heightened black level became. I think that my eyes opened as much as they could in a true black room and the not-so-black video black showed itself for what it was. So, keeping some light on kepts the irises in my eyes from opening completely.


I think that this fact that you and I have noticed runs counter to the prevailing conventional wisdom, which is to get your room as black as possible.


I don't worry about these things anymore with the Black Diamond. Blacks are always good.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dovercat* /forum/post/20430233
> 
> 
> Screen Innovations claim it increases projector contrast over 900%, enabling viewing with the lights on, and even improves contrast by 900% with the lights off.



Really? I didn't see those claims on the site. Those are pretty outrageous sounding claims, especially the latter.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20430804
> 
> 
> For the reasons that you mention, back when I was using a High Power Screen, I found that blacks appeared blacker when I kept a small amount of light on in the room. The darker and blacker the room, the more noticable a heightened black level became. I think that my eyes opened as much as they could in a true black room and the not-so-black video black showed itself for what it was. So, keeping some light on kepts the irises in my eyes from opening completely.
> 
> 
> I think that this fact that you and I have noticed runs counter to the prevailing conventional wisdom, which is to get your room as black as possible.



There's definitely some truth to that and as someone who has a full black velvet screen wall around the image, and who has tried to darken my room as much as possible, I've mentioned it before too.


If you've got a projected image of a dark scene, and it's surrounded by true light absorbent pitch black, the contrast can make the lack of true black in the image more noticeable. The lower the APL of the scene, the more this can intrude.


When I've viewed the BD screens, especially with the JVC projectors, the black levels looked good, generally. But especially in one room that has lighter painted walls, it sort of helps that the area outside the screen frame isn't pitch black, for the reasons we are talking about.


But in dark scenes when I look at the actual contrast of the "black" of the image to the true pitch black of the screen frame, the grayness of the "blacks" in the image are quite visible. So it's quite apparent that if the rest of the wall were pitch black, like mine at home, those black levels are going to be revealed as not very black after all.


So there are certainly trade offs.


I've gone with the black wall/dark room because ultimately I find the trade-offs much more in favor of the dark approach. When the projected image is surrounded by black the image appears more vivid and often more contrasty, in most types of film/TV scenes. Since I can open up my masking at the touch of a button, it always amazes me how the image sort of dulls when I open the masking to see black bars, and how it comes alive once masked.


The other benefit is the pristine look of an image against black, and the utter lack of visual distractions, which makes it feel more theater like and focused. It can also enhance the "window effect" because of the lack of distractions it's like you are seeing right through the screen wall on to the event, which is particularly cool when the gang is over to watch something like the UFC.


Also, the darker I make the room with room treatments, the more dynamic the image seems to become, perhaps because I'm preserving ANSI better or whatever.


Finally, the darker I make the room with treatments, the more immersive and focused the viewing experience. As the rest of the room disappears, you just feel more transported into the movie world.


One of the benefits of the BD screen in lights out conditions is just as described: it lights up the room less, making it to some degree "darker" when the movie is on.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20430804
> 
> 
> 
> I don't worry about these things anymore with the Black Diamond. Blacks are always good.



As I've mentioned, those are the comments that fascinate me. Such comments imply, even when it's not meant, that you make black levels blacker with a dark substrate so that, sort of automatically it makes blacks blacker. "_Hey, look how dark that screen is compared to the white screen. Of course it's going to make the blacks darker!"_


But what determines black levels isn't how black the screen is but it's ultimate gain rating once the optical coating is applied. A super dark screen with optical coating applied to get it up to 1.0 gain is not going to produce blacks any deeper than a white screen of the same gain.

So the black levels any screen can ultimately achieve is constrained by the gain rating (assuming accuracy) not however dark the screen surface appears. So we are always talking about either a lowering of overall brightness of the image to get deeper black levels (e.g. going below 1.0 gain) and/or talking of room effects on the images.


If the blacks are better overall and "always good" that suggests it's simply because the screen has dimmed the image (and shouldn't produce blacks any better/deeper than a similarly dimmed image on a white screen - i.e. one dimmed via a JVC projector's iris control), or that the room was previously having quite a large effect on your black levels overall.


I'm sure you are quite aware of all that Lawguy, but it seems a good idea to have these issues clarified for on-lookers.


Cheers,


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20431327
> 
> 
> But in dark scenes when I look at the actual contrast of the "black" of the image to the true pitch black of the screen frame, the grayness of the "blacks" in the image are quite visible. So it's quite apparent that if the rest of the wall were pitch black, like mine at home, those black levels are going to be revealed as not very black after all.



This is true to a certain extent. But, when I show a 0 Ire pattern on my BD screen, the light of the screen is really just barely visible. This makes for very convincing low contrast, low apl scenes, provided you have good source material, of course. The BD enabled me to achive this for the first time.




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20431327
> 
> 
> But what determines black levels isn't how black the screen is but it's ultimate gain rating once the optical coating is applied.



It's really not that simple. Put a 1.4 gain BD and a 1.4 gain white screen in a well lit room. Which will have better blacks? In a bright room, a white screen will be revealed to be white, which is what it is. A screen with a dark substrate will look darker, because it is. This also applies as the room gets darker, but the effect obviously diminshes.


----------



## bud16415

That's the exact reason I like the lower gain grays and overdriving them at the projector. You can lower black levels by turning the projectors iris down or placing a neutral density filter over the lens but all it will do as you say is lower white and black equally. A gray screen of low gain will act on the projected light and the ambient light both, and if you hit it with more lumens to compensate you still end up with the same amount of rebound scatter to deal with. Adding a optical coating will increase gain and the side result is more light to the viewer less to the side walls, the secondary result is light coming from the side will skip off the coating and be directed into the opposite side wall. So in the case of a low gain high dispersion surface dealing with absorbing the rebound off the side walls has to be part of the plan.

That's only part of the plan though and the part that deals with dealing strictly with the situation like your eyes were of a fixed aperture, and I think the bigger part of this is the perception of contrast. Bias lighting is talked about a lot but also the overall returning FL's in a ANSI like image. The best test I find is watching the credits at the end of a movie black screen with white letters. look at the black at the edge of the screen and the black near the letters and compare it to your black boarder as a control for what is actually black. because there is a little white on the screen it's not on off contrast you are seeing and it's also not 50/50 ANSI like a black and white checkerboard will show you black. As the credits get less and less with white content the black will fall off fast as your eyes adjust. That black is closer to the black you really are getting all the time but fortunately most of our watching isn't at straining at weak black images.

After thinking about this stuff a while and you go to your local cinema you quickly find out that even some of the not so good home setups beat out the cinema. But then again the little IMAX by me has 25 times the screen area I do to light up.

Below is a test I did a long time ago with 4 sections of the exact same shade of neutral gray but with 4 different optical coatings that would induce different levels of angular gain. one shot is with just room lights the other is with the flash on the cam simulating a bright light source like the projector. the outward appearing darkest sample has the greatest gain coating thus looks darker because its rejecting most side light. With the flash it becomes the whitest for the reverse reason. Most likely the BD is doing the same type thing. examples below.

no flash
 


flash
 


You can also see how too much of a good thing can cause a hot spot.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20431420
> 
> 
> This is true to a certain extent. But, when I show a 0 Ire pattern on my BD screen, the light of the screen is really just barely visible. This makes for very convincing low contrast, low apl scenes, provided you have good source material, of course. The BD enabled me to achive this for the first time.



So either your room was having a large effect on your image and/or the BD is simply making your image more dim to get better black level.


One thing that could help the BD screen allow image blacks blend in with the screen border a bit better is hot-spotting. By nature it hotspots in the centre (that's where the rated gain brightness comes from, I believe) and dims toward the outer parts of the images, so it is actually a bit darker wherever the image meets the screen frame.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20431420
> 
> 
> 
> It's really not that simple.



Certainly, and I've written quite a bit about exactly why it isn't so simple. I also included that caveat yet again in that post:



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> So the black levels any screen can ultimately achieve is constrained by the gain rating (assuming accuracy) not however dark the screen surface appears. So we are always talking about either a lowering of overall brightness of the image to get deeper black levels (e.g. going below 1.0 gain) *and/or talking of room effects on the images*.



What I'm trying to explicitly address is the notion that many people have, and I think it even feels intuitive to those of us that should know better, that when looking at a gray-based screen the black levels will be lower "because the screen is darker." That _the very fact that the screen looks so dark and gray_ means that black levels will therefore be darker than a white screen. Which is not true when we are talking about screens using gain - because it is the gain that determines the screen's ultimate ability to produce black level, not how dark it appears to our eyes with the room lights on.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20431420
> 
> 
> Put a 1.4 gain BD and a 1.4 gain white screen in a well lit room. Which will have better blacks? In a bright room, a white screen will be revealed to be white, which is what it is. A screen with a dark substrate will look darker, because it is.



The gray screen is darker because it is reflecting less total room light than the white screen. Again, these are the room effects I was talking about.


But in lights out conditions from the viewing position, which is where the screen gain of a BD-type screen is focused, all other things being equal it's the gain that matters, no matter how dark the substrate. If you put a very reflective substance like glass over a pitch black board you still get a mirror.


I have samples of the DNP .8 gain and 2.3 gain samples. Both being specialty dark gray screens to combat ambient light, like the BD screens.


The 2.3 gain from anything but on-axis looks incredibly dark - as dark as the BD screen at least I'd say. But with lights off and a projected image, viewed on axis (where the gain is focused) on a white image, it looks like bright white, making a sheet of white paper look gray beside it. That goes for the whole light spectrum, so black levels are just as elevated over a white paper as are the bright areas. So the fact the screen substrate is incredibly dark, and looks really dark in regular room lighting does not mean it produces "better" black levels than a white screen (in controlled conditions, the white neutral gain screen will be dimmer hence darker blacks). That's the illusion I'm trying to point out. If you have a super dark screen, but have applied a coating to get 2.3 (or 1.4) gain to the viewing position, that screen can never *ultimately* realise as dark a black level as a neutral gain white screen, no matter how dark the screen substrate. The only thing it can do is preserve a better level of contrast in challenging conditions.


IF the DNP (or BD) screen produced deeper black levels it's due to room effects, not strictly that the material is dark gray.




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20431420
> 
> 
> This also applies as the room gets darker, but the effect obviously diminshes.



Exactly, which was already part of what I was saying.


I hope I'm being clear about what I want to get across.


Cheers,


----------



## ccotenj

mine came today... very well packed, i can't imagine they lose too many of these to shipping damage...


it went together easily... i did it myself, with the exception of hanging it on the wall, i required swmbo to help me with that... having never assembled a screen before, i had some anxiety before i started... but it was a piece of cake... i took my time and was careful, and it was on the wall in a bit under an hour after opening the box...


as noted in earlier posts, this is my first projector... i only had the manual da-lite screen up for a week, and have been projecting on the wall for a few days... so any commentary i might have must be taken with a GIGANTIC grain of salt....


now that the disclaimer is out of the way...










it's pretty darn cool... is like having a 106" kuro? no. but it certainly doesn't suck... with filtered sunlight in my room right now (which is how i would "normally" watch tv at this time of day), it's REAL nice...


i'll have more to say after i've watched it for more than 15 minutes... but the initial reaction is that it's well worth what i paid for it... considering i paid 1500 more for the kuro than the pj/screen combined, i can't complain about the bang for buck factor...


color me initially very happy...


----------



## R Harkness

Sounds great!



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/20433344
> 
> 
> 
> it's pretty darn cool... is like having a 106" kuro? no. but it certainly doesn't suck... with filtered sunlight in my room right now (which is how i would "normally" watch tv at this time of day), it's REAL nice...



Wait until you can watch it in the dark. Then you may think comparison with a Kuro isn't that far off....


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/20433344
> 
> 
> mine came today... very well packed, i can't imagine they lose too many of these to shipping damage...
> 
> 
> it went together easily... i did it myself, with the exception of hanging it on the wall, i required swmbo to help me with that... having never assembled a screen before, i had some anxiety before i started... but it was a piece of cake... i took my time and was careful, and it was on the wall in a bit under an hour after opening the box...
> 
> 
> as noted in earlier posts, this is my first projector... i only had the manual da-lite screen up for a week, and have been projecting on the wall for a few days... so any commentary i might have must be taken with a GIGANTIC grain of salt....
> 
> 
> now that the disclaimer is out of the way...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it's pretty darn cool... is like having a 106" kuro? no. but it certainly doesn't suck... with filtered sunlight in my room right now (which is how i would "normally" watch tv at this time of day), it's REAL nice...
> 
> 
> i'll have more to say after i've watched it for more than 15 minutes... but the initial reaction is that it's well worth what i paid for it... considering i paid 1500 more for the kuro than the pj/screen combined, i can't complain about the bang for buck factor...
> 
> 
> color me initially very happy...



Well Someone Call me Susan he likes his Screen....









Welcome to the BD Family...









Please when you get a chance please post some shots....


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20432985
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What I'm trying to explicitly address is the notion that many people have, and I think it even feels intuitive to those of us that should know better, that when looking at a gray-based screen the black levels will be lower "because the screen is darker." That _the very fact that the screen looks so dark and gray_ means that black levels will therefore be darker than a white screen. Which is not true when we are talking about screens using gain - because it is the gain that determines the screen's ultimate ability to produce black level, not how dark it appears to our eyes with the room light,



I think that people's intuition is largely correct, at least as respect grey screens with gain. They are right because the room can't ever be taken out of the equation.


Just as the 1.4 BD will have better black levels in a well lit room as compared to a white 1.4 gain screen, the BD will also have better black levels with the lights off, even of the difference may not be as obvious with the lights off.


The reason for this is that real world rooms throw light on the screen.

This effect can be minimized but it can't be eliminated.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/20433344
> 
> 
> mine came today... very well packed, i can't imagine they lose too many of these to shipping damage...
> 
> 
> it went together easily... i did it myself, with the exception of hanging it on the wall, i required swmbo to help me with that... having never assembled a screen before, i had some anxiety before i started... but it was a piece of cake... i took my time and was careful, and it was on the wall in a bit under an hour after opening the box...
> 
> 
> as noted in earlier posts, this is my first projector... i only had the manual da-lite screen up for a week, and have been projecting on the wall for a few days... so any commentary i might have must be taken with a GIGANTIC grain of salt....
> 
> 
> now that the disclaimer is out of the way...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it's pretty darn cool... is like having a 106" kuro? no. but it certainly doesn't suck... with filtered sunlight in my room right now (which is how i would "normally" watch tv at this time of day), it's REAL nice...
> 
> 
> i'll have more to say after i've watched it for more than 15 minutes... but the initial reaction is that it's well worth what i paid for it... considering i paid 1500 more for the kuro than the pj/screen combined, i can't complain about the bang for buck factor...
> 
> 
> color me initially very happy...



Have a good night watching. I hopw you have some good disks picked out.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20433988
> 
> 
> Have a good night watching. I hopw you have some good disks picked out.



I just watched the Season Finale of Smallville on my BD..

It looked awesome.









Fridays just wont be the same without that show...


----------



## ccotenj

Quote:

Originally Posted by *R Harkness* 
Wait until you can watch it in the dark. Then you may think comparison with a Kuro isn't that far off....








you sir, would be correct!














in a dark room (bit of light leakage, but not a lot) with a good source, it isn't far off... if you take absolute black levels out of the equation (easily distinguished by the "black bars", the kuro was noticeably "blacker" there), i am astounded by the results (and i'm not easily astounded)...


as i noted in an earlier post, screenies are nice eye candy, but they don't tell me anything, and i've learned the hard way with other stuff in life that things often fall short when not presented in their best light (i call this the "denny's menu theory"







)...


so when i finally decided to do this project, i went into it with my eyes wide open and with muted expectations... if i could get a watchable picture during the day, a "better than watchable" picture at night with lights on, and close to a "real movie theater" at night with the lights off, i was gonna be happier than a pig in slop...


now that it's here and up, this pig feels like he won the slop lottery...







swmbo always referred to the kuro as "the magic window" for it's ability to create the illusion of reality... this is like i blasted out a regular sized window and installed a big honkin' picture window... the illusion of reality is VERY strong...


here's some initial commentary (copied and pasted from my build thread)... i stayed up WAY past my bedtime last night...







i'll have more to say as time goes on... again, all of this is from a first time projector owner, so i'm trying very hard to look past the sheer awesomeness of that big picture, the satisfaction of finally having one and the cost of entry and be realistic in my comments... i'm well aware of the placebo effect, and those three things are a pretty damn big placebo...










- it's not really "black", it's a softish grey... actually rather cool looking on the wall when nothing is being projected on it...


- it works as advertised... the ability to reject light from above is pretty amazing... and the "overall" ambient light rejection is pretty good as well... very solid picture under my "normal" viewing conditions yesterday afternoon (filtered indirect sunlight from north windows, enough so that you can read)... definitely will do the job for sports during the day without having to cave up the room... as this was a big priority for me, i'm very pleased with that result... something interesting here... when closing up the blinds/turning off the lights (still a lot of light leakage), the black levels are noticeably better than with the filtered light if you switch back and forth... but if i watch for a minute or so with the filtered light, it's almost like my eyes/brain "adjust" to it... i read a few posts about this effect, and it was pretty interesting to experience it...


- at night... mamma mia! we watched "tron legacy" last night (bad movie, swmbo was VERY disappointed in it, but for eye candy, it worked)... i'm "used to" having a "quality picture" (i've had a kuro 150fd from the day they came out, and had a 111fd as well, both well calibrated), and i can easily be described as a "picky" viewer... i would imagine as time goes on, i will have some nits to pick with this... that being said, if you put absolute black levels out of the equation, this is VERY close to being a very big kuro... i was completely transfixed...


- at night, with the high side lights turned on... again, VERY good... i recorded the truck race and watched it after swmbo went to bed last night... played with various lighting... i can turn the side lights on almost all the way with very little degradation of pq... blacks obviously begin to wash out a bit, but (as noted above) it seems like my eyes/brain adjust pretty quickly and "create" the missing contrast... it would appear that if your pj can create enough lumens, you can light up the room pretty good with not too many bad effects... more to come on this as i experiment with lighting positions more...


- it doesn't "light up the room"... the da-lite (high contrast matte white) would light up the room almost enough to read... this puts very little light back into the room... there ARE reflections off the speakers, but not as bad as i had thought...


- rejection of light coming from the sides is HIGHLY dependent on "how far away from the screen it is", and highlights how important the "create the right conditions" credo is... it does NOT like light coming from the side if it is close to the front wall... opening the blind completely on the closest window to the screen washed it out to an "unwatchable" condition... migrating an artificial light across the space in between the windows, there's a "magic spot", where there's a big (and i mean BIG) shift in light rejection... that magic spot is half the distance between myself and the screen (i think i might know why on this, but i'm not sure yet)... once past the magic spot, it just eats up the light... with the blind in the back left corner wide open, there's obviously some washout, but it still renders a "better than just watchable" picture...


- the black velvet around the edges point out exactly how "not black" the black paint on the wall is...


----------



## Kevin 3000

ccotenj


No amount of reading about can prepare you for the impact this screen has in your own room and your initial approval being a Kuro owner is high praise indeed.


Just remind us again is it the 1.4 BD3 106" ?


----------



## Lawguy

Quote:

Originally Posted by *ccotenj* 
you sir, would be correct!














in a dark room (bit of light leakage, but not a lot) with a good source, it isn't far off... if you take absolute black levels out of the equation (easily distinguished by the "black bars", the kuro was noticeably "blacker" there), i am astounded by the results (and i'm not easily astounded)...


as i noted in an earlier post, screenies are nice eye candy, but they don't tell me anything, and i've learned the hard way with other stuff in life that things often fall short when not presented in their best light (i call this the "denny's menu theory"







)...


so when i finally decided to do this project, i went into it with my eyes wide open and with muted expectations... if i could get a watchable picture during the day, a "better than watchable" picture at night with lights on, and close to a "real movie theater" at night with the lights off, i was gonna be happier than a pig in slop...


now that it's here and up, this pig feels like he won the slop lottery...







swmbo always referred to the kuro as "the magic window" for it's ability to create the illusion of reality... this is like i blasted out a regular sized window and installed a big honkin' picture window... the illusion of reality is VERY strong...


here's some initial commentary (copied and pasted from my build thread)... i stayed up WAY past my bedtime last night...







i'll have more to say as time goes on... again, all of this is from a first time projector owner, so i'm trying very hard to look past the sheer awesomeness of that big picture, the satisfaction of finally having one and the cost of entry and be realistic in my comments... i'm well aware of the placebo effect, and those three things are a pretty damn big placebo...










- it's not really "black", it's a softish grey... actually rather cool looking on the wall when nothing is being projected on it...


- it works as advertised... the ability to reject light from above is pretty amazing... and the "overall" ambient light rejection is pretty good as well... very solid picture under my "normal" viewing conditions yesterday afternoon (filtered indirect sunlight from north windows, enough so that you can read)... definitely will do the job for sports during the day without having to cave up the room... as this was a big priority for me, i'm very pleased with that result... something interesting here... when closing up the blinds/turning off the lights (still a lot of light leakage), the black levels are noticeably better than with the filtered light if you switch back and forth... but if i watch for a minute or so with the filtered light, it's almost like my eyes/brain "adjust" to it... i read a few posts about this effect, and it was pretty interesting to experience it...


- at night... mamma mia! we watched "tron legacy" last night (bad movie, swmbo was VERY disappointed in it, but for eye candy, it worked)... i'm "used to" having a "quality picture" (i've had a kuro 150fd from the day they came out, and had a 111fd as well, both well calibrated), and i can easily be described as a "picky" viewer... i would imagine as time goes on, i will have some nits to pick with this... that being said, if you put absolute black levels out of the equation, this is VERY close to being a very big kuro... i was completely transfixed...


- at night, with the high side lights turned on... again, VERY good... i recorded the truck race and watched it after swmbo went to bed last night... played with various lighting... i can turn the side lights on almost all the way with very little degradation of pq... blacks obviously begin to wash out a bit, but (as noted above) it seems like my eyes/brain adjust pretty quickly and "create" the missing contrast... it would appear that if your pj can create enough lumens, you can light up the room pretty good with not too many bad effects... more to come on this as i experiment with lighting positions more...


- it doesn't "light up the room"... the da-lite (high contrast matte white) would light up the room almost enough to read... this puts very little light back into the room... there ARE reflections off the speakers, but not as bad as i had thought...


- rejection of light coming from the sides is HIGHLY dependent on "how far away from the screen it is", and highlights how important the "create the right conditions" credo is... it does NOT like light coming from the side if it is close to the front wall... opening the blind completely on the closest window to the screen washed it out to an "unwatchable" condition... migrating an artificial light across the space in between the windows, there's a "magic spot", where there's a big (and i mean BIG) shift in light rejection... that magic spot is half the distance between myself and the screen (i think i might know why on this, but i'm not sure yet)... once past the magic spot, it just eats up the light... with the blind in the back left corner wide open, there's obviously some washout, but it still renders a "better than just watchable" picture...


- the black velvet around the edges point out exactly how "not black" the black paint on the wall is...
Great observations. You understand the importance of thinking about your overall environment. This will allow you to get the most out of your system, of which the screen is just one part.


----------



## ccotenj

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* 
ccotenj


No amount of reading about can prepare you for the impact this screen has in your own room and your initial approval being a Kuro owner is high praise indeed.


Just remind us again is it the 1.4 BD3 106" ?
yup, the 1.4 bd3 106"... it's basically as big as i can fit and still have speakers properly placed in the room...


yes, it's a big impact... some of that has to do with the properties of the screen... some of the impact is also the sheer wonder at a picture that large in my living room...

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Lawguy* 
Great observations. You understand the importance of thinking about your overall environment. This will allow you to get the most out of your system, of which the screen is just one part.
thanks...







yup... that point was driven home pretty hard while i was reading/researching/dreaming... i knew it wouldn't just be a matter of throwing it up on the wall and "a miracle occurs" (although that sure would be nice)... i went into this knowing that certain compromises would have to be made, and that it would take some effort to produce the best results...


----------



## R Harkness

Chris,


I'm so happy that your jump into projection has proven thrilling.


Even after 1 1/2 years of my theater being finished, even last night I could hardly believe I get this experience at home.


I seem to have missed this: What projector are you using?


----------



## ccotenj

^^^


thanks rich...







it really has proven to be thrilling (a good word choice there)... i looked forward to this day for a long time, and i couldn't be more happy... i was lucky enough to have santa deliver me some nice toys on christmas when i was growing up, but even the "best" christmas doesn't measure up to this...


the pj is a vivitek h5080...


you get a HUGE thank you from me... your posts (not just in this thread, but in many others) taught me more than everything else i read, combined...







if you are ever in the southern new jersey area, i owe you more than one beverage of your choice...


----------



## charlievoviii

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* 
*Set your display distinguishing all squares A to Z altering brightness/contrast

then realize the magic of a BLACK DIAMOND 1.4 in BIGHT room conditions.

More contrast on screen in real life....*










those black are grayish on my fully calibrated NEC MultiSync LCD3090W 30" monitor i use for video editing. Also your pix is not just a resize of the original copy, you actually done a little bit more than that. Matter facts the pix you posted Color/gray scales has been altered and the software you use is Adobe photoshop CS3. I downloaded your pix and look at the pix history aka what has been done since the original copy, soon as i saw it i know some isn't right










Care to explain ?


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *ccotenj* 
^^^


thanks rich...







it really has proven to be thrilling (a good word choice there)... i looked forward to this day for a long time, and i couldn't be more happy... i was lucky enough to have santa deliver me some nice toys on christmas when i was growing up, but even the "best" christmas doesn't measure up to this...


the pj is a vivitek h5080...


you get a HUGE thank you from me... your posts (not just in this thread, but in many others) taught me more than everything else i read, combined...







if you are ever in the southern new jersey area, i owe you more than one beverage of your choice...








If you have not already done it you will need to recalibrate your Projector since adding the new screen,

Then you can see really where your black levels are at..

And also your white levels.


again on the major benifits of the black diamond most users

fall in love right away.

When i havent been in my room for a while then go down there and watch a movie or Sporting event,

i am just left with a big Wow all over again...


Glad your enjoying the screen.

again when you get a chance please post some pics of your room...


----------



## Kevin 3000

Quote:

Originally Posted by *charlievoviii* 
those black are grayish on my fully calibrated NEC MultiSync LCD3090W 30" monitor i use for video editing. Also your pix is not just a resize of the original copy, you actually done a little bit more than that. Matter facts the pix you posted Color/gray scales has been altered and the software you use is Adobe photoshop CS3. I downloaded your pix and look at the pix history aka what has been done since the original copy, soon as i saw it i know some isn't right










Care to explain ?
Whats to explain apart from my lack of skills to fully capture the dynamic range of what i see in real life as explained in post?


----------



## ccotenj

@fraisa...


tons of pics of the "build" (not much of a "build", more like a re-arrangement) are in the first link in my signature...


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/20436458
> 
> 
> @fraisa...
> 
> 
> tons of pics of the "build" (not much of a "build", more like a re-arrangement) are in the first link in my signature...



okay so from looking at your room journey it looks like you have gone from a diy screen to a Black Diamond is that right

if so what DIY Paint did you have?

Edit

Never mind i see looks like you just painted a screen while you waited for your BD to Come...


----------



## programmergeek




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/20435656
> 
> 
> yup, the 1.4 bd3 106"... it's basically as big as i can fit and still have speakers properly placed in the room...
> 
> 
> yes, it's a big impact... some of that has to do with the properties of the screen... some of the impact is also the sheer wonder at a picture that large in my living room...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thanks...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> yup... that point was driven home pretty hard while i was reading/researching/dreaming... i knew it wouldn't just be a matter of throwing it up on the wall and "a miracle occurs" (although that sure would be nice)... i went into this knowing that certain compromises would have to be made, and that it would take some effort to produce the best results...



Chris glad to see you are happy with the results of the screen. Every one I put in people have a similar wow reaction. Let me know if there is anything else I can help you with.

I am impressed with your speaker set up and you did a great job balancing audio and video.


Jason

Integrated Tech Solutions.


----------



## ccotenj




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *programmergeek* /forum/post/20438055
> 
> 
> Chris glad to see you are happy with the results of the screen. Every one I put in people have a similar wow reaction. Let me know if there is anything else I can help you with.
> 
> I am impressed with your speaker set up and you did a great job balancing audio and video.
> 
> 
> Jason
> 
> Integrated Tech Solutions.



thanks jason, i am very happy...







and i sure will...


thanks! i'm not sure yet the subwoofers will be "happy" in the front of the room like that (one of them has a troubled amplifier right now, so i can't really do any measuring), but it looks wicked cool...


----------



## dovercat




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20431196
> 
> 
> Really? I didn't see those claims on the site. Those are pretty outrageous sounding claims, especially the latter.



Screen Innovations own website

"Bright Environment Benefits

In a bright environment Black Diamond is the only screen that absorbs all unwanted ambient light in a room. Ambient light is absorbed above, below, and even in the path of the projector, allowing the screen to maintain and preserve the projectors contrast. Only the projectors light is reflected back into the viewers eyes creating over 900% more contrast compared to all other screens"


Screen Innovations own pres-releases

"About Screen Innovations

Screen Innovations leads the market in US-manufactured projection screens. We employ an industry-specific engineering staff and advanced robotics to create cutting edge screen technologies. Black Diamond is a key example, allowing any projector to perform well in either a bright or dark environment by rejecting ambient light, while enhancing projector contrast by over 900%."


The only UK authorized dealer with a website.
http://www.anthemavs.co.uk/product/s...creen-material 

"Black Diamond allows projection to exist with the lights on or off by increasing projector contrast over 900%. Customers now have the ability to utilize projection in environments that only a flat panel TV could exist before."


Not even leaving avscience I can find a 900% claim stated by Screen Innovations head of marketing. Youtube avscience`s channel CEDIA 2010 Screen Innovations Black Diamond. The CEDIA 2010 video on Screen Innovations own website and youtube channel also makes a 900% claim.



Before cynicism killed my interest I made a note of the various claims after reading/hearing them in the various promotional videos, articles and reviews, but I did not think to note where I read/heard them.


It would be nice if Screen Innovations provided detailed specification sheets on their screens. With things like charts / graphs showing horizontal and vertical gain vs angle. White papers showing how they came up with their various claims of 75% less light scatter in to the room and 300% or 900% contrast improvements would also be nice. Last but not least less high restocking fees for opened products.


I guess I am spoilt living in the UK with advertising standards requiring manufactures to provide robust evidence to back up any scientific claims, and distant selling regulation enabling consumers to return products after trying them out, for a full refund.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20438728
> 
> 
> @fraisa
> 
> People find it hard to believe just how good thses BDs work in ambient controlled lighting.
> 
> 
> My pics represent as good as i can do with the tools available close to life contrast retained on screen in my lighting conditions.
> 
> 
> If you want to learn my technique PM me but be aware its not just point and click.



Thanks but i already know how to make my pics represent the close to accurate detail on the screen, with regards to Colour, Blacks and Contrast levels....


it takes alot of work and taking extra shots to get it up to my level standards.


I always take extra shots and play with the colour modes if i am not happy with whats display on the camera vs whats on the screen...

I want the Whites White and not blue.

and skin tones to whats on the screen...


And my poor mans camera has done an awesome job.

Some critics that have judged these screen shots have other adgenda's that

no shot would make them happy.....


Shots are very hard to take thats why you have alot of people that judge,

but dont take and post screen shots themselves.

Because if they did you would see they dont know what the flip they are doing....


Here is a shot below...

This is somethings that show how I judge a shot ..

This shot shows a orange tone in the blacks and my walls.

If i correct that to a different colour mode that Pink top will become

Blue and wont be true..

I would rather have a little orange tone than a blue top..

But the reason why this is happens has a result of where my camera is in position to the

room lighting.

If i move my camera to a different spot the orange tone dissapears and we have a more accurate shot..

In which with my UFC shot that orange goes away and the whites are still white and not blue...


But the reason this because a more issue is because the lights are on,,,


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20439977
> 
> 
> Just apoligize for accusing me of using Photo PC Software to enhance my Pics and Call it a Day....



The end of that day will never come, because as I will repeat....I did not say you had done so, only that in your case you were simply letting the camera present thing just a little bit skewered.


Just re-read the Post, and my re-quote. Pause to absorb.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20440280
> 
> 
> @fraisa
> 
> Your pictures in Bright room conditions are unmatched especially with the type of camera used.
> 
> 
> I appreciate your effort in taking them as nodoubt others do spreading the word of this special unmatched bright room champion screen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 20% off my next purchase
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT
> 
> Department of Environmental Conservation will tell you how to dispose of any DIY paint safely.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jokes aside i do appreciate the effort keep posting be



Thanks,


Us BD owners are the BD Family.

With New Family Members Beeing added Daily...


I really love how with Lights on i can watch an unfaded image...

All of use BD owners love are screens

Lights on or off.....


I am planning on adding a Second Projector to my Room mid Summer

Going to put up a Mits 9000


----------



## ERuiz




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Us BD owners are the BD Family.
> 
> I really love how with Lights on i can watch an unfaded image...
> 
> All of use BD owners love are screens
> 
> Lights on or off.....
> 
> 
> I am planning on adding a Second Projector to my Room mid Summer
> 
> Going to put up a Mits 9000



Just curious ... when you say lights on, how many lights? What type of lights? Total wattage? Placement? Full blast or on dimmers? Saying lights on can be so subjective. For some, lights on can be a very dimly lit set of recessed lights, while for other's like God, when he said let there be light, it lit up the whole sky!  Just curious, that's all.


----------



## dovercat




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20440672
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Us BD owners are the BD Family.
> 
> I really love how with Lights on i can watch an unfaded image...
> 
> All of use BD owners love are screens
> 
> Lights on or off.....



Over in the DIY forum fraisa posted how happy and impressed he was using a tan wall in his office, even with ambient light, and Kevin 3000 posted he was impressed by the fraisa`s tan wall. Some Black Diamond owners seem to be easily impressed.


Lots of black diamond owners on this thread do seem ecstatically happy with their screens. However I do remember at least one who was somewhat disappointed. karlsch, from post 1267, and his own thread Black Diamond vs. Da-Lite in ambient light comparison. Quite a few people seemed unimpressed with samples back around post 550, a new member even posted asking if anyone was happy with the Black Diamond screen.


I guess it comes down to expectations, the room and projector setup. I doubt you can just stick it in any living room and transform your projector into a giant flat panel screen. It comes down to where and what the ambient light sources are, the projector and viewers locations, what you consider acceptable picture quality. That along with the high re-stocking fee is why I would be more likely to consider a Black Diamond if I was using a custom installer or using the expertise of a dealer to guide me about a particular setup and they recommended it. Ideally you want to try it and see if you like it with screens, but sadly this is rarely possible.


----------



## programmergeek




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ERuiz* /forum/post/20440803
> 
> 
> Just curious ... when you say lights on, how many lights? What type of lights? Total wattage? Placement? Full blast or on dimmers? Saying lights on can be so subjective. For some, lights on can be a very dimly lit set of recessed lights, while for other's like God, when he said let there be light, it lit up the whole sky!  Just curious, that's all.



Does it really matter, it is better than any other screen with the lights on. Sure a spot light pointed right at the screen you will see but a little ambient light from a window it maintains it's blacks pretty well.


I encourage anyone that is considering one of these to go look at one, then PM me, just kiddn. Keep in mind your local Best Buy probably has the BD II and not the newer one, at least mind does but with that in mind it will give you an idea. Anyhow I have taken a bunch of pics and what I find is you are really only seeing what the dslr cmos chip seas which at least differs somewhat from my eyes and real life. If anyone is in the tristate area feel free to make an appointment and stop by with your projector or I can shoe you mind to see what a BD III can do.


The only negative I have ever heard is that it does have a very slight grain and now that the new formula is out that has almost gone away at lest it is the best out of any 1.4 gain screen I have seen.


----------



## ERuiz




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *programmergeek* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> Does it really matter



Yes it does. Can't believe you would even ask that.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *programmergeek* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> it is better than any other screen with the lights on.



Pretty bold statement and claim there, son.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *programmergeek* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Sure a spot light pointed right at the screen you will see



So it does matter after all how much ambient light is projected onto the screen.


----------



## ccotenj




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/20439949
> 
> 
> fraisa,
> 
> 
> 
> You would be so very much better off simply letting the end users use this Thread, as their posted results would/will carry far more emphasis as to how satisfied they are with their own screens. And if no one posts....so be it.
> 
> 
> If only you could stop and understand how much good you could do by simply toning down the rhetoric and letting the BD stand on the merits "others" relate. But I'm afraid your oblivious to that sort of reasoning and advice.



yes... it is becoming rather tiresome... and i know that i will be much more inclined to post my impressions as a new owner if they aren't reacted to with a constant barrage of screenshots, unneeded advice about calibration, etc.


fwiw... not all bd owners are members of "the family"...


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ERuiz* /forum/post/20440803
> 
> 
> Just curious ... when you say lights on, how many lights? What type of lights? Total wattage? Placement? Full blast or on dimmers? Saying lights on can be so subjective. For some, lights on can be a very dimly lit set of recessed lights, while for other's like God, when he said let there be light, it lit up the whole sky!  Just curious, that's all.



No harm asking,

I actually make it a point to try to include my 2 front pot lights that are 75 Watt Spot Lights in the shots....

I have 4 Pots in my room on one switch,

3 others on seperate switches,

Posted a link to my Ambient Light Album few pages back..


----------



## ERuiz




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> No harm asking,
> 
> I actually make it a point to try to include my 2 front pot lights that are 75 Watt Spot Lights in the shots....
> 
> I have 4 Pots in my room on one switch,
> 
> 3 others on seperate switches,
> 
> Posted a link to my Ambient Light Album few pages back..



Ok, thanks for responding. How do you set your dimmers when watching with lights on? Say 50% brightness? I want to replicate more or less your lighting conditions since I also have 4 recessed lights and see how my image looks under the similar lighting conditions. Just for SAG.


----------



## eclou

This thread is such a beating. I have had my 1.4 138" BDII for 18 months or more now. Everyone who sees it freaks out how good the picture quality is lights on or off. I would have a hard time believing that anyone could be dissatisfied owning this screen. In the end though, I could care less if anyone else buys this screen or not. Haters gonna hate...


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ERuiz* /forum/post/20441292
> 
> 
> Ok, thanks for responding. How do you set your dimmers when watching with lights on? Say 50% brightness? I want to replicate more or less your lighting conditions since I also have 4 recessed lights and see how my image looks under the similar lighting conditions. Just for SAG.



Most of the Time its around 80 Percent..

BUt it changes vs what we are watching ...

Sports / Movies/ Gaming... Everyone in our Family has different Lighting Settings..

I just like that i have a screen that is flexable for all in our Household...


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *programmergeek* /forum/post/20440941
> 
> 
> 
> The only negative I have ever heard is that it does have a very slight grain and now that the new formula is out that has almost gone away at lest it is the best out of any 1.4 gain screen I have seen.




The only negative?

You've seen the BD screens: So, you don't notice the hot-spotting?









(That certainly is a negative mentioned in this thread, and has been pointed out by several reviewers...though...as usual, like the screen texture...many don't notice. But I'd expect an AV pro to certainly notice).


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20441650
> 
> 
> The only negative?
> 
> You've seen the BD screens: So, you don't notice the hot-spotting?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (That certainly is a negative mentioned in this thread, and has been pointed out by several reviewers...though...as usual, like the screen texture...many don't notice. But I'd expect an AV pro to certainly notice).



Rich,

This is why i love this Thread...

You are allowed to make comments of your Opinion.


Try doing that in other threads(Hmmm)

......and watch what Happens...











I will say that the Gen III of the BD 1.4 and .8 has really focased on this Issue and also the Sparkle issue..

I dont really notice that on My .8 Gain.

Maybe the Odd Very Minor Sparkle when watching hockey,

But you Really Really have to Look for it.

and If your looking for that effect then your not watching the game.

For me or anyone that is over watching hockey its a Non Issue...


----------



## dovercat




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ERuiz* /forum/post/20440803
> 
> 
> Just curious ... when you say lights on, how many lights? What type of lights? Total wattage? Placement? Full blast or on dimmers? Saying lights on can be so subjective. For some, lights on can be a very dimly lit set of recessed lights, while for other's like God, when he said let there be light, it lit up the whole sky!  Just curious, that's all.




Do not know about fraisa setup. But according to Screen Innovations sales development manager Blake Vackat post 1160. With the lights on in a home theater environment is 2.5 foot-candles while a brightly lit room is over 20 foot-candles.


If my maths is correct that works out as about 7.9 foot lamberts (dim lighting). and 157.1 foot lamberts (a brightly lit office).

(1 footcandle = 10.764 lux, 1 lux = 1 lumen/meter2, 1 lumen/meter2 = 0.29 foot-lambert)


The 2.5 foot-candle light used in their video is ideally placed and it is dim lighting for a living room 26.9 lux 7.9 foot-lambert. But it is correct for a home cinema as SMPTE reference white for a CRT TVs is 35fL with ambient lighting being up to 20% of the display white level, 7fL.

Typical rooms in a home are 50-80lux (4.6-7.4 footcandles) = 14.6-23.3 foot-lambert with the lights on, with SMPTE and EBU target white for displays in normal lit environments that they should be able to reach at least 50fL white level.


Black Diamond Projection Screen Room Possibilities video shows 1.1 foot-candles blue strip light, which they equate to a typical home theater, and 20-23 foot-candles. The 1.1 foot-candles they describe as bring the projector out of the dark with the lights on, not tripping over the chairs or looking for the remotes. The 20-23 foot-candles ambient light image they say is very watchable.


Black Projection Screen video uses 3.5 footcandles of ambient light.



Black Diamond Projector Screen Bright Room video states 20+ foot-candles of ambient light. They equate 20+ foot-candles to a living room with windows.


Proof of concept video part 2, is middle of the afternoon in family room with windows to the right and left and a bright ceiling. 1.4 gain black diamond and about 1000 lumen JVC 550, showing a very bright CGI cartoon. They imply it would also be fine for sports, is a perfect image better than a flat panel in the same environment. In another video they state windows to the side are no problem.


Black Diamond 2 Projection Screen Trailer video intro shows the black diamond being used outside in daylight next to a swiming pool, and in a latter part of the video has black diamond being used in an environment with huge windows in daylignt, with it being described as like a giant flat panel.


The last two videos are probably what karlsch believes are misleading as his setup with window to the side failed to perform as he thought it would, but going by the videos and claims you would of thought it would of worked great.





To be honest their with the lights on 1.1-3.5 foot-candle examples, so you are not tripping over the chairs, can find the remote, can see your popcorn and beer, etc... do not look much brighter than how lit up a bat-cave gets with just the projector screen as a source of light. In a batcave I might not be able to see the side walls, ceiling, etc... but I can see where my chair, remote, popcorn etc... is because I sit in the path the light takes bouncing off the screen.


So to me it comes down to how good the screen is at dealing with room reflections lowering contrast. I would expect very good as it has a limited viewing angle. I use a retro-reflective screen in my batcave for the same reason, if you can setup the angles right and are happy with the limited viewing angles then retro-reflective and angular-reflective screens can produce higher contrast images because no room is perfect.


The real question is how good is the screen in a living room with normal living room lighting or windows. Is it a paradigm shift enabling projectors to replace flat panels, or as they say in some of their videos better than flat panels because they do not have screen reflections, glare.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/20441201
> 
> 
> yes... it is becoming rather tiresome... and i know that i will be much more inclined to post my impressions as a new owner if they aren't reacted to with a constant barrage of screenshots, unneeded advice about calibration, etc.
> 
> 
> fwiw... not all bd owners are members of "the family"...



I honestly don't understand this post. You mentioned the blacks weren't as good as your Kuro, and someone suggested that calibration may help that. Someone asked for screenshots, and I would like to see screenshots as well. If you don't want to provide them, then just mention that you would rather not. I don't see the issue with "excitement" about a product and the sharing of experience (calibration suggestions).


Am I reading your post wrong, or are you basically saying - leave me alone, don't give me suggestions, stop asking for screenshots, and I don't want to be a member of the BD family??


And then MississippiMan wants to enforce a minimum camera requirement?


Strange stuff for a community forum...


Dave


----------



## Mazda74Speed3

Hey guys we are getting ready to swap out our current matte white screen for the new BD II Venue in June. I'll keep you guys posted, here is our current setup.



 


Uploaded with ImageShack.us


----------



## Kevin 3000

*Black Diamond 1.4 200watts Halogen Lights on which throws off the cameras metering White Balance

so no not what i see colour wise but onscreen contrast is close in this BRIGHT room test.*


----------



## pb_maxxx

Kevin 3000;


that screenshot is not all that impressive. there is no real large amount of light hitting the screen and the light from the lamps is directed away from the screen.


but it's easy to see that screenshot is overexposed... simply from the lack of detail of the individual buttons on the remotes in the foreground. secondly, you can also see this with the contrast bars on the screen in which the light gray progressing to white bars are half missing (ie..top end/half of bars are just one color of white with no distinction between them). and finally, it's decidely gray as it's top end black level color. oh, and the hotspot (or should we say uniformity issues) are also present as well.


----------



## ERuiz




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pb_maxxx* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> kevin 3000;
> 
> 
> that screenshot is not all that impressive. There is no real large amount of light hitting the screen and the light from the lamps is directed away from the screen.
> 
> 
> But it's easy to see that screenshot is overexposed... Simply from the lack of detail of the individual buttons on the remotes in the foreground. Secondly, you can also see this with the contrast bars on the screen in which the light gray progressing to white bars are half missing (ie..top end/half of bars are just one color of white with no distinction between them). And finally, it's decidely gray as it's top end black level color. Oh, and the hotspot (or should we say uniformity issues) are also present as well.



+1


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pb_maxxx* /forum/post/20448313
> 
> 
> that screenshot is not all that impressive. . .



So only a little bit impressive?


----------



## prof55

OT and argumentative posts removed, please play nice.


Thank you,

Garry


----------



## ccotenj




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks* /forum/post/20445817
> 
> 
> I honestly don't understand this post. You mentioned the blacks weren't as good as your Kuro, and someone suggested that calibration may help that. Someone asked for screenshots, and I would like to see screenshots as well. If you don't want to provide them, then just mention that you would rather not. I don't see the issue with "excitement" about a product and the sharing of experience (calibration suggestions).
> 
> 
> Am I reading your post wrong, or are you basically saying - leave me alone, don't give me suggestions, stop asking for screenshots, and I don't want to be a member of the BD family??
> 
> 
> And then MississippiMan wants to enforce a minimum camera requirement?
> 
> 
> Strange stuff for a community forum...
> 
> 
> Dave



you are reading my posts wrong... i'll do you the courtesy of giving you the "why i posted that"...


here's the deal... EVERY post that points out an issue with the BD screen is greeted by a barrage of (already posted who knows how many times) screen shots, and the same repeated commentary (you are doing it wrong, other screens suck more, etc.)... enough already... it's impossible to actually share information in this thread...


as far as the rest of it... had the person who suggested certain things to me actually taken the time to read ALL of my post(s), they would have realized that certain advice wasn't necessary... etc...


i'm more than willing to post some screenshots, but i'm not willing to post them and then be subjected to the above...


one member needs to back off a bit in this thread... it's almost embarrassing to admit i own this screen because of him (and he really needs to disclose his dealer status in his signature if he's going to keep pimping this thing)... if being part of the "bd family" means "hear no evil, see no evil", then yes, you can count me out...


----------



## dovercat




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pb_maxxx* /forum/post/20448313
> 
> 
> Kevin 3000;
> 
> 
> that screenshot is not all that impressive. there is no real large amount of light hitting the screen and the light from the lamps is directed away from the screen.



I agree it does not look especially projector unfriendly. But I would expect a matt white screen in the same setup to look very washed out.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pb_maxxx* /forum/post/20448313
> 
> 
> but it's easy to see that screenshot is overexposed... simply from the lack of detail of the individual buttons on the remotes in the foreground. secondly, you can also see this with the contrast bars on the screen in which the light gray progressing to white bars are half missing (ie..top end/half of bars are just one color of white with no distinction between them). and finally, it's decidedly gray as it's top end black level color. oh, and the hotspot (or should we say uniformity issues) are also present as well.



Can any camera take a shot of a grey scale ramp on a projector and not over or under expose clipping to black or white or both?


Cameras have significantly less dynamic contrast range than projectors, and projected images on a screen in projector friendly rooms.


A Nikon compact digital camera at ISO 100 for example only has a dynamic range of about 446:1, while a JVC HD950 LCOS projector has a native contrast of 50,000:1, a budget DLP projector 2,500:1 and some top of the range LCD projectors about 4,000:1 native.

The projector contrast is going to be reduced by room reflections (less so for reduced viewing angle screens) and really hit by ambient light (less so for grey-black screens). But in a projector friendly room I would hope it would still be too good to take a photo of a greyscale ramp without clipping. While in a projector unfriendly room I would just hope for a watchable picture that might be flattered by the camera.


Some people believe photos can be misleading because the camera can exaggerate how black the grey-black on the screen looks, making the image appear to have better black level or higher contrast than in real life or alternatively with a very dark image on screen surrounded by black velvet masking make it look more grey and washed out than in real life. Cameras are just generally not up to the job.


Since in this case the black of the wall looks blacker than the black on the screen and it is clipping the top of the grey scale to white, I expect it looks better in real life than the photo.


----------



## ccotenj




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Elboron* /forum/post/20448659
> 
> 
> That's something I've always noticed with regular TVs, lots of light being blasted back at me. That's one of the main reasons I've been looking at alternatives, and after wading through most of the screenshots in this and a couple other threads, I like the Black Diamond idea most.
> 
> 
> Essentially what I've read, appart from the actual picture quality, is that with the reduced reflection back from the BD, there will be less eye strain on the viewer. I'll admit I'm not great with numbers, so I skipped over the discussions about foot candle power (although thinking about it now, that's likely where the info I want will be).



in my room, with my projector, i would say that is true... the room lights up significantly less with the bd than the da-lite hc matte white i had before... however, it also must be noted that my walls reflect less light than they did before as well... so that plays into it as well...


can't comment on the effective reduction on eye strain though...


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Elboron* /forum/post/20448659
> 
> 
> That's something I've always noticed with regular TVs, lots of light being blasted back at me. That's one of the main reasons I've been looking at alternatives, and after wading through most of the screenshots in this and a couple other threads, I like the Black Diamond idea most.
> 
> 
> Essentially what I've read, appart from the actual picture quality, is that with the reduced reflection back from the BD, there will be less eye strain on the viewer. I'll admit I'm not great with numbers, so I skipped over the discussions about foot candle power (although thinking about it now, that's likely where the info I want will be).



You are right that the BD screen, especially the .8 gain, will reflect significantly less light onto surrounding ceiling/walls than a regular white screen. If you are looking for a screen to reduce reflections, the BD is in an elite class.


However, light reflecting into the room is not particularly related to "eye strain." When most people talk of display devices, projection included, and eye-strain, this usually has to do with image size (some people find too big or small an image to cause feelings of eye-strain) or image brightness. Some people find a very bright image in the dark to be hard to watch.

In fact, the more "dark" you have around the image to contrast with, the subjectively brighter it can appear, and the greater the swings in brightness changes for your eye (as dictated by changes, for instance, between night and day shots in a movie) and hence can possibly cause eye strain more readily. This is why there are advocates of "bias lighting," usually used for Rear Projection TVs, Flat panels, CRT TVs and the like (because they tend to be brighter than most consumer front projection). You surround the image with a bit of light glow and it provides a "base light level" for your eyes, so they don't constrict as widely than if the image were surrounded by dark. Also, the bias lighting can provide contrast to make the dark areas of an image look darker.


Looked at that way, a BD screen in a dark room, projecting the same image brightness as a white screen, could be more apt to cause eye-strain, because the white screen would light up some adjacent portion of the room a bit more, acting as a sort of "bias lighting" (not being constant, though, it wouldn't be full bias lighting).


However, in real life I heavily doubt the differences between "eye strain" with a white screen or BD screen amount to any issue at all. I'm just floating basic concepts so that you may understand the general issues of display technology and "eye-strain," since that seems to be a concern of yours.


If the BD screens suit your needs that's great. They are an excellent product that makes for many happy customers.


Cheers,


----------



## dovercat

I think I would abbreviate your post to

Quote:

Originally Posted by *fraisa* 
Okay

Last night i was able to play around more with the bd in the cafe with all the lights on in the store and all i have to say is WOW..
Quote:

Originally Posted by *fraisa* 
i still have a watchable image.
It is wow a front projector producing a watchable image in that environment. If I was a restaurant or bar owner and needed a watchable large screen display it would definitely be worth considering.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/20448630
> 
> 
> you are reading my posts wrong... i'll do you the courtesy of giving you the "why i posted that"...
> 
> 
> here's the deal... EVERY post that points out an issue with the BD screen is greeted by a barrage of (already posted who knows how many times) screen shots, and the same repeated commentary (you are doing it wrong, other screens suck more, etc.)... enough already... it's impossible to actually share information in this thread...
> 
> 
> as far as the rest of it... had the person who suggested certain things to me actually taken the time to read ALL of my post(s), they would have realized that certain advice wasn't necessary... etc...
> 
> 
> i'm more than willing to post some screenshots, but i'm not willing to post them and then be subjected to the above...
> 
> 
> one member needs to back off a bit in this thread... it's almost embarrassing to admit i own this screen because of him (and he really needs to disclose his dealer status in his signature if he's going to keep pimping this thing)... if being part of the "bd family" means "hear no evil, see no evil", then yes, you can count me out...



We're not all the same, and different folks have different sensitivities. I respect yours and would suggest that you do not succumb to the requests, if you are not able to handle the replies. Nothing wrong with that at all.


For my sensitivity, I would not have an issue if someone requested pictures or made comments on my posts. I also don't have a problem with folks propping up the screens they own. I also like to see the problems mentioned, as well as the rebuttals to those problems. Some folks contribute good information and some folks might just contribute personal opinions. For me, it's all part of a community forum.


Can you elect to not see posts from certain members? If so, that might help make this thread a better experience for you.


Dave


----------



## Kevin 3000

Black Diamond 1.4 contrast retained in BRIGHT room conditions test - Lens flare present.


----------



## R Harkness

Screen shots are always hard.


That looks pretty much what my image looks like on my white screen if I turn up every light in my room. I'm not saying that the BD doesn't in fact do better than a white screen for ambient light. It obviously does. What I'm saying is that, whatever it looks like in real life, I'm not sure your screen shots are doing the BD screen justice. (Sorry to point that out as I do admire the effort you have put into them...it's just that this stuff is really hard to convey with screen shots and it's not necessarily any lack of skill on your part. Part of the problem must be that you have a very dark room, so in order to even light up the room to show lights are on you have to really blast the lights, which in turn produces an almost impossible situation for any screen, BD included, to look any good).


Generally speaking even though you can see the picture, much of the detail is washed out, it has almost no contrast so it's quite a poor image. Would you actually watch that image with the lights up? (I personally couldn't come up with any reason to do so).


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20468592
> 
> 
> That looks pretty much what my image looks like on my white screen if I turn up every light in my room.



I'd like to see a picture of that!


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20471323
> 
> 
> I'd like to see a picture of that!



I too would like to see that Rich...

Even you taking a current screen shot would be an awesome thing let alone with the lights on...


I know how your screen looks Like with lights on and its nothing like what Kevin 3K has posted...


But again i would be happy to see any type of ambient light New Shot on that ST130.....


......


----------



## R Harkness

Ok guys, I'll try to grab a quick snap if you are that interested.


Remember, I didn't say my room looks like Kevin 3000's, only that I get a similar image (well, actually, much better in person) when I have all my lights on. As I've said many times before, with some foresight you can simply make sure you don't aim your lights right on the picture, and then you can have a very serviceable amount of light on in the room and still get quite a visible image (when I've left some lights on some guests think they are looking at a plasma).


So I have my lights in zones. However, one set of lights is quite close to the screen and when all lights are up the light does spill on to the screen (which is why I have those off if every watching a movie). But I'll post a shot with all the lights up, including the ones that spill on to the screen somewhat (much like Kevin 3000's).


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20472768
> 
> 
> Ok guys, I'll try to grab a quick snap if you are that interested.
> 
> 
> Remember, I didn't say my room looks like Kevin 3000's, only that I get a similar image (well, actually, much better in person) when I have all my lights on. As I've said many times before, with some foresight you can simply make sure you don't aim your lights right on the picture, and then you can have a very serviceable amount of light on in the room and still get quite a visible image (when I've left some lights on some guests think they are looking at a plasma).
> 
> 
> So I have my lights in zones. However, one set of lights is quite close to the screen and when all lights are up the light does spill on to the screen (which is why I have those off if every watching a movie). But I'll post a shot with all the lights up, including the ones that spill on to the screen somewhat (much like Kevin 3000's).



Looking forward to your Shot...


----------



## Lawguy

FWIW, I think that your shots show good onscreen contrast for the amount of light in your room.


Have you ever thought about getting rid of some of that black in the room?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20473242
> 
> 
> While we wait for Rich`s contribution.......and to reply to his query I regularly watch sports with all the lights on in my room but trying to show here is as you say hard. Another attempt enjoy.



That Shot is Flippin Awesome...

You have colour detail that is not faded,

Its totally impossible to get that type of image in ambient light on a ST130..


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20473564
> 
> 
> its totally impossible to get that type of image in ambient light on a st130..


----------



## R Harkness

Ok, earlier today my wife and kid finished watching a Katie Perry performance on the big screen, so I grabbed some shots with my iPhone afterward. This is with all the lights turned on. It's all dark around the image - or looks that way - because my screen wall around the image is pitch black velvet, so even though all the lights are on, no matter how much I crank up the exposure it won't register much.

_ETA for those who may have missed it: These are shots of a JVC RS20 projector on to a Stewart ST-130 1.3 gain_ *white screen* _in ambient light conditions_.


Even though I only used my iPhone, to my surprise they capture quite accurately the type of contrast I'm seeing with the lights on.


Here's a few shots:











Closer:











You can see a bit more of the room in this shot:











Cheers,


Rich


----------



## R Harkness

BTW,


Since it's hard to get the whole room and the screen image in the shot, I turned the camera around and just snapped a couple of photos of how the room looked with those lights on. The room is very non-reflective once set up so it's tough to photograph. But the lights are pretty bright in the room, in person.











This one here has the black curtain along that bright wall, which I do for more "critical viewing"::


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20473918
> 
> 
> BTW,
> 
> 
> Since it's hard to get the whole room and the screen image in the shot, I turned the camera around and just snapped a couple of photos of how the room looked with those lights on. The room is very non-reflective once set up so it's tough to photograph. But the lights are pretty bright in the room, in person.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This one here has the black curtain along that bright wall, which I do for more "critical viewing"::



First your room layout has won a vote from me,

Love the style of warmth that comes from that sectional..( when you going to invite me and my Family over for a Movie and Popcorn....he he)


Now put the light up by the screen like Kevin 3k has and you will get a washed out image.

Its really not fair to compare this shot to Kevins since he had light up by the screen and you dont.

I see light back in the seating area but nothing up by the screen...

In kevins shot i see the detail of his speakers and Front wall in yours its just total Black...


Again Still a nice shot and i love your room setup,

But we are not compairing apples to apples room light wise with regards to light distance from the screen...


But with that back room light i am shocked you have received that good of an image .... For that Well done.

Also Side note,

Back Black speaker what brand is that? ,,, Looks like one of my Older style Energy Speakers i use to have in my room...


@ Kevin3K

What is the distance from your Side lights from the screen looks to me like a Foot and a half...


----------



## R Harkness

fraisa,


Thanks for the compliments.


However, you seem to have missed the point I've been making. I haven't said "_If you allow lights to shine directly on a white screen that it will handle it just like a Black Diamond screen_." And I specifically didn't say "If I shined my lights at the screen I'd get an image like Kevins." I said: When *I* turn my lights up I get an image like (better than!) the one Kevin posted. Why is that? Because, like I keep preaching, I've taken care in how I set up my lighting so I can be in such a situation.


What I keep saying is: *If you just go about your lighting set up reasonably and make sure you aren't shining your room lights directly on the screen, THEN you can still have a very watchable image with some room lights on, even with a white screen.* (And having a low reflectance room/sofa etc only increases this ability).


The point is, that is what I've done. As you can see from the room shots, the lights are on! (Although I have taken care that most of my track/pot lights don't spill on to the screen at all, the nearest couple do spill on to the sides of the screen a bit. The image would be significantly better if I even just turned those 2 lights off, but I kept them on. If the screen-wall were not covered in the blackest velvet I could find, then the wall all around the screen would have been visibly lit in the shots as well).


If I took the velvet off the rest of the walls, you'd see how bright the rest of the room would be (click on the link below my signature, and it looks similar to the first couple room shots). You said you can't get a good image like Kevin's with the ST-130 in ambient lighting. Well, sorry, but you can see my room undeniably has it's lights on! And it's a small room too - the ottomans are only 6 feet from the screen - the sofa 8 feet from the screen. The room is about 13' by 13' or so.


I simply set my lights not to shine on the screen! And the decor, when properly set, absorbs stray light very well. So I can turn on virtually all the lights in the room and still get an image like you see there.


It seems you are so set to expect a washed out image from a white screen that when it doesn't happen it seems hard for you to accept.

It just takes some pretty obvious thought toward room lighting to make it happen.


Why does anyone want to watch their image with the lights on? I dunno...maybe you want to watch a concert or sports show with the buddies and have the lights up to see everyone, what you are eating, whatever. As you can see there is more than enough light on in my room to do all that...and yet I still get the image you see. So it should be pretty clear that the options aren't strictly "I want to have a decent projected image with some lights on, and if that's the case I must get a BD-type screen because any white screen will look poor with any ambient light."


However as I'm sure you can now see, _if you can plan your lighting and room_, you can have both a white screen, lights on in the room, AND a nice image.


ETA: That back wall surround speaker is a Monitor Audio Bronze BR-FX surround speaker. I chose it because it looks nice, but more importantly, because it makes a very good timbrel match for my Hales Transcendence L/C/R speakers. The Hales speakers are covered in black velvet which is why they aren't visible in the images.


That black curtain that I put across the bright wall (2nd room picture) is acoustically transparent speaker cloth, so it doesn't impede the sound from the speaker.


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20474066
> 
> 
> fraisa,
> 
> 
> Thanks for the compliments.
> 
> 
> However, you seem to have missed the point I've been making. I haven't said "_If you allow lights to shine directly on a white screen that it will handle it just like a Black Diamond screen_." And I specifically didn't say "If I shined my lights at the screen I'd get an image like Kevins." I said: When *I* turn my lights up I get an image like (better than!) the one Kevin posted. Why is that? Because, like I keep preaching, I've taken care in how I set up my lighting so I can be in such a situation.
> 
> 
> What I keep saying is: *If you just go about your lighting set up reasonably and make sure you aren't shining your room lights directly on the screen, THEN you can still have a very watchable image with some room lights on, even with a white screen.* (And having a low reflectance room/sofa etc only increases this ability).
> 
> 
> The point is, that is what I've done. As you can see from the room shots, the lights are on! (Although I have taken care that most of my track/pot lights don't spill on to the screen at all, the nearest couple do spill on to the sides of the screen a bit. The image would be significantly better if I even just turned those 2 lights off, but I kept them on).
> 
> 
> If I took the velvet off the rest of the walls, you'd see how bright the rest of the room would be (click on the link below my signature, and it looks similar to the first couple room shots). You said you can't get a good image like Kevin's with the ST-130 in ambient lighting. Well, sorry, but you can see my room undeniably has it's lights on! And it's a small room too - the ottomans are only 6 feet from the screen - the sofa 8 feet from the screen. The room is about 13' by 13' or so.
> 
> 
> I simply set my lights not to shine on the screen! And the decor, when properly set, absorbs stray light very well. So I can turn on virtually all the lights in the room and still get an image like you see there.
> 
> 
> It seems you are so set to expect a washed out image from a white screen that when it doesn't happen it seems hard for you to accept.
> 
> It just takes some pretty obvious thought toward lighting to make it happen.



So true, Rich. I have black fabric on my side walls and ceiling, out about 7 feet from the screen wall, and with a Dalite HP 126" screen and RS20 the pic stays very contrasty and of high quality even if I have reading lights on at our seats. The trick is not to have the light hitting the screen, as you say. It's amazing how effective it is to have black material on the ceiling/side walls to frame the screen.


----------



## Kevin 3000

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Lawguy* 
FWIW, I think that your shots show good onscreen contrast for the amount of light in your room.


Have you ever thought about getting rid of some of that black in the room?
No the movie experience with the black walls and Black Diamond combination is like looking through a window with no distracting light spill.


@fraisa

The side walls are 10" from screen.


@R Harkness

You have made a good point and i knew what you wanted to show from the off







, but tell us the wattage/type of lights on in your bright room pics so others realise the whole story.


----------



## Lawguy

I agree with everyone that Rich's setup is very nice and very well thought out. Well done.


But, I do ask that Rich take a picture where the majority of the image is black, like the one that Kevin posted (the one with the car in it). The distinction is that all colors are from projected light. Blacks (at least ideally) are not the product of projected light but of the environment, including the screen.


I am curious to see how a white screen in a room with that amount of ambient light (directed as it is away from the screen) can maintain black in a scene where the majority of the image is black. White can only appear to be black when there is not much light present.


----------



## R Harkness

Lawguy,


If you look in my previous shots you can see the "black levels" and note how they are elevated relative to the surrounding pitch black wall.

As I mentioned, these shots are surprisingly close to what I'm seeing in real life.


Here's another shot I took at the same time. Singer is light of course, but he's singing at night so all the surrounding is mostly night city. You can certainly see the elevated black levels:











What do you think? "Watchable?"



Kevin,


Bulbs are *MR16, 50W* (although design is supposed to make them "brighter" than 50W...can't remember how much brighter). There are *13* of them. Room is about 13ft x 14ft (ish).


----------



## Lawguy

Quote:

Originally Posted by *R Harkness* 
What do you think? "Watchable?"
Yes. That is watchable.


The point I was making is that Kevin's shot with the car in it is not really a high contrast shot. It is a low APL shot. Your shot with the singer is still a high contrast shot because there are significant portions of bright areas.


I am curious to see what a low APL shot looks like in your room.


----------



## R Harkness

Cover the singer and it's low APL 


Also, Kevin's boxing screen shot is not low APL, so you also compare the images I've posted to his brighter image as well.


----------



## Benito Joaquin

very nice shots Rich.


benito


----------



## Lawguy

Quote:

Originally Posted by *R Harkness* 
Cover the singer and it's low APL 
I get that but its not that simple, as I am sure you know.


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20475225
> 
> 
> Kevin,
> 
> 
> Bulbs are *MR16, 50W* (although design is supposed to make them "brighter" than 50W...can't remember how much brighter). There are *13* of them. Room is about 13ft x 14ft (ish).



Rich

But how many were on in the first pics posted 1 or maybe 2 judging by the light pattern on the seating pics? If they were all on in the screen pics thats 700+ watts in room on whilst you took the pic Correct?


----------



## R Harkness

I'm not too inclined to bother again. I'm not in "screen shot" mode these days. Perhaps if I have the opportunity today or tomorrow I'll find a low APL scene.


However, I think the shots make my point. As I've said it's obvious a white screen won't combat ambient light, especially directly on the screen, as well as a BD screen.

In almost every condition where I have lights on in the room, if you replaced my white screen with a BD screen, the BD screen is going to preserve better contrast. (Although things being complicated, at a certain point the added gain of my screen will make some images look more impressive and vivid, given the same projector light output).


However, a lot of people seem to think the only way to have a viewable image with some lights on is a BD-type screen, and my point is that you can also have a decent image with lights on with some care to how you've set up your room. So the comparison for me is between a BD-type screen in a room that has not been set up with lighting care, vs a white screen in a room that has.


I've seen the BD screens in all manner of lighting conditions, including the "isn't this amazing" with some more room lights on demos. However, I generally get a much better image at home with some room lights on than what I've seen on the BD screen ambient light demos, only due to my controlling how light plays in my room.


I've also seen lots of low APL images on the BD screen with some room lights on and have not ever seen the image look "good" in such conditions. It's more of a "isn't that amazing you can see a thing at all" effect, rather than a good quality image, so personally I wouldn't care to watch any low APL movies or scenes of such quality, either on a BD screen or a white screen. But, again, personal preferences play a big role here.


As I said, I don't think that much of screen shots these days, and I would not judge Kevin's image via a screen shot. I'm sure it looks terrific under good lighting conditions. But if people are so taken with screen shots here, if I had the choice of watching an image like Kevin's non-APL boxing screen shot or the ones I've posted.....well....


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20475561
> 
> 
> Rich
> 
> But how many were on in the first pics posted 1 or maybe 2 judging by the light pattern on the seating pics? If they were all on in the screen pics thats 700+ watts in room on whilst you took the pic Correct?



Sorry, I just noticed one is burned out. So there were 12 of those lights on during the screen shots I took.


Has this been helpful at all?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20475600
> 
> 
> Sorry, I just noticed one is burned out. So there were 12 of those lights on during the screen shots I took.
> 
> 
> Has this been helpful at all?



Can you take a shot of you standing next to your screen like below so i can gauge how much light is at the front of your viewing area..


Few pages back i mentioned about the St130 and Grayhawk 8/10s on the .8 black diamond...

In this shot below you can clearly make out my brothers hand in the shot and his face...

Showing how much light is in the front of the viewing area...


BD.8









ST130









Grayhawk










If i was to shut off my front lights that are 2-3 feet infront of the screen you wouldnt be able to see his hand and i am thinking thats what would be similiar to your lighting condition...


Again great shots and you know i am a fan of your Room..

Still havent told me what those speakers are at the back....










Again your ST130 has different Win/Fails than the BD has,

Your ST130 is still a great Screen ... Just as the Grayhawk is also


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20475600
> 
> 
> Sorry, I just noticed one is burned out. So there were 12 of those lights on during the screen shots I took.
> 
> 
> Has this been helpful at all?



Your conscience you decide.


----------



## R Harkness

Kevin 3000,


I must be thick today. Why would you mention my "conscience?" Could you explain clearly what you wish to imply by your comment?


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20476171
> 
> 
> Kevin 3000,
> 
> 
> I must be thick today. Why would you mention my "conscience?" Could you explain clearly what you wish to imply by your comment?



You asked "has this been helpful at all?" so i gave you a reply do with it what you like. Be evasive its upto you.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20476210
> 
> 
> You asked "has this been helpful at all?" so i gave you a reply do with it what you like.



You left a reply that appears to question my integrity.

Why would you do that? Why not a clear statement? Man up, please.


Why leave a comment that makes you potentially look like an A-hole? I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt here.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20476210
> 
> 
> Be evasive its upto you.



Sorry..me evasive?


People here asked me to post screen shots. I went to the work of doing just that, as best I could, showing screen shots and also trying to show my full room.


I've also told you the room dimensions. At *YOUR* request about my lights, I went digging through my bulbs and receipts to look up what wattage of bulbs I'm using and how many lights, to make sure and give you accurate information.


Instead of acknowledging this even with a polite "thank you," instead you make a post implying something ought to bother my conscience....just letting the implication hang there, refusing to be clear what you mean.


And then you go on to start calling _me_ "evasive." Please re-examine your comments here.


----------



## bud16415

This is about the best I was able to do with a gray screen made from a $12 can of wall paint.







This room only has (8) 60w flood lamps going though. But to its favor the lights in the front are only 3 feet from the screen.

 


I did a whole thread about it with pictures facing both directions showing the lighting.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=790374 


I do have to agree with Rich none of this really tells a whole lot, and why would you want lights on in the screen end of the room. the place for task lights is at the viewer end of the room. Now that the new iPhone4 cams have HDR abilities I suspect we will be seeing all kinds of amazing screen shots. So far I haven't tried mine yet.

Without a scientific approach to screen shots they are totally meaningless even with the best of a scientific approach the results should be taken with a grain of salt.


----------



## Kevin 3000

R Harkness


Evasive to my question and others, ignoring frasias request getting shirty for some odd reason. I am not polluting this thread with this it ends now.


I thought you were 1 of the good guys.....apologies for speaking out of place and i take back whatever upset you.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20476366
> 
> 
> R Harkness
> 
> 
> Evasive to my question and others,



I haven't "evaded" any questions. Which question of yours, specifically, have I "evaded?"


(You are welcome for the info you requested).



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20476366
> 
> 
> ignoring frasias request getting shirty for some odd reason.



Ignoring what??? You keep making weird accusations without being remotely clear.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20476366
> 
> 
> 
> I thought you were 1 of the good guys.....



Another weird phrase that seems to imply I'm not a good guy. Why so cryptic?




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20476366
> 
> 
> apologies for speaking out of place and i take back whatever upset you.



A word of Internet forum advice, in terms of tone: When you precede your apology with more accusations it makes the apology seem insincere.


It's like saying: Your posts lead me to infer you are an evasive A-hole....but if I've said anything bad about you, sorry, my apologies.


----------



## Toe




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20475343
> 
> 
> Cover the singer and it's low APL
> 
> 
> Also, Kevin's boxing screen shot is not low APL, so you also compare the images I've posted to his brighter image as well.



Great shots Rich. I also got similar amb light results with my 130 when I had it up.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20475580
> 
> 
> I'm not too inclined to bother again. I'm not in "screen shot" mode these days. Perhaps if I have the opportunity today or tomorrow I'll find a low APL scene.
> 
> 
> However, I think the shots make my point. As I've said it's obvious a white screen won't combat ambient light, especially directly on the screen, as well as a BD screen.
> 
> In almost every condition where I have lights on in the room, if you replaced my white screen with a BD screen, the BD screen is going to preserve better contrast. (Although things being complicated, at a certain point the added gain of my screen will make some images look more impressive and vivid, given the same projector light output).
> 
> 
> However, a lot of people seem to think the only way to have a viewable image with some lights on is a BD-type screen, and my point is that you can also have a decent image with lights on with some care to how you've set up your room. So the comparison for me is between a BD-type screen in a room that has not been set up with lighting care, vs a white screen in a room that has.
> 
> 
> I've seen the BD screens in all manner of lighting conditions, including the "isn't this amazing" with some more room lights on demos. However, I generally get a much better image at home with some room lights on than what I've seen on the BD screen ambient light demos, only due to my controlling how light plays in my room.
> 
> 
> I've also seen lots of low APL images on the BD screen with some room lights on and have not ever seen the image look "good" in such conditions. It's more of a "isn't that amazing you can see a thing at all" effect, rather than a good quality image, so personally I wouldn't care to watch any low APL movies or scenes of such quality, either on a BD screen or a white screen. But, again, personal preferences play a big role here.
> 
> 
> As I said, I don't think that much of screen shots these days, and I would not judge Kevin's image via a screen shot. I'm sure it looks terrific under good lighting conditions. But if people are so taken with screen shots here, if I had the choice of watching an image like Kevin's non-APL boxing screen shot or the ones I've posted.....well....



Rich,


I just wanted to add a couple of things. First, I'll echo what's already been said - those are terrific pictures and a really nice theater and seating. I also want to compliment your lighting scheme. Your room is setup so that you can have ambient light with a white screen and still have a nice image. It really shows other folks what a lighting scheme, along with wall and ceiling materials, can do for a home theater. Excellent job!


You asked if it's helpful, and I'm sure it will be helpful to some folks. You also mentioned your preference to not do any more screen shots, and that is your choice. I understand, because your application is perhaps different than what some others may be curious about.


For example, I have two large windows and an Arcadia door on the left side of my great room (family room & kitchen combo). I do not have a lighting scheme during the day, so I'm curious about how a BD and a projector would work as a TV - both day and night. I understand there will be compromises, but if it's decent enough, then it might be a consideration. Right now, I have Pioneer Elite Pro 710HD rear projection TV, and it too is compromised by light coming into the room from the windows. Still, if I can get the performance of that TV (compromised by daylight) on a 113" screen, that would be awesome.


Thanks again,


Dave


----------



## fraisa

R Harkness Quote....

:


> Quote:
> Ignoring what??? You keep making weird accusations without being remotely clear.
> 
> :



This is what i think Kevin is referring to.....

From the last page post that had the ST130 Screen shots compared to Grayhawk and BD .8 Gain.....


Quote...

Can you take a shot of you standing next to your screen like below so i can gauge how much light is at the front of your viewing area..


If i was to shut off my front lights that are 2-3 feet infront of the screen you wouldnt be able to see his hand and i am thinking thats what would be similiar to your lighting condition...


.....End Quote...


I do find it a little odd that You didnt comment on the ST130 to BD .8 Screen shot comparision,

As you do normally leave a comment on my shots..


That shot does show the Black Detail limits of the St130 and Grayhawk in ambient light...


ST130


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20476602
> 
> 
> This is what i think Kevin is referring to.....
> 
> From the last page post that had the ST130 Screen shots compared to Grayhawk and BD .8 Gain.....
> 
> 
> Quote...
> 
> Can you take a shot of you standing next to your screen like below so i can gauge how much light is at the front of your viewing area..



Sorry Fraisa, it's my wife's birthday, so I'm afraid I don't have much time to immediately follow up every screen shot request. I'll see if time permits later. I also don't want to go too far in filling a BD thread with shots of my non-BD screen. I've only put some in due to requests.




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20476602
> 
> 
> I do find it a little odd that You didnt comment on the ST130 to BD .8 Screen shot comparision,



I guess because there isn't anything new I could say: It shows the obvious, which is that a specialty gray screen will tend to preserve contrast better than a regular white screen when you have ambient light hitting the screens. That basic point has been established so long ago, and given I've acknowledged this over and over in my own posts...what more is there for me to add on that issue?


That is why I've moved to, what to me is more interesting and perhaps less intuitive: how can we also preserve contrast with a white screen, with room lights on? And how close can we get to having a BD-like experience with room lights on (when carefully managed, so lights aren't directed at the screen)? I know I've pretty much found the answer for myself. Given others seem interested I've posted screen shots, but those can only go so far

as a replacement for trying these things for yourself.


Thanks again for your nice comments on my room.


----------



## R Harkness

(Since my wife went out with my eldest son for a while...I snuck a few more screen shots as requested).


For Fraisa:


My son is standing at the edge of the carpet, which puts him 22" from the screen surface. Note the light is designed so the lights closest to the screen falls off just in front of the screen. If I ever have lights on to watch any content I don't even turn those front lights on because I have plenty of other lights over the seating area (and hence I get a much better image).











Left Side, which is a tad darker:


----------



## R Harkness

For LAWGUY:


I'm sorry, but I've run into the limits of my iPhone light sensor. The iPhone is introducing lots of noise when trying to pick up low APL scenes (none is present in the real images, and the noise actually lightens the blacks somewhat and lowers contrast...in this case the image definitely looks better in person).


But, FWIW....same lights on conditions as before:





























Personally, I wouldn't want to watch images like that if I can avoid it.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20477650
> 
> 
> (Since my wife went out with my eldest son for a while...I snuck a few more screen shots as requested).
> 
> 
> For Fraisa:
> 
> 
> My son is standing at the edge of the carpet, which puts him 22" from the screen surface. Note the light is designed so the lights closest to the screen falls off just in front of the screen. If I ever have lights on to watch any content I don't even turn those front lights on because I have plenty of other lights over the seating area (and hence I get a much better image).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Left Side, which is a tad darker:



That is better than i thought it would turn out...

But with this screen you have to have a paint treated room or the light coming back would be Huge..

I am puzzled with one thing ,

In your shots the person the camera is focusing on the blacks are better but anything in the background

is a little faded....Could be the camera effect not sure..


But you are getting a performance that no DIY screen can do,

So for too that i say bravo...


----------



## R Harkness

Yes, the darker room surfaces help a lot. You sort of expect that with some lights on, even somewhat near the screen, it will wash out the image more. But much of it is absorbed quite well so it doesn't. I also have aimed my lights so that when room treatments are not on they are hitting bright areas of the walls etc, so it feels cheery and un-bat-cave-like when not watching movies. But other lights are deliberately aimed over light absorbing areas, like the sofa. I also chose bulbs with narrow beams for the same reason, to control light spread. When you put all of this together, as I say, the image can still be quite impressive with some lights on.


But I always prefer to watch in the dark. Even if I had the BD screen I'd be watching it in the dark.


----------



## ERuiz




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> But you are getting a performance that no DIY screen can do



Unless it's painted with Silver Fire v2.


----------



## Kevin 3000

*Black Diamond 2 1.4 projector RS10 25k contrast.









Just imagine what a BD3 0.8 would look like with an RS20 50k contrast lawguy knows or an Epson9700UB fraisa knows














*


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20477671
> 
> 
> For LAWGUY:
> 
> 
> Personally, I wouldn't want to watch images like that if I can avoid it.



These shots look pretty good. You really have done a fine job with light direction. Like everyone else, I am pretty surprised with the results that you got with a white screen. It shows what is possible if you really think about your room and what you are trying to accomplish. All that time you spent planning things pays off handsomely.


One thing that I hoped to convey in my BD review is that even with the BD, you must still pay attention to light - where it is coming from and where it is going to. I think that the BD gives you more latitude than a white screen does. In my room, when using a white screen I could never get blacks looking anywhere near as black as you do with as much light present.


As they say, there is more than one way to skin a cat.


----------



## dovercat




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20479210
> 
> *Black Diamond 2 1.4 projector RS10 25k contrast.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just imagine what a BD3 0.8 would look like with an RS20 50k contrast lawguy knows or an Epson9700UB fraisa knows
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



JVC RS10 25,000:1, JVC RS20 50,000:1 Epson 9700 UB 200,000:1

With ambient lighting and in the case of Lawguy and fraisa not in non-reflective batcaves?


The room is a major factor in the picture quality achieved by front projection. It would be nice to read some measurements on/off and ANSI checkerboard contrast ratio off screen in the rooms with lights on/off.


To achieve those contrast ratios sequentially on screen you need a room with no lights on.

Commercial cinemas are recommended to be


----------



## ccotenj




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dovercat* /forum/post/20479920
> 
> 
> Black diamond screens can reduce the amount lights and room reduce the picture quality but not make the marketing "no loss in picture quality" true. Its cheaper and more effective to reduce the effect of lighting and room by changing the lighting and room than it is to buy a Black Diamond screen. But if money was no object I expect it would be excellent in a dedicated home cinema since no room is perfect.



whereas i agree that the capabilities of the screen are often overstated in this thread, i can't agree that "changing the lighting and the room" is cheaper than buying a bd screen... you can't just wiggle your nose and have the room magically transform...


i love rich's setup... but a bd screen would have been a HECKUVA lot cheaper (albeit, not what he wanted) than his room transformation...


----------



## Lawguy

No everyone wants so many dark colors in a room. The BD works well in real world rooms (again, provided some steps are taken to control light).


The goal is good picture quality. There are many variables that can be played with to make this happen. Like so many things, the outcome depends on how good the choices are that you make.


----------



## R Harkness

Thanks Lawguy.


As I've said, my purpose isn't an "apples to apples" comparison. There's no point for me to compare a white screen with the BD screen under the exact same lighting conditions as that has been done plenty of times and the results are obvious: Under any of the ambient light room scenarios I've posted, even very dim ambient light, if you replaced my white screen with a BD screen, the BD screen is obviously going to preserve contrast/black levels better, no doubt.


That is why I'm instead looking at the general concept of "_Can we achieve a good/watchable projected image while allowing for some lights on in the room_?" The BD screen is one way to do so; careful consideration in use of lighting is another, which can allow for other screen choices if desired. It's just about our being aware of the possibilities.


To end my picture contributions to this thread, and since I meant to post these with the other screen shots....


I had mentioned earlier that Kevin's shots looked similar to my rooms image with "all the lights up" so when you folks wished to see screen shots with "all the lights up," that's what I provided. (I also have one row of colored LED track lights aimed directly at the screen that do a "light show" on the screen for when I'm listening to music...obviously I wouldn't be talking about having those on, ever, when trying to watch a movie, as there would be no movie image at all).


However, it was never my intention when setting up my lighting to be able to view my projected image with "every" light on. That's why I set it up in progressive zones. I would never have the lights closest to the screen on, as I did when taking the photos posted here.


So just to illustrate how I'd actually use my room, here are some shots under various lighting conditions (no added room treatment in these shots...it's better when I pull the curtains over the walls):

*1.* Room lit up with "all lights on" for the screen shots I posted in this thread:










*2.* With lights closest to the screen turned off, along with the side wall lights down. That's all that is necessary to put the image quality into a whole different league, since light no longer spills near the screen:










*3.* Lights further dimmed, only over seating area. The projected image then becomes so good it's almost as good as lights out bat-cave quality (especially when I have the room treatment curtains pulled over the walls).

But there's plenty of light for seeing one another, eating, even reading if desired:










*4.* If we don't want any lights on ourselves, but only a tiny bit of "task" lighting on the Ottomans, e.g. to see any food or drinks we've placed on trays there, I can control lighting over the Ottomans. Again, this leaves the on screen image looking spectacular:











So those are some of the ways I chose to skin this particular cat in terms of having the choice of some lights on while watching the projector.


I still much prefer the experience with all lights off, which is how I watch almost all the time. The reason I set up my lighting carefully like this is so I can control the mood of the room to my desire, especially when listening to music. But I was thinking guests might like some light on for watching movies, and especially when I have big gangs of people over to watch sports, like the UFC (which I do almost every month). So many people on these forums talk about "but I want lights on for when we watch sports" etc. that I took it for granted that's how guests would prefer the experience.


Somewhat to my own surprise, when given the choice my guests generally prefer to watch with all the lights off, like me. It's not that they can tell any difference in image quality with task lights on or off - they rave about the image either way - but one of the things they actually like is how the room melts away when the lights are off, giving more of that transporting-you-to-the-event experience. (I should perhaps have anticipated this to some degree, given that for years I'd watch movies and sports on my plasma with the lights out and guests started to prefer it that way as well).


Life's a box o' chocolates and all that....


Cheers,


----------



## dovercat




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/20479933
> 
> 
> i can't agree that "changing the lighting and the room" is cheaper than buying a bd screen... you can't just wiggle your nose and have the room magically transform...



What are you including in the cost?

If you already have spare rooms, converting one to a home cinema if you go DIY is not massively expensive. Enough black velvet to cover a 14ft x 12ft room floor walls and ceiling is only around £1,000.


If you only have the one room available and need to also use it as a living room, family room, or what have you then a black diamond screen is going to be a lot cheaper than having an extension built or buying a bigger house, and a lot more wife/family friendly then making the room black.


----------



## ccotenj

^^^


put the quote back in the context it was written in... here is the rest of the post that you left out...


"i love rich's setup... but a bd screen would have been a HECKUVA lot cheaper (albeit, not what he wanted) than his room transformation..."


don't pull my quote out of context and use the emphasis that i used in the part that you left out... i'm not a starry eyed, hear no evil, see no evil person when it comes to the screen... cripes...


as far as diy is concerned... IF you have the skills, and IF you have the tools, and IF you have the room, and IF you want a dedicated theater room, and IF the dollar value that you place on your "free time" isn't higher than the cost of having someone else do it, then sure, diy is an option...


i'm not getting suckered into the rest of the stuff... i've already stated a couple times that at least one poster is beyond over the edge in his descriptions of the screen... you guys can fight that out amoungst yourselves...


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/20481396
> 
> 
> ^^^
> 
> 
> put the quote back in the context it was written in... here is the rest of the post that you left out...
> 
> 
> "i love rich's setup... but a bd screen would have been a HECKUVA lot cheaper (albeit, not what he wanted) than his room transformation..."
> 
> 
> don't pull my quote out of context and use the emphasis that i used in the part that you left out... i'm not a starry eyed, hear no evil, see no evil person when it comes to the screen... cripes...
> 
> 
> as far as diy is concerned... IF you have the skills, and IF you have the tools, and IF you have the room, and IF you want a dedicated theater room, and IF the dollar value that you place on your "free time" isn't higher than the cost of having someone else do it, then sure, diy is an option...
> 
> 
> i'm not getting suckered into the rest of the stuff... i've already stated a couple times that at least one poster is beyond over the edge in his descriptions of the screen... you guys can fight that out amoungst yourselves...



If anyone was aware of Where the 2pcs projection market is headed in regards to target Growth.. then you would already know that the growth area is the Family Room and Living Room Target.

Gone is the day for 2pcs projection to be limited to just a dedicated room,

Been there, done that and if it was to stay there then 2pcs projection wouldn't have seen the growth it has in the last few yrs.

So the SI black diamond screen is a vital element in the 2pcs projection industry with regards to expansion and growth markets.


As far as i am concerned I will continue to show different applications where the average 2pcs projection would have been impossible and will continue to push the elements of this screen to maximize its Potential.

I am not going Anywhere and neither is this Black Diamond Screen it will only continue to get More Popular as the Market continues to Grow.


----------



## dovercat




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/20481396
> 
> 
> ^^^
> 
> 
> put the quote back in the context it was written in... here is the rest of the post that you left out...
> 
> 
> "i love rich's setup... but a bd screen would have been a HECKUVA lot cheaper (albeit, not what he wanted) than his room transformation..."
> 
> 
> don't pull my quote out of context and use the emphasis that i used in the part that you left out... i'm not a starry eyed, hear no evil, see no evil person when it comes to the screen... cripes...



I quoted one paragraph, as a paragraph is normally a self-contained unit of a discourse making a key point. It was unfair of me to use the HECUVA lot as you did not use that word in the paragraph I quoted. That particular room transformation looks like it would cost a HECUVA lot, with the new ceiling etc... and it is the context in which you used the word. I am sorry for any offense and have amended my post to remove the HECUVA lot.


----------



## ccotenj




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20481469
> 
> 
> If anyone was aware of Where the 2pcs projection market is headed in regards to target Growth.. then you would already know that the growth area is the Family Room and Living Room Target.
> 
> Gone is the day for 2pcs projection to be limited to just a dedicated room,
> 
> Been there, done that and if it was to stay there then 2pcs projection wouldnt have seen the growth it has in the last few yrs.
> 
> So the SI black diamond screen is a vitial element in the 2pcs projection industry with regards to expansion and growth markets.
> 
> 
> As far as i am concerned I will continue to show different applications where the average 2pcs projection would have been impossible and will continue to push the elements of this screen to maximize its Potential.
> 
> I am not going Anywhere and neither is this Black Diamond Screen it will only continue to get better and Better...



"growth" in a microscopic marketplace isn't worth getting too excited about... i feel safe in saying that the "next great craze" amoungst consumers isn't going to be installing projectors in their living rooms...


you haven't caught on yet that you aren't helping your cause... oh well...


it'd be nice if this was an "owner's thread", rather than a "shiller's thread"...


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dovercat* /forum/post/20481362
> 
> 
> What are you including in the cost?
> 
> If you already have spare rooms, converting one to a home cinema if you go DIY is not massively expensive.



I'll attest to the fact through a lot of experience that as far as adapting even a Family room to be more ideally suited (...if not actually perfect...) for Front projection, I've seldom seen such an expense go beyond $1k for Paint & Draperies and switching Can bulbs / installing Can lights..


Any or all of those things represent a commonsense approach to achieving better results via effective planning.


A lot is made of "WAF" but I also have seen that if anything reasonable is to be considered the "significant other" usually will agree to it...if not initially, certainly after seeing the less-than desirable results that come with compromise. However diplomacy and reasoning on the front end is far better than the "push & shove' bickering or sour grapes many experience on the tail end.


For those who fail to, or cannot/will not consider bucking the Horse, well then, most likely something else that the Wife, the room itself...or the budget limitation introduces will rain on their parade before all is said and done.


It's really only a simple truth....consider and adjust for as many contingencies as you can and your end results will always be better than they would be otherwise. That applies to any/all projector/Screen/room combos. Fail to do so, and most probably you'll be posting about how you wish you had, or how you must do so now...at greater trouble & expense.


No matter what else, there exists no practical solutions for "worst case" scenarios, just "expensive fixes" made necessary by intractable personalities.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/20481497
> 
> 
> "growth" in a microscopic marketplace isn't worth getting too excited about... i feel safe in saying that the "next great craze" amoungst consumers isn't going to be installing projectors in their living rooms...



Hey now...hold on there!


Unless your on the bleeding edge of consumer response and demand for "The Big Picture" such as fraisa (or myself in most instances...) do not assume to say that the market is "microscopic" because it is FAR removed from being so.


In the last 5 years and over 200 installations, only *"3"* of the ones I've been involved with ...with normal individuals who knew next to nothing about Front projection, have involved using a Panel Display. Nope...they all asked about Front projection.


Why do you think these threads garner the response they do...eh? And AVS represents on a fractional number of the entire market. Those of us who are involved see the last 10 years of our advocacy for FP as being a helpful boost...if not indeed a deciding factor in the decidedly large up-tic in user demand.


Use-to-was there were the Projector-heads and the Plasma/RPTV advocates going toe to toe in the trenches. Now Display prices have plummeted, and RPTVs are history. Yet EVERYONE still lusts after "Jetson-sized" wall screen TVs. .


----------



## ccotenj




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dovercat* /forum/post/20481476
> 
> 
> Sorry for any offense will amend my post to remove the HECUVA lot. Since the particular room transformation looks like it would cost a HECUVA lot what with the new ceiling etc... and it is the context in which you used the word.



cool...










i'm basically not far off the same page as you... believe me... if i indeed had the space for a dedicated theater room, that's the route i'd go... and i'd likely figure out a way to do most of it myself (except stuff i can kill myself with







)...


unfortunately, my "projector room" is always going to be my "media room" in this house... every square inch of this house is pretty much used up... and given the real estate market, i'm gonna be here for a bit...










as noted, at least one poster is over the top in this thread... i hope that at least a few of us won't get painted with the brush that he is painting himself with...


the screen does what it is supposed to do... it has limitations (for example, if anyone tells you that they can't see the texture in it or the hotspotting, they are either consciously NOT looking for it, or ummm, fibbing), and it does not work miracles... i can get a very watchable picture during the daytime, with a lot of light through north windows... but as someone posted a long time ago... it's not that the bear dances great, it's that the bear dances at all... the picture is very watchable, but as soon as you turn the lights out, the deficiencies of a lighted environment become immediately obvious...


i do have some screenshots that i've taken, but i'm not a "pro" photographer, and have no desire to learn how to become one... these screenshots may (or may not) help someone see what the screen looks like _in my room with my lighting_... but frankly, i have no desire to post them just so i can get ripped...


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/20481598
> 
> 
> i do have some screenshots that i've taken, but i'm not a "pro" photographer, and have no desire to learn how to become one... these screenshots may (or may not) help someone see what the screen looks like _in my room with my lighting_... but frankly, i have no desire to post them just so i can get ripped...



We should start an "Ambient Light Projection" thread. That is pretty much what we are all discussing here in this thread. But, that thread might be a little more civilized because people might not try to do the things there that they do here (for whatever motives they might have).


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/20481497
> 
> 
> "growth" in a microscopic marketplace isn't worth getting too excited about... i feel safe in saying that the "next great craze" amoungst consumers isn't going to be installing projectors in their living rooms...
> 
> 
> you haven't caught on yet that you aren't helping your cause... oh well...
> 
> 
> it'd be nice if this was an "owner's thread", rather than a "shiller's thread"...



There are many in the 2pc projection fan club that are very excited that there are now products like the bd that can now be put in rooms that Rival Flat Panel applications.

I for one cant watch flat panel tv anymore.

It gives me huge eye strain.

Elboron mentioned this benefit a few pages back so others are seeing this benefit as an attraction also.


I for one would welcome the idea of a Ambient Light Screen thread,

then this thread could stay on focus... that being Black Diamond....


----------



## dovercat




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20481469
> 
> 
> If anyone was aware of Where the 2pcs projection market is headed in regards to target Growth.. then you would already know that the growth area is the Family Room and Living Room Target.
> 
> Gone is the day for 2pcs projection to be limited to just a dedicated room,
> 
> Been there, done that and if it was to stay there then 2pcs projection wouldn't have seen the growth it has in the last few yrs.
> 
> So the SI black diamond screen is a vital element in the 2pcs projection industry with regards to expansion and growth markets.
> 
> 
> As far as i am concerned I will continue to show different applications where the average 2pcs projection would have been impossible and will continue to push the elements of this screen to maximize its Potential.
> 
> I am not going Anywhere and neither is this Black Diamond Screen it will only continue to get More Popular as the Market continues to Grow.



I would of thought the Black Diamond was a luxury item aimed at a niche market. It seems to be priced to be partnered with a relatively expensive projector, and I would expect it to be promoted more at CEDIA than on home shopping channels. But then in the USA it is stocked by Best Buy. So maybe it is mass market in the USA, in the UK projectors are still very uncommon, only a handful are stocked by chain stores and usually not on display.


----------



## ccotenj




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20481682
> 
> 
> We should start an "Ambient Light Projection" thread. That is pretty much what we are all discussing here in this thread. But, that thread might be a little more civilized because people might not try to do the things there that they do here (for whatever motives they might have).



i'm up for that...


after all, if the "home projection market" is the burgeoning beast that some are trying to convince me that it is (







), and that boatloads of new people are going to be jumping in to the pool, i'd like to think that my observations as a "novice user" (i.e. first projector/screen) would be useful to at least some... especially those who are going to be willing to make some modifications to their living space, but are not willing (or don't desire) to go to extremes... also, i can easily be described (once getting over the initial "my new toy is so awesome" phase) as an "objectivist", so you'll get it both good and bad (that is what has led to my frustration in this thread)...


@dc... i'd agree... imo, it is a luxury item aimed at a niche market... but imo, for the most part, the whole pj shebang is a niche market... i respect what mm posted (and enjoy/learn from many of his posts), but ime, there's a lot more peeps looking for 42" lcd's than 100" pj screens... even if it can be done "cheap", i don't see it happening... maybe i'm just a pessimist, it wouldn't be the first time (nor the last) that i end up being proven wrong...










if you look at it straight dollars and cents, pj's WOULD be a burgeoning market... heck, even if you DO spend the money on a bd screen and a "decent, but not great" pj, it's still a "bargain"... i paid $1700 more for my display than i did for the pj/screen combined... the combination produces decent daytime picture quality, and more than decent nighttime picture quality... add in the ridiculously huge real estate advantage that the pj/screen has over the display, and it goes beyond "bargain" to "steal"...


and no doubt, if you are willing to diy, it goes beyond "steal" to, well, i'm not sure, but it's even better than "steal"...







but i am generally willing to trade money to avoid headaches, which diy projects generally end up to be for me...










but that's one man's situation/opinion... i understand that others are coming at it from a different angle...


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/20482607
> 
> 
> @dc... i'd agree... imo, it is a luxury item aimed at a niche market...



I can only identify a person or two who I know who live locally to me and who are into front projection. That sounds pretty niche to me.


I think that people are put off by the obstacles. Once bright lampless projectors become common (if that ever happens) I think that projection will become more comonplace. OR . . . if you can go into Best Buy and buy a 100" flat panel for a few grand, projection will be killed except for the most extreme applications. Let's see which happens first. Personally, the 100" flat panel sounds better.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20484157
> 
> 
> I can only identify a person or two who I know who live locally to me and who are into front projection. That sounds pretty niche to me.
> 
> 
> I think that people are put off by the obstacles. Once bright lampless projectors become common (if that ever happens) I think that projection will become more comonplace. OR . . . if you can go into Best Buy and buy a 100" flat panel for a few grand, projection will be killed except for the most extreme applications. Let's see which happens first. Personally, the 100" flat panel sounds better.



YOu have to remember what people are thinking when it comes to 2pcs projection from the past,

Dark Room..... Expensive Bulb Replacement..... Dim picture....


And ya you know 2 people in your area that have it..

In my Subdivision there is only 2 people that have it and i am one of them.

But for this industry and a Black diamond screen thats a huge opportunity for this industry growth,

if compared to the above myths.

That's why there is so much opportunity for 2pcs projection and they have to get it right this time.

Sharp has just come out with a 70 inch flat panel and i figure 100 inches is about 4-5 yrs away(from being affordable to the Normal Individual).

But just think of all that Light coming back into the Room from a Flat Panel.... I totally Don't want one...

So this industry has that much time to really do its expanding.


And the black diamond screen paired with a decent projector , heck even a Epson 9350/8350 can pull it off making a believer and converting people from the Flat panel Dark Side into the Light...


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/20481598
> 
> 
> cool...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i do have some screenshots that i've taken, but i'm not a "pro" photographer, and have no desire to learn how to become one... these screenshots may (or may not) help someone see what the screen looks like _in my room with my lighting_... but frankly, i have no desire to post them just so i can get ripped...



ccotenj

Post them pics how bad can they be? Look at whats been posted already no name dropping from me










Some peoples raison d'etre in this thread `they know who they are`repeatedly repeating what they think needs repeating yet you look at their history and it only occures in this thread each to their own, it dosen`t deter me quite the opposite










So if someone gets carried away with `ripping your pics apart` the mods jump on them and delete the BS or if they miss it report the offending post, you must know this seeing how many posts you have posted










I would rather this be the main thread for all Black Diamond related topics.


My camera is calling must go.......


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20484157
> 
> 
> I can only identify a person or two who I know who live locally to me and who are into front projection. That sounds pretty niche to me.
> 
> 
> I think that people are put off by the obstacles. Once bright lampless projectors become common (if that ever happens) I think that projection will become more comonplace. OR . . . if you can go into Best Buy and buy a 100" flat panel for a few grand, projection will be killed except for the most extreme applications. Let's see which happens first. Personally, the 100" flat panel sounds better.



I agree that really big flat panels, if affordable, are likely to curtail some portion of the projector market. But I'm not sure it would "kill" it or that necessarily only the extreme would be left over.


I used to lust after the Panasonic 103" diag plasma. It was my dream display and my local AV store still has one in their show room.


However, once I set up my projection system I've become used to being able to watch images far larger. CinemaScope 2:35:1 movies in particular at up to 120" wide are so much more immersive and engrossing, that now when I see the 103" Panny it seems quite small and I feel I wouldn't swap my projector for it even if I could do so. And for someone with masking and/or using a CIH set up, going back to a smaller image with black bars for 2:35:1 movies would be tough.


I think this sentiment may be more common these days among people using projection. One reason is that, as the market has gotten bigger and, even more important, as sources have become high-definition (cable and Blu-Ray) screen sizes have been increasing. When DVD ruled a 100" diagonal screen seemed to be the norm, but now a large portion of users have much bigger screens, as we can see here on AVS. In other words, screens significantly larger than 100" diagonal are no longer "extreme" but seem pretty common.


Given this, I'm not sure how readily all these people used to larger images would want to replace with a smaller flat panel (even if it's a big one).


I don't really know if I'm right of course. Just musing.


----------



## Benito Joaquin

Quote:

Originally Posted by *fraisa* 
YOu have to remember what people are thinking when it comes to 2pcs projection from the past,

Dark Room..... Expensive Bulb Replacement..... Dim picture....


And ya you know 2 people in your area that have it..

In my Subdivision there is only 2 people that have it and i am one of them.

But for this industry and a Black diamond screen thats a huge opportunity for this industry growth,

if compared to the above myths.

That's why there is so much opportunity for 2pcs projection and they have to get it right this time.

Sharp has just come out with a 70 inch flat panel and i figure 100 inches is about 4-5 yrs away(from being affordable to the Normal Individual).

But just think of all that Light coming back into the Room from a Flat Panel.... I totally Don't want one...

So this industry has that much time to really do its expanding.


And the black diamond screen paired with a decent projector , heck even a Epson 9350/8350 can pull it off making a believer and converting people from the Flat panel Dark Side into the Light...
I agree 100% with what you are saying fraisa but this is old news. The industry has been heading in this direction for the past 10 years or so. Strong push in the last 5. The industry in general was pushing for those applications for some time now.


An application or group of people that the industry just can't seem to get to are gamers! Believe it or not, companies have been trying to go after gamers for a few years now with no luck.


Benito


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* 
I agree 100% with what you are saying fraisa but this is old news. The industry has been heading in this direction for the past 10 years or so. Strong push in the last 5. The industry in general was pushing for those applications for some time now.


An application or group of people that the industry just can't seem to get to are gamers! Believe it or not, companies have been trying to go after gamers for a few years now with no luck.


Benito
Why do you think they dont get Gamers.

When was the last time you where at your local dealer and he had a PS3 in his Showroom?


Gaming on the Black diamond is an amazing experiance especially Lights off

because you are completely Pulled into the image because of the Light scatter Reduction.


Any kid plays there ps3 game on a black diamond is totally hooked...

Thats one thing i have not done is Screen shots of gaming...

Thanks you just game me an Album Idea for our Facebook page...

K3K Now my Camera is calling....he he


----------



## BobL

The large flat screens will still be a problem for sometime even if the price comes to the


----------



## Kevin 3000

fraisa

You should see the latest Witcher 2 PC Uber settings DX11(that is a setting in options







) - PS3 is pants in comparison.


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* 
fraisa

You should see the latest Witcher 2 PC Uber settings DX11(that is a setting in options







) - PS3 is pants in comparison.
I think its time for a Few BD Gaming SHots...

Kevin go get your Camera Going....lol


----------



## MississippiMan

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* 
I agree 100% with what you are saying fraisa but this is old news. The industry has been heading in this direction for the past 10 years or so. Strong push in the last 5. The industry in general was pushing for those applications for some time now.


An application or group of people that the industry just can't seem to get to are gamers! Believe it or not, companies have been trying to go after gamers for a few years now with no luck.


Benito


That comes a shocking news to me! While I'll agree that the US Gamer market is lagging behind in it's potential sales, it's not only still there, it's growing rapidly. The over riding issue has been expense as relates to visual quality. Serious Gamers focus on using PCs on Steroids that easily cost 2x the average entry level PJ. Most that do opt for FP screens go in for entry level DLPs


In the UK, fully 25% of all serious gamers utilize FP screens for gaming. (...albeit they are usually smaller, 72'ers and the like...) That's a serious percentage.


Wherever you find a Serious Gamer, you find a dark space they dwell in. Concentrating on what's on screen is essential to seeing what happens / is happening on screen and reacting before the other person. (...and all serious gamers indulge in one on one / multi-player Games...)


This means having no lag/delay in processing commands and seeing it happen on screen instantaneously is critical.


More directly related to the subject, in reality, no one who has not been intimately involved in Front Projection since at least 2000 can appreciate, let alone understand how vastly changed the general Public's acceptance of Front Projection has become. Those of us who are aware of the changes can easily remember when the Front Projection related Forums were awash with primarily Projector Heads that actually resented the growing influx of Noobs that were clueless, who asked questions that made eyes roll backwards, and ( "OMG!") were actually considering placing a FP/Screen in a Family Room!


The Horror!










The same applied to the CRT boys, who were totally disdainful of Digital Projection, and how it was attracting individuals they felt were NOT capable of understanding what real performance relates to. Strange how that entire market is essentially defunct now. Ok...not so strange.










Nope, that's all changed now. First the jump to 720p, then the leap to 1080p...with subsequent price wars that have drove down the cost of ownership, have ushered in Customers that now buy such systems on near-impulse. many if not most still are prudent purchasers though...with many desirous of using the Projector/Screen for everyday viewing in normal environments, and not doubling up and also upgrading their conventional Flat panel TVs


Now then, it's those Customers who are more apt to integrate FP into a normal room, because it's affordable. The Black Diamond screens are NOT affordable, being roughly 2.5x the cost of the entry level PJs most of the Customers considering such "Family Oriented" FP systems would be apt to consider.


The BD products are most assuredly "niche" items, primarily due ro their price points, and are usually sold based on extremely profuse advertising claims. And... at most exhibitions and trade shows, the set ups they are shown in are specifically intended to mitigate the light that would affect them worst...and that light is often what they would encounter in a Home setting where the Wife does not want a dark room every time / anytime the family wants to watch content.

To the defense of BD Dealers everywhere, few will sell a Screen out of hand without first determining exactly what conditions exist in the viewing location.

It does not serve any reputable BD Dealer very well to simply state how good the Screen is and how it can perform in a lighted room, only to find that the locations of said lighting, and the viewing habits of the Customer does not / will not blend well with the expectations they have.


I can recall not long ago that it was stated several times on this Thread, and exactly along those lines, that such considerations had to be taken into account before one decides to purchase a BD screen. This was primarily because most Posters would have to order a Screen and have it delivered...not go into a Store and "see" one, or have a Store Rep / Installer come into the Home environment and adjudge as to if the screen being considered was an appropriate choice, or to make suggestions on how to improve / change ambient / direct lighting values so as to compliment the BD's performance envelope.


Nowadays, pretty much all we see written about is how the BD screens can "do it all"....but little is stated about the expense of such...the "non-return-ability" of the screen (barring defects or damage of course) or how the stated performance can fail to measure up to consumer expectations if the consumer cannot / will not mitigate adverse viewing conditions. and all that the term "less light scatter" really equates to is a restricted view cone...something that is just fine for a small room with restricted seating, but not really necessary or desirable for larger Family Rooms, which constitute tha majority of the up coming market that covers the general buying Public.


All of that, being mentioned regularly and honestly, would turn what is a decidedly promotional-oriented thread into a "Informative" Thread that would place more BD Screens in locations where they can indeed do their best service.


Lastly, if SI would ever consider reducing their pricing, the potential for the BD Screen line up to slide into a great many more homes would increase exponentially. Until that happens, the delay in doing so simply leaves many with no choice other than to consider any/all other alternatives. And there are alternatives, affordable alternatives that keep getting even more consideration because PJ performance ( brightness/contrast ) allows for more simple, far less expensive High Contrast Gray screens to do the job almost just as good....certainly good enough to allow someone who does not have an additional $2500.00+ to lay out so that their $1200.00 Pj can work within their room's lighting conditions.


So I repeat...if SI would come out with the same screens or larger screens at less cost, they could ace out a considerable amount of the market based solely on what they can do better than most other high performance screens. But instead, they seem bent on competing directly with Stewart FS for that niche High End market Stewart has held sway with for so long.


----------



## ERuiz

Quote:

Originally Posted by *fraisa*
it is now possible to run against Flat Panel which Is Awesome.
@ $2500 for a screen, it better be. I have a $80 DIY screen and I can also say it can run against a flat panel.


----------



## ccotenj

@fraisa...


this response was posted before you deleted your last post...


ummm... avs isn't "that kind" of a site... it's not a "hear no evil, say no evil" site, even when it comes to site sponsors...


if anything avs is exactly the opposite...


if you REALLY believe that avs is merely here to give people the opportunity to shill for the products they sell (which you seem to believe), then you need to rethink your beliefs...


you seem to believe that this thread is merely here to extol the virtues of the bd screen (and to give you an opportunity to continue to shill the product)...


oh well... i've tried to get this point across to you a couple times... i now give up, and you get to join the ignore list...


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *ccotenj* 
@fraisa...


this response was posted before you deleted your last post...


ummm... avs isn't "that kind" of a site... it's not a "hear no evil, say no evil" site, even when it comes to site sponsors...


if anything avs is exactly the opposite...


if you REALLY believe that avs is merely here to give people the opportunity to shill for the products they sell (which you seem to believe), then you need to rethink your beliefs...


you seem to believe that this thread is merely here to extol the virtues of the bd screen (and to give you an opportunity to continue to shill the product)...


oh well... i've tried to get this point across to you a couple times... i now give up, and you get to join the ignore list...
I have edited my post...


----------



## Benito Joaquin

Sorry Fraisa and Missi....I think you might have misunderstood my post, and now that i go back and read it, i'm a little confused myself










It's not that the industry is not going after them, it's that they have had no luck getting to them successfully. Every now and then you hear about items geared towards gamers. Gaming is one of the only industries that didn't get hit by the horrible economy. In fact, some of their best selling games of all times came out during that time. It's just that the industry to this date has been unable to really tap into it. Believe me, they are trying hard and although it makes perfect sense for any gamer to want and in some cases need a huge screen, it's just not happening as fast as the industry would like.


Fraisa, highly recommend the gaming pics for your facebook!! Post here so we can check out!!


----------



## BobL

I understand his point is that if you look at an inexpensive PJ with a bargain screen, say .8 gray screen with a good viewing angle a lot more people would put these in their family rooms. For instance take an 8350 or HC4000 and a


----------



## MississippiMan

fraisa,


I agree, my point has been made...and unfortunately it has seemed necessary to make it repeatedly. How many times in the future, if indeed at all, it would have to be revisited again is all in your domain. If you can understand that...then indeed, hope floats.


----------



## ccotenj

but i'll post them anyway... was playing around this weekend, and snapped these... again, i'm not a professional photographer, don't care to become one, and these are posted for entertainment purposes only...










late afternoon sun through north window... there is also another north window in the back corner of the room... all pics taken with the slat blinds on that window open, and the blind in the west window closed (albeit not what one would exactly call "opaque"







).... if i had been thinking, rather than just playing around, i would have measured the lighting in the room, but, alas, i was not thinking...










first three pics are just a magenta image on the screen...


pic 1... slat blind open... sitting on my couch with camera aimed at the corner of the room...











pic 2... slat blind open... sitting on my couch with camera aimed at screen...











pic 3... slat blind closed... sitting on my couch, camera aimed at screen...











pic 4... slat blind open, wow disk splash screen...











thought i took a pic with blind closed and splash screen, but i can't find it... however, the result is much the same as in pic 3...


with "blind open" at that time of day, it's pretty bright in here...


with "blind closed" at that time of day, it's still bright enough to comfortably read...


comparing the pictures vs. irl, the severe washout on the left side of the screen with slats open is illustrated pretty well... the hotspotting on the magenta screen is as well, albeit exagerrated in the pic... however, when an actual image is projected (i.e. the splash screen), it looks significantly "better" irl than in pictures (other than the left side washout, that part of the image is gone, no matter what you display with the slat open)...


----------



## R Harkness

Chris,


Your screen wall looks so great and the BD screen looks terrific there as well. It must be just great with the lights off. I find images against a black wall can get an almost seeing-through-a-window dimensionality.


(I'll even forgive the visible speakers, since they are so nice looking...







)


----------



## Lawguy

Good pics. There is a lot of light in that room. I don't think that I would watch with the slats open like that but I understand that this was not your point in taking the pictures that way. The missing pic - blind closed splash screen - is probably the most important one because it represents typical viewing conditions.


Thanks for posting them.


----------



## ccotenj




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20486361
> 
> 
> Chris,
> 
> 
> Your screen wall looks so great and the BD screen looks terrific there as well. It must be just great with the lights off. I find images against a black wall can get an almost seeing-through-a-window dimensionality.
> 
> 
> (I'll even forgive the visible speakers, since they are so nice looking...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )



thanks rich...







yea, with the lights off, it's pretty amazing... i still need to do the velvet panels to go around the screen, but i'm a happy pig right now...










lol... i can't cover up my babies...







although i did do the measurements the other day for the removable covers... now i just have to sweet talk my mother in law into making them for me...











> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20486373
> 
> 
> Good pics. There is a lot of light in that room. I don't think that I would watch with the slats open like that but I understand that this was not your point in taking the pictures that way. The missing pic - blind closed splash screen - is probably the most important one because it represents typical viewing conditions.
> 
> 
> Thanks for posting them.



yea, i wouldn't watch with them open like that... it just completely destroys the picture... those (as you figured out) were more "theoretical" shots...


yup. there is a lot of light in here. no doubt about that. and something that needed to be preserved to pass maf (me acceptance factor)... i'm not big on being in the dark when it's light outside... that's part of what held me back from a pj for so long*...


i'll take a few more later today and make sure i remember to take some with the slats closed... as you say, that would represent the "typical" viewing conditions...


* side note: that's why i'm usually amused when people dismiss plasmas for usage in a bright room.... never seemed to be any problem for me...


----------



## Kevin 3000

Chris


Thanks for sharing your setup, i knew you would eventually


----------



## fraisa

Chris,

Very Nice Room

Thanks for Sharing


----------



## Benito Joaquin

Yeah man, i'm a big fan of the screen wall being black. been trying to talk the wife into it for some time now!


Benito


----------



## ERuiz

I don't know if this is the right place for this but I am putting up a link to a quick video I took with my Sony HDR-SR11 camcorder, of my setup while playing Battlefield Bad Company 2. The camcorder records in 1080i and I think better illustrates the lighting of the room than a regular camera would.


On the video, you can see that I have two of the recessed lighting on, which are closest to the seating area. I have two other lights near the screen which I don't use because technically, there is no use for them. You want to light your seating area, not the screen.


Anyway, the lights are on a dimmer and when gaming or watching sports or regular TV, I have the lights on at 50%. The lights are regular 75w flood lamps.


Here is the link: VIDEO HERE 


PS. The video is a 30.5MB .MTS file. If you have any special requests, please let me know and I will try to video them. BTW, I have a DIY screen. It's 2.40 AR but for gaming, I use 16:9.










I am posting this as an example as to why we perhaps should just use a video camera instead of a regular point and shoot, when trying to show our screens off.


----------



## pawstar




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/20486292
> 
> 
> the hotspotting on the magenta screen is as well, albeit exagerrated in the pic... however, when an actual image is projected (i.e. the splash screen), it looks significantly "better" irl than in pictures (other than the left side washout, that part of the image is gone, no matter what you display with the slat open)...



How far away is the projector from the screen ?


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ERuiz* /forum/post/20487336
> 
> 
> I
> 
> Here is the link: VIDEO HERE



ERuiz

Thanks for posting this it just goes to show why i upgraded from my white/grey screens the light spill is really annoyingly distracting to me and the Black Diamond cpntrols this to a degree that you have to whitness to believe.


Pictures from cameras/camcorders are good up to a point but until you demo a Black Diamond in a room like yours you will not want for anything else.


Sorry to keep repeating this message.


----------



## ccotenj




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pawstar* /forum/post/20487730
> 
> 
> How far away is the projector from the screen ?



throw is just a tad under 13.5 feet... i'm sitting right about 12 feet...


----------



## ccotenj




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20486959
> 
> 
> Yeah man, i'm a big fan of the screen wall being black. been trying to talk the wife into it for some time now!
> 
> 
> Benito



keep trying...







she'll give in eventually...







my wife "expected" it to be black (as in, "you are going to paint the front wall black, right?"), so fortunately, i didn't have to do any persuasion there... as long as i get "good" results in the end, it's all good with her...










the black screen wall was pretty much a "given" for me going into this... i really liked the effect that other people got with it (the "see through the window" effect that rich noted in his recent post)... at night, it gives the illusion of just a picture hanging in space...


plus, at least for me, it helps maintain focus on the screen... before i got the black corner panels done, my eyes were being "pulled" to the white bass traps...


i also believe that the black wall acts as a bit of a placebo as well... puts you in that "i'm in a real movie theater" frame of mind... which can't hurt...


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20486880
> 
> 
> Chris,
> 
> Very Nice Room
> 
> Thanks for Sharing



Yes, thanks for sharing the pictures.


Dave


----------



## fraisa

I know this is the black diamond thread but has anyone had any Experiance viewing the SI Lunar .85 Gain Screen?


I myself have not and am curious of its performance as it also is recommended for ambient light from there site.


----------



## ccotenj

since i started the holiday weekend early, a few more... usual caveats apply... all taken with my carcass in it's "normal resting position"... 










fwiw, pj is a vivitek h5080... "very roughly calibrated" by eye from the wow disk, based off the movie setting...


as requested, with slat shade to the immediate left shut... about 3pm on a hazy day...











corner to immediate left...











one using the flash, just for giggles...



















back left corner...











back right corner (west facing window, other two face north)...


----------



## Lawguy

I like the sneakers up on the ottoman in the first pic. Nice!


----------



## ERuiz

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* 
ERuiz

Thanks for posting this it just goes to show why i upgraded from my white/grey screens the light spill is really annoyingly distracting to me and the Black Diamond cpntrols this to a degree that you have to whitness to believe.


Pictures from cameras/camcorders are good up to a point but until you demo a Black Diamond in a room like yours you will not want for anything else.


Sorry to keep repeating this message.
Thanks and I do agree, gray is very advantageous.


----------



## ccotenj




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20491336
> 
> 
> I like the sneakers up on the ottoman in the first pic. Nice!



i'm actually sitting (lying?) on a reclining sofa...







i pretty much based the positioning of my screen on where i could see over my feet...










as i become more aged, my back (and assorted other parts) likes the reclined position much better than sitting up straight...


----------



## HeadRusch

Guys, I currently still have 2 720p projectors hung....and I've been thinking of going 1080p, but keep going "why".....720p is good enough, my 1080p LCD/Plasma sets are fine for what they are but I'm not hung-up on resolution like some folks.....so I said "Maybe, instead of a projector....I get a better screen".


I currently have an aging pull-down 106" Greywolf by Panovision.......and I have whiteish burbur carpet and white drop-ceiling panels. I think a screen like this would be perfect to really make the most of my current technology...


Dare I ask this...do they make a pull down? Can you hang a solid frame from hooks? (I don't have a flat wall to hang the screen from, hence my request).....and lastly.....is this something you can get via AVS or do you have to go direct?


Thanks!


----------



## ccotenj

^^^


no pull down yet, although one is supposedly coming...


can't comment on hanging a solid frame from hooks... however, they do sell stands for it... that might be an option...


----------



## HeadRusch

Thanks, a stand is what I would need.....not an inexpensive upgrade.....but probably worth it...


----------



## newfmp3

I'm just not sold on this screen. The screen shots I'm seeing here don't look any better to me then my 8700 does with the HP 2.4 gain in the day light. And if I turn on Dynamic mode, its quite watchable.


I do not doubt it works, or doubt its blacks are good, I just do not see it worth 3 grand for a decent size screen. I'd rather dump the money into a better/brighter PJ.


...mind you I do not trust screen shots. I know when I take pics of mine they come out all wonky.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *newfmp3* /forum/post/20493485
> 
> 
> I'm just not sold on this screen. The screen shots I'm seeing here don't look any better to me then my 8700 does with the HP 2.4 gain in the day light. And if I turn on Dynamic mode, its quite watchable.
> 
> 
> I do not doubt it works, or doubt its blacks are good, I just do not see it worth 3 grand for a decent size screen. I'd rather dump the money into a better/brighter PJ.
> 
> 
> ...mind you I do not trust screen shots. I know when I take pics of mine they come out all wonky.



It you don't care about blacks it is probably not worth the expense.


----------



## programmergeek

I have to comment here I have tried several projectors now and people have brought in their own projectors, yes blacks improve but it also seems to make the colors richer/more saturated and also the pic has a more 3D appearance. I think just dumping more money into a projector could be a mistake in some cases. The system needs to be balanced.


It would be like dumping let’s say 40k into speakers but having cheap front end. The speakers are grate but you would never hear their total potential.


I am not saying a BD screen is the right choice but you should go look at a couple screens to see where the best bang for buck in your system is, allot of the time it is not the projector if you have anything current.


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *HeadRusch* /forum/post/20493409
> 
> 
> Guys, I currently still have 2 720p projectors hung....and I've been thinking of going 1080p, but keep going "why".....720p is good enough, my 1080p LCD/Plasma sets are fine for what they are but I'm not hung-up on resolution like some folks.....so I said "Maybe, instead of a projector....I get a better screen".
> 
> 
> I currently have an aging pull-down 106" Greywolf by Panovision.......and I have whiteish burbur carpet and white drop-ceiling panels. I think a screen like this would be perfect to really make the most of my current technology...
> 
> 
> Dare I ask this...do they make a pull down? Can you hang a solid frame from hooks? (I don't have a flat wall to hang the screen from, hence my request).....and lastly.....is this something you can get via AVS or do you have to go direct?
> 
> 
> Thanks!



They had a drop down version but failed. I know they are working on it and hopefully for everyone in the industry....they make it happen.


You should have no problem hanging a screen with eye hooks or example. I've done it many times with other manufacturers so i don't see why you wouldn't be able to do it with a SI screen.


We are a direct dealer of SI so feel free to contact any of the sales team for some pricing.


Benito


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *newfmp3* /forum/post/20493485
> 
> 
> I'm just not sold on this screen. The screen shots I'm seeing here don't look any better to me then my 8700 does with the HP 2.4 gain in the day light. And if I turn on Dynamic mode, its quite watchable.
> 
> 
> I do not doubt it works, or doubt its blacks are good, I just do not see it worth 3 grand for a decent size screen. I'd rather dump the money into a better/brighter PJ.
> 
> 
> ...mind you I do not trust screen shots. I know when I take pics of mine they come out all wonky.



You really need to demo this screen with a matching quality current projector.

Your eyes in person is the true test if this screen is for you or not.


----------



## dovercat




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *programmergeek* /forum/post/20493669
> 
> 
> I have to comment here I have tried several projectors now and people have brought in their own projectors, yes blacks improve but it also seems to make the colors richer/more saturated and also the pic has a more 3D appearance. I think just dumping more money into a projector could be a mistake in some cases. The system needs to be balanced.



Which black diamond screen, and what screen did you have before, is the room light colored or dark?


The difference could be down to the directional gain increasing brightness, while decrease the effect of room reflections, so increasing contrast. Also the screen illuminating the side walls and ceiling less. I like limited viewing angle screens with gain.


It could be down to having a lower black level.

Black level underpins the image, it creates the illusion of image depth, as long as the image also has good dynamic range, contrast.

Color + white = less color saturation, black level is the amount of white being added to the image. Color saturation also improves color contrast which increases the illusion of depth.


----------



## Kevin 3000

Black Diamond 2 1.4 Light Diffusion/scatter/spill test. Angular reflective works wonders when set up correctly.

Projector RS10 prism needs a clean, 981 lamp hours, shading the lower portion of screen, cleaned it twice

before (other lamps) and shading goes.. 100% white pattern, iris fully open 400-450 lumens maybe?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20499097
> 
> 
> Black Diamond 2 1.4 Light Diffusion/scatter/spill test. Angular reflective works wonders when set up correctly.
> 
> Projector RS10 prism needs a clean, 981 lamp hours, shading the lower portion of screen, cleaned it twice
> 
> before (other lamps) and shading goes.. 100% white pattern, iris fully open 400-450 lumens maybe?



When i see this i really want to paint my room black...

This effect is Awesome.


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20499097
> 
> 
> Black Diamond 2 1.4 Light Diffusion/scatter/spill test. Angular reflective works wonders when set up correctly.
> 
> Projector RS10 prism needs a clean, 981 lamp hours, shading the lower portion of screen, cleaned it twice
> 
> before (other lamps) and shading goes.. 100% white pattern, iris fully open 400-450 lumens maybe?



Are the 4 corners actually darker than the center part of the screen, or is this just the photo?


----------



## ERuiz




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *millerwill* /forum/post/20499168
> 
> 
> Are the 4 corners actually darker than the center part of the screen, or is this just the photo?



Yea, I think that's called hotspotting, but it could just be the camera too. Hard to tell by just looking at a pic.


----------



## R Harkness

Quote:

Originally Posted by *millerwill* 
Are the 4 corners actually darker than the center part of the screen, or is this just the photo?
That's the hot-spotting from the screen. Typical of angular reflective screens with gain.


----------



## Kevin 3000

Don`t get obsessed with hotspotting (emphasized by camera/dirty prism) once a movie is playing the experience is truly breathtaking 3D like and no noticeanle shaded corners.

Unlike when i owned a Greywolf 1.8gain now thats got hotspotting/texture/lights up the room.


----------



## R Harkness

I agree that people shouldn't get too concerned over hot-spotting. Once a movie is playing it distracts the eye, and also our eye isn't always that good at seeing variances like hot-spotting. (Some viewers, however, like myself and some others find the hot-spotting quite visible even during movie content).


As I keep saying: most people simply don't notice hot-spotting.


On perhaps a more practical note: Hot-spotting can impact the overall brightness of a screen, and hence when you are doing your calculation as to which screen to use with your projector it can be good to keep this in mind.


As I understand it, and as I believe Darinp has explained before here, the gain rating (e.g. the BD .8 gain rating) from most screen manufacturers is the "peak" brightness. That is, the brightest point of the screen. In the case of an angular reflective screen with significant gain applied, like the BD, this means the center of the screen will be brighter for an on-axis viewer, with the screen dimming from the center to the edges. Therefore, taken as a whole, the screen gain works out lower than rated (dimmer).


For instance, the Stewart Firehawk used to be rated by Stewart at almost the same gain of it's white screen equivalent, the ST-130 (1.3 gain). So you'd think they'd produce an equivalent brightness of image. However, when people did measurements of the full screen - taken at the center, off center, sides, corners etc - the Firehawk's brightness came out a lower gain (hence, dimmer) than the ST-130.

It was obvious the Firehawk was dimmer next to the ST-130 even just by eye.


Just stuff to keep in mind....


----------



## ccotenj

^^^


in my short experience, i'd agree with that... it's there, i can see it when i look for it, but i don't generally see it in "normal viewing" if i'm not looking for it (so i don't look for it







)...


----------



## Toe




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20500447
> 
> 
> Don`t get obsessed with hotspotting (emphasized by camera/dirty prism) once a movie is playing the experience is truly breathtaking 3D like and no noticeanle shaded corners.
> 
> Unlike when i owned a Greywolf 1.8gain now thats got hotspotting/texture/lights up the room.



I would say everyone should check this out for themselves before deciding how big or little of an issue this is. Everyone is different as far as what bothers us or does not bother us as far as screen issues go. I have owned 6 different screens at this point and *all* have had pros/cons. I owned both Carada white screens for example (Classic Cinema White and Brilliant White) and could not live with either due to things I found which I have NEVER read about on these forums, but I do seem to be extremely sensitive to certain types of screen issues compared to most. As far as hot spotting, I can easily see it and it bothers me, but again this is going to change depending on who you ask. Bottom line, go see ALL the screens you are considering if possible before making a purchase. Or just keep experimenting like me and many others have done until you find one with the least amount of compromises for your room, eyes and setup (obviously this is not very practical, but if part of your interest in this hobby is trying different things, screens can be fun/interesting to experiment with).


----------



## fraisa

Okay did see the 2.7 Gain BD in action last night paired with the Mits 9000

and all i can say is wow..

I really thought i was watching an High End LED LCD Image..

Very Bright, Very Detailed , But Better Blacks..

Better Viewing Angle.

(Best Viewing angle of all BD material)

I didnt notice any sparkle or hotspoting and when it came to 3d it was an image that stayed crisp, Clear , and i could move around and go off angle and still keep the 3d Effect.

This viewing angle in 3d would challenge most Flat panels with off axis 3d Effect Viewing.

Very Great Job SI....

Well Done.


Pasted in Review of the Mits with BD 2.7 Gain Material.


My MIts 9000 Demo Thoughts


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Okay Guys,

Did the demo and all i can say is WOW...


All know I have my epson 9700 thread and if anyone has read my thread they would see I have been a huge Epson 9700 Believer..

But......

This Mits 9000 Slays my 9700 in 2d.

The Mits gives a new meaning to Detail that my epson 9700 cant keep up to.

I can use the super res processing on the Epson to get that extra detail that is need but the mits does this without the need for processing and with Ease.

This is the one of the best Projectors i have seen to date.


Again with regards to Black Levels this Unit also Kill my Epson,,

the Biggest thing i notice with regards to black levels is Detail in the black levels... You have Detailed Blacks....


Also this Unit is Whisper Quiet also another area where it slays my 9700.

THe Auto Iris when turned on i didnt other than the initial on motion is also very very Very Quiet...


I did the demo paired with the SI BD 2.7 Gain Screen 92 inch.

Which also was a great match for this projector.

This was the first time I have seen the 2.7 Fabric and its not the traditional bd colour, its actually like a light Silver Shade and when paired with the mits projector it was like seeing a very high end LED LCD display Lights on.

Very Bright image with alot of Pop.

Blacks blended Very Well actually with a 2.35 image on the 16:9 size screen there was many scenes where the top corners of the image blended with the black bars so i actually thought that it was all part of the image...

Coolest thing ever.


Now 3D...

Again WOW,

I was blown away by the performance of this projector.

The detail was great, the colours stayed pure,

And just to note this Mits unit was not Calibrated straight settings out of the box and to my eye was Really Really Close to Bang On...

if it was me just minor lowering of contrast and Brightness and your Mint.


the Emitter was located on the projector and i did find that if i went under the projector that the glasses lost Signal.

Easy solution would be mount the Emitter next to the top of the screen and call it a day problem solved.


The BD 2.7 Viewing angle the best in the bd series i went way off angle and

3d effect stayed and no shading in the opp side corners.

I didnt see any Sparkle effect and No Hot Spotting was Present.


Clearly Mits is in it to Win It with this Unit,

And I Now want one Really Really Bad...


End Paste....


----------



## R Harkness

Good Gosh.


2.7 gain on a mere 92" screen? That sounds eye-searing. Even on my lower 1.3 gain screen at that size the image is blasting bright. (I can vary my image size).


Sounds like intriguing screen material, though.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20515095
> 
> 
> Good Gosh.
> 
> 
> 2.7 gain on a mere 92" screen? That sounds eye-searing. Even on my lower 1.3 gain screen at that size the image is blasting bright. (I can vary my image size).
> 
> 
> Sounds like intriguing screen material, though.



Ya you would really find this screen material very Intresting especially with the increased viewing angle.


Its a bright image but not a Eye ache bright .

Still very easy on the eyes.

My Eyes are very sensitive to brightness ,

If i go into a Electronics store i find I cant look long at there lcds or plasmas as i get immediate eye strain.

Didnt get that with this Screen at all.

Also with regards to the Mits 3d,

it was the first 3d I also could watch that didnt give me eye strain.

Most 3d flat panels i cant watch.


----------



## ERuiz




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> Ya you would really find this screen material very Intresting especially with the increased viewing angle.
> 
> 
> Its a bright image but not a Eye ache bright .
> 
> Still very easy on the eyes.
> 
> My Eyes are very sensitive to brightness ,
> 
> If i go into a Electronics store i find I cant look long at there lcds or plasmas as i get immediate eye strain.
> 
> Didnt get that with this Screen at all.
> 
> Also with regards to the Mits 3d,
> 
> it was the first 3d I also could watch that didnt give me eye strain.
> 
> Most 3d flat panels i cant watch.



Sweet... When are you gonna have some in stock?


----------



## Toe




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20515281
> 
> 
> Ya you would really find this screen material very Intresting especially with the increased viewing angle.
> 
> 
> Its a bright image but not a Eye ache bright .
> 
> Still very easy on the eyes.
> 
> My Eyes are very sensitive to brightness ,
> 
> If i go into a Electronics store i find I cant look long at there lcds or plasmas as i get immediate eye strain.
> 
> Didnt get that with this Screen at all.
> 
> Also with regards to the Mits 3d,
> 
> it was the first 3d I also could watch that didnt give me eye strain.
> 
> Most 3d flat panels i cant watch.



A bit off topic, but what 3d titles did you demo on the 9000 and how bad was the ghosting? I still say anyone serious about 3d should look to DLP just because of ghosting (and this is coming from a RS40 owner) since I have not seen a non DLP yet that did not ghost to some degree.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Toe* /forum/post/20515437
> 
> 
> A bit off topic, but what 3d titles did you demo on the 9000 and how bad was the ghosting? I still say anyone serious about 3d should look to DLP just because of ghosting (and this is coming from a RS40 owner) since I have not seen a non DLP yet that did not ghost to some degree.



Despicable Me,

Pirates of the Caribean II


And i didnt see any ghosting at all

again one thing i did notice was the 3d kicked off when i was under the projector because the emitter was mounted above the projector so it lost signal.


----------



## Toe




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20515520
> 
> 
> Despicable Me,
> 
> Pirates of the Caribean II
> 
> 
> And i didnt see any ghosting at all
> 
> again one thing i did notice was the 3d kicked off when i was under the projector because the emitter was mounted above the projector so it lost signal.



Thanks. Interesting about the emitter. Curious to read Marks 40 vs 9000 impressions as far as ghosting goes. Of course both will ghost to some degree being non DLP, but I am curious if one will be worse than the other.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Toe* /forum/post/20515607
> 
> 
> Thanks. Interesting about the emitter. Curious to read Marks 40 vs 9000 impressions as far as ghosting goes. Of course both will ghost to some degree being non DLP, but I am curious if one will be worse than the other.



Again this emitter could just be mounted next to the screen and problem solved.

Again 2.7 Gain was very impressive really encourage all if you can go see this new Gain Screen you will be Impressed...


----------



## Toe




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20515619
> 
> 
> Again this emitter could just be mounted next to the screen and problem solved.
> 
> Again 2.7 Gain was very impressive really encourage all if you can go see this new Gain Screen you will be Impressed...



Yeah, that would be an easy fix as far as the emitter.


If I am ever in the market for a new screen, I would definitely check out the BDs, but that certainly wont be happening any time soon as I am very happy overall with my HP 2.8 (and I still have my ST130 that I need to sell!)










Thanks again


----------



## dovercat

92" 16x9 screen

73.53"x41.31" = 21.1sq ft

Screen 2.7 gain.

(half gain angle 60 degrees)


Going by Cine4Home.de preview of a pre-production Mitsubishi HC9000D

1100 Lumens = 141fL, calibrated 900-800 Lumens = 115-102fL

Eco-mode 800 Lumens = 102fL, calibrated 720-640 Lumens = 92-82fL

3D genlocked pre production 110 Lumen = 14fL

(3D production models can go brighter, user adjustable 9 levels switching prevent cross talk vs more light output but with increased risk of ghosting)


White level 2D puts it in the same league as flat panels.

Contrast should mean a good black level

ANSI checkerboard contrast pre-production model 420:1

Native full on / full off contrast pre-production model 15,000-20,000:1 (production model target 30,000:1)

Dynamic iris full on / full off contrast pre-production model 150,000:1


My concerns would be hot spotting, limited viewing angle and ambient light rejection while having a 2.7 gain?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dovercat* /forum/post/20516127
> 
> 
> 92" 16x9 screen
> 
> 73.53"x41.31" = 21.1sq ft
> 
> Screen 2.7 gain.
> 
> 
> 
> My concerns would be hot spotting, limited viewing angle and ambient light rejection while having a 2.7 gain?



That was also my concern and i was really trying at different angles to find these issues.

I didnt see any hotspoting,

The viewing angle was one of the best i have seen to date with a screen.

Even at a large off angle i had very bright image no dimming in corners.

and i still had the 3d effect present.

Ambient light Rejection or Light scatter again still great at rejecting light coming back into the room.

All three concerns where also my concerns...


I am still amazed with this 2.7 and the advancement in Material.


With regards to the 1.4 Gen 3,

I did notice a smoother image and the sparkle issue was gone i couldnt see that at all.

The material of the screen does even look smoother

noticed actually little more contrast vs the Gen 2.


The RD Dept at SI did a really good job on the Gen 3 and this 2.7 gain


----------



## ERuiz




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> That was also my concern and i was really trying at different angles to find these issues.
> 
> I didnt see any hotspoting,
> 
> The viewing angle was one of the best i have seen to date with a screen.
> 
> Even at a large off angle i had very bright image no dimming in corners.
> 
> and i still had the 3d effect present.
> 
> Ambient light Rejection or Light scatter again still great at rejecting light coming back into the room.
> 
> All three concerns where also my concerns...
> 
> 
> I am still amazed with this 2.7 and the advancement in Material.
> 
> 
> With regards to the 1.4 Gen 3,
> 
> I did notice a smoother image and the sparkle issue was gone i couldnt see that at all.
> 
> The material of the screen does even look smoother
> 
> noticed actually little more contrast vs the Gen 2.
> 
> 
> The RD Dept at SI did a really good job on the Gen 3 and this 2.7 gain



When will you have these screens in stock?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20493936
> 
> 
> They had a drop down version but failed. I know they are working on it and hopefully for everyone in the industry....they make it happen.
> 
> 
> You should have no problem hanging a screen with eye hooks or example. I've done it many times with other manufacturers so i don't see why you wouldn't be able to do it with a SI screen.
> 
> 
> We are a direct dealer of SI so feel free to contact any of the sales team for some pricing.
> 
> 
> Benito



Since you are in the USA you should contact

Benito from Avs Forums Sales


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20514365
> 
> 
> Clearly Mits is in it to Win It with this Unit,




I'm guessing you watch American Idol?







Anyways, for 2D only and given the choice, would you choose the BD III .8, 1.4, or 2.7?


Thanks, Dave


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks* /forum/post/20518969
> 
> 
> I'm guessing you watch American Idol?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyways, for 2D only and given the choice, would you choose the BD III .8, 1.4, or 2.7?
> 
> 
> Thanks, Dave



For 2d, it depends on your viewing desire..

Lights on 2d i rate it like this...

.8 if your focus is on Deep Blacks,

1.4 if you want more contrast lighter image, decent blacks.

2.7 if you want a very LED LCD Style black that is not deep at all but has detail and a bright Contrast style balanced image ...


Hope this helps explain the difference,

Again If you demo this screen at any dealer you need to ask 2 questions...

What Gen is it ,

And What Gain..


Regardless of the Gain

SI's GIII is Definetly in it to Win it....


----------



## Warbie

Thanks for the info, fraisa. Did you notice any sheen or sparkles with the 2.7material?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Warbie* /forum/post/20520685
> 
> 
> Thanks for the info, fraisa. Did you notice any sheen or sparkles with the 2.7material?



Didnt notice any BD Sparkles.

Thats because with the Gen III they have really addressed this issue,

have done a very good job


----------



## Toe




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20514365
> 
> 
> 
> Clearly Mits is in it to Win It with this Unit,




You mean besides the broken CMS, lack of panel adjustment and being non DLP you will get ghosting to some degree (worse with 120hz material if it is like the JVCs), right?










My question is how is the 2.7 not showing any hot spotting? Certainly there will be some, no?


----------



## Warbie




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20520760
> 
> 
> Didnt notice any BD Sparkles.
> 
> Thats because with the Gen III they have really addressed this issue,
> 
> have done a very good job



That's excellent news. I'll try and organise a demo as soon as this material is available in the UK. The only thing putting me off BD screens so far has been the sheen.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Toe* /forum/post/20520763
> 
> 
> You mean besides the broken CMS, lack of panel adjustment and being non DLP you will get ghosting to some degree (worse with 120hz material if it is like the JVCs), right?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My question is how is the 2.7 not showing any hot spotting? Certainly there will be some, no?



I looked for hotspotting from many angles and it wasnt there...

At All

What ever SI did in the material for the GenIII to Get rid of sparkle also works against Hot spotting...


You really need to demo this for yourself like i did and you will be blown away...


----------



## Benito Joaquin

fraisa,


I agree that they did a great job in cleaning up the material but for you to say that it's not there is not 100% correct. Especially on the 2.7 material. We tried a variety of projectors that we had available to us with this material including a Sim2, DPI, Runco and went down to an Epson and Samsung.


When we tested the Gen III material the sparkles were still there. Clearly better than the second gen but still there....especially on the bright scenes. Hot spotting was also there and I saw it just as bad as the second gen. That was one area that was not really addressed in my opinion.


Key point to this is that this is simply my opinion!


Note that i'm not bringing this material down, they did a great job in improving on some issues they had in previous gens but didn't eliminate them 100%.


Benito


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20521128
> 
> 
> fraisa,
> 
> 
> I agree that they did a great job in cleaning up the material but for you to say that it's not there is not 100% correct. Especially on the 2.7 material. We tried a variety of projectors that we had available to us with this material including a Sim2, DPI, Runco and went down to an Epson and Samsung.
> 
> 
> When we tested the Gen III material the sparkles were still there. Clearly better than the second gen but still there....especially on the bright scenes. Hot spotting was also there and I saw it just as bad as the second gen. That was one area that was not really addressed in my opinion.
> 
> 
> Key point to this is that this is simply my opinion!
> 
> 
> Note that i'm not bringing this material down, they did a great job in improving on some issues they had in previous gens but didn't eliminate them 100%.
> 
> 
> Benito



Hey Ben.,

I really looked for hot spotting when doing the Demo with the Mits 9000,

I didnt see it and neither did the other person with me.

I looked for the sparkle i would see before in the light blue and white or cloud scenes and didnt see that either.

I was going by my eye not a Science Meter Gauge.

So to my eye I am confident in saying i didnt see it.

I am sure though if one is looking really hard for something then they are missing the image and movie that is actually on the screen...


----------



## Warbie




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20521128
> 
> 
> When we tested the Gen III material the sparkles were still there. Clearly better than the second gen but still there....especially on the bright scenes.



How would you say it compares to the Firehawk G3 material when it comes to sparkles/sheen? The sheen on that was enough to make it a no go for me.


----------



## ccotenj

as a 1.4 gen 3 owner, i'll confirm that sparklies and hotspotting still exist...


how it compares to previous gens, i have no idea...


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/20521401
> 
> 
> as a 1.4 gen 3 owner, i'll confirm that sparklies and hotspotting still exist...
> 
> 
> how it compares to previous gens, i have no idea...



Have you ever contacted SI and did a serial check to make sure you have a gen III?

there is a 4 digit number on the back of the screen material.


Every screen has a unique number to that screen can pull up

when it was made and what gen it is...


Just a thought


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Warbie* /forum/post/20521393
> 
> 
> How would you say it compares to the Firehawk G3 material when it comes to sparkles/sheen? The sheen on that was enough to make it a no go for me.




I've been able to compare the BDII to the Firehawk side by side and the BDIII to Firehawk but not the BDII side by side to the BDIII.


The sparkles/sheen were less visible on the Firehawk G3 than the BDII, but not by much. The BDIII also has sparkles but are a little less noticeable than the Firehawk G3 but again....not by much. They definitely made an improvement in that area but it's still visibly there, even with an untrained eye.


Off axis viewing was still an issue as well.


But if you are in a room with high ambient light (windows / sunlight) and sitting directly in front of the screen, i would put up with the sheen and slight hot spotting to get the image this material can produce. It really is amazing to see what this material in action.


Benito


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20522366
> 
> 
> 
> Off axis viewing was still an issue as well.
> 
> 
> 
> Benito



Are you saying there were issues with the 2.7 off axis viewing

because i didnt see that at all

Off axis viewing was awesome 2.7...


----------



## Toe




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20521128
> 
> 
> fraisa,
> 
> 
> I agree that they did a great job in cleaning up the material but for you to say that it's not there is not 100% correct. Especially on the 2.7 material. We tried a variety of projectors that we had available to us with this material including a Sim2, DPI, Runco and went down to an Epson and Samsung.
> 
> 
> When we tested the Gen III material the sparkles were still there. Clearly better than the second gen but still there....especially on the bright scenes. Hot spotting was also there and I saw it just as bad as the second gen. That was one area that was not really addressed in my opinion.
> 
> 
> Key point to this is that this is simply my opinion!
> 
> 
> Note that i'm not bringing this material down, they did a great job in improving on some issues they had in previous gens but didn't eliminate them 100%.
> 
> 
> Benito



Good info. Thanks Benito.


----------



## Kevin 3000

With the anount of hot-spotting/texture and sparkles apparently visible why would JVC, Epson etc at last years CEDIA showcase the BDII in front of thousands of public/press? This axe needs no grinding its blunt.


My BDII 1.4 110" JVC RS10 combo 16ft throw shows no adverse artifacts to me or friends/family nobody has said whats this or that or it looks brighter in the center than the edges.......even after the initial awesome shock of first seeing this combo 16months on still no complaints......


Would JVC really showcase their new projectors on an artifact riddled screen.......


----------



## Warbie

To each their own. If the sheen on the BDII didn't bother me i'd own one now, the same for the Firehawk.


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Warbie* /forum/post/20524815
> 
> 
> To each their own. If the sheen on the BDII didn't bother me i'd own one now, the same for the Firehawk.



Warbie

Have you looked at a DNP screen someone on the UK AVforum choose this over a BD in a side by side test.

http://www.avforums.com/forums/proje...amond-etc.html


----------



## Warbie

I haven't - i'd like to give it a go. It seems overly difficult to get screen samples of demo viewings in the UK. The things is - when a screen costs this much money i'm loathe to part with the cash without being a 100% sure and any screen texture/sheen would really grate on me.


----------



## ccotenj




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20524802
> 
> 
> With the anount of hot-spotting/texture and sparkles apparently visible why would JVC, Epson etc at last years CEDIA showcase the BDII in front of thousands of public/press? This axe needs no grinding its blunt.
> 
> 
> My BDII 1.4 110" JVC RS10 combo 16ft throw shows no adverse artifacts to me or friends/family nobody has said whats this or that or it looks brighter in the center than the edges.......even after the initial awesome shock of first seeing this combo 16months on still no complaints......
> 
> 
> Would JVC really showcase their new projectors on an artifact riddled screen.......



i can't comment on to why they use what they use; i can only tell you what i see in my room (re: my earlier post on this subject)... i'm in no way disappointed in my purchase (if anything, i'm more happy with it as each day passes), but just because i am happy/content with something doesn't mean that i stop looking at it with a critical eye...


"friends and family" commentary, unfortunately, tends not to be overly useful, ime... for a myriad of reasons...


----------



## dovercat




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Warbie* /forum/post/20524880
> 
> 
> I haven't - i'd like to give it a go. It seems overly difficult to get screen samples of demo viewings in the UK. The things is - when a screen costs this much money i'm loathe to part with the cash without being a 100% sure and any screen texture/sheen would really grate on me.



If you can not see the screen in person to decided if you want it or not. In the UK you could buy it from home from a UK business doing distant selling, not a auction or a shop you visited before in person. Doing so you should be covered by the EU distant selling legislation as implemented by the UK. But I would read the regulations at the oft and trading standards websites just to make sure.


The regulations entitle you to upto seven days to inspect the goods, unpack them and try them out taking reasonable care of the goods, with the option of canceling the contract by letter, email or fax (and phone if premitted in the contract) even if the goods are not faulty, you just do not like them or have changed your mind.


You then get a full refund including delivery costs, this may take up to thirty days. If the contract stipulates it you may have to arrange and pay for the return of the goods, you do not have to return the goods in the original packaging. No restocking fee is permitted. So in the UK a at home buyer from a UK distant seller is only down the return delivery cost if they change their mind or do not like the product.


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dovercat* /forum/post/20525560
> 
> 
> If you can not see the screen in person to decided if you want it or not. In the UK you could buy it from home from a UK business doing distant selling, not a auction or a shop you visited before in person. Doing so you should be covered by the EU distant selling legislation as implemented by the UK. But I would read the regulations at the oft and trading standards websites just to make sure.
> 
> 
> The regulations entitle you to upto seven days to inspect the goods, unpack them and try them out taking reasonable care of the goods, with the option of canceling the contract by letter, email or fax (and phone if premitted in the contract) even if the goods are not faulty, you just do not like them or have changed your mind.
> 
> 
> You then get a full refund including delivery costs, this may take up to thirty days. If the contract stipulates it you may have to arrange and pay for the return of the goods, you do not have to return the goods in the original packaging. No restocking fee is permitted. So in the UK a at home buyer from a UK distant seller is only down the return delivery cost if they change their mind or do not like the product.



Good thinking, just make sure they are in stock and not ordered from mfg to be delivered directly to you getting around the distant selling legislation maybe?.


----------



## Lawguy

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* 
Would JVC really showcase their new projectors on an artifact riddled screen.......
It is crazy to hear people flat out deny that the artifacts exist. They exist. You can argue about what the right words are to use to describe them (people use the term "hotspotting" in a way that I would not use it, for example). But, you cannot deny that certain issues are present.


The real issue is how noticable the issues are. This is a subjectve thing. Reasonable people can disagree. 1.0 gain white screens have issues too. If they did not, screens like the BD would not exist.


----------



## BobL

Screen artifacts are like rainbows on a DLP projector. Most people don't notice them but once they do they will bother them forever. All gain screens have artifacts and some more easily noticeable than others. It is the nature of gain screens and you can't change physics. Screens are definitely application driven and you need to choose the right screen for your application.


----------



## fraisa

Again you need to demo the Gen III Screens to see if this is an issue for you.

Make the Trip to Cedia this yr.

Then you can demo over and over and see if this stuff is a bother.


I viewed the 2.7 last week and it was a non issue for me.


But these screens will be at cedia for all to see.


----------



## Toe

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Lawguy* 
It is crazy to hear people flat out deny that the artifacts exist. They exist. You can argue about what the right words are to use to describe them (people use the term "hotspotting" in a way that I would not use it, for example). But, you cannot deny that certain issues are present.


The real issue is how noticable the issues are. This is a subjectve thing. Reasonable people can disagree. 1.0 gain white screens have issues too. If they did not, screens like the BD would not exist.
Agreed. I have owned 6 screens and seen quite a few others and ALL have had issues of some sort. Some I could live with and some I could not, but there is no such thing as a perfect screen.


Curious to see the BD screens to see how much/little its own set of issues bother me.


----------



## Kevin 3000

Those who are sensitive (you know if you are by constantly looking for the right screen) are unlucky but those of us who aren`t we just watch the big picture uninterrupted by the magnificent quality attained by having such a specialist screen and untainted deoxyribonucleic acid.


----------



## Benito Joaquin

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* 
With the anount of hot-spotting/texture and sparkles apparently visible why would JVC, Epson etc at last years CEDIA showcase the BDII in front of thousands of public/press? This axe needs no grinding its blunt.


My BDII 1.4 110" JVC RS10 combo 16ft throw shows no adverse artifacts to me or friends/family nobody has said whats this or that or it looks brighter in the center than the edges.......even after the initial awesome shock of first seeing this combo 16months on still no complaints......


Would JVC really showcase their new projectors on an artifact riddled screen.......
Sorry for the delay in responding, i was gone all weekend.

Just a really quick response to this...

I cannot comment on the reason they went that route but it usually boils down to one word.....politics! Or who knows, maybe they simply really liked the material!!

What I can tell you is that it's not always the case for manufacturers to go with the best screen to showcase their new product. For example, back when Runco was around, they were showing off their stuff with a Stewart screen and for some reason changed it to a Da Lite screen with horrible masking on it. The reason why had absolutely nothing to do with Runco projectors or best screens available.


Benny


----------



## fraisa

Here is the link for the Video of the New 2.7 Gain Material

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8aWZ...layer_embedded


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20519523
> 
> 
> For 2d, it depends on your viewing desire..
> 
> Lights on 2d i rate it like this...
> 
> .8 if your focus is on Deep Blacks,
> 
> 1.4 if you want more contrast lighter image, decent blacks.
> 
> 2.7 if you want a very LED LCD Style black that is not deep at all but has detail and a bright Contrast style balanced image ...
> 
> 
> Hope this helps explain the difference,
> 
> Again If you demo this screen at any dealer you need to ask 2 questions...
> 
> What Gen is it ,
> 
> And What Gain..
> 
> 
> Regardless of the Gain
> 
> SI's GIII is Definetly in it to Win it....



Cool! The only time I'd want to watch with a lot of light on is for a sporting event, and for that, the LED LCD style of the 2.7 would be fine for me. With the lights out, is there a huge difference in black levels? I do prefer really good blacks, when lights are off and watching a movie, but it they're close with the lights off, then it sounds like the 2.7 might be the best way to go. I noticed the video you posted as well. I'd like to see SI demo the different gains side by side, both with lights on and lights off, in order to see what I would prefer. Obviously, the best way is to see it in person, but SI has mentioned to me that nobody has any of their screens on display in Phoenix, so I have to go with second best.


Thanks, Dave


----------



## pers1

I just got my SI BD 0.8 G3 80" yesterday and first BD film i tried to watch was Ice Age 3

And yes there were sparkling in every snow or bright sceens like snow and skies.

I use a JVC X3 projctor it`s 3 meters (same distance as I have as well) away from the screen about 20 higer than than the top of the screen (it`s ceiling mounted)

It seems that the sparkling is only were if the BD had been a mirrror and i could see back into the lense.

I have the JVC at low and iris at -8, it seems the JVC has to much light output?

Please advise, the scrren is produced 13.05.11



PerS


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20519523
> 
> 
> For 2d, it depends on your viewing desire..
> 
> Lights on 2d i rate it like this...
> 
> .8 if your focus is on Deep Blacks,
> 
> 1.4 if you want more contrast lighter image, decent blacks.
> 
> 2.7 if you want a very LED LCD Style black that is not deep at all but has detail and a bright Contrast style balanced image ...
> 
> 
> Hope this helps explain the difference,
> 
> Again If you demo this screen at any dealer you need to ask 2 questions...
> 
> What Gen is it ,
> 
> And What Gain..
> 
> 
> Regardless of the Gain
> 
> SI's GIII is Definetly in it to Win it....


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pers1* /forum/post/20540500
> 
> 
> I just got my SI BD 0.8 G3 80" yesterday and first BD film i tried to watch was Ice Age 3
> 
> And yes there were sparkling in every snow or bright sceens like snow and skies.
> 
> I use a JVC X3 projctor it`s 3 meters (same distance as I have as well) away from the screen about 20 higer than than the top of the screen (it`s ceiling mounted)
> 
> It seems that the sparkling is only were if the BD had been a mirrror and i could see back into the lense.
> 
> I have the JVC at low and iris at -8, it seems the JVC has to much light output?
> 
> Please advise, the scrren is produced 13.05.11
> 
> 
> 
> PerS



This is the nature of the beast. You will see this, especially on those kinds of images.


If you can increase the projector's throw distance, that could help. Further cutting light output could also help. Whatever you do, you won't get rid of it completely.


----------



## pers1

Thanks

I will try to recalibrat to the new screen and set the iris to -16.

Is it aslo better to use Gamma 2.5 insted of 2.2?


PerS


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pers1* /forum/post/20541056
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> I will try to recalibrat to the new screen and set the iris to -16.
> 
> Is it aslo better to use Gamma 2.5 insted of 2.2?
> 
> 
> PerS



I am glad that you are calibrating.


You might have to do some experimenting to see what works best.


Closing down the iris all the way on the X3 impacts ANSI contrast. But, I think that this approach may work in spite of that because the BD will preserve on screen contrast. So, you have a net win. Again, see what works best for you.


If the projector is new you can expect a lot of dimming over the first few hundred hours. That may remedy most of the issue.


I don't think that raising the gamma will do much but you can try. The areas in which the texture is visible are probably pretty close to 100 IRE level and increasing the gamma won't affect them that much, if at all. I use a 2.3 gamma, but that is just a personal preference.


What you might do is use the AVS calibration disk and project a 100 Ire pattern and play with the iris. Then observe how the issue changes. If the issue is that the X3 is too bright for an 80" screen regardless of what you do, you might want to buy a good ND filter and find a way to mount it in the projector's light path. This is a simple way of cutting brightness.


----------



## Kevin 3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pers1* /forum/post/20541056
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> I will try to recalibrat to the new screen and set the iris to -16.
> 
> Is it aslo better to use Gamma 2.5 insted of 2.2?
> 
> 
> PerS



pers1

Projector 20"above 10` throw screen being an angular reflective the angle needs to be right for maximun gain even though its already too bright, lower PJ or raise screen or maybe angle screen up a little to test.


Lawguy will correct me on this....


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pers1* /forum/post/20541056
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> I will try to recalibrat to the new screen and set the iris to -16.
> 
> Is it aslo better to use Gamma 2.5 insted of 2.2?
> 
> 
> PerS



Adjusting the angle of the projected image from the PJ to the angle of viewing is a "best fix" as reducing brightness enough to really make a difference is counter productive. Attenuating 'a little' and doing the following should effect the best compromise.


From a sitting position, measure your Eye level from the Floor, then slowly rise up until the sparklies are reduced enough to matter. Make that eye level measurement and drop the PJ accordingly if possible.


Good luck.











> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20541153
> 
> 
> pers1
> 
> Projector 20"above 10` throw screen being an angular reflective the angle needs to be right for maximun gain even though its already too bright, lower PJ or raise screen or maybe angle screen up a little to test.
> 
> 
> Lawguy will correct me on this....



I type too slow.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* /forum/post/20541153
> 
> 
> pers1
> 
> Projector 20"above 10` throw screen being an angular reflective the angle needs to be right for maximun gain even though its already too bright, lower PJ or raise screen or maybe angle screen up a little to test.
> 
> 
> Lawguy will correct me on this....



I guess the answer to this is whether the projector is 20 inches or 20 centimeters above the screen. Like you, I had thought that it was 20 inches, which, using some rough math and some other assumptions seems like a sufficiently unideal angle so it would not be worth changing. But, if it is 20 centimeters, it may be worth raising it some.


----------



## pers1

its only 20 centimeters above the top of the screen


PerS



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy* /forum/post/20541245
> 
> 
> I guess the answer to this is whether the projector is 20 inches or 20 centimeters above the screen. Like you, I had thought that it was 20 inches, which, using some rough math and some other assumptions seems like a sufficiently unideal angle so it would not be worth changing. But, if it is 20 centimeters, it may be worth raising it some.


----------



## rdjam

Ok - my Black Diamond 3D 2.70 gain is on the way...!










Will post thoughts after some testing.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rdjam* /forum/post/20543778
> 
> 
> Ok - my Black Diamond 3D 2.70 gain is on the way...!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will post thoughts after some testing.



Awesome,

Please post some shots of the screen on the wall,

I am sure all would be intrested in seeing the look of this Screen Fabric.


----------



## Mazda74Speed3

Here is an update pic. We will be going with an edge to edge BD II 1.4, screen will be installed in the coming weeks in addition with the new Christies HD12K 12,000 Lumens 1.2 Kilowatt Xenon PJ.










[/URL] 

ImageShack.us [/IMG]


----------



## ERuiz




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mazda74Speed3* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Here is an update pic. We will be going with an edge to edge BD II 1.4, screen will be installed in the coming weeks in addition with the new Christies HD12K 12,000 Lumens 1.2 Kilowatt Xenon PJ.
> 
> 
> [/url]
> 
> ImageShack.us [/IMG]



Holy blown retinas Batman! 12,000 lumens? Will you be using this screen/pj outside at noon?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mazda74Speed3* /forum/post/20544188
> 
> 
> Here is an update pic. We will be going with an edge to edge BD II 1.4, screen will be installed in the coming weeks in addition with the new Christies HD12K 12,000 Lumens 1.2 Kilowatt Xenon PJ.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/URL]
> 
> ImageShack.us [/IMG]



That should get you better performance vs a Goo Screen and a Epson 8350...


Props to you for doing this project Right.

Should look amaZing please keep us posted...


----------



## Mazda74Speed3

Well I hope so since the PJ is roughly $125,000 lol


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Mazda74Speed3* 
Well I hope so since the PJ is roughly $125,000 lol
That is going to be amazing.

What is the final screen size?


----------



## ERuiz

Quote:

Originally Posted by *fraisa*
That is going to be amazing.

What is the final screen size?
The Great Wall of China lol


----------



## Benito Joaquin

Oh man, you are going to see a HUGE difference!!!! Definitely post pics when done!!


Where is the screen located?


Benito


----------



## Mazda74Speed3

Here are some before pics









[/URL]


----------



## CNWDI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mazda74Speed3* /forum/post/20544188
> 
> 
> Here is an update pic. We will be going with an edge to edge BD II 1.4, screen will be installed in the coming weeks in addition with the new Christies HD12K 12,000 Lumens 1.2 Kilowatt Xenon PJ.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/URL]
> 
> [/IMG]





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mazda74Speed3* /forum/post/20546815
> 
> 
> Here are some before pics



I wonder what my wife will think when I say we're relocating to OKC ?


----------



## ccotenj

holy crap! that's a BIG screen...










i want me one of those!


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mazda74Speed3* /forum/post/20546815
> 
> 
> Here are some before pics
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/URL]



Ya let us know where your Sports bar is located because i would love to come see this when its done.

Also let us know the final size of the screen...

This is totally Awesome..

I have a new saying....

You cant afford cheap screens....lol


----------



## Mazda74Speed3

Here are a lot better pics or our GastroPub
http://www.arthitectural.com/elliott...lic-gastropub/


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mazda74Speed3* /forum/post/20551462
> 
> 
> Here are a lot better pics or our GastroPub
> http://www.arthitectural.com/elliott...lic-gastropub/



These pics are awesome...

Cant wait to see the final finished project


----------



## Kamus




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20533659
> 
> 
> Here is the link for the Video of the New 2.7 Gain Material
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8aWZ...layer_embedded



active AND passive?


Does this mean it preserves polarized light?


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kamus* 
active AND passive?


Does this mean it preserves polarized light?
I have tested it with an Active 3d on the Mits 9000hc,

That was the best 3d i have ever seen.


as for the preserving polarized light will let others answer that one


----------



## Screeny24

"ST-Silver-Screen-3D" a rigid screen from Germany preserves polarized light:

screen-tech.de


----------



## Benito Joaquin

There are many screens out there that preserve polarized light but most of those screens also come with some issues and some are considered a specialty screen.

In some confidential testing, the Firehawk LS preserved light better than most if not all grey screens. If you are interested in a material that preserves polarized light, definitely give that material a shot. Note that Firehawk LS is not the same as Firehawk G3.


Benito


----------



## superheropunk

I am thinking about getting a .8 BDII 80" 16:9 screen and have read many pages of this thread. My room is more of a family room type and not a dedicated HT (but can it is very dark with lights off).


Used the screen wizard at screeninovations.com and recommends the BD .08 and the Lunar/Maestro second.


After reading so many opinions and seeing a 1000 screen shots I think the determining factor should be a coin toss. Heads I get one and Tails I don't?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *superheropunk* /forum/post/20706315
> 
> 
> I am thinking about getting a .8 BDII 80" 16:9 screen and have read many pages of this thread. My room is more of a family room type and not a dedicated HT (but can it is very dark with lights off).
> 
> 
> Used the screen wizard at screeninovations.com and recommends the BD .08 and the Lunar/Maestro second.
> 
> 
> After reading so many opinions and seeing a 1000 screen shots I think the determining factor should be a coin toss. Heads I get one and Tails I don't?



You have seen the pics so you know what i think about it...I love it,

But if someone doesnt have the budget for the bd I direct them over to the Lunar Screen...


----------



## ccotenj

to be really honest, 80 inches is too small... at that point, you might as well go with a big rear projection set...


imo...


----------



## Benito Joaquin

agree with ccotenj,


how far back will you be seated from the screen? is there a reason why you are only going 80"?


Benito


----------



## superheropunk




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20708916
> 
> 
> agree with ccotenj,
> 
> 
> how far back will you be seated from the screen? is there a reason why you are only going 80"?
> 
> 
> Benito



I would be about 9 - 9 1/2 feet max. Currently am sitting that distance with a 46" screen.


----------



## ccotenj

^^^


given that, i'd definitely go rear projection... cheaper/better, without the attendant issues of front projection... keep in mind that even though the bd does well with ambient/artificial light, it's not a panacea... despite what some might post (and what the marketing materials say), you aren't just going to throw one up on your wall without some consideration for ambient/artificial lighting...


unless you want to go bigger than 80", which you could fwiw... i'm 11-12 feet from a 106" screen, and wouldn't mind if it was bigger (unfortunately it wouldn't fit)... then it would be worth the effort...


----------



## Benito Joaquin

are you limited to where you can't go bigger?


Benito


----------



## ccotenj

^^^


me or him?


me, yea... any bigger, and part of it would be blocked by the main speakers...


----------



## whitetrash66

anyone else see one of the new 2.7 gain in person? i'm curious about the viewing angle, ambient light blocking ability, and hotspots/sparkles


----------



## Benito Joaquin

I'll try to find out what gain it was that i was looking at. I was able to see two of the Gen III materials.

Both did not work as good as i hoped off axis. Ambient light rejection was amazing!!! hot spots were still present as were the sparkles. Although not as bad as previous generation.


Benito


----------



## whitetrash66




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20712331
> 
> 
> I'll try to find out what gain it was that i was looking at. I was able to see two of the Gen III materials.
> 
> Both did not work as good as i hoped off axis. Ambient light rejection was amazing!!! hot spots were still present as were the sparkles. Although not as bad as previous generation.
> 
> 
> Benito




How far off angle were you when the image looked bad? Apparently the 2.7 is supposed to have the widest viewing angle out of all of them.


----------



## fraisa

Will be Taking Shots Tomorrow of The 2.7 with the Mits HC9000....

Stay Tuned...


----------



## whitetrash66




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20716461
> 
> 
> Will be Taking Shots Tomorrow of The 2.7 with the Mits HC9000....
> 
> Stay Tuned...



Oh boy, let us know how it looks in 2d AND 3d. I want to do almost exactly the same thing, but i'm concerned about black level, screen texture, and hotspotting.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *whitetrash66* /forum/post/20717728
> 
> 
> Oh boy, let us know how it looks in 2d AND 3d. I want to do almost exactly the same thing, but i'm concerned about black level, screen texture, and hotspotting.



Start of some Shots...

Mits 9000 & SI BD 2.7 Gain


My Camera IS not the best and my ISO was set to auto so a bit of noise but atleast they are in focus...































Matte White Screen Above 2.7 below


----------



## crazyravr

I read very good things about this screen. But in a light controlled room is there really that much of a difference over a standard white screen?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *crazyravr* /forum/post/20726685
> 
> 
> I read very good things about this screen. But in a light controlled room is there really that much of a difference over a standard white screen?



In a Light Controlled Room this screen is amazing,

Because of the Ambient Light Scatter Control it has.


----------



## goneten

Please someone correct me if I'm wrong, but are the sparklies you mention more visible on higher gain screen materials from the BD range ? So for example, are the sparklies less visible on the 1.4 gain material vs the 2.7 ? What about the 0.8 gain ?


Or are the sparklies equally as bad on all gain types ?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *goneten* /forum/post/20727925
> 
> 
> Please someone correct me if I'm wrong, but are the sparklies you mention more visible on higher gain screen materials from the BD range ? So for example, are the sparklies less visible on the 1.4 gain material vs the 2.7 ? What about the 0.8 gain ?
> 
> 
> Or are the sparklies equally as bad on all gain types ?



For Me the sparkles are worse on the higher gain say the 2.7 vs the .8 but i only notice them on a bright image...

Like a Blue Cloud or Hockey Rink..


And in the latest Gen III you really have to look for the Sparkles vs previous Gen Vrs.


If you are really sensitive and Picky to Sparkle then .8 or 1.4 is what you should stick with...

Again the sparkle on the 2.7 not a big deal but i am not looking for sparkle i am looking at the awesome bright LCD style Image.


I love my .8 gain and will be pairing it with a MIts 9000 Next Prestige Room Upgrade...


----------



## whitetrash66

Fraisa,


sounds amazing! i want one. Any hotspotting? what kind of throw are you using, min or max?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *whitetrash66* /forum/post/20728541
> 
> 
> Fraisa,
> 
> 
> sounds amazing! i want one. Any hotspotting? what kind of throw are you using, min or max?



The Throw distance I am using is 14.5ft on my .8 and hotspotting is non issue for me...


With regards to throw distance on the 2.7 it was around 15-16 ft and i looked for hotspotting and again non issue..

again i wasnt over looking for issues as i was in awe of the image...


----------



## goneten




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> If you are really sensitive and Picky to Sparkle then .8 or 1.4 is what you should stick with...



Thanks for your advice. Have you (or anyone) tested or seen the .8 gain BD G3 ? It looks like black, so it's clearly darker than the previous generation. I would imagination it would give CRT levels of black in a fully darkened space.


If you are going for a 90 inch 16:9 screen size would you say the .8 gain would work well with a projector with 800-1000 lumens....with some ambient light thrown in ? Or is that cutting it a bit ? I'll be watching most of my movies with the lights off but I would like the convenience of enjoying watching with some light in the room. Watching films in total darkness tends to irritate my eyes after awhile.


----------



## BlackShark

I'm looking forward to crosstalk tests with polarised 3D. I'd seriously consider this screen for christmas to replace my Harkness Spectral 240 silverscreen.

rdjam, do you still have your polarisers to do this test ?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *goneten* /forum/post/20732781
> 
> 
> Thanks for your advice. Have you (or anyone) tested or seen the .8 gain BD G3 ? It looks like black, so it's clearly darker than the previous generation. I would imagination it would give CRT levels of black in a fully darkened space.
> 
> 
> If you are going for a 90 inch 16:9 screen size would you say the .8 gain would work well with a projector with 800-1000 lumens....with some ambient light thrown in ? Or is that cutting it a bit ? I'll be watching most of my movies with the lights off but I would like the convenience of enjoying watching with some light in the room. Watching films in total darkness tends to irritate my eyes after awhile.



I have the .8 gain in my room.










Above shot is with a Epson 9700 at 1600 lumens..on the .8 gain GIII

I think it all depends on the projector your planning on using,

Some projectors say there 1600 but shoot at 1000,

Others say 1000 but do higher...


So the question is,

what projector are you thinking of...


----------



## jerryjj

Need some help here folks. The shopping list is:


Marantz SR7005

Oppo BDP-93

Klipsch FS-82ii CS-62ii


It's the screen and projector that I need help with.


- The projector will be 13' to 14' from the screen.


- The screen will be on the diagonal wall so the light from the windows will not be shining directly on the screen.


- Room shape:


W = window

P = Projector

/


----------



## goneten




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> So the question is, what projector are you thinking of...



Panasonic AE4000. BTW, the screen looks fantastic in your room. Very nice.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *goneten* /forum/post/20736921
> 
> 
> Panasonic AE4000. BTW, the screen looks fantastic in your room. Very nice.



Thanks,

With regards to the Panny, I am not a Panny 4000 fan..

So hard for me to comment without me being hard on that unit.


I have played with a Mits 4000, 6800 and both did very well with the .8 gain

Have the 9700 epson it does well.


If you choose the Panny you will need to get someone in or calibrate it yourself because the panny on a White screen out of the box is very off with its settings ... On a .8 gain BD the Panny is even worse out of the box..

Can be dialed in but will take alot to do it.


----------



## whitetrash66

hey all, I've already posted this in the High End Projector forum, but someone suggested I post it in here.


I am ordering a screen from the store here, and I have decided to go with a black diamond screen for sure.I need to keep the contrast up with lighting, and I have a white ceiling that I cannot paint.


I am getting a projector in a few months and want something that is both 3d and has excellent black levels in 2d. Possibly the new sony vw95 or even the hw30.


Should I go with the 1.4 gain, or the 2.7 gain? I cannot sample, because I live literally 10 hours away from the nearest dealer. I would like to get the 16x9 113" black diamond III.


I am coming from a 63 inch samsung 3d plasma and am pretty happy with the brightness in 2d and 3d, but want a bigger screen. Will the 1.4 gain screen be bright enough for me on a 113" screen? or should I sacrifice black level and go with the 2.7? My plasma calibrated puts out about 31 fl for whites, and the blacks measure about .07. Throw distance will be about 10 to 12 feet, so fairly close


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *whitetrash66* /forum/post/20737569
> 
> 
> hey all, I've already posted this in the High End Projector forum, but someone suggested I post it in here.
> 
> 
> I am ordering a screen from the store here, and I have decided to go with a black diamond screen for sure.I need to keep the contrast up with lighting, and I have a white ceiling that I cannot paint.
> 
> 
> I am getting a projector in a few months and want something that is both 3d and has excellent black levels in 2d. Possibly the new sony vw95 or even the hw30.
> 
> 
> Should I go with the 1.4 gain, or the 2.7 gain? I cannot sample, because I live literally 10 hours away from the nearest dealer. I would like to get the 16x9 113" black diamond III.
> 
> 
> I am coming from a 63 inch samsung 3d plasma and am pretty happy with the brightness in 2d and 3d, but want a bigger screen. Will the 1.4 gain screen be bright enough for me on a 113" screen? or should I sacrifice black level and go with the 2.7? My plasma calibrated puts out about 31 fl for whites, and the blacks measure about .07. Throw distance will be about 10 to 12 feet, so fairly close



Blacks are better on the 1.4 vs the 2.7 gain,

If it was me i would go with the Mit 9000 vs the sony..


If your watching alot of bright images like Hockey go with the 1.4 if you just watching for movies and dont care about ambient light the 2.7 will still keep your ceiling black..


But from what your telling me i would go with the 1.4...


----------



## goneten




> Quote:
> I have played with a Mits 4000, 6800 and both did very well with the .8 gain



So you would personally pick the Mit 4000 over the AE4000 ? Isn't that projector supposed to be in a slightly higher class compared to the Optoma HD20 ? Seems like a budget projector price-wise, but I've heard nothing but good things from it.


Personally the only reason why I'm considering the AE4000 is the powered zoom for 2:35. I don't think the Mit 4000 would have that feature especially at it's price point. If it does then I would seriously consider it.


You say you have used the 4000 on the .8 screen. What in particular did you not like about the AE4000 ? Only color ?


----------



## whitetrash66




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20738436
> 
> 
> Blacks are better on the 1.4 vs the 2.7 gain,
> 
> If it was me i would go with the Mit 9000 vs the sony..
> 
> 
> If your watching alot of bright images like Hockey go with the 1.4 if you just watching for movies and dont care about ambient light the 2.7 will still keep your ceiling black..
> 
> 
> But from what your telling me i would go with the 1.4...



Well, i would say that i game 45% of the time, watch blu rays/HD cable 45% of the time, and the other 10% is casual viewing or getting a UFC PPV or something. The room is 80% light controlled, but i have a white ceiling. I want something bright enough to give me GOOD 3d for movies/gaming, but something that makes 2D movies/games GREAT.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *goneten* /forum/post/20738663
> 
> 
> So you would personally pick the Mit 4000 over the AE4000 ? Isn't that projector supposed to be in a slightly higher class compared to the Optoma HD20 ? Seems like a budget projector price-wise, but I've heard nothing but good things from it.
> 
> 
> Personally the only reason why I'm considering the AE4000 is the powered zoom for 2:35. I don't think the Mit 4000 would have that feature especially at it's price point. If it does then I would seriously consider it.
> 
> 
> You say you have used the 4000 on the .8 screen. What in particular did you not like about the AE4000 ? Only color ?



I just didnt like how out of the box the color was so far Off..

takes alot of work to calibrate in.


If you like the motor zoom then you should look at the Mits 6800 it has that motor zoom and its coming to the end of its cycle about to be replaced in the fall..

So you should be able to get a good deal on a 6800...


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *whitetrash66* /forum/post/20738858
> 
> 
> Well, i would say that i game 45% of the time, watch blu rays/HD cable 45% of the time, and the other 10% is casual viewing or getting a UFC PPV or something. The room is 80% light controlled, but i have a white ceiling. I want something bright enough to give me GOOD 3d for movies/gaming, but something that makes 2D movies/games GREAT.



2.7 will be good it still does very well with light scatter and that will help with your white ceiling..

Just keep in mind that the 2.7 will show more sparkle than the 1.4


----------



## goneten




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> If you like the motor zoom then you should look at the Mits 6800 it has that motor zoom and its coming to the end of its cycle about to be replaced in the fall..
> 
> So you should be able to get a good deal on a 6800...



I did a bit of reading in the Mit 4000 thread and apparently you can get 2:35 to work. It's basically almost half the price of the AE4000 and after reading most of the reviews it seems like a real winner for the price. One of these partnered with a 0.80 gain screen would be fantastic I think.


I'm tired of watching projected images where there is huge light reflections off the ceiling, even in a fully blacked out space ! And even then in many cases the blacks aren't that black. Scenes in space don't look very immersive.


Please do me a favour when you are able to find the time and take a few shots of your set up with and without the lights on. If you can use some challenging material like the Dark Night or something similar. I realize screenshots don't tell the whole story but pics are always welcome.










Thanks again for your advice.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *goneten* /forum/post/20739633
> 
> 
> I did a bit of reading in the Mit 4000 thread and apparently you can get 2:35 to work. It's basically almost half the price of the AE4000 and after reading most of the reviews it seems like a real winner for the price. One of these partnered with a 0.80 gain screen would be fantastic I think.
> 
> 
> I'm tired of watching projected images where there is huge light reflections off the ceiling, even in a fully blacked out space ! And even then in many cases the blacks aren't that black. Scenes in space don't look very immersive.
> 
> 
> Please do me a favour when you are able to find the time and take a few shots of your set up with and without the lights on. If you can use some challenging material like the Dark Night or something similar. I realize screenshots don't tell the whole story but pics are always welcome.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks again for your advice.



Just pmd you the link to My Photos from Facebook...

In those albums are the screen shots lights on and off....


----------



## whitetrash66




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20739838
> 
> 
> Just pmd you the link to My Photos from Facebook...
> 
> In those albums are the screen shots lights on and off....





Any chance you could send me a link too? Any pics of a black diamond screen can only help my decision.

Is it your .8 hooked up to your 9000 right now?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *whitetrash66* /forum/post/20739976
> 
> 
> Any chance you could send me a link too? Any pics of a black diamond screen can only help my decision.
> 
> Is it your .8 hooked up to your 9000 right now?



Sent....

No right now is the 9700 Epson...


----------



## goneten

Thanks Fraisa ! System looks stunning. I think the best thing besides the black levels is lack of light reflection off the ceiling. It really makes you concentrate a lot more on the actual picture. I take it the 0.80 gain will be better at reducing light reflections than the 1.4 and 2.7 gain models ?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *goneten* /forum/post/20741335
> 
> 
> Thanks Fraisa ! System looks stunning. I think the best thing besides the black levels is lack of light reflection off the ceiling. It really makes you concentrate a lot more on the actual picture. I take it the 0.80 gain will be better at reducing light reflections than the 1.4 and 2.7 gain models ?



Actually i have found that with regards to light reflection .8 & 1.4 are the same.

The 2.7 actually is also good with light scatter maybe a 10 percent drop vs the other gains but still good. But when it comes to 3d the 2.7 has the best viewing angle...


----------



## ParanoidDroid

How does the sparkle effect compare to the Silverstar Screen. I have a sample of that and from 10 ft back (my viewing distance) its pretty noticeable.


Also, Fraisa, please send me a link also. Thanks.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ParanoidDroid* /forum/post/20742012
> 
> 
> How does the sparkle effect compare to the Silverstar Screen. I have a sample of that and from 10 ft back (my viewing distance) its pretty noticeable.
> 
> 
> Also, Fraisa, please send me a link also. Thanks.



Done,


I have never seen the Silverstar screen before so i really cant compare.

All Gen III Gains have really reduced sparkle vs Gen II.


----------



## Benito Joaquin

I confirm what fraisa is saying about the Gen III materials.

I've seen two of the three and noticed a huge improvement in sparkles. Still noticeable but definitely better than the Gen II


Benito


----------



## Benito Joaquin

Hey all,


Just a friendly reminder that AV Science is an authorized Screen Innovations dealer.

So after getting some good advice from fraisa, myself and others....you don't have to go too far to get good pricing as well!


Benito


----------



## ParanoidDroid




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20742737
> 
> 
> Hey all,
> 
> 
> Just a friendly reminder that AV Science is an authorized Screen Innovations dealer.
> 
> So after getting some good advice from fraisa, myself and others....you don't have to go too far to get good pricing as well!
> 
> 
> Benito



PM Sent.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20742737
> 
> 
> Hey all,
> 
> 
> Just a friendly reminder that AV Science is an authorized Screen Innovations dealer.
> 
> So after getting some good advice from fraisa, myself and others....you don't have to go too far to get good pricing as well!
> 
> 
> Benito



Amen,

Benito will Take good care of you...


----------



## goneten

PM sent.


----------



## fraisa

Here is how I class the BD Gain's

.8 Best Blacks , minor sparkle Viewing Angle 44%

1.4 Very Good Blacks and More Contrast, Minor sparkle but little more vs .8...Viewing Angle 55%

2.7 Okay Blacks and Alot of contrast, little more sparkle vs the 1.4..best 3d..Viewing Angle 60-65%


Hope this helps


----------



## ParanoidDroid




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20745803
> 
> 
> Here is how I class the BD Gain's
> 
> .8 Best Blacks , minor sparkle
> 
> 1.4 Very Good Blacks and More Contrast, Minor sparkle but little more vs .8
> 
> 2.7 Okay Blacks and Alot of contrast, little more sparkle vs the 1.4..best 3d
> 
> 
> Hope this helps



Could you do the same with the viewing angle. I know the 2.7 will have the narrowest bc of the gain, but ive read where its still good.


Are all of these retroreflective?


----------



## kabrumbs

Hi guys,


I live in Brazil, and this reduce a lot my screen options. We have here a very good 0.9 gain HC gray option, and some matte white 1.0 gain options. We have a reseller here for the Black Diamond, and even if the price is a liver blow (you cant imagine how much it will cost me!!!), I'm willing to get it if it works in my environment. To make things worse, we dont have here a place to demo the screen.


1) My new hometheater room is 9.5 ft wide, 15.5 ft deep and 8.2 ft height. Eyes will be at 10.5 feet from the screen and 3.2 feet from the floor. Projector will be at the end of the room (probably lens at 12 feet).

2) I really want a 2.4 screen with 8.5 feet wide. Fixed frame.

3) I want to do CIH zoom, and probably will be taking one of the new projectors with lens memory (fingers crossed to see a good LCOS projector with this feature).

4) It will be a semi dedicated room with no light from outside. It will be most used to movies and series (80%), but some sports with a little ambiente light (20%). No worried, at this point, with 3D.

5) I really like Rich's room and I´m willing to paint walls and ceilling in a similar way http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1259917 . Black and gray with low reflective properties. But I think, even with this treatment, my narrow room will have lots of side reflections.

6) I like black levels, but I love nice colours. I enjoy a bright image.


I have these doubts:


1 - With the points above, how would a 1.4 BD III perform? And how it woud compare with a good 0.9 gain HC gray screen?

2 - What is the best placement of screen/projector/eyes to optimize gain?

3 - Is there another screen that would perform better and could be shipped to Brazil?


Thx


----------



## Kevin 3000

Quote:

Originally Posted by *kabrumbs* 
Hi guys,

I have these doubts:


1 - With the points above, how would a 1.4 BD III perform? And how it woud compare with a good 0.9 gain HC gray screen?

2 - What is the best placement of screen/projector/eyes to optimize gain?

3 - Is there another screen that would perform better and could be shipped to Brazil?


Thx
Research DNP Supernova based on same tech....... http://www.avforums.com/forums/proje...amond-etc.html


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *ParanoidDroid* 
Could you do the same with the viewing angle. I know the 2.7 will have the narrowest bc of the gain, but ive read where its still good.


Are all of these retroreflective?
Will Edit In..

Now Done...


Repeat...


Here is how I class the BD Gain's

.8 Best Blacks , minor sparkle Viewing Angle 44%

1.4 Very Good Blacks and More Contrast, Minor sparkle but little more vs .8...Viewing Angle 55%

2.7 Okay Blacks and Alot of contrast, little more sparkle vs the 1.4..best 3d..Viewing Angle 60-65%


Again when it comes to my screens of Choice,

My First Choice is always an SI Screen

Love there company and there staff including there RnD DEpt is amazing..

FYI,

They Do have other screens in the Line up

List of there Reference Screens including BD...
http://www.screeninnovations.com/pro...xed/reference/


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Kevin 3000* 
[/url]
Hey Brother,

Good to see you back on the forum...

have you seen the new 2.7 yet..?


----------



## ParanoidDroid

Quote:

Originally Posted by *fraisa* 
Will Edit In..

Now Done...


Repeat...


Here is how I class the BD Gain's

.8 Best Blacks , minor sparkle Viewing Angle 44%

1.4 Very Good Blacks and More Contrast, Minor sparkle but little more vs .8...Viewing Angle 55%

2.7 Okay Blacks and Alot of contrast, little more sparkle vs the 1.4..best 3d..Viewing Angle 60-65%


Again when it comes to my screens of Choice,

My First Choice is always an SI Screen

Love there company and there staff including there RnD DEpt is amazing..

FYI,

They Do have other screens in the Line up

List of there Reference Screens including BD...
http://www.screeninnovations.com/pro...xed/reference/
wow, so the 2.7 has the best viewing angle?


----------



## millerwill

I'm curious if any of you have compared the BD's to the new Dalite HiPower 2.4 gain screen. I imagine the BD's have better light rejection, but that the HP's are free of any artifacts, i.e., sparkles, etc. Would be interesting to hear about any direct comparisons.


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *ParanoidDroid* 
wow, so the 2.7 has the best viewing angle?
Yes the 2.7 has the best viewing angle,

Better viewing angle comes in handy with 3d.


Thats why you really need to look at the 3 gains and pick whats the deciding factor in choosing the right gain for your needs...


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *millerwill* 
I'm curious if any of you have compared the BD's to the new Dalite HiPower 2.4 gain screen. I imagine the BD's have better light rejection, but that the HP's are free of any artifacts, i.e., sparkles, etc. Would be interesting to hear about any direct comparisons.
I am in no way a dalite fan ,,, At All.

Dont like there product,.

Staff very hard to get ahold of to get support and answers......

They talk the big talk but fail to show up to the gun fight .. (ie the Stewart vs dalite shoot out.... Dalite was a no show..)


----------



## BobL

HP vs BD are two different animals. The HP is retroreflective which reflects light back towards the projector, a good choice if your head is near the projector like mounted just above head height. The BD is angular reflective which reflects light at the same angle away from the light source, similar to a laser pointer hitting a mirror. Tends to work best for ceiling mounted projectors.


----------



## ParanoidDroid

Quote:

Originally Posted by *fraisa* 
Yes the 2.7 has the best viewing angle,

Better viewing angle comes in handy with 3d.


Thats why you really need to look at the 3 gains and pick whats the deciding factor in choosing the right gain for your needs...
Unfortunately, I cant. My local dealer only has a gen2 0.8 gain. Hes way overpriced, livesvin an expensive neighborhood and can charge that. He knows I basically was using him to look at a sample. Im in Birmingham, AL so we dont have much. Id be willing to drive to Atlanta, or Nashville, if I knew of one there.


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *ParanoidDroid* 
Unfortunately, I cant. My local dealer only has a gen2 0.8 gain. Hes way overpriced, livesvin an expensive neighborhood and can charge that. He knows I basically was using him to look at a sample. Im in Birmingham, AL so we dont have much. Id be willing to drive to Atlanta, or Nashville, if I knew of one there.
What i meant by look was consider not actually view in person...

You need to compare the 3 gains with regards to spec knowledge..


----------



## kabrumbs

Quote:

Originally Posted by *BobL* 
HP vs BD are two different animals. The HP is retroreflective which reflects light back towards the projector, a good choice if your head is near the projector like mounted just above head height. The BD is angular reflective which reflects light at the same angle away from the light source, similar to a laser pointer hitting a mirror. Tends to work best for ceiling mounted projectors.
Tends to work best for ceiling mounted or is recommended? What would be the optimal projector placement on an angular reflective screen like BD 1.4?


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *kabrumbs* 
Tends to work best for ceiling mounted or is recommended? What would be the optimal projector placement on an angular reflective screen like BD 1.4?
 http://www.screeninnovations.com/too...jector-wizard/


----------



## kabrumbs




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20747596
> 
> http://www.screeninnovations.com/too...jector-wizard/



Thanks for the link fraisa, but this calculator is about distance of the projector from screen, not height. I want to know what is the recomended placement of projector/screen/eyes on vertical axis (probably is influenced by horizontal distantce, and that's why I post my data on the post above)


[]s Humberto


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *kabrumbs* /forum/post/20747652
> 
> 
> Thanks for the link fraisa, but this calculator is about distance of the projector from screen, not height. I want to know what is the recomended placement of projector/screen/eyes on vertical axis (probably is influenced by horizontal distantce, and that's why I post my data on the post above)
> 
> 
> []s Humberto



I have only done ceiling mounts with any bd screen no issues...


----------



## BobL

You have to figure the angles for the projector. You could probably use a mirror and see if you can see the projector from your seating position. Place the mirror in the center of the screen. Also, the further back the projector is the less noticeable the hot spotting and better screen uniformity.


----------



## whitetrash66

Quick question....


Was thinking about doing a 113" 16x9 Black Diamond in the 1.4 gain. Now with the new Panasonic AE7000 announced with MEMORY ZOOM







i'm thinking about using a 2.40 aspect screen in a 130"ish screen. My concern is the viewing angle... with a wide screen like this and with the black diamond, will colors/brightness fall off noticeably at the sides of the screen? should i stick with a 16x9 screen for uniformity?


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *whitetrash66* /forum/post/20754848
> 
> 
> Quick question....
> 
> 
> Was thinking about doing a 113" 16x9 Black Diamond in the 1.4 gain. Now with the new Panasonic AE7000 announced with MEMORY ZOOM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i'm thinking about using a 2.40 aspect screen in a 130"ish screen. My concern is the viewing angle... with a wide screen like this and with the black diamond, will colors/brightness fall off noticeably at the sides of the screen? should i stick with a 16x9 screen for uniformity?



This is a very good question. Though not with a BD, I was considering the new Dalite HP (2.4 gain) in either its White or its Gray (HC) version, the latter having only about half the viewing angle of the former. Using samples obtained from Dalite, for the very large screen I wanted (and got), 144"W (for 2.35), I found that there was noticeable drop off in brightness at the sides of the Gray samples, but not so with the White ones.


So it certainly does bear checking out whether or not the viewing angle of any screen of interest is wide enough to prevent this kind of non-uniform brightness.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *whitetrash66* /forum/post/20754848
> 
> 
> Quick question....
> 
> 
> Was thinking about doing a 113" 16x9 Black Diamond in the 1.4 gain. Now with the new Panasonic AE7000 announced with MEMORY ZOOM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i'm thinking about using a 2.40 aspect screen in a 130"ish screen. My concern is the viewing angle... with a wide screen like this and with the black diamond, will colors/brightness fall off noticeably at the sides of the screen? should i stick with a 16x9 screen for uniformity?



The Viewing angle of the 1.4 is the same for both 16x9 and 2:35.

I have posted that value on the previous page..


----------



## BobL

Any screen with a gain coating will have uniformity problems. You can't change physics. Remember even a negative gain screen like a .8 screen could be .6 screen with a 1.3 coating.


With an angular reflective screen the light that is reflected in the center of the screen is reflected back towards someone sitting centered on the screen. The light hitting the sides of the screen is hitting the screen from a different angle and not as much is reflected back toward the viewer causing these difference in screen uniformity. There is a fix though that helps improve screen uniformity, it is called a curved screen










Wtih a retoreflective screen the situation is improved as the light is reflected back towards the projector. If your head could be exactly where the projector is placed you should have fantastic uniformity but unfortunately that isn't possible.


However, we often do not notice the difference in brightness on different parts of the screen. It is easier to notice if we project a solid color on the whole screen but not as easy with viewing material.


----------



## whitetrash66




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20755172
> 
> 
> The Viewing angle of the 1.4 is the same for both 16x9 and 2:35.
> 
> I have posted that value on the previous page..



i know the viewing angle is the same, but i'm concerned about having such a wide screen, and if the brightness shift would be visible during a 2.40 movie. How much would the sides be dimmer?


----------



## jayray

Just viewed, what I was told, was a G3 1.4 screen. I recall seeing one several months ago and it looked close to black with no image projected on it. I was struck by how grey this screen, I saw today, looked. Do these screens look more grey or black? It didn't look much darker than a Stewart Grey Hawk which was also in the room. Any thoughts would be appreciated.

John


----------



## Benito Joaquin

Definitely darker than a Greyhawk. The 1.4 could be compared to the Firehawk. The .8 gain is definitely close to black. The 2.7 is a lighter grey that could be close to a Greyhawk but still a bit darker.


Benito


----------



## jayray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20756195
> 
> 
> Definitely darker than a Greyhawk. The 1.4 could be compared to the Firehawk. The .8 gain is definitely close to black. The 2.7 is a lighter grey that could be close to a Greyhawk but still a bit darker.
> 
> 
> Benito



I was very surprised at how grey it looked. I'm not sure if the sale guy didn't know which one he was showing me but even the grey bars looked lighter than I recalled. Will have to talk to the manager on Monday. Thanks,

John


----------



## jayray

One last question. I have a BenQ W5000 and a Carada Brilliant White 1.3 gain screen. Which of the Black Diamond screens would still give me similar light output? The 1.4 or .80?

thanks,

John


----------



## BobL

Whitetrash66,


I doubt most would notice the difference because the shift happens gradually from the center to the sides. Some people might notice in bright scenes like shots of a blue sky or ice and even then unless the know the material they might just think its part of the film.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BobL* /forum/post/20756342
> 
> 
> Whitetrash66,
> 
> 
> I doubt most would notice the difference because the shift happens gradually from the center to the sides. Some people might notice in bright scenes like shots of a blue sky or ice and even then unless the know the material they might just think its part of the film.



Hey Bob,

What Type of BD and size do you have?


----------



## jayray

Well my calibrator said the 1.4 BD would be best for my room and pj so I ordered one. Hope to have it shortly. He said the pj would have to be recalibrated after using it with a Carada Brilliant White 1.3 gain screen. That should happen late Aug. Excited to see the diff with this screen and will report when it's done.

John


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jayray* /forum/post/20770127
> 
> 
> Well my calibrator said the 1.4 BD would be best for my room and pj so I ordered one. Hope to have it shortly. He said the pj would have to be recalibrated after using it with a Carada Brilliant White 1.3 gain screen. That should happen late Aug. Excited to see the diff with this screen and will report when it's done.
> 
> John



Thats awesome, and yes it would have to be Recalibrated for sure since coming from your Carada...


----------



## whitetrash66

so how much sparkle and hotspotting is present in the new 1.4 black diamond iii compared to the previous generation? is it noticeable at 12 feet back?


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *whitetrash66* /forum/post/20774132
> 
> 
> so how much sparkle and hotspotting is present in the new 1.4 black diamond iii compared to the previous generation? is it noticeable at 12 feet back?



Are you 12 feet back or the projector? How big a screen?


Benito


----------



## whitetrash66




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20774155
> 
> 
> Are you 12 feet back or the projector? How big a screen?
> 
> 
> Benito



Depending on the projector, probably the viewing distance AND the projector distance would be 12 feet back... maybe slightly farther for the projector.


I'm looking at a 129" 2.35 or 16x9 120"


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *whitetrash66* 
Depending on the projector, probably the viewing distance AND the projector distance would be 12 feet back... maybe slightly farther for the projector.


I'm looking at a 129" 2.35 or 16x9 120"
Largest 16x9 is 113inches....

So if you want bigger you will have to go 2.35


----------



## jayray

Got my 106 BD 1.4 today and the mission is accomplished










1. gray bars are closer to black

2. reflected light is reduced significantly, the room is darker around the screen.

3. better contrast.


Great screen









John


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jayray* /forum/post/20779662
> 
> 
> Got my 106 BD 1.4 today and the mission is accomplished
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1. gray bars are closer to black
> 
> 2. reflected light is reduced significantly, the room is darker around the screen.
> 
> 3. better contrast.
> 
> 
> Great screen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> John



Nice!

WHat projector are you using? What screen size? How far back is the projector from the screen?


Benito


----------



## jayray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> Nice!
> 
> WHat projector are you using? What screen size? How far back is the projector from the screen?
> 
> 
> Benito



BenQ W5000

106"

15.5' from screen

No hotspot, or sparklies seen. To be calibrated in two weeks so I checked the brightness and contrast and adjusted those. No loss of brightness that I can tell from my previous screen but contrast is better. Room is now much darker too.

John


----------



## whitetrash66

nobody has gotten or seen the 2.7 gain black diamond yet for impressions? I'm mainly curious about:


1:Light Scatter from screen to surrounding walls/ceiling

2: Performance in ambient light compared to 1.4 and .8 black diamond, as well as the Da-Lite High Power screen

3: Sparklies/ screen texture

4: Performance in dark scenes, since it is so high gain


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *whitetrash66* 
nobody has gotten or seen the 2.7 gain black diamond yet for impressions? I'm mainly curious about:


1:Light Scatter from screen to surrounding walls/ceiling

2: Performance in ambient light compared to 1.4 and .8 black diamond, as well as the Da-Lite High Power screen

3: Sparklies/ screen texture

4: Performance in dark scenes, since it is so high gain
I have and have posted screen shots a few pages back,

Also have gave a report of the unit working with a Mits 9000


1: Light scatter Greatly reduced from screen

2: 2.7 Blacks are not as black in Ambient Light vs 1.4 or .8.... Da Lite HP sucks with regard to Light scatter

3: Sparklies More present on the 2.7 vs the 1.4 or .8

4: In Dark Scenes in a Dark Light setting blacks are black but in ambient light blacks are not as black as the 1.4...


Hope this helps


----------



## fraisa

Black Diamond Zero......

http://www.screeninnovations.com/pro...mond-zero-edg/


----------



## glennQNYC




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Black Diamond Zero......
> 
> http://www.screeninnovations.com/pro...mond-zero-edg/



Sexy!


----------



## Benito Joaquin

That looks freaking cool!! I've done a few installs with Stewart rear projection that look just like that in real life! Also did a few with Firehawk but i would imagine with that type of room, the BD screen would knock it out!!


Benito


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20828142
> 
> 
> That looks freaking cool!! I've done a few installs with Stewart rear projection that look just like that in real life! Also did a few with Firehawk but i would imagine with that type of room, the BD screen would knock it out!!
> 
> 
> Benito



This is just Freakin Sick its so Sexy...

Man So getting this in my Room in the months to come...


----------



## ParanoidDroid




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20827370
> 
> 
> Black Diamond Zero......
> 
> http://www.screeninnovations.com/pro...mond-zero-edg/



That looks awesome. Any idea on how much (in additional money) that bad boy will cost?


Could you just pick this type of screen border instead of the original border? I mean its less material so itll cost less right?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ParanoidDroid* /forum/post/20833435
> 
> 
> That looks awesome. Any idea on how much (in additional money) that bad boy will cost?
> 
> 
> Could you just pick this type of screen border instead of the original border? I mean its less material so itll cost less right?



I have no idea on what it costs...

Just know I Like It , I want It, I need It......NOW.....he he


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ParanoidDroid* /forum/post/20833435
> 
> 
> That looks awesome. Any idea on how much (in additional money) that bad boy will cost?
> 
> 
> Could you just pick this type of screen border instead of the original border? I mean its less material so itll cost less right?



Give me a size you have in mind. They will email me pricing that i can compare to one of their standard sizes.


Benito


----------



## fraisa

What i like about the Zero is with having no border for me that would give more screen to project an image on.

In my Room i have height restrictions that limit me to 113 but if the frame is gone then i can get a 120 - 125 and its all image.


Pass me some Funky Cold Medina and give me some NFL on that screen......


----------



## Benito Joaquin

working on a 110" diagonal price so that we can compare to standard BD screen, should have it any minute now....


Benito


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20837517
> 
> 
> working on a 110" diagonal price so that we can compare to standard BD screen, should have it any minute now....
> 
> 
> Benito



Can you post the percent difference between the Reference & Zero

IE 10 percent more or Same...


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20837670
> 
> 
> Can you post the percent difference between the Reference & Zero
> 
> IE 10 percent more or Same...



Yup, not a problem!! I'll do that as soon as i get pricing from them.


Benito


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20837732
> 
> 
> Yup, not a problem!! I'll do that as soon as i get pricing from them.
> 
> 
> Benito



Awesome,,,

Again this Screen is going to be a Real Winner...

Especially with the Frameless Plasma's and Lcd flat panels that are coming out...


And the guys thought last yrs Superbowl and Grey Cup party was Good,

With this New screen it will be Legandary


----------



## Benito Joaquin

Looks like the screens will "officially" start shipping around 10/15. If you wanted one now, you could get it, they will make on a case by case basis. Expect to see several of these at CEDIA this year.


Just to give you an idea.....Retail on one of these is about $3,699. There is a bit of an up charge to jump into one of these good looking screens. MSRP on regular BD 110" diagonal will run you $3,099.


Please remember that if interested, it's always best to call in to get best prices!!


looks pretty damn awesome though....


thickness is 3/8" thick. From front of screen to wall would be 1/2".

OD of screen would be image + 3/4".


I've definitely got to see one of these to see how it compares to others out there.


Benito


----------



## fraisa

SI has a Video on there website of the Edge Zero...

http://www.screeninnovations.com/ 


Love this Video because Now the World can see that this Edge Zero is the Real Deal...


----------



## mjbnz

I am more interested in the retractable Black Diamond screen that I was assured (by SI) would be out Q3 2010, then Nov then Dec, then Feb etc... What has happened to that?


----------



## mjg100

Quote:

Originally Posted by *fraisa* 
Black Diamond Zero......

http://www.screeninnovations.com/pro...mond-zero-edg/
I will have to say, that screen looks very good. I hope it looks that good at cedia.


----------



## clausdk

Finally saw the black diamond 0.8 gain screen 92".


Overall I think it is rather impressive. Still looking forward to the motorized version.


I did notice some hotspotting and some sheen. I guess one has to decide if the advantages outweighs the dissadvantages of this screen. I'm still undecided and I haven't seen the 1.4 gain yet. I don't seem to bothered with hotspotting and viewing angle but a washed out image annoys me


----------



## glennQNYC




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mjbnz* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I am more interested in the retractable Black Diamond screen that I was assured (by SI) would be out Q3 2010, then Nov then Dec, then Feb etc... What has happened to that?



I hear ya! I believe the final production design will be shown at CEDIA next month.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *glennQNYC* /forum/post/20846562
> 
> 
> I hear ya! I believe the final production design will be shown at CEDIA next month.



I can confirm it will be shown at Cedia


----------



## BlakeV




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20847417
> 
> 
> I can confirm it will be shown at Cedia



In booth #719....


We will show an 80" Zero Edge with our 2.7 gain Black Diamond.


An 80" Zero Edge with our 1.4 gain Black Diamond.


And a 106" Zero Edge 1.4 gain Black Diamond.


We will also show our patent pending prototype of Black Diamond Stealth, to be released in spring of 2012. Black Diamond Stealth is the Black Diamond motorized.










If you would like to see both the new Zero Edge and Black Diamond Stealth then check out our new posted brochure. Zero Edge is on page 3 and Stealth is on page 5.

http://www.screeninnovations.com/wp-...2-Brochure.pdf


----------



## Benito Joaquin

I really hope they pull off the BD Stealth. It would be a nice addition to the market. A direct competitor to the drop down Firehawk G3.


Benito


----------



## glennQNYC




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeV* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> In booth #719....
> 
> 
> We will show an 80" Zero Edge with our 2.7 gain Black Diamond.
> 
> 
> An 80" Zero Edge with our 1.4 gain Black Diamond.
> 
> 
> And a 106" Zero Edge 1.4 gain Black Diamond.
> 
> 
> We will also show our patent pending prototype of Black Diamond Stealth, to be released in spring of 2012. Black Diamond Stealth is the Black Diamond motorized.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you would like to see both the new Zero Edge and Black Diamond Stealth then check out our new posted brochure. Zero Edge is on page 3 and Stealth is on page 5.
> 
> http://www.screeninnovations.com/wp-...2-Brochure.pdf



Wow, the Black Diamond Stealth looks unbelievable! The 'floating' design is totally unique and very, very cool.


----------



## BlakeV




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20852637
> 
> 
> I really hope they pull off the BD Stealth. It would be a nice addition to the market. A direct competitor to the drop down Firehawk G3.
> 
> 
> Benito



All the issues we had with Black Diamond motorized that kept us from shipping were fixed in the first prototype of Black Diamond stealth. This product works and will ship in Spring 2012.


----------



## clausdk

Black Diamond Stealth looks pretty awesome in the brochure! From what I can make of it, it's similar to DNP's flex model, with strings holding a "frame like" screen that can be rolled up. I hope the price isn't too high!


----------



## fraisa

Stealth looks just as Sexy as the Edge...

So Plans for the Room are...

1.4 Zero Edge 113...

and 120-130 2.7 Stealth Above....


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeV* /forum/post/20853189
> 
> 
> All the issues we had with Black Diamond motorized that kept us from shipping were fixed in the first prototype of Black Diamond stealth. This product works and will ship in Spring 2012.



man i remember those issues all too well. I had a chance to play around with one of the original drop down screens and yeah there a few minor things keeping it from mainstream.


Benito


----------



## boarder1995

Totally into the zero edge - looks great. I need the drop down version to maximize screen size, but am interested in seeing how they implement the retraction - will it rise up into a ceiling into a case? Or just up next to the ceiling? Will have to wait and see I suppose.


----------



## fraisa

Well,

Getting the New Itch for a projector and Now My .8 Gain BD is getting a New GirlFriend this Friday.

Went with Mits HC9000D.

Cant wait to see what this unit can do in 2d on my .8 gain screen..

Will post some screenies for sure...


Should be legendary

..................................

My Screens got a brand new girlfriend.

We went and jumped off the deep end,

Man, I think I'm on to somethin',

Ya know I feel just like a kid again.

I got a brand new girlfriend.

...................

he he


----------



## whitetrash66

Hey all,


So I got a sample of the 1.4 gain gen 3, and it looks pretty darn good to me.

I want to use a sony hw30 on a 113" 16x9 screen. what do you all think of this combo?

how is the gen 3 1.4 for sparkles and hot spotting? My room is light controlled but has a white unpaintable ceiling and light walls


----------



## jayray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *whitetrash66* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Hey all,
> 
> 
> So I got a sample of the 1.4 gain gen 3, and it looks pretty darn good to me.
> 
> I want to use a sony hw30 on a 113" 16x9 screen. what do you all think of this combo?
> 
> how is the gen 3 1.4 for sparkles and hot spotting? My room is light controlled but has a white unpaintable ceiling and light walls



I don't see any sparkles or hot spotting on my 106" 1.4 G3. My pj was just calibrated and the gray bars are now closer to black. Light reflection from my white ceiling has been greatly reduced as has the reflection from carpet and walls. Great screen.

John


----------



## whitetrash66




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jayray* /forum/post/20863774
> 
> 
> I don't see any sparkles or hot spotting on my 106" 1.4 G3. My pj was just calibrated and the gray bars are now closer to black. Light reflection from my white ceiling has been greatly reduced as has the reflection from carpet and walls. Great screen.
> 
> John



sounds good to me.how is the off angle?

could you private message me where you got it and for how much? Canadian dealers soul want double what US dealers want


----------



## jayray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *whitetrash66* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> sounds good to me.how is the off angle?
> 
> could you private message me where you got it and for how much? Canadian dealers soul want double what US dealers want



Off angle is not a problem. BTW, I'm 15.5 ft. From screen.

John


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *whitetrash66* /forum/post/20863858
> 
> 
> sounds good to me.how is the off angle?
> 
> could you private message me where you got it and for how much? Canadian dealers soul want double what US dealers want



There is a logical reason for this ......

and its not for free bmw's


----------



## whitetrash66




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20863900
> 
> 
> There is a logical reason for this ......
> 
> and its not for free bmw's





fraisa, I know it is a specialty item. But a canadian price of 5k+ seems like way too much for a 113". I can get it in the states for less than half. Canadian msrp is stupid, especially with a canadian dollar on par with the US (actually, higher today)


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *whitetrash66* /forum/post/20864000
> 
> 
> fraisa, I know it is a specialty item. But a canadian price of 5k+ seems like way too much for a 113". I can get it in the states for less than half. Canadian msrp is stupid, especially with a canadian dollar on par with the US (actually, higher today)



Unless its started to ship with Gold That is no way close.


----------



## whitetrash66




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20864023
> 
> 
> Unless its started to ship with Gold That is no way the CA MS_P.




Some dealer in calgary quoted me that. Another guy in lethbridge quoted me 400 less. I'm glad we agree that price is silly


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *whitetrash66* /forum/post/20864035
> 
> 
> Some dealer in calgary quoted me that. Another guy in lethbridge quoted me 400 less. I'm glad we agree that price is silly



Heck for that price i would rather get my Wife some dd's instead of a screen.... he he


----------



## jayray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> Unless its started to ship with Gold That is no way the CA MS_P.



You said it!

John


----------



## fraisa

FYI...


If you live in the Great White North and buy a Screen South of the Border...

SI will not honor your Warranty that is Fact.

SI has a policy in place with a Canadian distributor that Screens that come into the great tundra country has to be directed thru the proper channels for warranty to be honored

This is the agreement that is in place.

So just like with any appliance if it crosses the border not thru the proper paths you dont have any warranty...


Many of Us Canadians buy stuff across the border all the time and dont care if they have the warranty,

Heck i did that with my Dishwasher....

but my dishwasher only cost me Peanuts compared to a BD Screen...


----------



## fraisa

My Screens GF just arrived at the door.

puralator just dropped off the MIts 9000d,

will be playing around later getting it up and will report how it is in 2d

with the .8 gain...

Cant wait...


----------



## jayray

"If you live in the Great White North and buy a Screen North of the Border...

SI will not honor your Warranty that is Fact."


You don't really mean that do you? I live in Canada, bought the screen in Canada through an SI Authorized Dealer so I should have a warranty. Isn't that how it works?

John


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jayray* /forum/post/20867131
> 
> 
> "If you live in the Great White North and buy a Screen North of the Border...
> 
> SI will not honor your Warranty that is Fact."
> 
> 
> You don't really mean that do you? I live in Canada, bought the screen in Canada through an SI Authorized Dealer so I should have a warranty. Isn't that how it works?
> 
> John




Just wanted to see if anyone would get it,

I ment South of the border...

Fixed it now reads Right


----------



## jayray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> Just wanted to see if anyone would get it,
> 
> I ment South of the border...
> 
> Fixed it now reads Right



Had me worried for a minute







What can go wrong with something that hangs on the wall with no moving parts and the only thing that touches it is light?

John


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jayray* /forum/post/20867280
> 
> 
> Had me worried for a minute
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What can go wrong with something that hangs on the wall with no moving parts and the only thing that touches it is light?
> 
> John



Many Things can happen

I will let others from SI go into detail on that one...


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20866949
> 
> 
> FYI...
> 
> 
> If you live in the Great White North and buy a Screen South of the Border...
> 
> SI will not honor your Warranty that is Fact.
> 
> SI has a policy in place with a Canadian distributor that Screens that come into the great tundra country has to be directed thru the proper channels for warranty to be honored
> 
> This is the agreement that is in place.
> 
> So just like with any appliance if it crosses the border not thru the proper paths you dont have any warranty...
> 
> 
> Many of Us Canadians buy stuff across the border all the time and dont care if they have the warranty,
> 
> Heck i did that with my Dishwasher....
> 
> but my dishwasher only cost me Peanuts compared to a BD Screen...



What fraisa says is very true.

Although i have a few customers that have been able to make it happen with no problems.


Benito


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20867398
> 
> 
> What fraisa says is very true.
> 
> Although i have a few customers that have been able to make it happen with no problems.
> 
> 
> Benito



Its Like rolling the dice in Vegas Sometimes you win and sometimes you get Burned...

I would rather play it safe and have that warrenty for the just what if situation..


----------



## pawstar

Yeah, I will second the notion of going with an Authorized Canadian dealer for your SI screen. You can easily find a well established SI BD dealer







who will give you a very reasonable price up here with full warranty.


----------



## Benito Joaquin

pawstar, that is true although i've heard of more stories stating the opposite. Dealers charging more than MSRP for a screen.


There are always ways to go about getting a screen to Canada from an authorized US dealer....just got to get creative.


Benito


----------



## fraisa

My Mits HC9000 is the NEw Advanced 9000

Canada is currently shipping this model...

Unit looks very on my .8 gain screen and will compare vs the 1.4 and report

again i am just doing 2D


----------



## ParanoidDroid

Has anyone viewed the 2.7 in person and can commentvon viewing angle?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ParanoidDroid* /forum/post/20871053
> 
> 
> Has anyone viewed the 2.7 in person and can commentvon viewing angle?



Yes i have ,

The viewing angle was lot better than the .8 and better than the 1.4..

Just you have to remember what you gain in viewing angle and detail you loose in black levels in ambient light vs the 1.4...


My Room Plans are to go from BD .8 to Zero Edge 1.4 Oct,

and BD Stealth 2.7 when it is released (comes Spring 2012)


----------



## fraisa

For the past yr i have been posting screen shots with my Digital Camera and some where really good but i am not a pro picture taker so they could have been better.


Having a pro come over to my room today with there equipment for Screen shots


Will Post a few results and a Link to the Pro Shot album in Photo Bucket...


----------



## fraisa

here is some shots,,

Non Calibrated Mits 9000 Advanced

SI BD .8 Gain


----------



## elmalloc

can we please see some screen shots of BD 2.7?


Also - if I'm sitting 15 ft away from 113", and the seating wall is 19ft in width - how much drop off will I see? I suppose I can do the triangulation math.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *elmalloc* /forum/post/20880321
> 
> 
> can we please see some screen shots of BD 2.7?
> 
> 
> Also - if I'm sitting 15 ft away from 113", and the seating wall is 19ft in width - how much drop off will I see? I suppose I can do the triangulation math.



Already did back a few pages ago,

100 inch 2.7 with Mits 9000 Advanced


----------



## MississippiMan

Where is the ambient light?


----------



## Benito Joaquin

I personally would like for you to show what the screen look like with ambient light coming in from different directions and also how it looks off axis.


Benito


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/20881407
> 
> 
> Where is the ambient light?



with the camera that we were using i couldnt get the colors right ,

It was turning my walls yellow tone


----------



## glennQNYC




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I personally would like for you to show what the screen look like with ambient light coming in from different directions and also how it looks off axis.
> 
> 
> Benito



Have you tried seeking out a live demo?


----------



## MississippiMan

I see the same yellow cast (...from the Incandescent Tungsten elements...) on the unused portion of the screen not utilized in 4:3 formatting. (...good advice: swap those Bulbs out for halogens. )


That *IS* going to happen with any screen that sports a gain factor of at/over .8, even if it's a exceedingly dark Gray surface, if you don't make the Camera adjust properly to the variables in the central / perimeter light levels.


I know you know I understand the why and the reasons that make it is so hard to get color correct screen shots in such lighting situations. The "Pro" should as well.


I often experience the same issues myself as noted below, though not to such an extreme. The difference is that your Camera was / is spot-metering on the screen, which is obviously very bright, thereby stopping down the Camera's Iris/ISO levels to a point where the Lights are showing up as being a dull shade of yellow.


The first image shown below shows the exact color difference between a white sheet of paper and the Silvery Gray screen surface of the screen used (...which shall remain nameless....)






























Plenty of light present in these pictures as well...more really than the Camera shows. But the difference between the Screen's illumination levels and the Room's illumination levels appear more balanced. I can say without hesitation that the images look virtually identical to the real life scenario. That is what anyone who takes a Screen shot simply must aspire...and adhere to.


Step back and use your Zoom to frame your image, then try metering the Camera by focusing more into a Can Light (...but NOT directly...) then holding down the shutter button slightly, you then shift down to frame the image.


You will still see a degree of yellowing, but it will no longer be so radically intrusive. Mostly, you'll see such on the most reflective surface the Camera has within it's imaging field.


The Raw areas of unused Screen.


Try again....you'll know when you nail down the results you want to see and illustrate to everyone.


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *glennQNYC* /forum/post/20881525
> 
> 
> Have you tried seeking out a live demo?



Sorry, i should have worded my original post differently. I should have said that i would like for fraisa to post pics of what i requested.


I have already seen the screen in action in multiple applications. I just can't recall which two gains i was able to play with.


Benito


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/20881794
> 
> 
> .



Yes its definetly my plan next time changing out those lights for different bulbs.

I had a friend come over who took the pics on there camera.


Like i mentioned earlier i just put up a new Projector

Mits 9000 advanced replacing my Epson 9700

Not looking to get into a Screen shot shoot out just wanted to show

how the New Mits 9000 Advance looks on my BD Screen.


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20881893
> 
> 
> Yes its definetly my plan next time changing out those lights for different bulbs.
> 
> I had a friend come over who took the pics on there camera.
> 
> 
> Like i mentioned earlier i just put up a new Projector
> 
> Mits 9000 advanced replacing my Epson 9700
> 
> Not looking to get into a Screen shot shoot out just wanted to show
> 
> how the New Mits 9000 Advance looks on my BD Screen.



That was not my intent either. Somehow I keep hoping you might take a few of my pointers to breast and get to a point where your shots actually represent what i know your probably seeing.


Really Frasia, from the beginning that was all I ever was trying to do for ya. It was just unfortunate that someone else worked so hard to turn it into a contest.


Anyway...the SXRD Mits (150K:1 cr) should certainly look very good hitting on a screen that itself is designed to augment whatever contrast potential the PJ brings to the table. One thing springs to mind...at least now the PJ costs more than the Screen...eh?










The PJ I was using was a Epson 9350UB, set to "Natural" mode


BTW, when your taking shots of an image coming from a SXRD PJ, all of the aforementioned pointers become all the more relevant. That technology (...and the lens it uses...) optimizes light output, and gol durn it...that just makes taking balanced screen shots all the more difficult.


If you go to using the higher gain BD screen...I strongly suggest you run the PJ in Economy mode. (...especially if your taking screenies...)


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/20881950
> 
> 
> That was not my intent either. Somehow I keep hoping you might take a few of my pointers to breast and get to a point where your shots actually represent what i know your probably seeing.
> 
> 
> Really Frasia, from the beginning that was all I ever was trying to do for ya. It was just unfortunate that someone else worked so hard to turn it into a contest.
> 
> 
> Anyway...the SXRD Mits (150K:1 cr) should certainly look very good hitting on a screen that itself is designed to augment whatever contrast potential the PJ brings to the table. One thing springs to mind...at least now the PJ costs more than the Screen...eh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The PJ I was using was a Epson 9350UB, set to "Natural" mode
> 
> 
> BTW, when your taking shots of an image coming from a SXRD PJ, all of the aforementioned pointers become all the more relevant. That technology (...and the lens it uses...) optimizes light output, and gol durn it...that just makes taking balanced screen shots all the more difficult.
> 
> 
> If you go to using the higher gain BD screen...I strongly suggest you run the PJ in Economy mode. (...especially if your taking screenies...)



I do take your advice,

This time it wasnt me taking the shots,

and our goal was to get what we saw on the screen in the shot.


.......


I will be going to the 1.4 gain soon and will be zero edge

Also will be adding the Mits 7800 next to the 9000 in my room....


The one thing that i have been trying to point out to everyone is how I really love the fact that with the BD in a room with a white ceiling,

Lights off,

my ceiling stays Dark even with the screen mounted so close to the ceiling ....

The Reduction of Light scatter is a huge benifit of the black diamond


And then go zero edge,

Thats just super sexy....


----------



## Jim Parys

Can anyone tell me if there is enough of a value in going with a BD G3 rather than a BD G2? I have a lead with a great price on a BD G2 1.4 133" screen for about $800 less then I can get a new BD G3. Even comes with a manufactures warrantly. I will be running it with a JVC RS50. Any thoughts?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jim Parys* /forum/post/20882508
> 
> 
> Can anyone tell me if there is enough of a value in going with a BD G3 rather than a BD G2? I have a lead with a great price on a BD G2 1.4 133" screen for about $800 less then I can get a new BD G3. Even comes with a manufactures warrantly. I will be running it with a JVC RS50. Any thoughts?



The G3 has reduced sparkle effect vs the G2,

Also the G3 in the 1.4 is much darker vs the G2...


To some that is a non issue for other its a huge reason to spend an extra 800$


----------



## Benito Joaquin

i would personally consider that $800 dollars an investment and go with the G3. There is a noticeable difference between the two and although to some it might not be worth $800....i think it would be in the long run.


Benito


----------



## HeadRusch

I guess I'll ask again







Any word on a pull-down version of the BD screens? I'd be looking at a 110-120 inch pull down, if that is even possible. right now I run a 106" pull down.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *HeadRusch* /forum/post/20884717
> 
> 
> I guess I'll ask again
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any word on a pull-down version of the BD screens? I'd be looking at a 110-120 inch pull down, if that is even possible. right now I run a 106" pull down.



Electric not pull down,

Electric BD Stealth will show at Cedia

Wont hit market Spring 2012


----------



## ParanoidDroid

What are the size differences in the zero and normal BD screen? I would be maxed out on a 110 inch normal. What would that equal on the zero? I cant find any info on their dimensions.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ParanoidDroid* /forum/post/20886186
> 
> 
> What are the size differences in the zero and normal BD screen? I would be maxed out on a 110 inch normal. What would that equal on the zero? I cant find any info on their dimensions.



110 inch normal bd Referance Frame

would be 110 inch bd zero,

Screen size would be the same

only difference would be total size from 3.5 inches to .354 inches in frame per side...


So total size would be from total frames size of 7 inches to 3/4 of an inch...


So your dropping 6.25 inches from the total size of the screen from

Reference to zero....


Again actual screen without the frame remains the same


----------



## ParanoidDroid




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20887159
> 
> 
> 110 inch normal bd Referance Frame
> 
> would be 110 inch bd zero,
> 
> Screen size would be the same
> 
> only difference would be total size from 3.5 inches to .354 inches in frame per side...
> 
> 
> So total size would be from total frames size of 7 inches to 3/4 of an inch...
> 
> 
> So your dropping 6.25 inches from the total size of the screen from
> 
> Reference to zero....
> 
> 
> Again actual screen without the frame remains the same



Sorry, that's what I meant. I know 110 inches reference would be 110 zero. Just wondering if 110 reference was the max in my room, what would be the max zero edge. Looking like 116 inches, right?


I noticed the largest they go for reference is 113 inches in a 16x9. Will this hold true for the zero edge?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ParanoidDroid* /forum/post/20887376
> 
> 
> Sorry, that's what I meant. I know 110 inches reference would be 110 zero. Just wondering if 110 reference was the max in my room, what would be the max zero edge. Looking like 116 inches, right?
> 
> 
> I noticed the largest they go for reference is 113 inches in a 16x9. Will this hold true for the zero edge?



No one knows posted size limits on the edge will know more late sept.

i have seen posted up to 140 but i dont know if thats 2:35...


We will know more in time...


----------



## glennQNYC




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ParanoidDroid* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I noticed the largest [diagonal size] for the Reference Series is 113 inches in a 16:9. [Does] this hold true for the Zero Edge?



Not exactly.

Max diagonal size for Zero Edge:


"Theater" (16:9) = 115"

"Scope" (2.35:1) = 144"

"Commercial" (16:10) = 106"


----------



## elmalloc

what's the MSRP and availability of zero edge?


----------



## glennQNYC




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *elmalloc* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> what's the MSRP and availability of zero edge?



Obviously MSRP varies according to size. I'll let your local dealer share pricing specifics.

SI has been shipping Zero Edge screens for at least a week or so...


----------



## Benito Joaquin

I'm about to sell one of these and asked the customer to come in here and post pics once all is set up. Hopefully we'll see it soon.


They are "officially" shipping this product starting Oct. 15th. But if anyone is interested, they are offering them on a case by case basis.

To give you an idea of pricing, here is the MSRP on a 110" diagonal

$3,699.


If you guys are interested in pricing, feel free to contact us.


Benito


----------



## glennQNYC

The following manufacturers chose to present their products using Screen Innovations' Black Diamond at CEDIA next week. Unquestionably a spectacular testimonial for BD performance and technology.


JVC Procision - Booth # 1127


JVC Professional Products - Hyatt Regency


Sony - Booth 1803


Epson - Booth 3751


Sim2 - Booth 5241


Vivitek - Booth 5531


Wolf Cinema - Sound Room (SR) 15


Panamorph - Booth 3265


Projection Design - Marriott Hotel


Procella Audio - Sound Room (SR) 8


NavNet- Booth 213


Paradigm Electronics - Booth 3224


----------



## BlakeV

Quote:

Originally Posted by *ParanoidDroid* 
Sorry, that's what I meant. I know 110 inches reference would be 110 zero. Just wondering if 110 reference was the max in my room, what would be the max zero edge. Looking like 116 inches, right?


I noticed the largest they go for reference is 113 inches in a 16x9. Will this hold true for the zero edge?
Zero Edge is now on the screen calculator. The calculator will give you sizes in 1" increments in 16:9 and 2:35. We are not doing 2:40 in Zero Edge do to over scan.

http://www.screeninnovations.com/too...en-calculator/


----------



## Benito Joaquin

I believe in 16:9, the largest they can do is 115" diagonal.


*****edit*****

exactly what Glenn posted


----------



## thezaks

Quote:

Originally Posted by *glennQNYC* 
The following manufacturers chose to present their products using Screen Innovations' Black Diamond at CEDIA next week. Unquestionably a spectacular testimonial for BD performance and technology.


JVC Procision - Booth # 1127


JVC Professional Products - Hyatt Regency


Sony - Booth 1803


Epson - Booth 3751


Sim2 - Booth 5241


Vivitek - Booth 5531


Wolf Cinema - Sound Room (SR) 15


Panamorph - Booth 3265


Projection Design - Marriott Hotel


Procella Audio - Sound Room (SR) 8


NavNet- Booth 213


Paradigm Electronics - Booth 3224
Absolutely - that is huge! Thanks for sharing that info.


Dave


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *glennQNYC* 
The following manufacturers chose to present their products using Screen Innovations' Black Diamond at CEDIA next week. Unquestionably a spectacular testimonial for BD performance and technology.


JVC Procision - Booth # 1127


JVC Professional Products - Hyatt Regency


Sony - Booth 1803


Epson - Booth 3751


Sim2 - Booth 5241


Vivitek - Booth 5531


Wolf Cinema - Sound Room (SR) 15


Panamorph - Booth 3265


Projection Design - Marriott Hotel


Procella Audio - Sound Room (SR) 8


NavNet- Booth 213


Paradigm Electronics - Booth 3224
Thats Awesome Info


----------



## ParanoidDroid

Quote:

Originally Posted by *glennQNYC* 
The following manufacturers chose to present their products using Screen Innovations' Black Diamond at CEDIA next week. Unquestionably a spectacular testimonial for BD performance and technology.


JVC Procision - Booth # 1127


JVC Professional Products - Hyatt Regency


Sony - Booth 1803


Epson - Booth 3751


Sim2 - Booth 5241


Vivitek - Booth 5531



Wolf Cinema - Sound Room (SR) 15


Panamorph - Booth 3265


Projection Design - Marriott Hotel


Procella Audio - Sound Room (SR) 8


NavNet- Booth 213


Paradigm Electronics - Booth 3224
Any idea on which gain they would be using?


----------



## glennQNYC

Quote:

Originally Posted by *ParanoidDroid* 
Any idea on which gain they would be using?
I have no idea.


----------



## ParanoidDroid

Some observations from samples:


I have a sample of the new 2.7 gain and a Vutec Silverstar 6.0.


This was a quick 2 minute review. The projector wasnt setup correctly. It was on the right side of the room @ eye level. I was sitting on the left side. Both screens are angular reflective. I dont have a ceiling mount yet so have to go by this.....


But it was hard to tell any difference in the 2.


The SS had slightly better blacks. Compression noise was a little less noticeable on the SS. Plus the SS is known for its huge viewing angle. I couldnt compare those as it wasnt setup properly for that. The sheen looked about the same for both. Ive heard SS has a noticeably bright sheen on some scenes.


Ill try and setup the screen samples with a properly placed projector soon. But for now, the 2.7 gain looks no better than a Silverstar. I can take pics of someone wants. What's the best setting on my camera for this?


Could someone get some samples and confirm?


----------



## Paul_Seng

I saw the sharp xvz17000 on a 92" BD II .8 gain at my local best buy(magnolia). The salesman also had the 1.4 sample he held up to the screen. With all the lights on in the studio I wasn't that impressed as the room I would like to put the screen on will have a lot more ambient light than their studio.

My question is who has seen the 2.7 gain BD III (not just samples) and what are his/her impressions on it?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Paul_Seng* /forum/post/20911865
> 
> 
> I saw the sharp xvz17000 on a 92" BD II .8 gain at my local best buy(magnolia). The salesman also had the 1.4 sample he held up to the screen. With all the lights on in the studio I wasn't that impressed as the room I would like to put the screen on will have a lot more ambient light than their studio.
> 
> My question is who has seen the 2.7 gain BD III (not just samples) and what are his/her impressions on it?



1st,.

The .8 Gain is way way better in the G3.

You do need a good projector with it but most of the screen shots i have posted are on that version.


2nd

Have seen the 2.7 Gain and flip a few pages back and you will see screen shots of the 2.7 gain with a mits 9000


I also gave my thoughts of that Screen


----------



## Paul_Seng




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20913393
> 
> 
> 1st,.
> 
> The .8 Gain is way way better in the G3.
> 
> You do need a good projector with it but most of the screen shots i have posted are on that version.
> 
> 
> 2nd
> 
> Have seen the 2.7 Gain and flip a few pages back and you will see screen shots of the 2.7 gain with a mits 9000
> 
> 
> I also gave my thoughts of that Screen



Thanks. I'll look for the post


----------



## glennQNYC

Black Diamond ZeroEdge at CEDIA.

Attachment 222096


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *glennQNYC* /forum/post/20922320
> 
> 
> Black Diamond ZeroEdge at CEDIA.
> 
> Attachment 222096



The 80" Zero Edge on the left was getting blasted by a 5000 lumen BenQ







I'm just say'in......










I saw a 84" DP Supernova hit by just 600 lumens (by Digital Projection) doing the exact same thing.

For $1700.00 (...but it did have a thicker edge....)


I might just move to Denmark.









(wishfull thinking, eh?)


----------



## ParanoidDroid




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *glennQNYC* /forum/post/20922320
> 
> 
> Black Diamond ZeroEdge at CEDIA.
> 
> Attachment 222096



Any idea on which gains these were?


----------



## studlygoorite

I have a 142" 2.4 Black Diamond 1.4 gain and was wondering if I would need a new screen with this new Epson 3D Projector?


John

http://www.projectorreviews.com/epso...first-look.php


----------



## glennQNYC




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> The 80" Zero Edge on the left was getting blasted by a 5000 lumen BenQ



I wasn't really attempting to capture a representation of the image quality, as much as just taking a picture of the booth. Maybe I'll try and take a better pic tomorrow.


----------



## glennQNYC




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ParanoidDroid* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> Any idea on which gains these were?



1.4 on the left; 2.7 on the right.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *studlygoorite* /forum/post/20928212
> 
> 
> I have a 142" 2.4 Black Diamond 1.4 gain and was wondering if I would need a new screen with this new Epson 3D Projector?
> 
> 
> John
> 
> http://www.projectorreviews.com/epso...first-look.php



For the best 3d experiance you need 2.7 gain,

1.4 will work but certain way you angle your head the 3d can fall off


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *glennQNYC* /forum/post/20928426
> 
> 
> I wasn't really attempting to capture a representation of the image quality, as much as just taking a picture of the booth. Maybe I'll try and take a better pic tomorrow.



Yes please if you can post some more shots...

Thanks


----------



## glennQNYC

Quote:

Originally Posted by *fraisa*
Yes please if you can post some more shots...

Thanks
It's difficult (if not impossible) to get an accurate representation of the image using an iPhone 4. This was the best I could make happen...



Attachment 222312 



Attachment 222313 



Attachment 222314


----------



## jalton68

Thanks for the link

[URL='http:/jie1.jpg%5B/img']http://www.************/jie1.jpg[/img[/URL] ]

[img] [URL='http:/jie2.jpg%5B/img']http://www.************/jie2.jpg[/img[/URL] ]

[img] [URL='http:/jie3.jpg%5B/img']http://www.************/jie3.jpg[/img[/URL] ]


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *glennQNYC* /forum/post/20932036
> 
> 
> It's difficult (if not impossible) to get an accurate representation of the image using an iPhone 4. This was the best I could make happen...



That image shows the 80" Zero Edge getting walloped by a 5000 lumen BenQ.

(previously mentioned) In the first image, the Center metering on the IPhone was biased toward the projected image, and crushed down all the other room lighting.


I have a couple others that show the same thing using my own camera. One can expect such to happen when there is too much light reflecting off a screen...and the use of the 5K lumen BenQ set just 6 feet away was counterproductive to capturing a decent shot..


As seen below:












Obviously, intense brightness was desired to show a "Plasma-like" image under the lighting conditions that prevailed (...although they had 50% of the Overheads turned off...) but that's taking it too far on too small a screen IMO when your supposed to be touting ambient light performance.


One can always make a good showing in a Bicycle Race if one rides a Ducati.


Now when you swing away from that blazing image and over toward the same screen getting hit by 1000 lumens, this is what you see.











If you peek at the left edge of the last shot where you can see the other ZE screen on the left, you can see just how much difference the 5000 lumens makes.



The last photo does a good job of showing real life existing light levels and screen performance on the 80" ZE screen. If they had used a 2000 lumen PJ the balance needed might have been achieved. With just 1000 lumens, the ZE BD is at least accomplishing more than one would expect normally. I can respect what I saw in that image as being a reality-based result.




However this next image of a 84" *DNP Supernova* getting just 600 lumens shows something else entirely.













Next up...a couple shots of the "Inside the Booth" Demo.




















The Demo did NOT include any imagery of dark content, so any effective determination as to how well black levels were /could be preserved wash literally "a wash".***

*** The shot below was the darkest content shown in the Demo. A obvious "Hot spot" exists in the center.











This next image is a screen set to the left side of the main Demo Screen. They only showed a static image. It had to be a "Still" because it never changed the entire time of the show. The overhead lighting was all set behind the screen, so it's effect was inconsequential. Under the sideways directed sconce lighting...contrast obviously suffered. Not bad though....credit where it's due must be given.










*Post Script:*


After dwelling on the above fer a spell, I thought I'd venture a assessment:


Now let me make one thing perfectly clear....the BD3 did look splendid as showed. And I saw no sparkles. I did see plainly obvious *speckles* in brightly lit sections of the image, especially in panned scenes, from a 15' viewing distance. (I wear glasses too...) . The dreaded "Dirty Window" effect. But lemmie' tell ya this. It was as noticeable as it was primarily because 90% of all exhibited material was not "contrasty" programming. More confusing is that when there was some contrasty content...a scene with some real black content(...and I never could catch any because it didn't stick around long enough and came along so infrequently...) the screens absolutely looked their best. Maybe they didn't blaze, but the looked very good...and that's a truism there.


Sadly, much of the above is a repeat of what happened at last year's CEDIA. Promotion took precedent over showing the real deal. Almost every location that used a BD screen took pains to at least mitigate worst-case lighting scenarios. Some did use Light Howitzers (5000 lumen jobs) but some, like Epson used the BD screens to their best effect. Of course they don't sell 'em, they just take advantage of them.


The BD lineup has serious competition, and cannot hold any claim to being the definitive ambient light solution. A really good one for certain....but certainly not the only one worth of note...or in a problematical sense, the Best performing...or the best value. That's a "IMO" so others are free to differ, absolutely.


Lastly, please note that I'm extremely critical about particular aspects of screen performance...perhaps more so than any Reviewer ever would be. I expect perhaps too much owing to my own degree of belief of what constitutes performance and appearance as relates to value. So understand that your own experience and satisfaction may, and most likely will not match up against my own. I heard plenty of "That's amazing" ....and "That's Incredible!" coming from my Peers around me, so by all means take that into consideration as well.


----------



## caliv7




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/20933508
> 
> 
> Now let me make one thing perfectly clear....the BD3 did look splendid as showed. And I saw no sparkles. I did see plainly obvious *speckles* in brightly lit sections of the image, especially in panned scenes, from a 15' viewing distance. (I wear glasses too...) . The dreaded "Dirty Window" effect.
> 
> The BD lineup has serious competition, and cannot hold any claim to being the definitive ambient light solution. A really good one for certain....but certainly not the only one worth of note...or in a problematical sense, the Best performing...or the best value. That's a "IMO" so others are free to differ, absolutely.



In fact, there is a new High Contrast Light Rejection Screen from "Skyline", that combines the best spec. from "SI Black Diamond" and "Dalite HP"... It's the new High Contrast Screen from "Skyline Screens"! And here you can read a shootout DNP Supernova - SI Black Diamond - and Skyline:

http://www.skylinescreens.com/about-1/recensioni/ is an Italian site.


It's a new 1.8 (2.5 gain is avalaible too...) gain screen, with light rejection properties, that help you to have a brightest white and at the same time a darkest black, with even ambient light... or in a living room with white reflective ceiling and wall. Black diamond is dark, Da lite HP is light, Skyline have dark black and light white! I have bought one 91" and i'm going to describe it...

Years ago, I read a review of the DNP supernova, but records do not fully convinced me and I decided to wait times and better materials. Then came the SI Black Diamond and things seemed better, but the users complained about the owners of the cloth (at least some) some defects unacceptable to me, as speckles, and as sparkles, and more or less visible in some types of installation, definitely unbearable ... Then came the most interesting Skyline, from the technical specifications (gain of 1.8 against 0.8 BD) especially in view of a future 3D projector, and which was said to have no side effects like hot spots or sparkles or speckles etc.. And now i own it, and here you can read my review:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1359032


----------



## MississippiMan

While your screen might be the 1.8 gain Skyline version, the Shootout on the Skyline site compared the .8 gain versions of the DNP and BD screens with a 2.5 gain Skyline.


Hardly anything but a test weighted favorably toward the Skyline. A true comparative test would be involving at least the 1.4 gain Gen.3 BD and the 1.7 gain SNP screens against the 2.5 Skyline.


Pretty much "business" as usual.


http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1359032 >


----------



## caliv7




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/20935893
> 
> 
> the Shootout on the Skyline site compared the .8 gain versions of the DNP and BD screens with a 2.5 gain Skyline.
> 
> 
> A true comparative test would be involving at least the 1.4 gain Gen.3 BD and the 1.7 gain SNP screens against the 2.5 Skyline.



It's true, there will be one next..., but is shown in the shootout, that gain values ​​are real and respected by all manufacturers, and varying versions of the gain, the proportions do not change, it would still have a similar black level but a highest white with Skyline (Ex .: BD 1.4 vs. Skyline 1.8 or Skyline 2.5, black remains the same but the white is in favor of Skyline, and consequently the contrast ...).


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *caliv7* /forum/post/20935941
> 
> 
> It's true, there will be one next..., but is shown in the shootout, that gain values ​​are real and respected by all manufacturers, and varying versions of the gain, the proportions do not change, it would still have a similar black level but a highest white with Skyline (Ex .: BD 1.4 vs. Skyline 1.8 or Skyline 2.5, black remains the same but the white is in favor of Skyline, and consequently the contrast ...).



Those are more "assumptions" than confirm-able facts, as different gains on different screens can introduce many different aberrations, from Color shifts to artifacts...etc. If a Mfg. Gray screen is not ISF Certified as being Neutral...it *WILL* pusg one way or another.


Gain is not the end all solution by and of itself. When combined effectively with contrast enhancing / preserving tendencies, the equation usually improves. But not always, nor proportionately as you seem to be willing to assume.


If your merely an end user, then such assumptions might be understandable. However something in your remarks seem to point toward your trying overly hard to convince people of "facts" that as of yet have no reference to be judged by. Statements that attempt to throw a Blanket assessment over any screen's potential performance always are to be considered suspect until irrevocably proven.


I've personally had that pointed out to me ...well, let's say more than once.










That is not to say your not right in your assumptions, and if you are, it might indeed bode well for many. Depending on the price point...which was conspicuously absent.


I sometimes post on this thread, but almost never reference any competing Screen Mfg or even a specific DIY application, out of common courtesy and accepted decorum. My mention of the DNP was to make a comparative point, and is itself resting on the boarder line of propriety. Still, it was and remains a good reference point for comparison.


One thing I *DID NOT* do was post a link to another competing Screen Mfg's website. There are lines I don't cross no matter how effusive I might feel about something.


You should carry this topic about the Skyline Screen products over to a new *dedicated* Thread....also out of courtesy. There you can make the statements and post the empirical evidence you feel necessary to illustrate your points without having anyone find a hair in your soup for having done so.


But keep everything involving promotion down to a dull roar, and focus on showing EXACTLY what the products can do. By all means post up about any and all valid comparisons, and make your own judgements and feelings known.


Do that, and I assure everyone who wants to respond to your missives will do likewise.


----------



## DaveHao

I agree with Mississippi man in terms of SI marketing, I just came back from CEDIA this year and checked out their booth as well. They were shooting high power projectors into small screens to get the best effect. Also the spark-lies and screen graininess problems have not been addressed. There has just been too many compromises in the material, clearly you can build a screen that enhances contrast without the hot spot, texturing as demonstrated by DNP. Retail pricing wise, they are basically the same. Basically their screen material consists of plastic backing and some sort of metallic paint painted onto a Mylar sheet bonded to the plastic backing. I have seen a lot contrast enhancing materials and the mark of a inferior material is one that boost contrast and at the same time creates a large amount of artifacts in the picture. What boggles my mind is how they managed to sell everyone SI is amazing with all its apparent flaws, great marketing for you. But that's marketing for you which you learn pretty early in business school that it is 80% marketing and only 20% product.


If you want a good ambient light rejection screen look at: Stewart Firehawk (solid contrast boost without the spark-lies), the hardest part in making a screen material that gives contrast enhancement properties is to keep the defects as minimal as possible. Stewart has that done with the Firehawk. SI has simply covered over their short comings with great marketing. They should be applauded for that.


If you want the best contrast enhancing screen that is ISF certified and no sparkles or flaws go with DNP Supernova. SI cannot get ISF certification due to their flaws. I examined their material thoroughly and it had both great ambient light rejection, contrast boost and Reference screen qualities of no texturing. Simply amazing product, but DNP's marketing could use work. Their booth didn't receive anywhere near the same traffic.


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DaveHao* /forum/post/20939744
> 
> 
> \\
> 
> 
> If you want the best contrast enhancing screen that is ISF certified and no sparkles or flaws go with DNP Supernova. SI cannot get ISF certification due to their flaws. I examined their material thoroughly and it had both great ambient light rejection, contrast boost and Reference screen qualities of no texturing. Simply amazing product, but DNP's marketing could use work. Their booth didn't receive anywhere near the same traffic.



Well....short of my going so far as to giving the BD3 the "BS" label, everything stated above is true.


Especially DNP's "shoe lace" presentation! The Gentleman doing most the presentation was kinda a rough looking character. (...probably just a hard workin' fella....) But he was verrrrry polite and verrrry obliging as he didn't hesitate a second when PB-Maxxx & I asked to hold up some DIY screen samples, and so right off they willingly obliged us. Both Reps didn't even lose their cool when we held one uber-dark example up that kinda embarrassed the 135" 1.7 gain DNP. (...we actually got "gasps" from other attendees and a "Head Nod" from the DNP guys...)


But nothing in our arsenal could make a dent in theDNP 2.5 gain version. (shown above) Yeow!







Absolutely nothing else compared to it at CEDIA in Performance / Value. I gotta state...I turned a bit Green.









Lottsa work to do and a very lofty pinnacle to aspire to reach.



The Booth itself was low key to a fault, and the location bespoke of their having decided at the last moment to exhibit.


Maybe not though...as the Big Boys have already staked out 2012's locations. 'Tis the way of things..


Anywho, the best thing that could happen would be the SI would get up off their price point and drop down into realistic territory. But I said the same thing about Stewart Screens 6 years ago and.........


----------



## DigsMovies




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/20933508
> 
> 
> However this next image of a 84" *DNP Supernova* getting just 600 lumens shows something else entirely.




Interesting pics from Cedia. What DNP screen material was in that picture ?




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/20940554
> 
> 
> ... Both Reps didn't even lose their cool when we held one uber-dark example up that kinda embarrassed the 135" 1.7 gain DNP. (...we actually got "gasps" from other attendees and a "Head Nod" from the DNP guys...)
> 
> 
> But nothing in our arsenal could make a dent in theDNP 2.5 gain version. (shown above) Yeow!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Absolutely nothing else compared to it at CEDIA in Performance / Value. I gotta state...I turned a bit Green.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lottsa work to do and a very lofty pinnacle to aspire to reach.



Are you sure about those gain ratings? For some time they have offered a .85 gain and 2.3 gain.


And to be fair to BD- Perhaps their screens are not without trade-offs, but for many it enables them to have a large projection screen where they otherwise might not.


----------



## fraisa

Hey Miss Man

Thanks for posting some pics of the booth,

and one thing i love about SI is that they introduce stuff to the rest of the industry IE,

Zero Edge...

They are leading the way and people are definetly taking notice...

Thanks again


Cant wait to get my zero edge screen


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20942686
> 
> 
> Hey Miss Man
> 
> Thanks for posting some pics of the booth,
> 
> and one thing i love about SI is that they introduce stuff to the rest of the industry IE,
> 
> Zero Edge...
> 
> They are leading the way and people are definetly taking notice...
> 
> Thanks again
> 
> 
> Cant wait to get my zero edge screen



not 100% true. I've assisted with a few 'zero edge' type of screens already from different manufacturers. both rear and front projection.....pain in the butt to work with.

But i do believe that SI is the first to introduce it as a standard model so definitely give them credit!


benito


----------



## BlakeV




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DaveHao* /forum/post/20939744
> 
> 
> I agree with Mississippi man in terms of SI marketing, I just came back from CEDIA this year and checked out their booth as well. They were shooting high power projectors into small screens to get the best effect. Also the spark-lies and screen graininess problems have not been addressed. I don't think it will ever be addressed as their technology is BS. Basically their screen material consists of plastic backing and some sort of metallic paint painted onto a Mylar sheet bonded to the plastic backing. I have seen a lot contrast enhancing materials and the mark of a inferior material is one that boost contrast and at the same time creates a large amount of artifacts in the picture. What boggles my mind is how they managed to sell everyone SI is amazing with all its apparent flaws, great marketing for you.
> 
> 
> If you want a good ambient light rejection screen look at: Stewart Firehawk (solid contrast boost without the spark-lies), the hardest part in making a screen material that gives contrast enhancement properties is to keep the defects as minimal as possible. Stewart has that done with the Firehawk. SI has simply covered over their short comings with great marketing. They should be applauded for that.
> 
> 
> If you want the best contrast enhancing screen that is ISF certified and no sparkles or flaws go with DNP Supernova. SI cannot get ISF certification due to their flaws. I examined their material thoroughly and it had both great ambient light rejection, contrast boost and Reference screen qualities of no texturing. Simply amazing product, but DNP's marketing could use work. Their booth didn't receive anywhere near the same traffic.



You have no idea how our screen works so please stop posting that you do.


----------



## jayray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeV* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> You have no idea how our screen works so please stop posting that you do.



My BD3 1.4 gain works as advertised with none of the artifacts listed above. No more masking and with my intended Epson 61000 purchase, it should look amazing.

John


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DaveHao* /forum/post/20939744
> 
> 
> 
> If you want a good ambient light rejection screen look at: Stewart Firehawk (solid contrast boost without the spark-lies), the hardest part in making a screen material that gives contrast enhancement properties is to keep the defects as minimal as possible. Stewart has that done with the Firehawk. SI has simply covered over their short comings with great marketing. They should be applauded for that.



Sorry but i totally disagree when it comes to the firehawk and lightscatter.

The SI BD out performs the Firehawk when it comes to light scatter.

all the testing i have done of the bd vs the firehawk that was on thing that was a totally WOW factor of the BD vs the Firehawk.


I also found that the Black levels where also better with the bd from my testing..,


To get true blacks you need to start with a black screen,,

how can a you expect to get amazing black levels if you start with a White or grey screen and then use a white bright light from a projector

Just as stated above the bd eliminates the need for masking ..

BD No Masking Required....


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jayray* /forum/post/20949550
> 
> 
> My BD3 1.4 gain works as advertised with none of the artifacts listed above. No more masking and with my intended Epson 61000 purchase, it should look amazing.
> 
> John



John,


I don't want to be accused of doubting any end user's word, but I find that a little hard to accept since in the Demo Booth at CEDIA, very obvious "speckled" artifacts could be seen in any lightly colored area, and were made very much more obvious during scenes when those areas were involved with any "panning" effect. I heard comments made about such...and the presenter stated that they had been reduced. He never said eliminated.


I personally was viewing those artifacts from a distance of 15' so I speak from my own recent experience. All the examples shown were of the latest generation. To be fair, yes, the issues were not as bad as before, but in no manner, way, shape or form have those issues been eliminated.


If the content on screen is dynamic and bright....graininess will be obvious to any onlooker.


As to if that aspect of the viewing experience will / would matter to any specific individual is to be out of necessity left open to conjecture. Plainly stated, if someone shells out the required cash for a BD, then they probably already know there are certain aspects (...if not entirely 'drawbacks...) to be accepted to obtain the performance the screens are most noted for providing.


What would be...and is detrimental is for anyone, Dealers included, to irrevocably state that no such issues exist. That opens the door for dissatisfaction, if only because there is a difference between what was promoted as being fact, and the facts as they are observed by the end user.


Frasia,


The abject need for masking has been greatly reduced....but if ambient light is present, there is still a noticeable difference between the Black Trim...or a darkened wall, than there is with the "Black Bars". Yes...they look decidedly as being a ultra dark Gray...but Black? Not.


Now in total dark...or a very near total darkness, yep...they do look completely invisible. Anyone who sees the BD under those circumstances would be telling an outright fib to say otherwise.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/20950620
> 
> 
> John,
> 
> 
> I don't want to be accused of doubting any end user's word, but I find that a little hard to accept since in the Demo Booth at CEDIA, very obvious "speckled" artifacts could be seen in any lightly colored area, and were made very much more obvious during scenes when those areas were involved with any "panning" effect. I heard comments made about such...and the presenter stated that they had been reduced. He never said eliminated.
> 
> 
> I personally was viewing those artifacts from a distance of 15' so I speak from my own recent experience. All the examples shown were of the latest generation. To be fair, yes, the issues were not as bad as before, but in no manner, way, shape or form have those issues been eliminated.
> 
> 
> If the content on screen is dynamic and bright....graininess will be obvious to any onlooker.
> 
> 
> As to if that aspect of the viewing experience will / would matter to any specific individual is to be out of necessity left open to conjecture. Plainly stated, if someone shells out the required cash for a BD, then they probably already know there are certain aspects (...if not entirely 'drawbacks...) to be accepted to obtain the performance the screens are most noted for providing.
> 
> 
> What would be...and is detrimental is for anyone, Dealers included, to irrevocably state that no such issues exist. That opens the door for dissatisfaction, if only because there is a difference between what was promoted as being fact, and the facts as they are observed by the end user.



Miss Man

What is the Deal Here?


Dont know why you continue to post so much Negitive stuff about this screen,

We all know you are not a fan

Why to continue to post the same negitive stuff over and over I dont get it

The Sad thing about this is

there are other members who are owners of the bd screen

who are little scared to post postitive comments because of the negitive posts that are going on in this thread..

Something seriously needs to be done and this needs to be finally addressed...

Enough is enough

Lets move on to continue to help other members in this thread

to help them enjoy the BD Screen


----------



## caliv7




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DaveHao* /forum/post/20939744
> 
> 
> I agree with Mississippi man in terms of SI marketing. Also the spark-lies and screen graininess problems have not been addressed. What boggles my mind is how they managed to sell everyone SI is amazing with all its apparent flaws, great marketing for you.
> 
> 
> If you want a good ambient light rejection screen look at: Stewart Firehawk (solid contrast boost without the spark-lies).
> 
> 
> If you want the best contrast enhancing screen that is ISF certified and no sparkles or flaws go with DNP Supernova. SI cannot get ISF certification due to their flaws.



You can also add to the list the Skyline, I will own a 91" and i can tell you that does not suffer from any of the BD defects, no sparkles, no speckles, no dreaded "Dirty Window" effect, only very good ambient light rejection and an amazing Ansi contrast...


----------



## jayray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> John,
> 
> 
> I don't want to be accused of doubting any end user's word, but I find that a little hard to accept since in the Demo Booth at CEDIA, very obvious "speckled" artifacts could be seen in any lightly colored area, and were made very much more obvious during scenes when those areas were involved with any "panning" effect. I heard comments made about such...and the presenter stated that they had been reduced. He never said eliminated.
> 
> 
> I personally was viewing those artifacts from a distance of 15' so I speak from my own recent experience. All the examples shown were of the latest generation. To be fair, yes, the issues were not as bad as before, but in no manner, way, shape or form have those issues been eliminated.
> 
> 
> If the content on screen is dynamic and bright....graininess will be obvious to any onlooker.
> 
> 
> As to if that aspect of the viewing experience will / would matter to any specific individual is to be out of necessity left open to conjecture. Plainly stated, if someone shells out the required cash for a BD, then they probably already know there are certain aspects (...if not entirely 'drawbacks...) to be accepted to obtain the performance the screens are most noted for providing.
> 
> 
> What would be...and is detrimental is for anyone, Dealers included, to irrevocably state that no such issues exist. That opens the door for dissatisfaction, if only because there is a difference between what was promoted as being fact, and the facts as they are observed by the end user.
> 
> 
> Frasia,
> 
> 
> The abject need for masking has been greatly reduced....but if ambient light is present, there is still a noticeable difference between the Black Trim...or a darkened wall, than there is with the "Black Bars". Yes...they look decidedly as being a ultra dark Gray...but Black? Not.
> 
> 
> Now in total dark...or a very near total darkness, yep...they do look completely invisible. Anyone who sees the BD under those circumstances would be telling an outright fib to say otherwise.



Miss Man,

I do view in a completely light controlled room so that explains my observations. I also presently use a BenQ W5000 which is no light canon and has above average contrast so in this case it made a significant diff. I sit 16 ft from the screen and cannot detect sparkles, perhaps because I don't have a high lumen output. I saw this screen demoed at my dealers but their projector was so cranked up in brightness and sharpness that what looked like sparkles may have been other artifacts. I did not see this effect on mine, using the same source material and I was looking for it.

John


----------



## MississippiMan

John,


Using a low lumen PJ can indeed make quite the difference. Thank you for that insight, and I do hope you also understand my position.


Frasia,


Can you honestly say anything I related was out of line, in error, or made with evil intent? If my crime is that i don't support a few of your stated claims, then yes...I'm guilty as charged. But it's not a hanging offense.


If I was the ONLY person to note the discrepancies in what is stated to be, and what really is, you'd have a stiff leg under you to stand on.


But I am not. So your looking pretty wobbly there.......


Frankly, it's the commentary and claims you yourself have made in the past and continue to make that fuels responses like mine and others. Overt promotion and excessive claims, even if made in the ecstasy pf loving something as much as you obviously do, do more harm than good on a Public Forum where all such claims and statements are open for review and comment.


I'll say this...you certainly are purposefully directed down the road you've chosen. But the speed your trying to maintain is fraught with potential trouble because of the Potholes your comments present. Now I'm not a Traffic Cop...just another Driver watching your Hub caps flyin' off your wheels.


Present your BD case with a little temperance, and you'll be surprised how quickly much of what your concerned about would vanish out of hand. Really...it's not so much about the BD's performance as it is about how it is being presented.


----------



## fraisa

Jayray

Glad you like your screen,

you , me and many others are enjoying the many benifits of a BD Screen

Lights on or Off...

Next on the horizian is the Zero Edge for me....

1.4 gain 115 inch


----------



## Jim Parys

Can anyone tell me how far off the wall the bd G3 ref screens sticks out? I will be doing a flush mount.


----------



## ccotenj

^^^


the front of the frame is 2" off the wall...


----------



## BlakeV

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Jim Parys* 
Can anyone tell me how far off the wall the bd G3 ref screens sticks out? I will be doing a flush mount.
an 1 1/2 inch is how far off the wall or about 2 fingers thick. We also have a wire hanging system.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20950003
> 
> 
> To get true blacks you need to start with a black screen,,



As usual (and we've gone over this numerous times before) such a statement is oversimplified to the point of being false.


In terms of the brightness of the image, black levels included, gain is gain.

It doesn't matter how dark the substrate is!


If the BD .8 is in fact .8 gain, then a projector's black levels should be no darker on the BD than on a .8 gain screen with a lighter substrate. No matter how dark the substrate, if you ADD enough reflective coating to get up to .8 gain, that brightens the entire image to .8 gain, including the black levels. That is what GAIN MEANS. It's why we have the number in the first place. If a black diamond screen actually produced much deeper blacks, that would be because it is significantly below the rated gain, and is simply making the image dimmer. (And in which case, anyone trying to use proper calculations to get the screen brightness they want, would be in big trouble when they receive their BD screen).



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20950003
> 
> 
> To get true blacks you need to start with a black screen,,



You perpetuate the misunderstanding that the BD screens are very dark colored to get deeper black levels. That is false: the reason for the dark substrate is for AMBIENT LIGHT REJECTION. The room, from an angle, "sees" the screen as black. But the added gain coating focuses the light to the viewer for a "normal" image brightness.


The only way you get a darker black level (presuming you have light control already) is by dimming the image. Closing down the iris of a projector does the same thing with black levels. So does adding ND filters to make the image darker....




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20950003
> 
> 
> Just as stated above the bd eliminates the need for masking ..
> 
> BD No Masking Required....



Again, false.


That is, if you are wishing to imply a BD screen makes projected black bars (top/bottom for scope on a 16:9 screen) invisible. Admittedly this is where some degree of advantage happens with the BD's hotspotting. Given brightness drops off obviously from the center to the edges, the black bar areas may be a bit darker than a more evenly reflecting screen. But not invisible, as there is still the gain on every BD screen.


I could easily see the black projected bars in many scenes on every BD screen I've viewed, and with JVC projectors as well. The "need" for masking is ultimately subjective, based on how much one cares about these things. But having lived with actual masking and seen BD screens in action, as good as they are for light rejection, I personally would certainly require masking.


----------



## fraisa

To Harkness,

The one thing that helps the BD produce awesome black levels is the fact that the screen starts with black color and not white or dark shade of grey.

And when we turn out the lights the ceiling above the screen and the wall besides the screen is a non issue because of the reduced light scatter.

Everyone who owns a BD loves this benifit.

When i watch a movie lights off all i see is the screen even the frame in my room dissapears Lights Off.


Then Lights on the black levels of the 1.4 and .8 are also very very good.

And we get non faded images Lights on.


I know one guy who bought a Stewart Greyhawk with a JVC projector and

he has an ambient light room,

Totally $ wasted because it was the wrong fabric of screen...

If he had of listened to me and got a Black Diamond he would be watching NFL this sunday Lights on having awesome Black levels...

But instead he is out at the local Hardware store buying paint to paint his room black....

Something that his wife is really not happy with....


So you could say Black diamond screen = Happy wife/ happy life...he he


----------



## KBMAN

Fellow BD2 .8 gain guys,

How do you like your screen? any pluses or minuses when it comes to this specific screen? I ask because there is one for sale here on AVS classifieds, and I might have the budget to do it, IF I get a more vibrant picture in all ways. The .8 gain has me scared though. Please let me know, as I am starting to get screen samples, but will not get the BD sample till late next week. MANY THANKS FOR FEEDBACK.....


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *KBMAN* /forum/post/20958654
> 
> 
> Fellow BD2 .8 gain guys,
> 
> How do you like your screen? any pluses or minuses when it comes to this specific screen? I ask because there is one for sale here on AVS classifieds, and I might have the budget to do it, IF I get a more vibrant picture in all ways. The .8 gain has me scared though. Please let me know, as I am starting to get screen samples, but will not get the BD sample till late next week. MANY THANKS FOR FEEDBACK.....



I have seen the BD2 .8 gain on display before and the BD3 .8 gain is alot better at handling Sparkle...

The G3 revision is worth the investment in my opinion


----------



## Mazda74Speed3

I kinda feel like I was the guinea pig for a frameless BDII.... Months and months ago I ordered a custom frameless BDII for our restaurant. Install will be the 26th of this month. A custom sub-frame had to be built to support the BDII material. Here is some pics of the sub-frame.

 


Uploaded with ImageShack.us


----------



## N.Wil

is there a curved version of the zero?


doesn't a curved screen eliminate the hot spotting issue people keep bring up with these screens?


and does anyone have any pics of a curved 2:35 black diamond screen?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *N.Wil* /forum/post/20962415
> 
> 
> is there a curved version of the zero?
> 
> 
> doesn't a curved screen eliminate the hot spotting issue people keep bring up with these screens?
> 
> 
> and does anyone have any pics of a curved 2:35 black diamond screen?



There is a bd curved video on the SI Website,
http://www.screeninnovations.com/vid...install-video/


----------



## Skylinestar

I have a question regarding the zero edge.

According to the brochure:


> Quote:
> Among the multiple mounting options include recessed (unframed), flush-to, projected off the wall, or flying from cables for an incredibly sleek appearance.



...what's the meaning of "flying from cables"?


I would like to have a screen that's to be positioned in front of my plasma, yet be able to shift the screen away easily so that I can view TV programs on the plasma. If I were to mount the screen behind the plasma, that would require a hydraulic jack for the plasma...which is cumbersome.


Any ideas?


----------



## glennQNYC

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Skylinestar*
I have a question regarding the zero edge.

According to the brochure:


...what's the meaning of "flying from cables"?


I would like to have a screen that's to be positioned in front of my plasma, yet be able to shift the screen away easily so that I can view TV programs on the plasma. If I were to mount the screen behind the plasma, that would require a hydraulic jack for the plasma...which is cumbersome.


Any ideas?
Black Diamond Stealth (retractable) should ship near February.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *glennQNYC* /forum/post/20966230
> 
> 
> Black Diamond Stealth (retractable) should ship near February.



Dude that wont ship til Late April - Early May....



Fraisa

Rock On


----------



## Benito Joaquin

Quote:

Originally Posted by *fraisa* 
Dude that wont ship til Late April - Early May....
and even then you can't guarantee that they will get it right. might have the same problems that they came across the first time around....


Benito


----------



## glennQNYC




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> Dude [the Black Diamond Stealth] wont ship til Late April - Early May....



They said six months at CEDIA...


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *glennQNYC* /forum/post/20970563
> 
> 
> They said six months at CEDIA...



We all want this tomorrow i would rather say longer and shock everyone than shorter and have people waiting...


Couple of shots posted on facebook

Was taken with my Insignia Digital camera so its not a pro shot


----------



## fraisa

Just put a G2 1.4 next to my G3 .8

and then G3 1.4 sample,.

Definetly the G3 1.4 is darker vs the G2 1.4

G3 is the way to go....


----------



## bubbakja

I have a chance to get a 92" GIII 1.4 open, but never used for $1250. I'm on a budget of $2400 though. My original plan was to get a Epson 8700 and a cheap screen.


If I care about Picture Quality, but do have a chance of some slight ambient light, would I be better off with the 8350 and this screen, or the 8700 and a cheaper screen ?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bubbakja* /forum/post/20982721
> 
> 
> I have a chance to get a 92" GIII 1.4 open, but never used for $1250. I'm on a budget of $2400 though. My original plan was to get a Epson 8700 and a cheap screen.
> 
> 
> If I care about Picture Quality, but do have a chance of some slight ambient light, would I be better off with the 8350 and this screen, or the 8700 and a cheaper screen ?



I would go with the Mits HC4000 and that BD Black Diamond 1.4

the mits is more realible than the epson...


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20982794
> 
> 
> I would go with the Mits HC4000 and that BD Black Diamond 1.4
> 
> the mits is more realible than the epson...



Normally would not fit his budget, but with the screaming deal on the 1.4, seems like a good recommendation.


Dave


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20977154
> 
> 
> Just put a G2 1.4 next to my G3 .8
> 
> and then G3 1.4 sample,.
> 
> Definetly the G3 1.4 is darker vs the G2 1.4
> 
> G3 is the way to go....



Pictures?


Dave


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks* /forum/post/20984694
> 
> 
> Pictures?
> 
> 
> Dave



Coming will edit it in

Bigger bottom is 1.4 Gen II

Smaller is 1.4 Gen III

Pic is in direct Sunlight....

Both materials are shades darker when not in direct sunlight


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bubbakja* /forum/post/20982721
> 
> 
> I have a chance to get a 92" GIII 1.4 open, but never used for $1250. I'm on a budget of $2400 though. My original plan was to get a Epson 8700 and a cheap screen.
> 
> 
> If I care about Picture Quality, but do have a chance of some slight ambient light, would I be better off with the 8350 and this screen, or the 8700 and a cheaper screen ?



If it is a Gen III, i would find a way to jump all over it. You might not come across a deal like that again. Go with an inexpensive projector that you will eventually upgrade anyway. That screen will last you a lifetime.


Benito


----------



## ccotenj

^^^


yea true dat... i wish i had found a deal like that when i bought mine...


----------



## fraisa

its amazing i post 2 awesome screen shots and there is nothing but silence....


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20986431
> 
> 
> its amazing i post 2 awesome screen shots and there is nothing but silence....



This thread has already been filled to the brim with screen shots (of various screens) showing essentially the same thing. There's not much to react to in seeing yet more of the same: shot #104 of a specialty screen showing a decent image with some lights on.....


Remember these?

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...8#post20473898 


I think they're pretty good too.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20986691
> 
> 
> This thread has already been filled to the brim with screen shots (of various screens) showing essentially the same thing. There's not much to react to in seeing yet more of the same: shot #104 of a specialty screen showing a decent image with some lights on.....
> 
> 
> Remember these?
> 
> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...8#post20473898
> 
> 
> I think they're pretty good too.



Those shots where good times










But what makes these shots different and worth the post

is most of the other screen shots where taken with

the Epson 9700ub

vs

the above shots taken on

the Mits HC9000 Advanced


So that is the reason for posting another couple of ambient light shots


The Mits HC9000 Advanced Really takes My SI Screen to the Next Level vs the epson 9700


----------



## bubbakja

Well oddly enough fortune seems to have shined down upon me twice. I got to work (after a couple months of researching projectors vs another plasma) and checked out employee classifieds and there was an AE4000U for only $1350 w/ 80 hours on the bulb.


I talked him down to $1200. I'll get the projo tomorrow and the screen should be here next week. This will be my first projector setup, pretty jazzed about it.


I currently have a 58V10 plasma upstairs, but wife wouldn't let me put it in the basement so this setup will be replacing a 6 year old Sony LCD rear projo unit.


----------



## ccotenj

^^^


you'll be even more jazzed when you fire it up...











of all the "wow" moments i've had in a/v, NOTHING comes close to the first time i fired up my pj...


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20986691
> 
> 
> This thread has already been filled to the brim with screen shots (of various screens) showing essentially the same thing.



I don't mind the screen shots. For now, it's the next best thing to seeing one in person, as there is not any to be seen in stores in the Phoenix, AZ area. I'm guessing the screen is still the .8 BD III?


Dave


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks* /forum/post/20989802
> 
> 
> I don't mind the screen shots. For now, it's the next best thing to seeing one in person, as there is not any to be seen in stores in the Phoenix, AZ area. I'm guessing the screen is still the .8 BD III?
> 
> 
> Dave



Hey Dave,

Yes the Screen is still the .8 BD III

will be staying until its replaced by the Edge Zero,.

My room plan is 115 Edge zero,

and then add Black Stealth 2.7 for Spring 2012 above the Edge


----------



## Dannyc211

Has anyone heard any news on the release date of the Zero Edge? Are they shipping earlier the expected?


----------



## jayray

So far my JVC RS50 and BD G3 1.4 are looking fantastic. The blacks are making the picture look absolutely amazing. Great combo









John


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Dannyc211* /forum/post/21008585
> 
> 
> Has anyone heard any news on the release date of the Zero Edge? Are they shipping earlier the expected?



Mid to late October


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Dannyc211* /forum/post/21008585
> 
> 
> Has anyone heard any news on the release date of the Zero Edge? Are they shipping earlier the expected?



you can order them now if interested. October is the 'official' release but we have been approved to order them now. If interested, feel free to contact us for pricing.


Benito


----------



## gamingchairs

Good luck with this and let us know what happens


----------



## bubbakja

I have some chair rail molding in my basement that sticks out 3/4" from the wall. Will I have any issues mounting the screen?


I found out it is a .8 not 1.4, so hopefully I still get decent levels. It will be in my basement so any movie watching at night will be very dark, but on Sundays I might have some light bleeding through the windows so people can see where they set their beers. They are traditional window well style at the top of the basement wall and like a foot high or so.


Also does anyone have a .8 screen with a Panny AE4000 ? I was hoping to get some help dialing it in, or any suggestions on DIY calibration. DNICE had some great help for my V10 Plasma.


----------



## Armand07

Hi,


I am considering a BD screen and would like some advice.


I have no windows or ambient light in the room except from walls are beige and ceiling is white. Today I have a white matt screen gain 1.0 and what bothers me most is washed out picture, especially with dark scenes, and also the way this screen lightens up the room.


Projector is Infocus sp8602, about 1000 lumens. It is 12 ft from the screen and ceiling mounted (5" above the screen).

I am thinking of a 2.40 screen about 114".

Viewing distance is about 13 ft.


Do you think the 0.8 would be the best choice and bright enough?


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Armand07* /forum/post/21016850
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> 
> I am considering a BD screen and would like some advice.
> 
> 
> I have no windows or ambient light in the room except from walls are beige and ceiling is white. Today I have a white matt screen gain 1.0 and what bothers me most is washed out picture, especially with dark scenes, and also the way this screen lightens up the room.
> 
> 
> Projector is Infocus sp8602, about 1000 lumens. It is 12 ft from the screen and ceiling mounted (5" above the screen).
> 
> I am thinking of a 2.40 screen about 114".
> 
> Viewing distance is about 13 ft.
> 
> 
> Do you think the 0.8 would be the best choice and bright enough?



Use the Projector Wizard on the SI website in the tools sections to see what gain is recommended for your projector


I will message you the link to my Facebook Gallery that has alot more pics of screens shots that shows what an .8 Gain screen can do


----------



## Armand07

Thanks, that's great!

Using the wizard I found to be in themiddle, just a small change and I'll jump from 0.8 to 1.4 or the other way around. Guess 1.1 would have been nice


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Armand07* /forum/post/21018127
> 
> 
> Thanks, that's great!
> 
> Using the wizard I found to be in themiddle, just a small change and I'll jump from 0.8 to 1.4 or the other way around. Guess 1.1 would have been nice



To be honest you should be fine with the .8 gain

but you cant do 3d on the .8 gain so ...

In my facebook gallary all the shots on my Mits 9000 are in Low or Normal lamp mode and Its still super bright image lights on..


----------



## jayray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Armand07* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Thanks, that's great!
> 
> Using the wizard I found to be in themiddle, just a small change and I'll jump from 0.8 to 1.4 or the other way around. Guess 1.1 would have been nice



The only problem with the wizard is Si is assuming the advertised lumens are accurate. My JVC RS50 is rated at 1300 lumens, which is not what it's outputting in THX mode and it looks great on the 1.4. It would be interesting to see it on the .8 but I think a little more light would be desirable for the .8 IMO. Either way you'll love their screens.

John


----------



## Armand07




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jayray* /forum/post/21018202
> 
> 
> The only problem with the wizard is Si is assuming the advertised lumens are accurate. My JVC RS50 is rated at 1300 lumens, which is not what it's outputting in THX mode and it looks great on the 1.4. It would be interesting to see it on the .8 but I think a little more light would be desirable for the .8 IMO. Either way you'll love their screens.
> 
> John



I guess you are right. My pj is rated at about 1000, but I am maybe down to 800-900 so I am perhaps leaning towards the 1.4. Also tempted to get LED pj and they have even lower lumens.


But does 16:9 material on a 2.35 screen without masking work fine with the 1.4 as well? Sufficient black level?


----------



## elmalloc

why is everyone so tempted by LED PJ? who cares about light bulb changeout when everyon eon this forum changes PJs every 3-4 years anyway?


----------



## ccotenj

^^^


dunno about anyone else, but i average almost 200 hours a month on my pj... that will likely work out to a lamp replacement once a year, so if an (cost effective) led option comes out, i'm certainly going to be in line for one...


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *elmalloc* /forum/post/21020127
> 
> 
> why is everyone so tempted by LED PJ? who cares about light bulb changeout when everyon eon this forum changes PJs every 3-4 years anyway?



I would think that the bulb fading over time would be frustrating. I've heard that the bulb is faded even after 200-300 hours. If you have your projector calibrated, doesn't the fading bulb affect the calibration? Not that LED won't fade, but the period of time is vastly expanded. Anyways, I want a projector and I've never had one, so I have zero experience. Just from what I've read about bulb fade makes me want to get an LED projector. However, I'm definitely open to hearing folks' comments here, because most of you have >0 experience (much more than me!).


Dave


----------



## elmalloc

the LED lumens are pitiful compared to other technologies...?


----------



## ccotenj

^^^


true... today...


but "tomorrow", they should be able to coax out more lumens, at cheaper prices... there are very few things that are immune to the technology curve...


----------



## Armand07

ccotenj,

hey you are only one post from 15,000 !!


----------



## jayray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> I would think that the bulb fading over time would be frustrating. I've heard that the bulb is faded even after 200-300 hours. If you have your projector calibrated, doesn't the fading bulb affect the calibration? Not that LED won't fade, but the period of time is vastly expanded. Anyways, I want a projector and I've never had one, so I have zero experience. Just from what I've read about bulb fade makes me want to get an LED projector. However, I'm definitely open to hearing folks' comments here, because most of you have >0 experience (much more than me!).
> 
> 
> Dave



As bulb fades, just open the iris. Calibration is not affected by bulb fade. 200-300 hrs is on the high side of fade from my experience. My last pj had the bulb replaced at 1500 hrs. and the diff with the new bulb wasn't significant. Remember, forums are filled with people who are unhappy with their purchase so negative experiences generally outnumber positive ones.

John


----------



## glennQNYC

I don't want to turn this thread into a LED projector discussion, but bulb life is only one of the advantages.

I'll admit that instant on/off, greater energy efficiency, and lower heat generation are pretty much ancillary. The big one is LED light engines are a better, more accurate source of light. Plus, the LED projectors on the market have three colored LEDs, so you don't have to deal with a color wheel and it's effects.

Don't forget, your conventional bulb will change color, as well as fade in brightness as the bulb gets hours on it.


----------



## jayray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *glennQNYC* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I don't want to turn this thread into a LED projector discussion, but bulb life is only one of the advantages.
> 
> I'll admit that instant on/off, greater energy efficiency, and lower heat generation are pretty much ancillary. The big one is LED light engines are a better, more accurate source of light. Plus, the LED projectors on the market have three colored LEDs, so you don't have to deal with a color wheel and it's effects.
> 
> Don't forget, you conventional bulb projector will change color, as well as fade in brightness as the bulb gets hours on it.



By the time they perfect LED I may be ready for my next pj









John


----------



## elmalloc




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Armand07* /forum/post/21021518
> 
> 
> ccotenj,
> 
> hey you are only one post from 15,000 !!



Not anymore, guess he decided to waste his next 3 posts elsewhere. I wouldn't be surprised if he created a whole new thread to celebrate his 15K post....


----------



## R Harkness

I took a look at a demo of the new BD 2.7 gain screen which was paired with Mitsubishi's latest top of the line projector at a local AV show. This was "lights on" conditions in a hotel room. Though the lights were of the very dull, amber glow type...a bit "fine dining" vibe if you will.

(As opposed to bright direct lighting or bright fluorescent lighting).


The screen first caught my attention by how vivid the image looked on the Blu Ray menu. Like a flat panel. That was very promising, so I was obliged with a demo of Avatar. I checked out various scenes - bright, mixed, dark etc.


First, as always, the BD screen makes for a watchable image even with the lights on - always a feat in of itself. The plus for this screen material was the sheer brightness, so bright scenes felt a lot more vivid than the dimmer .8 gain material of the same size (which I've viewed with Mitsu projectors before, lights on/off). Not surprisingly, given the screen substrate is much brighter and the gain is much higher, this 2.8 gain screen doesn't reduce the effects of ambient light nearly as well as the darker BD versions. Hence, dark image areas didn't fair nearly as well. Darker scenes, while visible and viewable and probably acceptable to some people, lost tons of contrast and depth - "blacks" becoming a very light see-through gray. I personally would not wish to sacrifice this much picture quality just to have the lights on, and would prefer a smaller flat panel if necessary vs a bigger, washed out image.


That said, if one had control of the lights - for instance lights on dimmers or being able to aim them - it would not take a lot of tweaking to allow the image to look much, much better (with some lights on) than what I saw at the show. The Mits projector is a damned sharp projector as well. So I can see that a spectacular image could be had with this projector/screen combo in the right settings.


I'm sure to anyone who might be familiar with my previous thoughts on the BD screens that it will come as no surprise that I had trouble with the amount of screen "noise" or screen speckly gain structure. This is typically to be expected with much higher gain screens (HP material excepted). I found the screen texture very pronounced and hard to ignore - it often felt like I was having to "see through" a layer of ice or something to the picture.


People's sensitivity to the gain coating/artifacts like these vary significantly, though. So it's obviously best to see screens for yourself.


FWIW....


----------



## nel69

about to buy the 6010 3d pr epson soon should i go with the 1.4 or should i go with 2.7 my screen size would be a 106'' i do like blacks in 3d to what should a go with


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/21026247
> 
> 
> I took a look at a demo of the new BD 2.7 gain screen which was paired with Mitsubishi's latest top of the line projector at a local AV show. This was "lights on" conditions in a hotel room. Though the lights were of the very dull, amber glow type...a bit "fine dining" vibe if you will.
> 
> (As opposed to bright direct lighting or bright fluorescent lighting).
> 
> 
> The screen first caught my attention by how vivid the image looked on the Blu Ray menu. Like a flat panel. That was very promising, so I was obliged with a demo of Avatar. I checked out various scenes - bright, mixed, dark etc.
> 
> 
> First, as always, the BD screen makes for a watchable image even with the lights on - always a feat in of itself. The plus for this screen material was the sheer brightness, so bright scenes felt a lot more vivid than the dimmer .8 gain material of the same size (which I've viewed with Mitsu projectors before, lights on/off). Not surprisingly, given the screen substrate is much brighter and the gain is much higher, this 2.8 gain screen doesn't reduce the effects of ambient light nearly as well as the darker BD versions. Hence, dark image areas didn't fair nearly as well. Darker scenes, while visible and viewable and probably acceptable to some people, lost tons of contrast and depth - "blacks" becoming a very light see-through gray. I personally would not wish to sacrifice this much picture quality just to have the lights on, and would prefer a smaller flat panel if necessary vs a bigger, washed out image.
> 
> 
> That said, if one had control of the lights - for instance lights on dimmers or being able to aim them - it would not take a lot of tweaking to allow the image to look much, much better (with some lights on) than what I saw at the show. The Mits projector is a damned sharp projector as well. So I can see that a spectacular image could be had with this projector/screen combo in the right settings.
> 
> 
> I'm sure to anyone who might be familiar with my previous thoughts on the BD screens that it will come as no surprise that I had trouble with the amount of screen "noise" or screen speckly gain structure. This is typically to be expected with much higher gain screens (HP material excepted). I found the screen texture very pronounced and hard to ignore - it often felt like I was having to "see through" a layer of ice or something to the picture.
> 
> 
> People's sensitivity to the gain coating/artifacts like these vary significantly, though. So it's obviously best to see screens for yourself.
> 
> 
> FWIW....



Glad you got to the show,;

Thats why i have said since the launch of the 2.7 if you want awesome blacks in ambient light you want the 1.4

If you have a controlled room or just can dimm the lights then 2.7 all the way

you still dont need to paint your room black as the 2.7 still is awesome at reducing light scatter...


----------



## cfm112

I recently purchased a 106" black diamond 1.4 screen along with an Epson 8700 for my new basement. I must say that I am disappointed with the sparkles in this screen. The projector is mounted 15 ft from the screen and about 3 inches above. My seating is approximately 16 ft from the screen. I have tried every possible adjustment on the projector to reduce the sparkle and no setting has helped. Sparkles on lighter / brighter colors are extremely distracting, especially on peoples faces. SI is sending me a sample of the .8 gain material to test.


Do you think this will solve my issue?

Is it possible that I received a defect?


I will say that I am very impressed with the contrast of the image in ambient light, but can not look past the sparkles. They are extremely distracting and really ruin the clarity of the image being projected.


----------



## Pete

Anyone considering Black Diamond should also be looking at the Da-Lite High Power High Contrast. It's less costly and (IMO) better behaved...doesn't suffer from color shift when you move your head or walk from side to side.


----------



## AV Science sales 1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Pete* /forum/post/21043009
> 
> 
> Anyone considering Black Diamond should also be looking at the Da-Lite High Power High Contrast. It's less costly and (IMO) better behaved...doesn't suffer from color shift when you move your head or walk from side to side.



This is a really good option to consider. And very true about the color shift. also no sparkles visible. only problem with this material is it's off axis viewing and projector limitations.


benito


----------



## cfm112




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/21043108
> 
> 
> Did you get the Gen 3 or Gen 2?
> 
> If its Gen 2 then that explains
> 
> What is YOur Dealer doing for YOu?





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/21043279
> 
> 
> Wow you must have really sentitive eyes because i can barely see sparkle on the G3 1.4 Gain...
> 
> 
> The .8 Gain has better Black Levels but the 1.4 has more Wow Factor...
> 
> 
> All my shots are on the .8 ,.
> 
> 
> Regardless SI is an amazing company and they will work with you on this thru your Dealer...
> 
> 
> Did you not see the screen on display before Purchase?



Honestly, I don't think my eyes are that sensitive. In certain scenes, it is impossible not to notice the sparkle. If there is a dark image on the screen, it looks incredible. Anything white or lighter in color is impossible not to see. I would be able to deal with this issue if it was only in scenes with the sky or a white screen, but having it show up on faces totally ruins the image clarity.


The only place that has the screen, which is an 1.5 hrs away from is a Best Buy. I went to check out the Gen II they had on display and did not notice anything and believe me I was looking. That's why I'm surprised about this issue and wondering if it can be a defect.


----------



## Jim Parys

I received my BDII G3 1.4 gain, 130 inch diag screen today. Very excited to have it installed just a little bit ago. A bit disapointed in ambient light watching tho. Even though my room will be (but not yet) light controlled I thought it would do better displaying a picture with the light bleeding thorugh from my 3 windows that are on the right side of the sceen. It doesnt, looks about the same, maybe a little better then my Stewart 2.0 gain electric drop down. I have yet to see the BD screen perform with my primary intended goals which were to reduce light scatter and have improved black level in a lights off enviornment. If I acheive that, then I will be happy. Also I am moving from an exclusively 16x9 to a 2.35:1 (BD) and 16x9 (Stewart) double screen configuration depending on the material. The 2.35:1 movies without black bars is great.I can see a little bit of artifacts in brite parts of movies, but not as bad as I see with my Stewart, so that is an improvement. I will post some pics later tonight of the install. The screen looks wicked.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jim Parys* /forum/post/21043659
> 
> 
> I received my BDII G3 1.4 gain, 130 inch diag screen today. Very excited to have it installed just a little bit ago. A bit disapointed in ambient light watching tho. Even though my room will be (but not yet) light controlled I thought it would do better displaying a picture with the light bleeding thorugh from my 3 windows that are on the right side of the sceen. It doesnt, looks about the same, maybe a little better then my Stewart 2.0 gain electric drop down. I have yet to see the BD screen perform with my primary intended goals which were to reduce light scatter and have improved black level in a lights off enviornment. If I acheive that, then I will be happy. Also I am moving from an exclusively 16x9 to a 2.35:1 (BD) and 16x9 (Stewart) double screen configuration depending on the material. The 2.35:1 movies without black bars is great.I can see a little bit of artifacts in brite parts of movies, but not as bad as I see with my Stewart, so that is an improvement. I will post some pics later tonight of the install. The screen looks wicked.



Awesome Cant wait to see the Pic's


welcome to the BD Family.....


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science sales 1* /forum/post/21043315
> 
> 
> This is a really good option to consider. And very true about the color shift. also no sparkles visible. only problem with this material is it's off axis viewing and projector limitations.
> 
> 
> benito



Benny,,,,

Wow another recommendation to a non si screen...

If i had a dollar for everyone of those i could retire....he he

Actually i do only need 1 more stamp for the Million from Mcdonalds.....

do you have boardwalk?lol



Fraisa

Guess who's Back ,,,


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *cfm112* /forum/post/21042472
> 
> 
> SI is sending me a sample of the .8 gain material to test.
> 
> 
> Do you think this will solve my issue?



I hate to say it, but it's unlikely to solve your sparkly issue. The sparkly texture you see on your current BD screen is due to the optical coating added to the screen, which increases the screen brightness (from the viewing position). The .8 version of the BD screen also has an optical coating to do the same thing. Both 1.4 and .8 BD screen therefore suffer from the sparkly artifacts. How much this is noticeable varies from person to person. But if it bothers you on your current BD screen, then it's likely to bother you on the .8 gain screen as well.


----------



## Jim Parys

Well had some good time with my new BD II G3 1.4 yesterday evening in complete blackout conditions.


The image from the screen is great and I really cant tell any of the color shift My projector is not calabrated yet. Because the screen is 2.35:1 aspec it without a doubt adds to the picture qty not having black bars above and below.


Not happy to report that althought i do see some improvmenet, I by far am not satisfied with the light scatter that the screen/projector combo is putting out. This was my number one reason for buying this screen. I still have signficant lightup of the ceiling and side walls. Although there is an improvement over my Stewart it is not what I expected/hoped for.


Black level seems to be a tab better than my Stewart, but in general it looks about the same to me.


As opposed to my daytime watching I was able to see the benifits of the ambient light rejection with my overhead cans. The pix still looked very watchable with all cans turned on and with the back cans on only, the pix looked great. This was a releif as this would be a typical environment when my kids watch movies. Althought I was not happy that the screen didnt perform well with ambient light from the side Windows during the day, with overhead lights it seems to work great.


I am happy with the brightness of the screen, which I thought moving from my 2.0 Stewart I would see a big drop.


All in all I could live with the screen, but really didnt get the satisfaction I was hoping for. Given the above I am wondering if I should try to go into the .8 version of the screen if my dealer is able to work something for me? For those in the know does it really perform better at the light scatter and blacks or would moving from the 1.4 to .8 not derive my desired outcome?


----------



## Jim Parys

My mistake. The screen is the newest BDIII 1.4, not BDII, sorry for the confusion.


----------



## bubbakja

I finally got my .8g G3 set up w/ Panasonic AE4000 yesterday, its amazing ! I was surprised how well it performed w/ a light on in the basement, off to the side.


I don't have the cash for an ISF calibration so I got the WOW! disc to tide me over, and it worked nicely. My projector is about 6" from the cieling including the frame and I don't see any light scattered on the top.


One thing I did notice was it seems like there was uneven lighting around the edge of the screen where the tension pulls are. Is that normal ? Its not noticeable to me during play, just on like a purity test. Hope I didn't mess up the screen mount. That was nerve wracking given the cost of the screen, but it looks solid now.


----------



## Screen Innovatio




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bubbakja* /forum/post/21053679
> 
> 
> I finally got my .8g G3 set up w/ Panasonic AE4000 yesterday, its amazing ! I was surprised how well it performed w/ a light on in the basement, off to the side.
> 
> 
> I don't have the cash for an ISF calibration so I got the WOW! disc to tide me over, and it worked nicely. My projector is about 6" from the cieling including the frame and I don't see any light scattered on the top.
> 
> 
> One thing I did notice was it seems like there was uneven lighting around the edge of the screen where the tension pulls are. Is that normal ? Its not noticeable to me during play, just on like a purity test. Hope I didn't mess up the screen mount. That was nerve wracking given the cost of the screen, but it looks solid now.



Please contact [email protected] (512 832 6939) so we can get this resolved. It should be a simple adjustment.


Best,


Ryan Gustafson


----------



## AV Science sales 1

It's official.....Black Diamond Zero Edge now shipping!


Benito


----------



## dukeav




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *cfm112* /forum/post/21042472
> 
> 
> I recently purchased a 106" black diamond 1.4 screen along with an Epson 8700 for my new basement. I must say that I am disappointed with the sparkles in this screen. The projector is mounted 15 ft from the screen and about 3 inches above. My seating is approximately 16 ft from the screen. I have tried every possible adjustment on the projector to reduce the sparkle and no setting has helped. Sparkles on lighter / brighter colors are extremely distracting, especially on peoples faces. SI is sending me a sample of the .8 gain material to test.
> 
> 
> Do you think this will solve my issue?
> 
> Is it possible that I received a defect?
> 
> 
> I will say that I am very impressed with the contrast of the image in ambient light, but can not look past the sparkles. They are extremely distracting and really ruin the clarity of the image being projected.



Give it a few months, hopefully you will stop noticing the sparkles and start enjoying the movies.


----------



## ray105




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mazda74Speed3* /forum/post/20546815
> 
> 
> Here are some before pics
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/URL]





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mazda74Speed3* /forum/post/20960963
> 
> 
> I kinda feel like I was the guinea pig for a frameless BDII.... Months and months ago I ordered a custom frameless BDII for our restaurant. Install will be the 26th of this month. A custom sub-frame had to be built to support the BDII material. Here is some pics of the sub-frame.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uploaded with ImageShack.us




Where are the updated pics of this amazing setup?!!


----------



## billgatesceo

Ray.....Some new pics in the gallery of the install were just posted

http://www.screeninnovations.com/gallery/


----------



## Dannyc211

Has anyone Recieved there zero edge yet? I haven't heard a d*mn thing about mine yet


----------



## AV Science sales 1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Dannyc211* /forum/post/21138570
> 
> 
> Has anyone Recieved there zero edge yet? I haven't heard a d*mn thing about mine yet



Hey Danny,


Who did you order from? If you ordered from AV Science, i can check on it for you.


Benito


----------



## Dannyc211




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science sales 1* /forum/post/21139618
> 
> 
> Hey Danny,
> 
> 
> Who did you order from? If you ordered from AV Science, i can check on it for you.
> 
> 
> Benito



No I got it from this place down the street. From what I understand there were a lot of pre orders and SI is just trying to catch up.


----------



## TimShadler

Greetings Everyone. I have a quick question. I currently have a 92" .8 gain BDII screen. I would like to upgrade to a larger 2.7 gain screen for a 3d setup. Does anyone have any clue what the resale value of the old 92" screen would be? Thanks!


----------



## ccotenj

have a bd iii 1.4...


any suggestions on what to use/how to clean the screen? not dust, i use swiffers for that and they work well.... mine is getting a bit grunged up and i'd like to clean it up some...


tia...


----------



## billgatesceo

SI sells a special cleaner specifically for BD. Any of the dealers should be able to get a hold of some. It comes in a square spray bottle that has a nice flat surface with a smooth cloth attached to it to clean any marks off. Works really well.


----------



## ccotenj

^^^


cool thanks...


----------



## ODEKK

I have a Black Diamond fixed screen new in the box. 80 inches.


Anybody want to buy it?


Kevin


----------



## 3Z3VH




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bubbakja* /forum/post/21014051
> 
> 
> I have some chair rail molding in my basement that sticks out 3/4" from the wall. Will I have any issues mounting the screen?
> 
> 
> I found out it is a .8 not 1.4, so hopefully I still get decent levels. It will be in my basement so any movie watching at night will be very dark, but on Sundays I might have some light bleeding through the windows so people can see where they set their beers. They are traditional window well style at the top of the basement wall and like a foot high or so.
> 
> 
> Also does anyone have a .8 screen with a Panny AE4000 ? I was hoping to get some help dialing it in, or any suggestions on DIY calibration. DNICE had some great help for my V10 Plasma.



I know I am a couple months late replying, but in case you were still on the fence about the purchase... The mounting with your chair rails should still be easy, you will just need to find some scrap lumber that is slightly thicker than your chair rails to use as a shim of sorts. Screw the lumber pieces to your wall studs, then screw the mounting brackets supplied with the frame into those shims, and hang your frame.


I have a setup close to the one you were asking about. I have a 100" Black Diamond 3G 0.8 Gain, 2.4:1 aspect ratio screen, which is positioned about 20 feet from a Panasonic AE7000U projector (seating is approx 16' from the screen). It is in a room with sliding glass doors for one wall, and is entirely watchable during the day. It isn't a theater quality image by any means, but plenty good enough for watching television shows. A night, however, I use the Cinema 1 mode on the projector which is actually made for higher contrast, and the image looks amazing. The only thing I ever have trouble watching during the day are shows and/or movies with very dark night scenes, such as True Blood, or Walking Dead. In those cases, if I set it to Dynamic picture mode, it drastically raises the brightness of the projector, at the cost of a bit of contrast ratio, but the payoff makes even those shows watchable during the day (again, keep in mind this is in a room with a wall of glass to the outdoors).


I do not see any of the 'sparkle' issues people have complained about, but each of the people I have spoken to who have seen those issues with BD screens, were watching it with a DLP projector. My theory is that the DLP rainbow effect is refracted off the coating in such a way that it causes these sparkles.


The only calibration I have done is with one of the test pattern blu-rays and filter sets.


----------



## ccotenj

^^^


i have a 1.4 g3, not .8, so it may be different... however, on the 1.4, the screen artifacts are the same whether using a dlp or a lcos...


a heads up to those with a 1.4... if you purchase a mits or sony lcos pj, don't plan on using 3d with it... due to the polarization method of the sony light engine (which mits also uses in the hc900d), it does not play nice with the screen... i love my bd screen, but it is going bye-bye because of this...










don't know if that applies to the .8 as well...


----------



## 3Z3VH

With my 0.8 3D works just fine, but as mentioned, I have an LCD projector.


----------



## pb_maxxx

3Z3VH;


are you talking about active 3d or passive?

the BD has known issues with screen artifacts with passive 3D.


----------



## ccotenj

^^^


active here, lcos... si is aware of it, they knew right away what I was calling about when I told them what pj I have...


they were very helpful, and I would buy their product again. just doesn't work for me now.


----------



## JaremyP

What exactly is the problem with the BD and LCOS? I had been imagining a BD G3 1.4 in my theater with a Sony 95es driving it. I thought I read other people using the same with fantastic results.


----------



## ccotenj

afaik, it's JUST the sony and the mits (which uses the sony panels)... it is possible that the 95 has changed something, i'm going on what blake at screen innovations told me...


with the mits glasses... if you do not hold your head at precisely the correct angle (slightly cocked to one side), you get blue and white streaks from the top to the bottom of the screen.. if you are so much as one degree off, these show up, and it is not insignificant (imagine looking through a very dirty streaky window)...


with the monster glasses... same issue as above, plus a massive blue push...


if considering either of these pj's with a 1.4 screen, i'd suggest giving si a call first... they are very helpful and honest...


----------



## mrburrito

You should have got a 2.7 gain screen


----------



## ccotenj

^^^


if i had the ability to look in the future, there's many things i should have done...










hint: i had the screen BEFORE i bought this pj...


edit: got any other brilliant advice, newbie?


----------



## rdjam




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> ^^^
> 
> 
> i have a 1.4 g3, not .8, so it may be different... however, on the 1.4, the screen artifacts are the same whether using a dlp or a lcos...
> 
> 
> a heads up to those with a 1.4... if you purchase a mits or sony lcos pj, don't plan on using 3d with it... due to the polarization method of the sony light engine (which mits also uses in the hc900d), it does not play nice with the screen... i love my bd screen, but it is going bye-bye because of this...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> don't know if that applies to the .8 as well...



Actually, those projectors with mismatched polarization on the green will not work with ANY screen if you attempt dual projector polarized stereo. However, will still work with single projector active stereo.


Now for those using dual JVCs for polarized stereo, only the BD II 2.70 will work properly, as the coating on the .8 and 1.4 will break the polarization. But for active stereo with a single projector there is no issue.


----------



## 3Z3VH




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pb_maxxx* /forum/post/21352395
> 
> 
> 3Z3VH;
> 
> 
> are you talking about active 3d or passive?
> 
> the BD has known issues with screen artifacts with passive 3D.



I am using the Active 3D offered by the Panasonic AE7000U. I was under the impression BD screens did not maintain proper polarization for passive 3D, no matter what projector is used. Am I wrong in that aspect ? I would love to find out that in the future I could use my screen for passive 3D as well !


----------



## rdjam




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *3Z3VH* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> I am using the Active 3D offered by the Panasonic AE7000U. I was under the impression BD screens did not maintain proper polarization for passive 3D, no matter what projector is used. Am I wrong in that aspect ? I would love to find out that in the future I could use my screen for passive 3D as well !



Yes the BD 1.4 and .8 will break polarization - but they rectified that with the 2.70, which is designed for passive 3D.


I sold my 1.4 to a friend without the frame and just rolled in a 2.70 panel instead. Very happy with it.


----------



## ccotenj




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rdjam* /forum/post/21354629
> 
> 
> Actually, those projectors with mismatched polarization on the green will not work with ANY screen if you attempt dual projector polarized stereo. However, will still work with single projector active stereo.
> 
> 
> Now for those using dual JVCs for polarized stereo, only the BD II 2.70 will work properly, as the coating on the .8 and 1.4 will break the polarization. But for active stereo with a single projector there is no issue.



gotcha... good to know, just in case...










i very briefly considered purchasing 2.7 material to replace the 1.4 material... but more screen artifacts/hotspotting wasn't going to get it done for me... so i ended up ordering a da-lite hphc from avs which should be here shortly...


we shall see how that works out... hopefully i won't have 3 screens for sale instead of just the 2 i have now...


----------



## BizarroTerl

Black Diamond Zero Edge video FWIW:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fm6aj...m6pvq-07nbE8xT


----------



## Audiojan

Ok, so do I understand this correctly? For passive 3D, BD won't work except for the new 2.7. For active 3D any BD will work, albeit the old and new 0.8 will be a bit too dark


----------



## ccotenj

^^^


close. check my posts again.


before purchasing a .8 or 1.4 for use with 3d, I would call si and talk to them. they are very helpful and shoot straight.


ps. mine is for sale...


----------



## Audiojan

Thanks but still confused... I already have a BD 0.8 Gen 1 with my Pioneer FPJ-1. Eventually I will replace the PJ and would probably get another JVC d-ila projector, but most likely that would probably include 3D capability. Just so I know what to except, would I need a new screen at that point.


----------



## ccotenj

well... you will likely need a new screen for 3d anyway, as it would be intolerably dim on a .8 screen... keep in mind that active 3d eats up about 75% (or more) of your lumens... even on my 1.4, it was quite dim, and that was with a brand new lamp in the mits... i likely could have lived with it (at least for awhile) if i hadn't had the polarization issue...


and as a reminder, 2d isn't an issue... the mits throws a wonderful picture in 2d on my 1.4 g3...


don't know anything about the g1 screens though vis a vis polarization, sorry...


----------



## rdjam




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Audiojan* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Thanks but still confused... I already have a BD 0.8 Gen 1 with my Pioneer FPJ-1. Eventually I will replace the PJ and would probably get another JVC d-ila projector, but most likely that would probably include 3D capability. Just so I know what to except, would I need a new screen at that point.



This depends on more than just whether the screen retains polarization.


Not sure what size your current screen is, or whether you intend to go larger.


I have a 133 inch 2.40 aspect ratio screen, and even with the 1.4 gain, my old JVC 550 was plenty bright, even more so with the RS40s that I have now.


However, I replaced the fabric with the 2.7 specifically just to get passive 3D.


If you are not sure you'll be doing passive 3D you can always stick to your current .8 screen until you get a new projector and see how it looks. The .8 does have the advantage of much better performance in a room that is not totally dark.


No sense in popping for a new screen before trying the new pj on the existing one, unless you have decided you definitely want passive 3D.


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rdjam* /forum/post/21373151
> 
> 
> If you are not sure you'll be doing passive 3D you can always stick to your current .8 screen until you get a new projector and see how it looks. The .8 does have the advantage of much better performance in a room that is not totally dark.
> 
> 
> No sense in popping for a new screen before trying the new pj on the existing one, unless you have decided you definitely want passive 3D.



Good advice. I have a 100" .8 gain BD that I use with an Epson 5010 and the 3D picture is more than bright enough.


----------



## Armand07

Got my 120" BD 0.8 curved screen (2.40) up on the wall yesterday. It throws a stunning picture. The black level details are incredible. I have a Infocus 8602, but will get a Sim2 Lumis 3D-S soon.


----------



## BrianMundt

Does anyone here have a 2.7 gain BD in their house yet? If so, how's it working out for you?


I'm looking to "future proof" my screen as much as possible (4K ready and good for 3D). I like my projected image with "pop," but don't know how sensitive I'd be to hotspotting and visible texture. Currently, I'm using an absurdly crappy 135" Elite Screens fixed frame and I just want something that doesn't flood my room with light. The screen has also started to "streak" for lack of a better term, and there's about three or four vertical lines that run the height of the screen and are very visible in any light scenes. I only paid about $500 for the screen, but the quality is absolutely awful. However, it was my first foray into projection and I had a minuscule budget. Thankfully, it's time to upgrade!


Unfortunately, I live in Wisconsin, and to my knowledge, there's nowhere to see a Black Diamond in person. I requested a sample from SI, but I know it won't be a good representation of the final product. Hopefully, I'll be able to get a good idea of the visible texture, however.


Does anyone know if there's a difference in hotspotting/texture visibility between the Zero Edge (the rigid material) and the regular fixed screen? I really like the look of the Zero Edge, but I don't know if I'd be able to actually get it downstairs to the theater.


Also, would increasing the distance of the projector to the screen improve the visible texture/hotspotting at all? Right now, I'm at about a 25-foot throw distance with my 8500UB.


And finally, is SI planning on introducing Gen IV of the material anytime soon?


As an aside, I have to say that the customer service so far has been great. Very prompt turnaround time for questions, very polite and informative.


When I inquired about the 2.7 gain screens, they did try to push me to the 1.4 automatically (without knowing the intended application)... not sure why. Maybe some people aren't satisfied with the 2.7?


----------



## pawstar




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/21370157
> 
> 
> well... you will likely need a new screen for 3d anyway, as it would be intolerably dim on a .8 screen... keep in mind that active 3d eats up about 75% (or more) of your lumens... even on my 1.4, it was quite dim, and that was with a brand new lamp in the mits... i likely could have lived with it (at least for awhile) if i hadn't had the polarization issue...



Well, my experience with the BD 1.4 G3 has been very positive for 3D. I've got a RS40 projector + JVC glasses and got away with using Anime mode for most of the 3D titles I've seen. I haven't noticed that much of light loss when using 3D. Its mostly attributed to the fact that the screen retains most of the polarization, so there isn't much loss from the 3D glasses. Plus, the screen gain is rather accurate (as opposed to many other screen brands). However, I never watch 3D with the lights on.


----------



## rdjam

Yes - the 1.4 is very bright with most material I tried - I only replaced it because I needed passive 3D polarisation retention.


@Brian - I love the 2.7 - but be aware you will need to be able to control the light in your room to get the best out of this screen. It cannot block light the same way that the .8 and 1.4 do.


Ideally, you should be 12 feet away or more so as not to notice the screen structure. Distance of the projector is not going to make much difference - it is more down to the distance of the viewer. However, as a rule, I would mount your projector as far away as possible, and as close to the center of the screen as possible.


I haven't had any issues with hotspotting. If you are too far off to the sides, you will be able to "objectively" discern dimming at the far corners (narrow viewing cone), but "subjectively" this is not something you notice during regular viewing.


----------



## BrianMundt




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rdjam* /forum/post/21428088
> 
> 
> Yes - the 1.4 is very bright with most material I tried - I only replaced it because I needed passive 3D polarisation retention.
> 
> 
> @Brian - I love the 2.7 - but be aware you will need to be able to control the light in your room to get the best out of this screen. It cannot block light the same way that the .8 and 1.4 do.
> 
> 
> Ideally, you should be 12 feet away or more so as not to notice the screen structure. Distance of the projector is not going to make much difference - it is more down to the distance of the viewer. However, as a rule, I would mount your projector as far away as possible, and as close to the center of the screen as possible.
> 
> 
> I haven't had any issues with hotspotting. If you are too far off to the sides, you will be able to "objectively" discern dimming at the far corners (narrow viewing cone), but "subjectively" this is not something you notice during regular viewing.



Thanks a lot for the reply and insight!


If all goes according to plan, I should have 100% light control in the home theater. I gave my fiancé permission to do the interior design for the upstairs portion of the house, if I could have total control over the home theater design. Compromise is always good!


The main reasons I'm considering a BD 2.7 is threefold. First, I'd like a 4k ready screen. Second, my next projector will definitely be 3D, and with the current limitations of mid-priced projectors, I'll need all the brightness I can get. Third, I would like to be able to host football parties and keep the lights up a bit-- no serious movie-watching with the lights up.


Hopefully, they'll send out that sample soon so I can test it out!


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BrianMundt* /forum/post/21420526
> 
> 
> Does anyone here have a 2.7 gain BD in their house yet? If so, how's it working out for you?
> 
> 
> I'm looking to "future proof" my screen as much as possible (4K ready and good for 3D). I like my projected image with "pop," but don't know how sensitive I'd be to hotspotting and visible texture. Currently, I'm using an absurdly crappy 135" Elite Screens fixed frame and I just want something that doesn't flood my room with light. The screen has also started to "streak" for lack of a better term, and there's about three or four vertical lines that run the height of the screen and are very visible in any light scenes. I only paid about $500 for the screen, but the quality is absolutely awful. However, it was my first foray into projection and I had a minuscule budget. Thankfully, it's time to upgrade!
> 
> 
> Unfortunately, I live in Wisconsin, and to my knowledge, there's nowhere to see a Black Diamond in person. I requested a sample from SI, but I know it won't be a good representation of the final product. Hopefully, I'll be able to get a good idea of the visible texture, however.
> 
> 
> Does anyone know if there's a difference in hotspotting/texture visibility between the Zero Edge (the rigid material) and the regular fixed screen? I really like the look of the Zero Edge, but *I don't know if I'd be able to actually get it downstairs to the theater.*
> 
> 
> Also, would increasing the distance of the projector to the screen improve the visible texture/hotspotting at all? Right now, I'm at about a 25-foot throw distance with my 8500UB.
> 
> 
> And finally, is SI planning on introducing Gen IV of the material anytime soon?
> 
> 
> As an aside, I have to say that the customer service so far has been great. Very prompt turnaround time for questions, very polite and informative.
> 
> 
> When I inquired about the 2.7 gain screens, they did try to push me to the 1.4 automatically (without knowing the intended application)... not sure why. Maybe some people aren't satisfied with the 2.7?



Take a tape measure and stretch it out to the same length as the screen. Then take two people and see if you can get the tape down the stairs with out bending it. Keep in mind that you can only fit the tape through in a way that allows for the height of the screen.


----------



## BrianMundt




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5* /forum/post/21434046
> 
> 
> Take a tape measure and stretch it out to the same length as the screen. Then take two people and see if you can get the tape down the stairs with out bending it. Keep in mind that you can only fit the tape through in a way that allows for the height of the screen.



Haha, probably should have mentioned I don't have the house (or home theater) yet! Planning on buying a new house in spring, and a space for a dedicated home theater is a must. I just know that a lot of the houses in the area are laid out similarly, and most of the time (every house I've seen, at least) the basement door is always very inconveniently located.


But, that's good advice for when I eventually do buy a house!


----------



## BlakeV




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *3Z3VH* /forum/post/21355331
> 
> 
> I am using the Active 3D offered by the Panasonic AE7000U. I was under the impression BD screens did not maintain proper polarization for passive 3D, no matter what projector is used. Am I wrong in that aspect ? I would love to find out that in the future I could use my screen for passive 3D as well !



Black Diamond .8 and 1.4 work great with the Panasonic 7000 in 3D.


----------



## BlakeV




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BrianMundt* /forum/post/21428922
> 
> 
> Thanks a lot for the reply and insight!
> 
> 
> If all goes according to plan, I should have 100% light control in the home theater. I gave my fiancé permission to do the interior design for the upstairs portion of the house, if I could have total control over the home theater design. Compromise is always good!
> 
> 
> The main reasons I'm considering a BD 2.7 is threefold. First, I'd like a 4k ready screen. Second, my next projector will definitely be 3D, and with the current limitations of mid-priced projectors, I'll need all the brightness I can get. Third, I would like to be able to host football parties and keep the lights up a bit-- no serious movie-watching with the lights up.
> 
> 
> Hopefully, they'll send out that sample soon so I can test it out!



All Black Diamond materials are rated at 4K. You can do one of the new JVC e-Shift projectors in both 4K mode and 3D mode on all of our BD materials. We have a video with myself and Dan from JVC showing the JVC and BD together.


----------



## BrianMundt




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeV* /forum/post/21445872
> 
> 
> All Black Diamond materials are rated at 4K. You can do one of the new JVC e-Shift projectors in both 4K mode and 3D mode on all of our BD materials. We have a video with myself and Dan from JVC showing the JVC and BD together.



Hi Blake,


I saw the video on the site, and I was very impressed. In fact, that's the reason I started to look at BD products-- I loved the look of that Zero Edge used in the video. I requested a few samples and can't wait to test them out.


At this point, I would be sold (love the aesthetic, comparatively wide viewing angles, improved contrast, brightness, etc.) but I'm worried about the visible screen texture which others have reported. But, we'll see how sensitive I am to it.


----------



## moparfan

with the borders included?



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccotenj* /forum/post/21368918
> 
> 
> ^^^
> 
> 
> close. check my posts again.
> 
> 
> before purchasing a .8 or 1.4 for use with 3d, I would call si and talk to them. they are very helpful and shoot straight.
> 
> 
> ps. mine is for sale...


----------



## ccotenj

^^^


sent you a pm...


----------



## stlcity

Guys just got the RS55...replacing my vutech screen with BD. Couple of questions I have:


1. 2.35 vs 2.4:1? Which is the way to go? My installer tells me that 2.40 is the way to go as most recent movies are made in this format.

2. Screen gain: since I am spending this much, would like to have screen for a while...will eventually do 3D. Wondering if it's good to go 2.7 instead of 1.4? Have a completely light controlled room. Use it predominantly for sports and movies.

3. Read about issues with Sony and Mitsubishi..anyone paired with the new jvc?


----------



## jae3cpamd

95


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *stlcity* /forum/post/21459552
> 
> 
> Guys just got the RS55...replacing my vutech screen with BD. Couple of questions I have:
> 
> 
> 1. 2.35 vs 2.4:1? Which is the way to go? My installer tells me that 2.40 is the way to go as most recent movies are made in this format.
> 
> 2. Screen gain: since I am spending this much, would like to have screen for a while...will eventually do 3D. Wondering if it's good to go 2.7 instead of 1.4? Have a completely light controlled room. Use it predominantly for sports and movies.
> 
> 3. Read about issues with Sony and Mitsubishi..anyone paired with the new jvc?



what issues does the bd zero edge have with the sony 95


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *stlcity* /forum/post/21459552
> 
> 
> Guys just got the RS55...replacing my vutech screen with BD. Couple of questions I have:
> 
> 
> 1. 2.35 vs 2.4:1? Which is the way to go? My installer tells me that 2.40 is the way to go as most recent movies are made in this format.
> 
> 2. Screen gain: since I am spending this much, would like to have screen for a while...will eventually do 3D. Wondering if it's good to go 2.7 instead of 1.4? Have a completely light controlled room. Use it predominantly for sports and movies.
> 
> 3. Read about issues with Sony and Mitsubishi..anyone paired with the new jvc?



2.40 is probably closest to the aspect ratio of most movies these days. I see a lot of 2.39 movies. Should not be a problem with the JVC.


----------



## Screen Innovatio




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *stlcity* /forum/post/21459552
> 
> 
> Guys just got the RS55...replacing my vutech screen with BD. Couple of questions I have:
> 
> 
> 1. 2.35 vs 2.4:1? Which is the way to go? My installer tells me that 2.40 is the way to go as most recent movies are made in this format.
> 
> 2. Screen gain: since I am spending this much, would like to have screen for a while...will eventually do 3D. Wondering if it's good to go 2.7 instead of 1.4? Have a completely light controlled room. Use it predominantly for sports and movies.
> 
> 3. Read about issues with Sony and Mitsubishi..anyone paired with the new jvc?



With Black Diamond Zero Edge we always match the native aspect ratio of the projector. i.e. the JVC and Sony are 2.35:1, the Projection Design is 2.37:1 etc. The ensures a full screen with no over-scan. There are two videos on our website illustrating how to setup wide aspect on Zero Edge.


SI Staff


----------



## eduardo alvarado

Hi guys!!!


This is my first post and I read a lot on regard the BD from some of you guys....


I wonder if any one have a comment or know about the Screen Tech material from Germany, wich I found very similar to that from SI.


I already see the BD at CES in the Vellagio suite this year and the year before and I found the results very formidably astounishing......

please serv yourself and check the web site from screen-tech


----------



## leeirvine

I just got my JVC RS45 set up with a 110 inch Black Diamond Zero Edge 2.35 Screen so thought I would post here. Both the screen and the projector look incredible. I was a little worried about the Black Diamond after some of the posts here about speckles etc, but it looks amazing!!!!!! What you can't see from the webiste is the LED lighting feature that you can add for about US500 and which looks very nice.


The screen performs incredibly well in my apartment in the evening with all the lights on and doesn't wash out at all. I am very very very pleased with my choice for my living room, mainly based on how it looks (still feels like a living room and not a cinema) and how it performs. I can read a book or my housemate can be cooking in the kitchen and the picture is still perfectly clear, even with all the lights on.


I would caveat that by saying that I can see why some people could be disappointed as, during the day with direct sunlight, it doesn't do so well and does tend to wash out, even though I have electric blinds since I also have huge floor to ceiling windows and there are gaps in the blinds through which a fair amount of light gets through and in addition have titled floors and white walls!! Anyone buying this expecting perfect viewing conditions in sunlight will be disappointed but then I am pretty sure there isn't a screen that could handle that, my plasma used to wash out in these conditions.


The screen is pretty dam good though and I am really happy with it. I also can't see any of these speckles or anything that people talk about and did look for them, again some people must be more sensitive than others I guess.


Lastly, the team at Screen Innovations (particularly Shannon and Tabi since I ordered mine from overseas), were incredibly helpful from my initial purchase right the way through until I actually got the screen - I had some problems with customs etc, so a big thank you to them.


Would highly recommend the screen overrall. Note is a 3D film which is why it looks out of focus.


----------



## leeirvine

I should also add that the pictures were taken with my iphone camera!


----------



## r4Yn

@leeirvine


Mother of god










I wish I could buy one of these in Germany. Red almost the whole thread. So if any SI fellow member reads this -> please bless our tiny market with your products










Greetings from Germany

Reinhard


----------



## stlcity

Ordered my BD screen 2 weeks ago: shipped friday. 2.40 142" 1.4. Will go up in my theater in couple of days paired with the JVC RS55.







Superbowl will be fun to watch although the team I want is not in it










Upgrading from RS1 and Vutech 1.0 gain screen...


----------



## leeirvine

I watch Iron Man 2 last night, now I am impressed....


----------



## BrianMundt




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *leeirvine* /forum/post/21580076
> 
> 
> I watch Iron Man 2 last night, now I am impressed....



Is it just an illusion created by the accent lighting, or does the screen bow a bit in the middle?


----------



## Skylinestar




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *r4Yn* /forum/post/21574550
> 
> 
> @leeirvine
> 
> 
> Mother of god
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wish I could buy one of these in Germany. Red almost the whole thread. So if any SI fellow member reads this -> please bless our tiny market with your products
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Greetings from Germany
> 
> Reinhard



You're not alone. I'm in Malaysia and I can't get it locally too. Even if it does exist here, it'll be at least 3 times more expensive.


----------



## r4Yn




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Skylinestar* /forum/post/21585510
> 
> 
> You're not alone. I'm in Malaysia and I can't get it locally too. Even if it does exist here, it'll be at least 3 times more expensive.



Ya, problem is there are'nt any comparable alternatives around










Anyway misery loves company










I ordered a DNP Supernova Core yesterday because I could get it locally for around $ 1500.- hoping it works as good as one of those diamonds


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *r4Yn* /forum/post/21585559
> 
> 
> Ya, problem is there are'nt any comparable alternatives around
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyway misery loves company
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I ordered a DNP Supernova Core yesterday because I could get it locally for around $ 1500.- hoping it works as good as one of those diamonds



Well your in luck there...in a "One-on-One" with a BD, the DNP would "smoke" the BD on all counts


The DNP is ISF rated, shows "absolutely" no graininess, has a far wider viewing cone, rejects ambient light better as coming from "any" direction, and costs less. MUCH less.


Hard to see where you could go wrong there....










Question remains, will you even bother to return to relate such a revelation?


----------



## r4Yn




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/21586519
> 
> 
> Well your in luck there...in a "One-on-One" with a BD, the DNP would "smoke" the BD on all counts
> 
> 
> The DNP is ISF rated, shows "absolutely" no graininess, has a far wider viewing cone, rejects ambient light better as coming from "any" direction, and costs less. MUCH less.
> 
> 
> Hard to see where you could go wrong there....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Question remains, will you even bother to return to relate such a revelation?



If you like I will










Guess you are referring to the 08-85 gain model of the Supernova. I'm afraid I ordered the 23-23 material. So I might have those issues like graininess? The high gain material was the only one available as an exhibition offer :/


I bought it though due to the affordable price it came with. Did you compared the Supernova with a BD in person?


Sry about my english and greetings from Germany

Reinhard


----------



## Armand07




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/21586519
> 
> 
> Well your in luck there...in a "One-on-One" with a BD, the DNP would "smoke" the BD on all counts
> 
> 
> The DNP is ISF rated, shows "absolutely" no graininess, has a far wider viewing cone, rejects ambient light better as coming from "any" direction, and costs less. MUCH less.
> 
> 
> Hard to see where you could go wrong there....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Question remains, will you even bother to return to relate such a revelation?



That´s not entirey true. There are pros and cons with both screens (most pros with both then







) I have compared both side by side (the 0.8).


Black diamond rejects ambient light from the sides far better than DNP. From the sides DNP rejects not that much, hence the wider viewing angle. For light rejection vertically they are pretty close.


Just one more word about viewing angle, I have a 4 piece row with my 2.40 screen. The outer seats are at the edge of the screen. With the Black Diamond there are no issues with the viewing angle in this setup whatsoever. You have to go even wider to experience a little drop in brightness, but also that is quite acceptable.


I agree that the DNP has less grainness, but this screen is also not completely free of this. But this is really not an issue with any of these screens in daily life unless you want to sit very close to them.


The BD has a clear benefit over the DNP when it comes to black level. The blacks are blacker. But the DNP has brighter white. You should ask yourself what is most important for you. I think your statements were far to drastic.


In my room I felt the SI was the overall winner, and a couple of others that took part of the comparison agreed.

Also to have a curved 2.40 screen as I have the SI BD was less expensive than the curved DNP. Some DNP models may be less expensive though, I have not checked all...


ps. I saw the new retractable Black Diamond screen from SI at the ISE show in Amsterdam this week. This is still a Beta-version, but it was looking very good!!


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *r4Yn* /forum/post/21587222
> 
> 
> If you like I will



Might be more polite to do that on a separate dedicated Thread. No, it positively would be best that way.



> Quote:
> Guess you are referring to the 08-85 gain model of the Supernova.
> 
> Reinhard



The +2.3 gain material, against which no BD measures up, and that is the screen we aspire to meet or exceed performance in our DIY Screen Coatings.


And you betcha....even the High Gain version is also without screen artifacts. I saw it demoed in FULL overhead lighting at Cedia using a 600 lumen PJ, something no other Screen Mfg came close to attempting.


----------



## r4Yn




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/21588015
> 
> 
> Might be more polite to do that on a separate dedicated Thread. No, it positively would be best that way.



Ok sir.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/21588015
> 
> 
> The +2.3 gain material, against which no BD measures up, and that is the screen we aspire to meet or exceed performance in our DIY Screen Coatings.
> 
> 
> And you betcha....even the High Gain version is also without screen artifacts. I saw it demoed in FULL overhead lighting at Cedia using a 600 lumen PJ, something no other Screen Mfg came close to attempting.



That sounds good to me







But to be honest, I bought my supernova blindly because of the price. I won't be able do compare it with a BD but thats ok if it fits my room/setup. Although one thing I know fore sure: The BD Zero Edge is the best looking out there by far







Anyway, form follows function imho.


Mfg Reinhard


----------



## pb_maxxx

BD isn't doing anything new and it's zero edge screen STILL HAS a visible black edge...


the guys over at diy have been doing real zero edge (non visible edge) floating screens for years










as for performance... you wont be disappointed in the dnp 23-23 black levels. the bd can not touch the 23-23 in white levels, color rendition (especially light yellows and flesh tones), or viewing cone.


at cedia, the 23-23 was the only screen that dared to show it's true self in the full lighting of the auditorium without any front, side, or top shading compromises. all the other big guys used tents, and/or top and side baffles to shade their screens and increase their performance. even so, without any compromises and just a 600 lumen pj, the 23-23 still had the best contrast.


----------



## R Harkness

I agree with much of what you wrote Armand, except:



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Armand07* /forum/post/21587264
> 
> 
> Just one more word about viewing angle, I have a 4 piece row with my 2.40 screen. The outer seats are at the edge of the screen. With the Black Diamond there are no issues with the viewing angle in this setup whatsoever. You have to go even wider to experience a little drop in brightness, but also that is quite acceptable.



(Assuming you use the .8 gain version that you referenced).


When you say "no issues" with your viewing angles on the BD to be more accurate it would be "I don't notice any issues."


There certainly will be visible hot-spotting from seats near one side edge of the screen on your BD screen. The side farther from you will be darker. It's physically impossible with the BD screen characteristics for that not to be the case - that's how it would measure objectively and it's very visible to folks like me (having seen these screens many times and checked out that specific characteristic of the BD screens).

I'd see it in a few second in your set up, guaranteed.


I only bring this up because, throughout my own exhaustive research in putting together my home theater, screens were probably the most problematic choice. Going on most people's reports was almost useless in one sense: I lost count of how many times I would read about a certain screen "There are no visible sparklies or screen texture" or "I don't experience any hot-spotting or viewing angle issues with this screen" only to encounter those screens in person and see those problems in spades.

I am rendered dumbfounded that anyone would miss the hot-spotting on these screens, let alone not see it when looking for it.


Which is why personally viewing screens, especially if you find yourself picky or sensitive to screen artifacts/hot-spotting, is definitely the best way to go if possible.


And, as I always say: none of that is to actually put down the BD screens since, otherwise, I find they are great at what they are made to do - maintain contrast in challenging conditions. All screens have compromises, the BD screens are not unique in that regard.


----------



## Skylinestar




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/21586519
> 
> 
> Well your in luck there...in a "One-on-One" with a BD, the DNP would "smoke" the BD on all counts
> 
> 
> The DNP ....... costs less. MUCH less.



How does US-Dollar 10,000 for a 120" 16:9 Supernova Core 23-23 sounds to you? Well, that's the pricing offered by the dealer in Malaysia.


----------



## MississippiMan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Skylinestar* /forum/post/21609411
> 
> 
> How does US-Dollar 10,000 for a 120" 16:9 Supernova Core 23-23 sounds to you? Well, that's the pricing offered by the dealer in Malaysia.



It does'nt....but I'm sure it reflects the state of affairs that consumers must face in your country. I'm also sure that many other products are also priced ridiculously in your country .


----------



## jacksdosen

When you see gain screen, screen size, how far the lens from the on-screen instructions. The room is dark, when your head side to side to see if there is a hot spot (part of the screen brighter than the rest and brioght point move your head movements) in the bright part of the screen, especially are white, some sparklies, gloss, if the whites look crushed.

Black Diamond II combination, we have seen in the past some of the best features of the black screen - that is, the plane Xscreen and Nexy support budget. It has excellent light Xscreen repellent ability and Nexy screen, light weight and flexibility.


----------



## r4Yn

I got my Supernova yesterday...but I irgnored the warning: "be careful not to overtighten". Guess you know the rest







Now I'm waiting for 2 new parts connecting the frame.


I could instantly kill myself for being such a ******.


----------



## Tireman1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *stlcity* /forum/post/21459552
> 
> 
> Guys just got the RS55...replacing my vutech screen with BD. Couple of questions I have:
> 
> 
> 1. 2.35 vs 2.4:1? Which is the way to go? My installer tells me that 2.40 is the way to go as most recent movies are made in this format.
> 
> 2. Screen gain: since I am spending this much, would like to have screen for a while...will eventually do 3D. Wondering if it's good to go 2.7 instead of 1.4? Have a completely light controlled room. Use it predominantly for sports and movies.
> 
> 3. Read about issues with Sony and Mitsubishi..anyone paired with the new jvc?



Have an RS40 with a 142" Dia. 1.4 and love it.


----------



## Cruzer99

Why is it bright white looks shiny ? Is there a way to turn that down on a projector ? I'm using a Epson pc6010 on a 100 inch zero edge BD 1.4 screen. About 10 ft throw, all is great its just when white flashes it's crazy bright and looks shiny even with the brightness down to -10


----------



## func




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Cruzer99* /forum/post/21628673
> 
> 
> Why is it bright white looks shiny ? Is there a way to turn that down on a projector ? I'm using a Epson pc6010 on a 100 inch zero edge BD 1.4 screen. About 10 ft throw, all is great its just when white flashes it's crazy bright and looks shiny even with the brightness down to -10



What color mode are you using on the Epson ? Are you using Eco or Normal lamp mode ? I'm guessing Eco but just need to be sure here. Also, what gamma mode are you using? The Epson is abit of a light cannon and its pretty close to the screen, 1.4 gain might just be abit much, i kinda doubt you'd need that gain for a 100" with that throw. Of course that depends on your room and light control etc.

Higher gain screen do have a tendency to "sparkle", it might be this effect you are experiencing. Or that you simply have to much lumens.


----------



## programmergeek




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *func* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> What color mode are you using on the Epson ? Are you using Eco or Normal lamp mode ? I'm guessing Eco but just need to be sure here. Also, what gamma mode are you using? The Epson is abit of a light cannon and its pretty close to the screen, 1.4 gain might just be abit much, i kinda doubt you'd need that gain for a 100" with that throw. Of course that depends on your room and light control etc.
> 
> Higher gain screen do have a tendency to "sparkle", it might be this effect you are experiencing. Or that you simply have to much lumens.



I use that set up all the time make sure your dynamic shutter is set to fast. If it is to bright the .8 bd is actually a better paired screen for total light control and a totally dark room, if you use si calculator that what they recommend, however you should have some ambient light on in the room no with large screens if that is the only light your eyes are getting it is to fast of a dark to light.


----------



## Cruzer99

Func I'm have it in Eco mode, it's an amazing picture just in some of those scenes we're the whole screen goes white it lights up the entire room. Didn't know higher gaijin screens give that sparkle look, guess that's what it is. No way to fix that i figure


----------



## Skylinestar

Has anyone seen the new Draper with ReAct2 screen surface? How does it fare against BD and Firehawk?


----------



## programmergeek




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *leeirvine* /forum/post/21580076
> 
> 
> I watch Iron Man 2 last night, now I am impressed....



Re you using a anamorphic lens and what projector? What size screen any over shoot?


----------



## leeirvine

JVC RS45 - no lens - just using the lens memory function to zoom in and out for 2.35, which isn't perfect and requires some adjustments now and then but works well enough.


----------



## leeirvine

I attach some pictures, these were taken in the day time - around 3pm-4pm - so not direct sunlight but still a lot of light through the windows. I notice that during the morning when I have direct sunlight the image is more washed out since the sun is shinning directly onto the screen so would bear this in mind, but at this time of day the image is easily very watchable, even with the shades up and was actually really impressed. With the shades down, even with all the lights on, the image is incredible - in fact, now often have a light on when watching the projector (since it is in my living room).


Lee


----------



## leeirvine

Sorry, Screen size is 110 2.35 screen.


----------



## func




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *leeirvine* /forum/post/21652787
> 
> 
> Sorry, Screen size is 110 2.35 screen.



Is this the .8 gain or 1.4 ? Btw, nice view


----------



## DigsMovies




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Screen Innovatio* /forum/post/21526431
> 
> 
> With Black Diamond Zero Edge we always match the native aspect ratio of the projector. i.e. the JVC and Sony are 2.35:1, the Projection Design is 2.37:1 etc. The ensures a full screen with no over-scan. There are two videos on our website illustrating how to setup wide aspect on Zero Edge.
> 
> 
> SI Staff



Any progress on an AT Black Diamond product? How soon until we might see something?


----------



## leeirvine

1.4 version. Thanks!


----------



## r4Yn

Hey leeirvine,


Since my trip with the DNP Supernova 23-23 wasn't worth it, I have a few questions for you.


Do you see any anoying graininess or sandy-like look an your BD ZeroEdge, especially in very bright areas? I had shadowstripes on my DNP from the left to the right like this . You can easily see them if you move your head back from the monitor. It would be very very helpful to me, if you upload a picture like mine










Greetings to your sunny place









Reinhard


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *leeirvine* /forum/post/21652784
> 
> 
> I attach some pictures, these were taken in the day time - around 3pm-4pm - so not direct sunlight but still a lot of light through the windows. I notice that during the morning when I have direct sunlight the image is more washed out since the sun is shinning directly onto the screen so would bear this in mind, but at this time of day the image is easily very watchable, even with the shades up and was actually really impressed. With the shades down, even with all the lights on, the image is incredible - in fact, now often have a light on when watching the projector (since it is in my living room).
> 
> 
> Lee



Well that room certainly shows the performance of a BD screen in a room with a lot of ambient light. Nice view by the way.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *leeirvine* /forum/post/21652784
> 
> 
> I attach some pictures, these were taken in the day time - around 3pm-4pm - so not direct sunlight but still a lot of light through the windows. I notice that during the morning when I have direct sunlight the image is more washed out since the sun is shinning directly onto the screen so would bear this in mind, but at this time of day the image is easily very watchable, even with the shades up and was actually really impressed. With the shades down, even with all the lights on, the image is incredible - in fact, now often have a light on when watching the projector (since it is in my living room).
> 
> 
> Lee



I just noticed the light hanging from the ceiling. I'm guessing your projector is not ceiling mounted? How far from the ceiling and/or floor is your projector mounted?


Thanks, Dave


----------



## hughtt

I just ordered a Zero Edge 1.4, 120", 2.35:1 screen with LED lighting to go with my JVC RS45. I feel silly because I paid more for the screen than for the projector.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hughtt* /forum/post/21774901
> 
> 
> I just ordered a Zero Edge 1.4, 120", 2.35:1 screen with LED lighting to go with my JVC RS45. I feel silly because I paid more for the screen than for the projector.



You should not feel silly. Most people keep items like screens and speakers much longer than projectors. In the long run it is better to put good money into something that you are going to keep long term.


----------



## TimShadler

Just posted my 92" Black Diamond II .8 Gain Screen in the classifieds. PM me with any questions. Thanks!

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/vbcla...do=ad&id=17167


----------



## Will Binegar




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *TimShadler* /forum/post/21776938
> 
> 
> Just posted my 92" Black Diamond II .8 Gain Screen in the classifieds. PM me with any questions. Thanks!
> 
> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/vbcla...do=ad&id=17167



What's next for you?


----------



## r4Yn

Hey hughtt,


looking forward to your pictures and thoughts over it


----------



## hughtt




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *r4Yn* /forum/post/21778641
> 
> 
> Hey hughtt,
> 
> 
> looking forward to your pictures and thoughts over it



Give me 3 weeks.


----------



## ozer19




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hughtt* /forum/post/21774901
> 
> 
> I just ordered a Zero Edge 1.4, 120", 2.35:1 screen with LED lighting to go with my JVC RS45. I feel silly because I paid more for the screen than for the projector.



I also went with Zero Edge 1.4, 115", 16:9 screen along with Epson 6010. I felt the same but I like the screen very much and I dont see it going anywhere soon. Even until I get a 4K projector, the screen is future proof for that


----------



## isisyodin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jayray* /forum/post/21008803
> 
> 
> So far my JVC RS50 and BD G3 1.4 are looking fantastic. The blacks are making the picture look absolutely amazing. Great combo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> John



Hi, I noticed you have my PJ. I currently have a Da-Lite 1.3 gain 92in screen. With the BD G3, how does 3D look? Did you have non BD screen with the RS50? How would you rate the upgrade in both 2D and 3D, lights on and off?


I am considering the BD, but I would love to see one in person. I noticed that my local dealer carries them, so I will check with them. Just in case, anyone in the Plano, TX area would like to demo theirs to me and my wife?










Cheers


----------



## Screen Innovatio




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *leeirvine* /forum/post/21652784
> 
> 
> I attach some pictures, these were taken in the day time - around 3pm-4pm - so not direct sunlight but still a lot of light through the windows. I notice that during the morning when I have direct sunlight the image is more washed out since the sun is shinning directly onto the screen so would bear this in mind, but at this time of day the image is easily very watchable, even with the shades up and was actually really impressed. With the shades down, even with all the lights on, the image is incredible - in fact, now often have a light on when watching the projector (since it is in my living room).
> 
> 
> Lee



Great pics, do you have high res? We will post on our website.


Thanks SI Staff


----------



## kazkioken

My previous screen was an 80" Carada with a 1.0 gain material using an Epson 8350. For the price and for the bedroom it was a great combination of bang for the buck. You can get better black level performance but the 8350 is such a killer picture for the price. I decided to go even bigger, basically taking almost the entire wall that faces the bed...definitely too large it's almost a 1:1 ratio of screen width to viewing distance...but we wanted maximum effect and zooming the projector out was just too much fun seeing it huge so we went for the larger screen.


Some early thoughts:


1: Hotspotting - compared to the flat white Carada which had almost unlimited viewing angle, the viewing cone of the BD 0.8 is much more narrow. While in bed it's perfect, moving outside of the tight area shows vignetting on the far side of the screen and in the extreme corners. It doesn't matter while watching straight on but something to consider if you need a wide angle of viewing. You will also notice when viewing straight on there is still some vignetting...if any of you are photographers it's kind of like what happens when you shoot wide open with a wide angle lens, you will get some vignetting in the corners. This also might be a function of sitting so close to the screen.


2: How black is it? - this is a hard question to answer because it depends on the kind of light hitting the surface, I mean, it's a screen meant to reflect light back outward. In neutral indirect light the .8 material looks to be about one shade brighter than black. It's dark, but not 100% black. More like...very dark grey. Depending on the amount of ambient light in the room you will see varying levels of absolute black on the screen. Attached pictures show mid day during the brightest it is with the blinds closed.


3: Does it lower the ultimate black level of your projector? - slightly, at least in my application there is still too much reflected light in the room even when pitch black to lower the black levels as compared to my old screen. The absolute black levels seem similar when using dynamic iris and the projector is showing a dark star field. Meaning: in my room, the Epson 8350 when showing a field of black has a similar brightness level on my BD screen as it did when I had my Carada 1.0. I've already packed and sold my old screen but had them up side by side to test and they looked almost identical with black showing on the projector. The 8350 has pretty good black levels so this was not an issue for me. Again to clarify I am talking about the darkest image level in a dark room. This shouldn't be any surprise the screen has a lower gain but it is still reflecting what the projector is spitting out.


4: Can I still see the bars? - yes. Absolutely even at night and all the lights are out using the .8 screen I can still see the bars when viewing a 2:35 image on my 16:9 screen. The black of the frame is darker than the black on the screen. Your application might be different, but I have a small room with white walls and silver metallic blinds. The bars do not "vanish" like you see on the videos online - they may in your room but not in mine. However, there is a substantial improvement from before and it is plainly obvious the amount of reflected light is vastly improved from before. So yes I can see the bars but they are much darker than before, and they stay dark even when the lights are on.


5: Worth it? - 100% YES. I am pretty astounded at the performance of this screen for my intended purposes: which is to watch a gigantic TV at all times of day with or without the lights on. Football season is particularly hard for me because we do not have "regular" tv's, just 3 projectors in various rooms all with the same issue of not being able to watch anything unless it is dark outside. This screen excels during the daytime, and especially at dusk when there is still light in the room or when you have the lights on - it's pretty astounding actually. If you have man cave with total light control you are better off getting a flatter image with a white matte screen and even gain. I don't have that situation so this is the best alternative.


6: What does it look like during the day? - I've attached pictures here that I just took of my bedroom and pretty much exactly what I see by eye. It is the worst case scenario...bright high noon light hitting the windows spilling onto half of the screen. All images are constant settings, EXIF data is retained if you want to have a look, untouched except processing jpeg from RAW. Remember this is with a $950 Epson projector. I've placed two white sheets of paper so you can see what the screen would have looked like before and to show what kind of dynamic range you can get during the very bright times of day. I've also shown different kinds of content so you can see 2.4:1, 16:9, bright, dark etc. This is being served by an HDI Dune Smart H1 media player (which I highly recommend). The projector in the living room is shooting onto a Stewart Grewhawk which works well in the evenings but it's black levels do not compare during the day.


----------



## kazkioken

more examples


----------



## Will Binegar

Great shots! Thanks for sharing them.


----------



## isisyodin

Nice... How did you get away with 3 PJs in your home? That is awesome. We have a dedicated room in our house, but a few months ago I was toying with the idea of getting a second PJ in our bedroom... I mentioned it to my wife, and she just gave me that look, the dreaded disapproval look with an eye roll and quick snap... and that was the end of it.

Early this week, I had an opportunity to check out a zero edge with 1.4 gain hooked up to JVC RS50. I played Rango and Tron which were the only blu-rays available. I had control of lighting conditions which included some fluorescent and flood lights and a door to a very bright area with daylight and flourescent lighting. Animated movies tend to look bright in most setups, so Tron was really the test; I have to say it appeared to have significant more contrast than my 1.3 gain Da-Lite cinema contour on both pitch black and partially lit conditions. I was overall pleased and think that my wife and I could really enjoy the PJ more when our toddler is hanging out with us in the media room since it has the lights on whenever my son is in there.

However, I have to agree that the YouTube videos posted are not really depicting the real thing; I expected it, so it was my main reason for seeing one in person. I honestly thought that the image would be more vivid, but no, it is still far from either one of my Pannys which was a bit disappointing.

I am still on the fence, mainly due to pricing vs benefits on a light controlled room with the occasional hour or two that I need to have lights on. I could do without the zero edge, but for 110" which is what I want the 3K range is a bit high. If they were just closer to 1.5K range, I would pull the trigger now.


----------



## kazkioken

further clarification on #4 of my post above about the black bars still being visible - testing last night concludes it is due to two things: the absolute black level of the projector is not 100% black and the screen reflects this light as it should...also there is light spillage from the blinds and windows of the street lights (that are actually quite bright) at night coming onto the screen and reflecting back. The entire wall that the screen sits on gets light hitting it - placing some white paper on the screen at night shows there is significant improvement from before I'll try and do some pictures tonight to demonstrate.


----------



## booaaaa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *r4Yn* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Hey leeirvine,
> 
> 
> Since my trip with the DNP Supernova 23-23 wasn't worth it, I have a few questions for you.
> 
> 
> Do you see any anoying graininess or sandy-like look an your BD ZeroEdge, especially in very bright areas? I had shadowstripes on my DNP from the left to the right like this . You can easily see them if you move your head back from the monitor. It would be very very helpful to me, if you upload a picture like mine
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Greetings to your sunny place
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Reinhard



This must be the 2.3 gain


----------



## booaaaa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MississippiMan* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> Might be more polite to do that on a separate dedicated Thread. No, it positively would be best that way.
> 
> 
> The +2.3 gain material, against which no BD measures up, and that is the screen we aspire to meet or exceed performance in our DIY Screen Coatings.
> 
> 
> And you betcha....even the High Gain version is also without screen artifacts. I saw it demoed in FULL overhead lighting at Cedia using a 600 lumen PJ, something no other Screen Mfg came close to attempting.



I think the 2.3 has issues. Whereas the 0.8 is a beauty


----------



## r4Yn




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *booaaaa* /forum/post/21850865
> 
> 
> This must be the 2.3 gain



Yes it was. Haven't tried the 0.8 screen but i think it is much more suitable for hometheaters/living rooms.


Now I'm using a Draper ReAct II 1.2 gain because it's a hell of a lot cheaper compared to the diamond zero edge. Looks like this 


I do think a 0.8 Zero Edge would outperform it but I am ok for now.


----------



## goneten

r4YN,


What speaker stands are you using in that pic? I like them.


----------



## hughtt

Finally my 120" 1.4 gain screen arrived after 3 weeks waiting. It looks wonderfull when the sun is down and the lights are dimmed. During the day, with what I currently have on my windows, I don't think I really want to watch anything on it yet.


----------



## goneten

Hughtt, you have an awesome system! I really like the look of the Zero Edge screen in your room (living room?). Every time you watch a movie it must be an event...


----------



## r4Yn

Hi hughtt,


thank you so much for sharing those pictures. This Sir simply looks brilliant. I'd love to watch a movie there.


So you would go for a zero edge again?


Greetings from Germany

Reinhard


----------



## hughtt




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *goneten* /forum/post/21901526
> 
> 
> Hughtt, you have an awesome system! I really like the look of the Zero Edge screen in your room (living room?). Every time you watch a movie it must be an event...



Thanks for the compliments.


----------



## hughtt




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *r4Yn* /forum/post/21904267
> 
> 
> Hi hughtt,
> 
> 
> thank you so much for sharing those pictures. This Sir simply looks brilliant. I'd love to watch a movie there.
> 
> 
> So you would go for a zero edge again?
> 
> 
> Greetings from Germany
> 
> Reinhard



Thanks. Sure, I would go for this screen again by the fact that I don't have to paint my whole room totally dark in order to watch a movie.


----------



## seancowger

How is the viewing angle on these screens? What about 3D?


I will be using an epson pro 6010


----------



## popalock




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hughtt* /forum/post/21900446
> 
> 
> Finally my 120" 1.4 gain screen arrived after 3 weeks waiting. It looks wonderfull when the sun is down and the lights are dimmed. During the day, with what I currently have on my windows, I don't think I really want to watch anything on it yet.



Stellar... The B&W Diamond (those are the 802's, correct?) and McIntosh combo is hard to beat in my opinion. I haven't read the whole thread, so I'm not sure if you already said it, but what you were using to cover the LFE department and what Projector are you using?


----------



## hughtt




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *popalock* /forum/post/21908788
> 
> 
> Stellar... The B&W Diamond (those are the 802's, correct?) and McIntosh combo is hard to beat in my opinion. I haven't read the whole thread, so I'm not sure if you already said it, but what you were using to cover the LFE department and what Projector are you using?



Those are 802D's. For LFE, I use an old Velodyne SPL1200 sub. The projector is JVC RS45.


----------



## Mr Magic

Do the Black Diamond screens still have 3D issues when used with Sony projectors?


----------



## Screen Innovatio




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mr Magic* /forum/post/21914599
> 
> 
> Do the Black Diamond screens still have 3D issues when used with Sony projectors?



No, Sony resolved the issue with an additional filter!


Thanks,


Blake


----------



## cR4p

Does anyone know a US dealer that will ship international, there's no distributors in my country and price of the other neighboring countries are outrageous, also the two I contacted are not taking custom size orders.


----------



## r4Yn

Hi,


point your question directly to [email protected] 


That will do


----------



## cR4p




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *r4Yn* /forum/post/21948364
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> 
> point your question directly to [email protected]
> 
> 
> That will do



Thx r4Yn,


I see you're in Germany, so am I, did you ordered one directly from them or how did it worked for you?


----------



## r4Yn

Your welcome mate










My story is written here . a1mLeSS = r4Yn










I ended up with a Draper ReAct II, but my next screen will be a Black Diamond.


----------



## mmiles

What is the largest [width in 2.37/2.4] and highest gain available on the ZeroEdge product?


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *seancowger* /forum/post/21907394
> 
> 
> How is the viewing angle on these screens? What about 3D?
> 
> 
> I will be using an epson pro 6010



With most screens, as you increase gain, viewing angle decreases. The BD screens are the opposite. The 0.8 gain has the least, with the 1.4 gain having a larger viewing angle and the 2.7 has the largest viewing angle. Viewing angle with the 1.4 should not be a problem in nearly any HT room.


----------



## saskroadie

I've just bought a 92' Black Diamond 16:9 in the .8 screen material. I currently have a white 1.2 gain 106' right now in a completely light controlled basement with light green walls and a white ceiling. The projector is a pt-ae 3000u and I am a little concerned it will not have enough light for this screen. I figure going with the slightly smaller size will help. I just can't stand having the projector wash out my blacks like it is doing now with the current set-up.

With my projector being ceiling mounted I am worried that I will have image drop-off. This means I may have to use a telescopic mount to lower the projector. If the Panasonic can't put out enough light then I may need a new projector. When my wife found out I bought the screen (and have to drive several hours to pick it up) she freaked out!! She theatend to divorce me and move back home..... Oh well, at least then I can paint the walls and ceiling!


----------



## saskroadie

Ok, so I've got my Black Diamond screen and first impressions are WOW..... Rough calibration does give some slight "sparklies" on whites (like my old 1.8 gain gray screen) but the black level is almost creepy.....Going to watch "Senna" on bluray tomorrow...looking forward to it......


----------



## isisyodin

Sounds excellent. Senna is on DVD only AFAIK and it is a documentary with rough footage. It is a good documentary no doubt... my wife is Brazilian, so there was a bit more to it when we watched it a few weeks ago. You should try something with a bit more dark scenes and some contrasty shots. I've been using Captain America for my calibration tests since the first chapter has a mix of both.

I can't wait to get my screen. I am however still on the fence mainly for a lack of budget. I have a Lumagen XS-3D and a 110 1.4 BDII on my sight and neither one is cheap











Correction: I just noticed that Senna is also on blu-ray. I guess Netflix is a bit behind.


----------



## speavler

sports on a 2.35:1 BD screen - do you guys stretch it or watch with bars on the side? and a follow up question: how do you like it? i'm trying to talk myself into a 2:35 zero edge for the family room.


----------



## rdjam




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *isisyodin* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Sounds excellent. Senna is on DVD only AFAIK and it is a documentary with rough footage. It is a good documentary no doubt... my wife is Brazilian, so there was a bit more to it when we watched it a few weeks ago. You should try something with a bit more dark scenes and some contrasty shots. I've been using Captain America for my calibration tests since the first chapter has a mix of both.
> 
> I can't wait to get my screen. I am however still on the fence mainly for a lack of budget. I have a Lumagen XS-3D and a 110 1.4 BDII on my sight and neither one is cheap
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correction: I just noticed that Senna is also on blu-ray. I guess Netflix is a bit behind.



I'd recommend Star Trek (the newer remake) for the ultimate test of this screen.


Amazing contrast in space scenes. First time I watched this on the BDII, someone in my audience bought the exact same projector and screen combo as mine, just because he had never see anything like it.


----------



## JimShaw

I have literally read every post on this 97 page thread. And for the long and sometimes tedious work, I have gathered a ton of great info regard the BD .8, 1.4 and the 2.7.


I have been to Best Buy to watch their 106", BD .8, Gen II and was impressed on how it performed in their room with all the lights on and light coming from the open doors.


I will be installing the Epson 5010 PJ which will reside in the family room and it's beam will light a 100" diag., 16:9 BD .9, motorized, recessed, screen which comes out this August as per Amy of SI.


It is going to be expensive but not as much the Supernova Flex, recessed with an MSRP of $11,000.00 per the quote I received from the DNP store manager.



m


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *JimShaw* /forum/post/22005131
> 
> 
> I have literally read every post on this 97 page thread. And for the long and sometimes tedious work, I have gathered a ton of great info regard the BD .9, 1.4 and the 2.7.
> 
> 
> I have been to Best Buy to watch their 106", BD .9, Gen II and was impressed on how it performed in their room with all the lights on and light coming from the open doors.
> 
> 
> I will be installing the Epson 5010 PJ which will reside in the family room and it's beam will light a 100" diag., 16:9 BD .9, motorized, recessed, screen which comes out this August as per Amy of SI.
> 
> 
> It is going to be expensive but not as much the Supernova Flex, recessed with an MSRP of $11,000.00 per the quote I received from the DNP store manager.
> 
> 
> 
> m




Is that a .8 or a .9 BD?


Dave


----------



## JimShaw




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks* /forum/post/22007081
> 
> 
> Is that a .8 or a .9 BD?
> 
> 
> Dave



You posted just when I was coming back in to make the change to .8



m


----------



## JimShaw

Here is a statement that I read about page 70 of this thread. I went back to find it but could not.


A gentleman in the Netherlands said that his friend was taking calibration classes and during one class they used the BD as the screen for the PJs and discovered the screen could not be calibrated. So, in his class notes the screen was marked as not-being-able-to-calibrate.


I found this statement to be extremely important but I was surprised that no one posted a reply refuting it.


What say you regarding the class finding?



m


----------



## truwarrior22




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hughtt* /forum/post/21900446
> 
> 
> Finally my 120" 1.4 gain screen arrived after 3 weeks waiting. It looks wonderfull when the sun is down and the lights are dimmed. During the day, with what I currently have on my windows, I don't think I really want to watch anything on it yet.



Wow, nice setup, what kinda lighting tricks do you have going on there?


----------



## isisyodin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *JimShaw* /forum/post/22007441
> 
> 
> Here is a statement that I read about page 70 of this thread. I went back to find it but could not.
> 
> 
> A gentleman in the Netherlands said that his friend was taking calibration classes and during one class they used the BD as the screen for the PJs and discover that the screen could not be calibrated. So, in his class notes the screen was marked as not-being-able-to-calibrate.
> 
> 
> I found this statement to be extremely important but I was surprised that no one posted a reply refuting it.
> 
> 
> What say you regarding the class finding?
> 
> 
> 
> m



This is an interesting conclusion. I don't have a BD but seriously considering one; however, no calibration capabilities would a deal breaker for me.

I wonder if it is because on a FPJ screen meters measure the reflected light at an angle and the BD is supposed to mitigate all reflected light at angles greater than the typical viewing ones.

I am interested to know more. My JVC RS50 has a built in reflectivity index for SI, but I am not sure if it is for the BD. Real live experiences and feedback would be nice, anyone?


----------



## saskroadie

My first attempt at "self calibration" (by eye alone) yielded some decent results. However, after watching a few movies, I found the picture was over saturated and even worse had a big drop in shadow detail. The good news was I didn't notice much (if any) drop in brightness or loss of viewing angle. 20 mins into Star Trek 2009 this morning I again recalibrated but this time really tried to balance black level/shadow detail and brightness. The next 1.5 hours of viewing was extremely enjoyable. My powered white screen is still installed, so I have the luxury of dropping it in front of the Black Diamond at anytime during a flick to compare the two. I continue to be very impressed with the BD.


----------



## isisyodin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *saskroadie* /forum/post/22019391
> 
> 
> My first attempt at "self calibration" (by eye alone) yielded some decent results. However, after watching a few movies, I found the picture was over saturated and even worse had a big drop in shadow detail. The good news was I didn't notice much (if any) drop in brightness or loss of viewing angle. 20 mins into Star Trek 2009 this morning I again recalibrated but this time really tried to balance black level/shadow detail and brightness. The next 1.5 hours of viewing was extremely enjoyable. My powered white screen is still installed, so I have the luxury of dropping it in front of the Black Diamond at anytime during a flick to compare the two. I continue to be very impressed with the BD.



Did you try the AVS disk? Adjusting the contrast and brightness does not require any special equipment and is fairly straight forward with the basic black and white patterns. For the rest (grayscale, gamma, and CMS), you will need the software and meter. Anyone out there with Calman or Chromapure and a decent meter?

On one of the promo videos from SI, they brag about calibration and being able to calibrate for just one light condition since the BDII screens are viewable during day and night lighting conditions, and you can practically retain the same calibration settings (I tend to disagree).


----------



## Blackdevil77

How much for a 106" BD screen in the HDTV (16:9) format? I can't find a price online. I was looking at other screens in the 1000 dollar range but everyone keeps talking about how amazing this screen is. It would be used with an Epson 6010 in a dedicated room.


Aren't most Blu Ray movies in the 16:9 format? Would there be any benefit of going with the 2:35:1 or 2:40:1?


----------



## isisyodin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Blackdevil77* /forum/post/22060926
> 
> 
> How much for a 106" BD screen in the HDTV (16:9) format? I can't find a price online. I was looking at other screens in the 1000 dollar range but everyone keeps talking about how amazing this screen is. It would be used with an Epson 6010 in a dedicated room.
> 
> 
> Aren't most Blu Ray movies in the 16:9 format? Would there be any benefit of going with the 2:35:1 or 2:40:1?



For material other than in 16:9 format, you will need an expensive lens system if you want it well done. Some newer projectors have internal masking systems, but they are done at a software level with compromises in overall quality.

Projector People dot com has the BD in the typical 16:9 or 2.35:1. You will have to decide on the gain since there are 3 options today. 0.8, 1.4 and 2.7 if am not mistaken. Since you have light control, maybe the 0.8 or 1.4 would be good depending if you will like to use it with the lights on often. Consider the variables: size, gain, viewing preference (dark or lit room), viewing angle. All the latter are related of course and typically it goes like this:

Bigger size require more lumens out of your projector; higher gain screens will give you higher brightness in front but decreases to half brightness at angles as small as 40 degrees of the main viewing point (dead center); too much gain also increases hot spotting or sparkles in the BD.

Also if your projector does 3D and you think it is a must, you may consider even the 2.7. Active shutter glasses 3D decrease the projector's light entering your eyes by up to 60 percent.

One last item is calibration. I am not completely sure how well you can calibrate the BD since no one has commented on my last post.


----------



## Blackdevil77




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *isisyodin* /forum/post/22061128
> 
> 
> For material other than in 16:9 format, you will need an expensive lens system if you want it well done. Some newer projectors have internal masking systems, but they are done at a software level with compromises in overall quality.
> 
> Projector People dot com has the BD in the typical 16:9 or 2.35:1. You will have to decide on the gain since there are 3 options today. 0.8, 1.4 and 2.7 if am not mistaken. Since you have light control, maybe the 0.8 or 1.4 would be good depending if you will like to use it with the lights on often. Consider the variables: size, gain, viewing preference (dark or lit room), viewing angle. All the latter are related of course and typically it goes like this:
> 
> Bigger size require more lumens out of your projector; higher gain screens will give you higher brightness in front but decreases to half brightness at angles as small as 40 degrees of the main viewing point (dead center); too much gain also increases hot spotting or sparkles in the BD.
> 
> Also if your projector does 3D and you think it is a must, you may consider even the 2.7. Active shutter glasses 3D decrease the projector's light entering your eyes by up to 60 percent.
> 
> One last item is calibration. I am not completely sure how well you can calibrate the BD since no one has commented on my last post.



Thanks! Damn! $2900 bucks! That's nearly 3X's the cost I was gonna spend. Is the picture on this screen really 3 times better then a typical screen or does the law of diminishing returns come into play here? Any deals to be had on these screens or are they priced as is?


I'm thinking the 1.4 gain screen should be good for my needs


----------



## isisyodin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Blackdevil77* /forum/post/22061228
> 
> 
> Thanks! Damn! $2900 bucks! That's nearly 3X's the cost I was gonna spend. Is the picture on this screen really 3 times better then a typical screen or does the law of diminishing returns come into play here? Any deals to be had on these screens or are they priced as is?
> 
> 
> I'm thinking the 1.4 gain screen should be good for my needs



You can get it elsewhere for less. Look around or talk to your local dealer.

Also, if you have Best Buy nearby or higher end home theater B&M place, go see it for yourself; some places do have it on their showrooms. The BD does work well when conditions are not perfectly light controlled as far as I have seen. I had the opportunity to test one, and it worked fine. Is it worth the money? I am still on the fence TBH.

There are other alternatives as well. There is an article about it on the latest issue of Home Theater Magazine; take a look at their website; those guys also had the BD for a little while and did a short write up on it.


----------



## Blackdevil77




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *isisyodin* /forum/post/22061344
> 
> 
> You can get it elsewhere for less. Look around or talk to your local dealer.
> 
> Also, if you have Best Buy nearby or higher end home theater B&M place, go see it for yourself; some places do have it on their showrooms. The BD does work well when conditions are not perfectly light controlled as far as I have seen. I had the opportunity to test one, and it worked fine. Is it worth the money? I am still on the fence TBH.
> 
> There are other alternatives as well. There is an article about it on the latest issue of Home Theater Magazine; take a look at their website; those guys also had the BD for a little while and did a short write up on it.



I have a local dealer that sells these, I'll send him an e-mail.


I just read the home theater article on the Black Diamond screen. The room I'm gonna have it in will be completely light controlled. Maybe OCCASIONALLY there would be some dim lighting. The most light that would be in that room is during super bowl










My only slight concern is off axis viewing. If your not directly in front of the screen, the picture darkens noticeably?


----------



## isisyodin

Here is a write up of a test also done recently, so you can get it an idea of the off-axis performance of similar screens (gain-wise).
http://www.hometheater.com/content/s...eens-ht-labs-m 

BTW, these screens are also pretty darn good.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Blackdevil77* /forum/post/22060926
> 
> 
> How much for a 106" BD screen in the HDTV (16:9) format? I can't find a price online. I was looking at other screens in the 1000 dollar range but everyone keeps talking about how amazing this screen is. It would be used with an Epson 6010 in a dedicated room.
> 
> 
> Aren't most Blu Ray movies in the 16:9 format? Would there be any benefit of going with the 2:35:1 or 2:40:1?



Give us a call and we would be happy to help you.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *isisyodin* /forum/post/22061128
> 
> 
> For material other than in 16:9 format, you will need an expensive lens system if you want it well done. *Some newer projectors have internal masking systems, but they are done at a software level with compromises in overall quality.*
> 
> Projector People dot com has the BD in the typical 16:9 or 2.35:1. You will have to decide on the gain since there are 3 options today. 0.8, 1.4 and 2.7 if am not mistaken. Since you have light control, maybe the 0.8 or 1.4 would be good depending if you will like to use it with the lights on often. Consider the variables: size, gain, viewing preference (dark or lit room), viewing angle. All the latter are related of course and typically it goes like this:
> 
> Bigger size require more lumens out of your projector; higher gain screens will give you higher brightness in front but decreases to half brightness at angles as small as 40 degrees of the main viewing point (dead center); too much gain also increases hot spotting or sparkles in the BD.
> 
> Also if your projector does 3D and you think it is a must, you may consider even the 2.7. Active shutter glasses 3D decrease the projector's light entering your eyes by up to 60 percent.
> 
> One last item is calibration. I am not completely sure how well you can calibrate the BD since no one has commented on my last post.



Actually some of the newer projectors (Sony VW95, VW1000 and all of the new JVC's) have lens memory. What they are doing is zooming the black bars off of the scope screen. These projectors are able to memorize different focus, zoom and shift postions of the lens. The black bars are still there, you just lose them on the dark back ground. You can also digitally mask the black bars, but that does not have any effect on the image its self. Nothing is being done digitally to degrade the image. Of course like with any image as you make it larger the pixels get bigger and the spacing between the pixels increases. The Panny 7000 is the projector doing it digitally by shifting the image on the chip, but it is not doing any processing, so the image quality stays the same other than the same stipulation of the pixels getting larger. it just severly limits the projector location if you are wanting to use a scope screen with this projector. There are a lot of people using the zoom method for CIH. With all of the above projectors, except the VW1000, everyone would agree that an A-lens is the better method compared to the zoom method. it is just a more expensive route.


----------



## cR4p

Hi guys,


My screen is finally here, the whole thing was quite the adventure, the ordering, the delivery and the installation wasn’t easy.


I originally wanted to order directly from SI since the price in Europe were so expensive but obviously they were not so keen on doing so since they had a distributor in my country, after insisting a lot they agreed to exceptionally sell me a screen directly but I had to take care of the shipping from their warehouse to Switzerland and this is when the real trouble began, it seems that shipping a 144inch across the pond is harder than it seems, the usual transporter FEDEX/UPS/DHL where not accepting such large parcel and only some freight transporter would do the trick, I received some estimates around 1’500$ for sea shipping with a transit time of 4-6 weeks and usually above 3’000$ for air freight and even then the price only included transport to closest port/airport.


I spent some time thinking about it and reached the conclusion that first it wouldn’t be much cheaper than buying the screen from the local distributor and second it would save me the headache of having to deal with it myself, so I place the order for a 144inch 2.35 Black Diamond Zero Edge, from there things moved surprisingly fast and in about 2 weeks the screen was ready for install.


This is only when the installer called me with concerns regarding the size of the parcel that I realized there was no way it would go through the staircase, for those who don’t know the zero edge is one solid piece and cannot be folded, I’m living on the 4th and last floor, so I had to contact a company that usually deals with moving piano to come with a crane to get the screen inside through the Balcony, I was a bit worried but in the end they made it look easy and in 30 minutes the screen was in my leaving room, it’s about that time my wife saw the box and almost fainted… good times…


Then even the installation wasn’t easy, installer came with an extra guy but to navigate with a 144inch in a living room was… challenging but I have to say the whole installation was quite straight forward, I went for the ceiling mount and to get it hanging was relatively easy, it’s still a 60kg screen but it went faster than expected,


Here’s a quick picture of the result, with and without curtains, hope you'll like it:


----------



## r4Yn

This Sir, simply looks brilliant! Which country in Europe you are fram in particular? SI qouted me $500 for shipping a 100" Zero Edge to Germany. But I do want to go for the exact screen you have after reconsideration










But I won't stand those shipping costs...


What gain is this beauty btw?


Kind regards

Reinhard


----------



## cR4p




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *r4Yn*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2910#post_22102176
> 
> 
> This Sir, simply looks brilliant! Which country in Europe you are fram in particular? SI qouted me $500 for shipping a 100" Zero Edge to Germany. But I do want to go for the exact screen you have after reconsideration
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But I won't stand those shipping costs...
> 
> What gain is this beauty btw?
> 
> Kind regards
> 
> Reinhard



Hi Reinhard,


I'm in Switzerland, I think your situation might be different since they don't have a distributor in Germany so they might agree to ship a screen to you directly and take care of the logistic aspect as well, they must have much lower shipping since it's probably negotiated.


I can tell you that if they agree to sell you a screen directly then the additional 500$ for shipping is NOTHING compared to the price you will get an EU dealer, the price I paid for mine was ~8'500$ including the LED kit at the back and the ceiling mount but this is roughly 2 more expensive than some price I was quoted by SI or other US retailer, so at +500$ with US price it's a bargain.


My screen gain is 0.8


----------



## Skylinestar

Congratulations cR4p.


@ r4Yn, I have the same problem with the expensive shipping charges (I'm from Malaysia). SI screens cost a bomb locally.


----------



## speavler

Beautiful screen! What projector are you using to drive that beast? I've got a 120" 2.35 1.4 gain BD screen on order and hoping my little HC4000 will be adequate in terms of brightness.


----------



## cR4p




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *speavler*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2910#post_22103215
> 
> 
> Beautiful screen! What projector are you using to drive that beast? I've got a 120" 2.35 1.4 gain BD screen on order and hoping my little HC4000 will be adequate in terms of brightness.



The beast is driven by a Sony VW-1000ES


----------



## speavler

VERY nice. Love the decor too. We're doing a somewhat contemporary re-do of our family room. Should be done in a few weeks. I went with the hanging from ceiling option too. How do you like the LED kit?


----------



## cR4p

the LED kit is nice but at least in Europe it's greatly overpriced, my installer told that the screen size was obviously driving the price up, maybe with some DIY skills the same effect could be reached for a fraction of the price, it looks great but it's a gadget


----------



## Kev1000000

Hey guys,


I am very interested in a BD 100" 1.4 gain Zero Edge, and I already ordered a few screen samples from SI. When experimenting with the samples, I noticed some very limiting viewing angles on the 1.4. Otherwise, I love the look. Does the viewing angle on a small sample represent the same angle I would get with a 100" screen? Is it more or less noticeable? This is the only thing holding me back.


----------



## Will Binegar

The sample is representative of how the whole screen would behave, but it is probably more obvious when placed against a screen that has a wider viewing cone. If your objective is ambient light rejection with a wider viewing cone, take a look at the DNP Supernova. To my eyes there is very little drop-off in the 2.3 gain material (23-23) and seemingly none in the .8 gain material (08-85); plus the off angle view doesn't seem to have any color shift.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kev1000000*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2910#post_22133618
> 
> 
> Hey guys,
> 
> I am very interested in a BD 100" 1.4 gain Zero Edge, and I already ordered a few screen samples from SI. When experimenting with the samples, I noticed some very limiting viewing angles on the 1.4. Otherwise, I love the look. Does the viewing angle on a small sample represent the same angle I would get with a 100" screen? Is it more or less noticeable? This is the only thing holding me back.



How wide is your room and how wide is your seating area? Also what size screen are you considering?


----------



## Kev1000000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Will Binegar*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2910#post_22136300
> 
> 
> The sample is representative of how the whole screen would behave, but it is probably more obvious when placed against a screen that has a wider viewing cone. If your objective is ambient light rejection with a wider viewing cone, take a look at the DNP Supernova. To my eyes there is very little drop-off in the 2.3 gain material (23-23) and seemingly none in the .8 gain material (08-85); plus the off angle view doesn't seem to have any color shift.



I have been trying to find the Supernova. Who sells it? Can I get samples?


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2910#post_22136635
> 
> 
> How wide is your room and how wide is your seating area? Also what size screen are you considering?



I am considering a 100" screen. The room width is about 15 feet, and we sit 13' back from the screen. The problem is, I have an L shaped couch that we use for seating, and the people on the top of the L have a pretty wide angle (about 100 degrees). Now, I know any light rejection screen will suffer at 100 degrees off axis, but the far side of the picture is nearly unviewable, at least on my 1.4 sample material from SI.


----------



## Mike Garrett

We are a DNP dealer, but getting samples is a problem. A DNP Supernova screen is not like sending out a screen sample from any other company.


----------



## Kev1000000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2910#post_22139369
> 
> 
> We are a DNP dealer, but getting samples is a problem. A DNP Supernova screen is not like sending out a screen sample from any other company.



What kind of price am I looking at for a 100"?


----------



## Mike Garrett

Call us.


----------



## Kev1000000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2910#post_22141793
> 
> 
> Call us.



Will do. Since other people may have the same question, what specifically about the Supernova makes it difficult to get samples?


----------



## Will Binegar

Unlke Stewart and Screen Innovations, DNP doesn't seem to have small samples of the material to send . The samples I've seen are like minature blackboards, maybe 24" diagonal complete with a frame. I'm lucky in that DNP has facility in Irvine, CA (about 40 minutes south of Los Angeles) so I was able to go have a demo on full sized screens. You could try the DNP site and look for dealers who are in your area; they may have a Supernova set up, or at least have a sample you could borrow.


----------



## dryeye

I ran into the same issue with the "blackboard" samples when I was researching for a screen. The dealer I talked to was across the country and wanted a few hundred dollar deposit on the sample while it was out of his hands!







Needless to say I didn't follow up. If getting a sample was that hard what kind of service could I expect if something went wrong with the order? SI and especially Tabitha have always been happy to send out samples. GIve them a call.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kev1000000*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2910#post_22142659
> 
> 
> Will do. Since other people may have the same question, what specifically about the Supernova makes it difficult to get samples?





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Will Binegar*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2910#post_22143307
> 
> 
> Unlke Stewart and Screen Innovations, DNP doesn't seem to have small samples of the material to send . The samples I've seen are like minature blackboards, maybe 24" diagonal complete with a frame. I'm lucky in that DNP has facility in Irvine, CA (about 40 minutes south of Los Angeles) so I was able to go have a demo on full sized screens. You could try the DNP site and look for dealers who are in your area; they may have a Supernova set up, or at least have a sample you could borrow.



Correct. A dealer has to place a healthy deposit to get a sample and it comes in a protective hard case. That is why the dealer wanted a deposit to send you the sample screen.


----------



## stlcity

Guys I have a Q for u: have the largest BD screen in 2.35:1. I am looking for a masking system for it. My installer said he does not know of any that works with the BD screen. I was wondering if anyone is using a masking system and if so which one...thanks in advance.


For anyone just considering the screen, for me it was a huge improvement in PQ compared to the regular white screen, specially if there is ambient light in the room...


----------



## Kev1000000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *stlcity*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2910#post_22156782
> 
> 
> For anyone just considering the screen, for me it was a huge improvement in PQ compared to the regular white screen, specially if there is ambient light in the room...



That is good to hear. Which gain do you have? How is the hotspotting and off-axis viewing? Those are my main two issues I am still hung up on after receiving my sample.


----------



## stlcity




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kev1000000*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2910#post_22157299
> 
> 
> That is good to hear. Which gain do you have? How is the hotspotting and off-axis viewing? Those are my main two issues I am still hung up on after receiving my sample.



Mine is 1.4. I have not noted any hotspotting yet. Paired with RS55. As far as off axis viewing: my room is pretty rectangular. So the seating arrangement is not too far from the center....I or anyone who has spent time watching stuff in the HT have not noticed any drop off from the center....hope it helps.


----------



## Kev1000000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *stlcity*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2910#post_22158221
> 
> 
> Mine is 1.4. I have not noted any hotspotting yet. Paired with RS55. As far as off axis viewing: my room is pretty rectangular. So the seating arrangement is not too far from the center....I or anyone who has spent time watching stuff in the HT have not noticed any drop off from the center....hope it helps.



I hate to ask, but is there any way you could take a picture of some off-axis shots? I want as much info as I can before I pull the trigger on something I can't physically see in person. If not, no worries.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kev1000000*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2910#post_22163056
> 
> 
> I hate to ask, but is there any way you could take a picture of some off-axis shots? I want as much info as I can before I pull the trigger on something I can't physically see in person. If not, no worries.



Unless he is very good with a camera, the picture will probably turn you off, regarding that screen. Hot spotting is a matter of screen size, lumen output and throw distance. When set up correctly the Black Diamond screens throw a nice image especially for rooms with ambient light.


----------



## Kev1000000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2910#post_22164975
> 
> 
> Unless he is very good with a camera, the picture will probably turn you off, regarding that screen. Hot spotting is a matter of screen size, lumen output and throw distance. When set up correctly the Black Diamond screens throw a nice image especially for rooms with ambient light.



Well regardless of setup, off-axis viewing should remain about the same, or am I mistaken?


I won't judge the overall quality of the picture. I would just like to see how much the picture brightness drops off from one edge of the screen to the other while viewing off-axis (around 90 degrees).


The problem with my setup is, I have a lot of ambient light, but also a wide-seating layout. I realize I will have to have some sort of tradeoff, but I am wondering whether to trade off some ambient light rejection or quality image from the side. If the off-axis viewing isn't too bad, then I can sacrifice some image quality for those guests. But with my sample, at the position where they would be seated, it looks nearly unwatchable. But then again, I only have a very small sample to make that assumption.


----------



## tomiy1

Hey guys, so i finally took the plunge into the front projection world for my family room and I went all in with it. (Black Diamond 92" G3 w/ the Panasonic PT-AE7000U Projector)

I got REALLY lucky on the screen... I got the screen unused & un-assembled from a guy on Craigslist for $760! ...now here's the bad part....it has a minor horizontal scratch on the bottom left portion.(1/2" or so) Also, there's a few really small dents but I'm definitely not as worried about those. I wanted to get some expert opinions from seasoned veterans in the front projection world to see if these issues are worth freaking out about. I haven't installed the screen or the projector in the family room yet, but I did try the Panasonic projector on the screen and BARELY noticed the small scratch. (only saw it when brighter colors were on the screen.. and when i say "saw it", i mean i had to really look for it) What do you guys think? Is it really worth going through all the trouble of replacing the entire screen just for that? Any help/suggestions would be greatly appreciated!


----------



## isisyodin

It is really up to you. I dont think the screen is going to fall apart or have any other issues than color variations in those places. The reflections may be quite noticeable depending on a variety of factors; i.e. viewing angle, image material, viewing distance, etc. I wouldn't be able to live with those spots, but I am extremely picky with all my gear.

The dents may be fixable or may disappear even over time. Other posters may have more suggestions.


----------



## dryeye

Unused and unassembled and at huge discount has the makings for being too good to be true. You mention buying it off craig's list. If the purchase was local try talking to seller about getting the screen replaced under warranty. Should be a free replacement for original owners in the first year of ownership for manufacturers defects.. You will need to provide some kind of proof of (original) purchase to the manufacturer for this warranty. Otherwise I believe a new screen runs 50% of list price. Good luck.


----------



## tomiy1

Thanks for the help guys! Honestly, I'm pretty OCD myself about gear (and anything actually), but the scratch is SO small and not noticeable that i may just keep it. (unless it bothers me later on) I dont feel like paying $1500 for a new screen film at the moment so ill just see how this works out. Thanks again


----------



## stlcity

Guys, have any of u used a masking solution with the BD screens? I have a 2.35 146"...when I asked about a masking solution for it, my installer told me that there is not one for the BD screens. Its not bad considering that the screen is gray and not white: but would love to mask it down if there is an option. Thanks in advance.


----------



## gadgetfreaky

Hey guys.. would love your advice. I am getting the Epson 5010, have a family room with white walls, ceilings and floor with a sliding glass door on one side of the room (5 feet from the left side of the seating area)


13 foot throw and 10.5' viewing distance.


I found on craigslist a guy locally selling a brand new 100" Zero edge 0.8 gain screen for $1,850 Is that a good deal?


I was hoping to wait for the motorized stealth black diamond, or was going to get the Da-Lite High power, or step up and pay for a Stewart Firehawk G3 (friend said he might be able to get a discount)


Should I pull the trigger on the zero edge? I originally had my older 50" panasonic plasma 50phd7uy hanging and wanted to drop a screen in front of the plasma for movies and when i wanted to watch. The plasma was for the kids cartoons etc.. However the zero edge is looking pretty damn good and maybe i put the plasma in my bedroom







. plus i get another 10" in viewing distance since i was a bit close to begin with


----------



## Kev1000000

Have you seen a sample of the BD 0.8? That is a fantastic deal, but keep in mind, the 0.8 material has a pretty small viewing angle. If this doesn't bother you, I would definitely pick it up. It's pretty much double that for a new BD ZE.


----------



## gadgetfreaky




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kev1000000*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2940#post_22261726
> 
> 
> Have you seen a sample of the BD 0.8? That is a fantastic deal, but keep in mind, the 0.8 material has a pretty small viewing angle. If this doesn't bother you, I would definitely pick it up. It's pretty much double that for a new BD ZE.



I didn't, but based on all the reviews I went ahead and pulled the trigger.. I hope to set it up by this weekend and will let you guys know what it looks like with a 5010! I'm pretty excited by the possibility at night it might look like a 100" plasma


----------



## Kev1000000

Good luck man, and congrats! Please report back. I am still debating between a DNP 08-85/23-23 or a BD 1.4 Zero Edge.


----------



## jslaw81




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gadgetfreaky*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2940#post_22264798
> 
> 
> I didn't, but based on all the reviews I went ahead and pulled the trigger.. I hope to set it up by this weekend and will let you guys know what it looks like with a 5010! I'm pretty excited by the possibility at night it might look like a 100" plasma



You will love it.. I have a 100" Black Diamond .8 gain fixed screen with the Epson 5010 and I love it. I've had the BD screen since April. Definitely gives that plasma like picture. I had a cheap screen before and once I added the BD it was a night and day difference. I have it setup in my living room which has off white walls, and black out curtains.


----------



## DP13

Wow, I haven't been on the forum since I bought my BD screen about 4 years ago shortly after their initial release.


I have a lot of catching up to do.


Have they fixed the vertical lines on the screens? When I bought mine, that was an ongoing issue. Many got their screens replaced and I was promised I would get mine replaced, but I never got a final e-mail response from the sales rep at SI. He did communicate with me saying that they issue was being fixed, but never gave me the news that I would get mine replaced. Bummer. Hopefully they got the issue resolved.


Well, let me start reading and catching up.


----------



## Skylinestar

Where do you guys bought the BD screen from? Is the price at projectorpeople.com normal (look expensive to me)?


----------



## gadgetfreaky

I'm a BIG believer in this.. my zero edge 100" screen .8 gain is absolutely gorgeous and viewable even during the day with all the window blinds open in a perfectly bright room the TV looks good. At night it's jaw dropping.


I got a killer deal on craigslist!!


----------



## tekbud

Anyone finding themselves using the more dynamic options on their pjs with these screens and turning lights on for movies, simply because you can? I didn't realize before just how dark my man cave was and am really enjoying some light! These things are awesome. Just bought a 106" g3 and am loving it!.


----------



## tekbud




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *isisyodin*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2880#post_22015572
> 
> 
> 
> This is an interesting conclusion. I don't have a BD but seriously considering one; however, no calibration capabilities would a deal breaker for me.
> 
> 
> I wonder if it is because on a FPJ screen meters measure the reflected light at an angle and the BD is supposed to mitigate all reflected light at angles greater than the typical viewing ones.
> 
> 
> I am interested to know more. My JVC RS50 has a built in reflectivity index for SI, but I am not sure if it is for the BD. Real live experiences and feedback would be nice, anyone?



I'm no calibration expert, but I've had good success calibrating the epsons in the past with a standard 1.0 gain elite screen. I bought a BD 1.4 g3 a few weeks ago. I'm having difficulty dialing it in. Seems no matter what I do it's still over saturated. I'm using theater1 settings on my 8500ub for night time viewing with complete light control. I wouldn't use theater1 for daytime viewing in my opinion you still have to have a day and night config.


Using dynamic for daytime heck even in the dark it looks fantastic. Used to be it would be totally washed out dynamic but the blacks and contrast are nuts . I'm not noticing any color shifts either. Of course I haven't calibrated dynamic besides brightness and contrast but I'm thinking about just leaving it alone for day and night viewing because it just looks beautiful. Anyone else have similar experiences? I hesitate to even calibrate it for fear it won't be good...


----------



## isisyodin

Great to hear. Epsons are typically very bright, so I can imagine with the BD it must be almost like looking at an LCD screen. My JVC RS50 has only 900 lumens or there about when calibrated, so it should help, but I would think I will not be able to have the same amount of ambient light as you.

I was about to get one, but I am currently in the process of moving to sunny South FLA. Once I find a house with HT potential, I will probably get one.


----------



## Mike Garrett

Only a few more days before I get to see the new Electric G3 Black Diamond at CEDIA 2012. Really looking forward to seeing this screen. Would love to have one of these in my family room.


----------



## trgraphics

I own a monoprice grey screen that is supposed to be 1 gain. If I get the 1.4 from SI woill I see a noticable jump in brightness? I have my dual W7000 setup in my family room with beige walls. Not a whole lot of light, blackout curtains control the light very nicely.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *trgraphics*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2940#post_22367383
> 
> 
> I own a monoprice grey screen that is supposed to be 1 gain. If I get the 1.4 from SI woill I see a noticable jump in brightness? I have my dual W7000 setup in my family room with beige walls. Not a whole lot of light, blackout curtains control the light very nicely.



You will see a noticeable improvement in brightness going to the Black Diamond.


----------



## trgraphics

Well a shop just a block away gave me a great price on the 108" 1.4 zero edge that I just could not pass up. They are delivery it tomorrow and I will give my impressions once I get it hung. Very excited to see this in action with my dual W7000 setup. It looked great in the showroom especially in 3d. One thing I looked for was the sparklies I have read about, but I didn't see anything like that and the viewing angle was quite wide as well even with the lights on. Very impressive.


----------



## trgraphics

I got the screen on the wall this morning and all I can say is"WOW".


The difference is night and day in my family room with the light colored walls and ceiling. I can now watch a movie or sports without being in the dark or what was close to dark with all the reflection from the screen I was getting before. The amount of light coming off the screen is reduced considerably, not gone, but much better than before.


As far as perceived black level, it is much better than my old screen. I draped my old monoprice grey screen over the zero edge to make a comparison of the blacks and there is no comparison. The image is brighter and the blacks are noticeably darker. I am very happy with my dual W7000 setup. I watched a bit of Fright Night, which is a dark 3d film, and that is what really sold me on this new screen. Shadow detail is fantastic and I get a good boost in brightness as well.. I had my doubts that this screen would make this much difference, but it truly does what they claim.


Thanks to most everyone in this thread for convincing me to give it a try. It is a lot of money for a screen, but if your stuck in a room with light colored walls, it is well worth the price.


----------



## studlygoorite

I just posted my 142" Black Diamond Scope Screen in the classifieds if interested.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *studlygoorite*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2940#post_22387930
> 
> 
> I just posted my 142" Black Diamond Scope Screen in the classifieds if interested.



What are you looking to go to?


----------



## mtp78

Looking to do my first projector/screen in my basment. Been looking around for the last few months. I do have some ambient light in my basement from two sets of large windows.


Was interested in the SI Diamond zero edge fixed screen, I have also been looking at the Stewart Firefox. Looking for a screen around 100 " and a 14 ft viewing disctance in an open media room. Thinking of using an epson 6020 or new sony ew50 to drive the image.


Any thoughts to the major differences to these two screens? I also see at cedia that SI came out with a G2 screen that has backlighting, Very cool


Thanks your the help.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mtp78*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2940#post_22396195
> 
> 
> Looking to do my first projector/screen in my basment. Been looking around for the last few months. I do have some ambient light in my basement from two sets of large windows.
> 
> Was interested in the SI Diamond zero edge fixed screen, I have also been looking at the Stewart Firefox. Looking for a screen around 100 " and a 14 ft viewing disctance in an open media room. Thinking of using an epson 6020 or new sony ew50 to drive the image.
> 
> Any thoughts to the major differences to these two screens? I also see at cedia that SI came out with a G2 screen that has backlighting, Very cool
> 
> Thanks your the help.



With a 14' viewing distance I would go with a larger screen than a 100" if you can. What is your throw distance? Need to keep the throw ratio in mind so you do not have to worry about hot spots. Both the 5020 and the HW50 will light up either of those screens nicely. If you have some specific questions, shoot us an email.


----------



## mtp78

Thanks for the replie Mike,


I am not sure what throw distance is, Is that the distance the projector will be from the screen? If so it would be about 15ft. How big a screen would you recommend? I have room...ceiling height is 8 ft, width is about 14 ft.. I wanted some room on each side of the screen for lighting or speakers. .


I was wondering if you think its worth spending the money for the new sony or just go with the 5020 ?



Thanks


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mtp78*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2940#post_22397251
> 
> 
> Thanks for the replie Mike,
> 
> I am not sure what throw distance is, Is that the distance the projector will be from the screen? If so it would be about 15ft. How big a screen would you recommend? I have room...ceiling height is 8 ft, width is about 14 ft.. I wanted some room on each side of the screen for lighting or speakers. .
> 
> I was wondering if you think its worth spending the money for the new sony or just go with the 5020 ?
> 
> Thanks



Throw distance is the horizontal distance from projector lens to screen. With 14' viewing and 15' throw, if you have room for a screen larger than 100" then I would go larger. If you would like to discuss the pros and cons of the various setup options, give us a call.


----------



## Special FX_45

Anyone know when SI is releasing their motorized BD screens? Anyone know what sizes they will come in? I would love a 119" or 120" version.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Special FX_45*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2940#post_22401117
> 
> 
> Anyone know when SI is releasing their motorized BD screens? Anyone know what sizes they will come in? I would love a 119" or 120" version.



Around 45 to 60 days for the screen to start shipping. Current 16:9 diagonal sizes:


80"

92"

100"

106"

110"


Later (Q1 2013) there will be 16:10, 2.35 and 2.40 screen sizes. If you need any more information give us a call.


----------



## jslaw81

Question for you guys, I have a 100" Black Diamond fixed g3 .8 gain screen and on one side the vertical part of the frame goes out a little bit past where it meets the horizontal piece. Is that normal or should each piece fit flush with nothing pointing out? Should I reconnect that side? Thanks for the help.


----------



## mrvegas1

Hey guys, I have a question. My theater room is about 14' wide by 22 deep. Ceiling height is 8.5 feet. I have an RS1 mounted about 13' from front wall and first riser (main seating area) is about 14' from front wall. My neighbor has same size room with an RS60 and a 135" Stewart perforated screen. My screen is a Stewart 110" diagonal and seems puny by comparison. If I upgrade to a screen about as big as his, can I still get decent performance from my RS1? Will I have to move it further back from the front wall?


----------



## mlg33

Hello,


First post in this awesome forum !










I have a question about the Black Diamond. I was wondering which screen you would prescribe for a regular living room with whites walls and ceiling, knowing that I only watch movies in a dark atmosphere, just leaving a blue tainted glow on.


I also want to watch some 3D content.

I'm looking forward to buying the X35 or 55 JVC.


Is a 0.8 gain good enough ?

Or is it too dim for 3D ?

And, if I need the 1.4 gain, will I have hot spots or texturing (sparkles) issue ?


Thank you.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mlg33*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2970#post_22429222
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> First post in this awesome forum !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have a question about the Black Diamond. I was wondering which screen you would prescribe for a regular living room with whites walls and ceiling, knowing that I only watch movies in a dark atmosphere, just leaving a blue tainted glow on.
> 
> I also want to watch some 3D content.
> 
> I'm looking forward to buying the X35 or 55 JVC.
> 
> Is a 0.8 gain good enough ?
> 
> Or is it too dim for 3D ?
> 
> And, if I need the 1.4 gain, will I have hot spots or texturing (sparkles) issue ?
> 
> Thank you.



What projector are you using? What is your throw distance and what is your viewing distance?


----------



## mlg33

Well, that's the interrogation point.


I'm in a research mode for now, since I do not have any VP in my possession.

I'm looking at the new JVCs X_5.


My throw distance and my viewing distance are not yet determined either.

I have not yet moved from my place. Looking forward to though.










But I'm aiming for a 80" or 92" diagonal max.

3 or 4 meters for viewing distance.

And 6 or 7 m maximum for throwing distance.

Suppose I buy the X35, should I pick the 0.8 or the 1.4 ?


Black levels are really important to me. My wife and I should be in front of the screen (no need for very wide viewing angles).


And last annoying point, I live in France.










Thanks for the reply.


----------



## BlakeSI

The .8 Black Diamond material should serve you well at 80" to 100". If you decide to go up past a 106" then the 1.4 would be a better choice.


----------



## BlakeSI

There is no need to mask a Black Diamond. The materials are self masking. Check out the video for the Zero Edge and you will see a 2:35 screen, back-lit with 16:9 content and I am sure you will deduce there is not need to mask.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *stlcity*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2940#post_22245297
> 
> 
> Guys, have any of u used a masking solution with the BD screens? I have a 2.35 146"...when I asked about a masking solution for it, my installer told me that there is not one for the BD screens. Its not bad considering that the screen is gray and not white: but would love to mask it down if there is an option. Thanks in advance.



There is no need to mask a Black Diamond .8 or 1.4 material. The material is self masking. Check out the videos for the Zero Edge. There are several shots of a 2:35 BD with 16:9 content in a dark room with the screen back lit.


----------



## trgraphics

I have had my 108" zero edge 1.4 screen for a few weeks now but I have to disagree about masking. I think it depends on your projector for the need or not for masking. I have a dual benq W7000 and it could use masking. Don't get me wrong, it is much better then a standard screen when it comes to the need for masking but it is not black with my setup. With the zero edge, I am wondering how to do masking without a frame to hold it in place. I had the monoprice adj. aspect screen and got used to having masking for films. It really does make a differnce.


----------



## Audiojan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mlg33*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2970#post_22429222
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> First post in this awesome forum !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have a question about the Black Diamond. I was wondering which screen you would prescribe for a regular living room with whites walls and ceiling, knowing that I only watch movies in a dark atmosphere, just leaving a blue tainted glow on.
> 
> I also want to watch some 3D content.
> 
> I'm looking forward to buying the X35 or 55 JVC.
> 
> Is a 0.8 gain good enough ?
> 
> Or is it too dim for 3D ?
> 
> And, if I need the 1.4 gain, will I have hot spots or texturing (sparkles) issue ?
> 
> Thank you.



I have almost the identical question, hence the quotation... I currently have a Pioneer Elite PRO-FPJ1 (which is same as the JVC RS-2U) with a Black Diamond first generation 0.8 screen. The picture is great, but eventually I may want to change to a 3D projector. Can I still use my screen? I would hate to have to change that as well... BD's are on the expensive side and if I would have to change that as well as getting a new projector, it might blow the budget... The new projector would be another JVC D-ILA, but I don't know which one (and it's still a bit out in time)


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *trgraphics*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2970#post_22433501
> 
> 
> I have had my 108" zero edge 1.4 screen for a few weeks now but I have to disagree about masking. I think it depends on your projector for the need or not for masking. I have a dual benq W7000 and it could use masking. Don't get me wrong, it is much better then a standard screen when it comes to the need for masking but it is not black with my setup. With the zero edge, I am wondering how to do masking without a frame to hold it in place. I had the monoprice adj. aspect screen and got used to having masking for films. It really does make a differnce.



I agree. Depending on the projector, the “black” bars can be anything from gray to very dark gray.


It's good enough for me because I'm not fussy, but I don't think that a hard core home theater enthusiast who wants inky black borders would consider the BD screens to be self masking.


----------



## mlg33




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Audiojan*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2970#post_22435447
> 
> 
> I have almost the identical question, hence the quotation... I currently have a Pioneer Elite PRO-FPJ1 (which is same as the JVC RS-2U) with a Black Diamond first generation 0.8 screen. The picture is great, but eventually I may want to change to a 3D projector. Can I still use my screen? I would hate to have to change that as well... BD's are on the expensive side and if I would have to change that as well as getting a new projector, it might blow the budget... The new projector would be another JVC D-ILA, but I don't know which one (and it's still a bit out in time)


I would say try and see.

Depending on your viewing distance and throw distance and the screen size, but you shouldn't buy a 1.4 until you have tried with the 0.8.


Besides, I have a question regarding the G3 1.4 BDs. Some say there are many problems with it. Like in bright scenes, there's a pink, or a shift in whites colors....

Is this true ? Is there some texturing issue, like sparkles or equivalent ?


Thank you.


----------



## Audiojan

Well... try and see is not the answer I hoped for... I don't want to spend money on a 3D projector and then find out I have to shell out another couple of grand to replace the screen.... I kind of remember reading somewhere that the Black Diamond first generation screens do not work for 3D (something about polarization), but I could be wrong.... that's my actual question I guess.


I do realize that a 0.8 might be a bit dark for 3D, but my screen is only 100" and we're about 15' away from it in a light controlled room. The Pioneer FPJ1 is a nice projector, but it was never known to have very good light output... yet it's working just fine for me now... and the newer JVC's are substantially brighter, so maybe the 0.8 will work... that is if it technically will work...


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Audiojan*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2970#post_22438719
> 
> 
> Well... try and see is not the answer I hoped for... ..................................
> 
> I do realize that a 0.8 might be a bit dark for 3D, but my screen is only 100" and we're about 15' away from it in a light controlled room. .......



I have a 100", .8 BD that I use with an Epson 5010 and the 3D picture is very good - not the least bit dark.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Audiojan*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2970#post_22435447
> 
> 
> I have almost the identical question, hence the quotation... I currently have a Pioneer Elite PRO-FPJ1 (which is same as the JVC RS-2U) with a Black Diamond first generation 0.8 screen. The picture is great, but eventually I may want to change to a 3D projector. Can I still use my screen? I would hate to have to change that as well... BD's are on the expensive side and if I would have to change that as well as getting a new projector, it might blow the budget... The new projector would be another JVC D-ILA, but I don't know which one (and it's still a bit out in time)



What size is your 0.8 gain BD screen? Also if you do need more gain, i would look into replacing the screen material, rather than the whole screen.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Audiojan*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2970#post_22438719
> 
> 
> Well... try and see is not the answer I hoped for... I don't want to spend money on a 3D projector and then find out I have to shell out another couple of grand to replace the screen.... I kind of remember reading somewhere that the Black Diamond first generation screens do not work for 3D (something about polarization), but I could be wrong.... that's my actual question I guess.
> 
> I do realize that a 0.8 might be a bit dark for 3D, but my screen is only 100" and we're about 15' away from it in a light controlled room. The Pioneer FPJ1 is a nice projector, but it was never known to have very good light output... yet it's working just fine for me now... and the newer JVC's are substantially brighter, so maybe the 0.8 will work... that is if it technically will work...



With one of the newer JVC's you should be between 9 and 10 Foot Lamberts for 3D. In a good room that will be a lot brighter than what you see at the movie theater.


----------



## Audiojan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2970#post_22439640
> 
> 
> What size is your 0.8 gain BD screen? Also if you do need more gain, i would look into replacing the screen material, rather than the whole screen.



100"... and the room is not perfectly light controlled, but still very dark.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Audiojan*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2970#post_22440247
> 
> 
> 100"... and the room is not perfectly light controlled, but still very dark.



With that size and gain screen 3D will still be pretty good.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Audiojan*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2970#post_22438719
> 
> 
> Well... try and see is not the answer I hoped for... I don't want to spend money on a 3D projector and then find out I have to shell out another couple of grand to replace the screen.... I kind of remember reading somewhere that the Black Diamond first generation screens do not work for 3D (something about polarization), but I could be wrong.... that's my actual question I guess.
> 
> I do realize that a 0.8 might be a bit dark for 3D, but my screen is only 100" and we're about 15' away from it in a light controlled room. The Pioneer FPJ1 is a nice projector, but it was never known to have very good light output... yet it's working just fine for me now... and the newer JVC's are substantially brighter, so maybe the 0.8 will work... that is if it technically will work...



I typically suggest using the BD 1.4 material with Active 3D due to the light loss when in 3D mode.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2970#post_22439640
> 
> 
> What size is your 0.8 gain BD screen? Also if you do need more gain, i would look into replacing the screen material, rather than the whole screen.



If you get a bright enough projector the active 3D on the BD8 works fine. I know i have one at home with a JVC RS70 on a 100" BD .8 G2. The new JVC line are a little bit brighter than mine so on a 100" BD.8 you should be fine.


FYI- it is pretty easy to swap out BD materials as the bungee and post system can move to the holes punched in the screen material.


----------



## mlg33

Hi again and hello Blake,


Would you recommend a BD in a non dedicated room with whites walls and ceiling, knowing that I only watch movies in the dark ?


In France, the only BD material I could get is a 1.4 G3 80" zero edge for more than 4000$ !

You should take that into account too... :/


----------



## dvzzz

Can anyone confirm if BD Fixed 1.4 can be successfully taken down, disassembled and shipped. I am looking to buy one but I may need to be moving a lot so moving a large BD screen assembled is not practical but all manuals say that you cannot even touch bare material ungloved, thus how can anyone pack it to ship? I know SI can do it, but do I need to hire SI to pack every time I move? Do they have packing supplies that they sell?

Thanks for the help.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mlg33*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2970#post_22444219
> 
> 
> Hi again and hello Blake,
> 
> Would you recommend a BD in a non dedicated room with whites walls and ceiling, knowing that I only watch movies in the dark ?
> 
> In France, the only BD material I could get is a 1.4 G3 80" zero edge for more than 4000$ !
> 
> You should take that into account too... :/



First, we have distribution in France so i am not sure why you are limited in your selection of BD. Given you are in a non dedicated room with white walls then i would definitely recommend a Black Diamond do to reduced light scatter. The room will be at least 65% darker because of the reduced light scatter from the screen and with white walls that's a pretty big deal. You also have a measured 900% improvement of contrast so even in a dark room you screens blacks will be blacker.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dvzzz*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2970#post_22450171
> 
> 
> Can anyone confirm if BD Fixed 1.4 can be successfully taken down, disassembled and shipped. I am looking to buy one but I may need to be moving a lot so moving a large BD screen assembled is not practical but all manuals say that you cannot even touch bare material ungloved, thus how can anyone pack it to ship? I know SI can do it, but do I need to hire SI to pack every time I move? Do they have packing supplies that they sell?
> 
> Thanks for the help.



I often have to re pack a BD Fixed screen when traveling for training's . We can send you new re pack materials, box and foam if you need it. The trick is to get a very tight role on the screen material. If the role is to loose then the material can "tunnel" or go "egg shape" and that is not good.


You can face the materials down on a soft bed sheet and then role that up together around a 6" tube. Just be sure to use something soft and not to use foam or bubble wrap on the screen materials.


----------



## Lace Vandorn

The only problem i have with black diamond screens is,,, SI don't offer any standard fixed screens in 16:9 over 113"

I can't use the zero edge because i don't have any chance to get it into my room ^^

I know people who brought their zero edge with a crane through the window but...i can't do that eather 

But a 16:9 150" Black diamond fixed would still be very nice










greets Lace


----------



## Will Binegar




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mlg33*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2970#post_22438673
> 
> 
> I would say try and see.
> 
> Depending on your viewing distance and throw distance and the screen size, but you shouldn't buy a 1.4 until you have tried with the 0.8.
> 
> Besides, I have a question regarding the G3 1.4 BDs. Some say there are many problems with it. Like in bright scenes, there's a pink, or a shift in whites colors....
> 
> Is this true ? Is there some texturing issue, like sparkles or equivalent ?
> 
> Thank you.



I did see some color shift, especially as you move a bit off angle, with the Black Diamond samples I had. That might be fixable with projector calibration.


----------



## Qualunquemente

Just got a Black Diamond Zero 110" 21/9 0.8 and yes blacks now are superb but I'm experiencing UNIFORMITY problems: the upper part of the screen is way dimmer then the bottom part.

Projector center lens is about 3,61 feets (110 cm) from the floor while screen bottom base and my head are both at 3,28 feets (100 cm) from the floor and viewing distance is about 13 feets (4m).

How can I better uniformity ?




PS: projector is TrueVue Vango and while projecting on a white wall uniformity was perfect ...


----------



## Darkstar757

I currently have a 73inch mits and Im thinking of moving to a projector with a BD screen.


Do I have a chance with this room layout?


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Qualunquemente*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2970#post_22482872
> 
> 
> Just got a Black Diamond Zero 110" 21/9 0.8 and yes blacks now are superb but I'm experiencing UNIFORMITY problems: the upper part of the screen is way dimmer then the bottom part.
> 
> Projector center lens is about 3,61 feets (110 cm) from the floor while screen bottom base and my head are both at 3,28 feets (100 cm) from the floor and viewing distance is about 13 feets (4m).
> 
> How can I better uniformity ?
> 
> PS: projector is TrueVue Vango and while projecting on a white wall uniformity was perfect ...



If you place a projector more than a foot (12") above the frame of the BD then the bottom of the screen will reject the light as ambient light.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Darkstar757*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2970#post_22496123
> 
> 
> I currently have a 73inch mits and Im thinking of moving to a projector with a BD screen.
> 
> Do I have a chance with this room layout?



Just eyeballing it but a 92" Zero Edge hanging from our cable system would look really good in that room. Depending on the projector you could go with our Black Diamond .8 as your viewing cone is very narrow.


----------



## Lawguy

My three year old threw a toy that landed pretty much right in the center of my Black Diamond. It is now dented, scuffed, and basically ruined. Ugh.


----------



## Elite Benito




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2970#post_22507631
> 
> 
> My three year old threw a toy that landed pretty much right in the center of my Black Diamond. It is now dented, scuffed, and basically ruined. Ugh.



have you considered upgrading into a 5 year old....j/k lawguy. i have a 2 year old and have a multipurpose room type set up. i know my day is coming when i come home to ruined towers or something similar......


Benito


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Elite Benito*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3000#post_22508674
> 
> 
> have you considered upgrading into a 5 year old....j/k lawguy. i have a 2 year old and have a multipurpose room type set up. i know my day is coming when i come home to ruined towers or something similar......
> 
> Benito



It is really my own fault and the Black Diamond's too!


This screen is used in a lit room, not a secure dedicated theater, and the kids use it all the time. So, something like this was bound to happen. It's not as bad as when my oldest was younger and she pressed in the tweeter on every single speaker like they were buttons.


I still love the BD so I'll probably just buy another one. I'm looking around right now, is there any competition yet for the lit room application? Maybe I'll just throw an 80"flat panel in that room. That'as more than I want to spend and still like front projection. I dunno.


----------



## Screen Innovatio




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lawguy*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3000#post_22510891
> 
> 
> It is really my own fault and the Black Diamond's too!
> 
> This screen is used in a lit room, not a secure dedicated theater, and the kids use it all the time. So, something like this was bound to happen. It's not as bad as when my oldest was younger and she pressed in the tweeter on every single speaker like they were buttons.
> 
> I still love the BD so I'll probably just buy another one. I'm looking around right now, is there any competition yet for the lit room application? Maybe I'll just throw an 80"flat panel in that room. That'as more than I want to spend and still like front projection. I dunno.



Did your screen get damaged? If so please contact [email protected]


----------



## Lawguy

I'll email her. It's out of warranty but anything you can do is great. Thanks.


----------



## Skylinestar

How's the packaging of the BD? Is it packed like a tank?


----------



## spuj

Edited.


----------



## Project H

Are there any clearance or open box screens available at screen innovations?


----------



## Sonyad

I've seen a couple of BD screens on clearance at a local Best Buy. They were running about $1000, but I don't know the going price for these screens.


----------



## Future Vision

My only options might be the Firehawk since I need a motorized and HC screen for my living room with light walls and celing, I'm able to darken the room but want to decrease the light scatter.

Am I stupid to go for Firehawk, It's >5 years old and I think they might upgrade it sooner or later.

Anyway, why I have decided to buy the Stewart is mainly for the money, since I need a motorized screen I'm looking at 18500$ for DNP, 11000$ for BD and (only) 7000$ for FH.

That is still a lot of money, and that's why I want to be sure. I can't see for my self, since there is nowhere for me to see those screen in a surrounding close to mine.

Why I ask is because I've been reading quite much for the last months and I'm getting mixed up about all the pros and cons, (everyone) have a different angle on how they see it.

I know this is hard to answer, since it depends on that I'm able to see, mounting issues and throw distance and so on, but anyway, I'm hoping some answer will help me enough to make a decision.

I'm probably gonna match the screen with Sony HW50ES. My throwing distance is only 1.55 and the lens will be 8" above the top of the screen and 110" in size.



Thanks all...


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Future Vision*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3000#post_22564607
> 
> 
> My only options might be the Firehawk since I need a motorized and HC screen for my living room with light walls and celing, I'm able to darken the room but want to decrease the light scatter.
> 
> Am I stupid to go for Firehawk, It's >5 years old and I think they might upgrade it sooner or later.
> 
> Anyway, why I have decided to buy the Stewart is mainly for the money, since I need a motorized screen I'm looking at 18500$ for DNP, 11000$ for BD and (only) 7000$ for FH.
> 
> That is still a lot of money, and that's why I want to be sure. I can't see for my self, since there is nowhere for me to see those screen in a surrounding close to mine.
> 
> Why I ask is because I've been reading quite much for the last months and I'm getting mixed up about all the pros and cons, (everyone) have a different angle on how they see it.
> 
> I know this is hard to answer, since it depends on that I'm able to see, mounting issues and throw distance and so on, but anyway, I'm hoping some answer will help me enough to make a decision.
> 
> I'm probably gonna match the screen with Sony HW50ES. My throwing distance is only 1.55 and the lens will be 8" above the top of the screen and 110" in size.
> 
> Thanks all...



Whether a Firehawk will give you the results that you want depends on your room and all of the efforts that you make to control the kind and direction of light that you have there.


See my BD review, which has some pictures of the Firehawk.

http://www.videovantage.com/?p=937 


Here is a pic of the BD and Firehawk together.

 


Keep in mind that with that pic there is no light shining directly on the screen, so if you have stray light, the FH will look worse.


----------



## Future Vision

Thanks, I will most of the time use curtains to block out any sun, but I want to decrease the light scatter that I get with a normal white screen.

Since my walls and ceiling are white I get a lot of reflection from any white screen, I had a 1.3 gain and I didn't like that since the whole room went lit.


----------



## mat57

I have a dedicated theater room with controlled lighting. The seating is 11-12 feet from the front wall and the ceiling is 10 feet high. I am planning to purchase the soon to be released JVC DLA-RS56 projector and I am trying to decide on a screen choice. I have been advised to consider the Stewart Studiotek 130 or the SI Black Diamond Zero Edge G2. I was considering a screen size with a diagonal dimension of 100 to 106 inches.


Any recommendations between these two options? Ambient light is not a concern. For the black diamond screen, what gain do you recommend? Is the LED lighting worth getting? Does the LED lighting distract or enhance viewing? Any recommendations on wall mounting versus ceiling cables?


Finally, do you recommend 16:9 or 2.35:1? If one chooses, 2.35:1, does that mean when I watch most movies or HD TV (e.g. sports) will there be black panels on the screen to reformat the image to 16:9 or can I fill or stretch the image to fill the entire screen? If the image is reformatted to fill the 2.35 format, is that a distorted image?


Thanks.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mat57*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3000#post_22570669
> 
> 
> I have a dedicated theater room with controlled lighting. The seating is 11-12 feet from the front wall and the ceiling is 10 feet high. I am planning to purchase the soon to be released JVC DLA-RS56 projector and I am trying to decide on a screen choice. I have been advised to consider the Stewart Studiotek 130 or the SI Black Diamond Zero Edge G2. I was considering a screen size with a diagonal dimension of 100 to 106 inches.
> 
> Any recommendations between these two options? Ambient light is not a concern. For the black diamond screen, what gain do you recommend? Is the LED lighting worth getting? Does the LED lighting distract or enhance viewing? Any recommendations on wall mounting versus ceiling cables?
> 
> Finally, do you recommend 16:9 or 2.35:1? If one chooses, 2.35:1, does that mean when I watch most movies or HD TV (e.g. sports) will there be black panels on the screen to reformat the image to 16:9 or can I fill or stretch the image to fill the entire screen? If the image is reformatted to fill the 2.35 format, is that a distorted image?
> 
> Thanks.



The answer to your question comes down to your viewing habits and certain other room features.



What color are your walls and ceilings? Have you taken measures to control reflections? Do you like to watch with the lights on? How much of the time will you watch with lights on?


White screens like the Stuidotek can compromise contrast if you do not control reflections. If your room lights up when you turn the projector on, you need to do a better job with reflections.

But, if you control reflections and mostly watch in a dark room, you really can't go wrong with the Studiotek 130.


The BD gives you much more flexibility than the Studiotek. You don't have to be a slave to your room. But, it does come at a cost. You will sometimes see a bit of texture from the screen, especially on brighter scenes. And, you have decreased viewing angles as compared to the Studiotek.


I am biased because I like the BD so much but I understand that it is not for people who do not share my priorities (maximizing contrast, keeping the lights on).


My experience is with the .8 BD. With your projector, I would not go larger than 100" with that gain. Also, I have only seen the Zero Edge at Best Buy so I can't comment on it much. Personally, I would avoid the bias lights but that is just an aesthetic choice on my part. With very bright displays (like flat panels), you can get a headache when watching in a dark room. Bias lights brighten up the room and makes it more comfortable to watch. Front Projection doesn't really have the problem but some people think it looks cool.


Aspect ratio is your choice. There is no right answer. If you mostly watch movies, you might want the scope option. But, your room seems kind of shallow and you may not have the throw distance to make it work properly.


----------



## mikedcc

I plan on buying a 144" BD 2.35 zero edge in a few days... my throw distance is going to be around 17' w/ a new Panasonic ae8000.


Is this too far away for a .8 gain screen, should I go with the 1.4? I'd prefer the .8 for the black levels but I fear shooting a 144" image from 17' is just too much, even with this projector being as bright as it is. If it matters, my room is blacked out at night and there is some very small ambient light from curtained windows behind the seats during the day. Also, the walls are dark brown and the ceiling is white


Thanks


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mikedcc*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3000#post_22580550
> 
> 
> I plan on buying a 144" BD 2.35 zero edge in a few days... my throw distance is going to be around 17' w/ a new Panasonic ae8000.
> 
> Is this too far away for a .8 gain screen, should I go with the 1.4? I'd prefer the .8 for the black levels but I fear shooting a 144" image from 17' is just too much, even with this projector being as bright as it is. If it matters, my room is blacked out at night and there is some very small ambient light from curtained windows behind the seats during the day. Also, the walls are dark brown and the ceiling is white
> 
> Thanks



I used our Screen material tool http://www.screeninnovations.com/tools/screen-wizard/ on our web site and a BD 1.4 gain is recommended for your light output and screen size with a minimal amount of light in the room. Also if you ever plan to use 3D the 1.4 gain is almost always recommended do to 3D light loss.


----------



## mikedcc




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3000#post_22590700
> 
> 
> I used our Screen material tool http://www.screeninnovations.com/tools/screen-wizard/ on our web site and a BD 1.4 gain is recommended for your light output and screen size with a minimal amount of light in the room. Also if you ever plan to use 3D the 1.4 gain is almost always recommended do to 3D light loss.



thanks for the help! I went ahead and ordered from AVS... looking forward to it arriving now


----------



## xtrips

Hello,


I need an advice please, I am very impressed with the way BD screens almost do not scatter light in the room and also that you don't need masking.

But i wonder if I really need a BD screen to achieve that or I can settle with other brands/material and get the same result.

The reason why I wonder is because my room has no ambient light. The ceiling is pitch mat black. The walls are very dark gray. Only the floor is dark maple wood.

No windows, no source of light, no furniture.

What do you think?


----------



## studlygoorite




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *xtrips*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3000#post_22594999
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I need an advice please, I am very impressed with the way BD screens almost do not scatter light in the room and also that you don't need masking.
> 
> But i wonder if I really need a BD screen to achieve that or I can settle with other brands/material and get the same result.
> 
> The reason why I wonder is because my room has no ambient light. The ceiling is pitch mat black. The walls are very dark gray. Only the floor is dark maple wood.
> 
> No windows, no source of light, no furniture.
> 
> What do you think?



Xtrips, I switched from my 144" BD to a Seymour 174" while having a Da Lite before those and can tell you that the BD was worth every penny, I have dark flat walls and my Seymour throws a lot more light back at them than the BD did and now I am thinking of making my walls and everything else darker because because of it. That said, the video they show of the light, or lack there of, reflecting off of the screen is a little deceiving as it still illuminated my room quite a bit but not as much as other screens, still worth it just for the ambient light rejection and remember, the light bouncing off of the screen around the room is ambient light bouncing back onto the screen.


----------



## DLopatin

Looking at building a new house with a dedicated theater room. The room I am looking at would be 23.5 x 14.5 x 9' height, and I would use two rows of seating. I should be able to control most of (if not all of) the light. Would like to use the largest screen possible, but don't want to screw around with an anamorphic lense. Would the 115" Black Diamond 1.4 16:9 zero edge work well? Is it too small for the room or when watching 2:35 content? I don't have a projector yet, but would likely consider one of the new JVC models. I would also like to watch some 3D.


I know there are larger Black Diamond screens in the 2:35 ratio. I wouldn't be opposed to using one of these, but I don't want to use an anamorphic lense and I am concerned about finding a reasonably priced projector which would be able to properly illuminate the screen.


Any suggestions for a room this size?


There is also another room which is 17.5 x 14 x 10' but I figured the above room was better as it was closer to the golden ratio.


Thanks for your help!


----------



## programmergeek

I use a 113" BD in a 35x25 room. Tape it up on the wall and see how you like it. I could do bigger but I really like the image off the 1.4 BD and paired with a epson 6020 at 3500 lumins is plenty bright. I find the JVC a bit to dim especally for 3d.


----------



## programmergeek




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *xtrips*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3000_100#post_22594999
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I need an advice please, I am very impressed with the way BD screens almost do not scatter light in the room and also that you don't need masking.
> 
> But i wonder if I really need a BD screen to achieve that or I can settle with other brands/material and get the same result.
> 
> The reason why I wonder is because my room has no ambient light. The ceiling is pitch mat black. The walls are very dark gray. Only the floor is dark maple wood.
> 
> No windows, no source of light, no furniture.
> 
> What do you think?



Besides what you mentioned above, I see very little grain and no hot spotting with the BD and the blacks are awesome and the whites jut pop because of the 1.4 gain with no black loss. I have been waiting for someone to make something close and I am surprised it has not happened but SI has the formula down pat. I also have total light control but even in your environment the screen is amazing. I would recommend going to a dealer and checking it out, preferable one that has samples of other screens on hand once you see the BD with other samples on it, and you like what you see, it is a no brainier. When we show them 90% of the time people want one even after coming in to look at something else.


----------



## Lawguy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *programmergeek*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3000#post_22647726
> 
> 
> Besides what you mentioned above, I see very little grain and no hot spotting with the BD and the blacks are awesome and the whites jut pop because of the 1.4 gain with no black loss. I have been waiting for someone to make something close and I am surprised it has not happened but SI has the formula down pat. I also have total light control but even in your environment the screen is amazing. I would recommend going to a dealer and checking it out, preferable one that has samples of other screens on hand once you see the BD with other samples on it, and you like what you see, it is a no brainier. When we show them 90% of the time people want one even after coming in to look at something else.



I'm also surprised that no other companies have tried to do what SI has done with the BD.


After two years now, I still marvel at what it does.


----------



## RyanChristopher

I am interested in the Black Diamond Zero Edge 1.4 2.35:1 122" screen to be paired with a 2013 JVC projector. But was wondering if it would possible to swap out the 1.4 BD screen material for a 2.8 BD later on when passive 3D technology becomes more affordable? If it is not possible with the style frame of the curent generation of the Zero Edge is this something that may be possible in future generations?


----------



## tomiy1

So, I've got a question for you guys...I currently have a 92" BD 1.4 and I was looking at changing it out with a zero edge 106" 1.4. Do you guys think it's worth the upgrade price and selling hassle? Your comments/advice are greatly appreciated! Thanks


----------



## kazkioken

I have a fixed frame BD .8 in the bedroom (posted pics earlier in the thread) and just installed a Zero Edge 1.4 108" in the living room. OMG. This is the best money I've spent in a long time. It's simply beautiful. How much is a 108" lcd or plasma? I've got this paired with a cheap Panasonic AR100U and even with this lower priced projector the image is amazing. I've got all sorts of light spill, reflections, silver blinds, white walls, etc. and it doesn't matter...for just plain entertainment in the living room for movies, football, etc. it's more than I expected. I will take some pictures during the day to compare, but the rear facing halo led's really do wonders for the contrast on the screen. The minimal image border, along with the led light forces your brain to compensate the contrast and you really do end up with perceived deeper blacks. If you're on the fence don't hesitate, especially if you are looking for something that is not in a dedicated theater room.


----------



## xtrips




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *programmergeek*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3000#post_22647726
> 
> 
> Besides what you mentioned above, I see very little grain and no hot spotting with the BD and the blacks are awesome and the whites jut pop because of the 1.4 gain with no black loss. I have been waiting for someone to make something close and I am surprised it has not happened but SI has the formula down pat. I also have total light control but even in your environment the screen is amazing. I would recommend going to a dealer and checking it out, preferable one that has samples of other screens on hand once you see the BD with other samples on it, and you like what you see, it is a no brainier. When we show them 90% of the time people want one even after coming in to look at something else.



Thank you for answering. Though I wish I could get more inputs on my question.

Let me phrase it differently.


Is there any point, at all, having a Black Diamond screen in a bat cave? What I mean by bat cave is black ceiling, near black walls, mat wooden floor, no windows, no openings, totally controlled lights.

Forget about the money.

Are there any advantages for Black Diamond in my conditions? Of course if you think of disadvantages, please name them too.


And since I am a professional calibrator, feel free to use our mumbo jumbo tech language.

And refrain from advising on visiting a local representative as there aren't any, so I will have to rely on the internet and what I remember seeing while at '11 Cedia.


Thank you


----------



## Joesyah




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *kazkioken*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3000#post_22692856
> 
> 
> I have a fixed frame BD .8 in the bedroom (posted pics earlier in the thread) and just installed a Zero Edge 1.4 108" in the living room. OMG. This is the best money I've spent in a long time. It's simply beautiful. How much is a 108" lcd or plasma? I've got this paired with a cheap Panasonic AR100U and even with this lower priced projector the image is amazing. I've got all sorts of light spill, reflections, silver blinds, white walls, etc. and it doesn't matter...for just plain entertainment in the living room for movies, football, etc. it's more than I expected. I will take some pictures during the day to compare, but the rear facing halo led's really do wonders for the contrast on the screen. The minimal image border, along with the led light forces your brain to compensate the contrast and you really do end up with perceived deeper blacks. If you're on the fence don't hesitate, especially if you are looking for something that is not in a dedicated theater room.



Thanks for the pics! I'm highly considering one of these screens. Still on the fence until I move, but man oh man that looks cool!


----------



## func




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *xtrips*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3000#post_22714494
> 
> 
> Thank you for answering. Though I wish I could get more inputs on my question.
> 
> Let me phrase it differently.
> 
> Is there any point, at all, having a Black Diamond screen in a bat cave? What I mean by bat cave is black ceiling, near black walls, mat wooden floor, no windows, no openings, totally controlled lights.
> 
> Forget about the money.
> 
> Are there any advantages for Black Diamond in my conditions? Of course if you think of disadvantages, please name them too.
> 
> And since I am a professional calibrator, feel free to use our mumbo jumbo tech language.
> 
> And refrain from advising on visiting a local representative as there aren't any, so I will have to rely on the internet and what I remember seeing while at '11 Cedia.
> 
> Thank you



Short answer is no.


I own a BD G3 .8 screen my self, I use it in a bright living room. This is the environment the screen was made for. To achieve the light rejecting properties of the Black Diamond there are tradeoffs. Because of having the projector and screeen in a bright living room I can "live" with the tradeoffs. But in a batcave i would never use this screen.

Things you need to be aware of:


1. There is a slight shimmer/glitter in the screen ( how much depends on how much lumens you throw at it, it seems), I've used it with both an Epson TW-9000 and a Sony HW50. The shimmer bothered me most at first, but now I dont really notice it much at all, so i guess you get used to it (its more like one of those things you get hung up on because you actively look for it). Also in my case the shimmer is not entirely even across the screen surface, it's more visible at the centre point of the light beam hitting the screen.


2. Viewing angle. There is a drop in brightness towards the edges ( this ofcourse depends on setup, how far from screen seating is and how much to the side etc. ). To me the drop in brightness seems pretty smooth, but its there, i recently tested with a DNP 08-85 sample and put it up in the corners, and i was a bit shocked at how much brightness was lost on the BD, the DNP sample was much much brighter and they have both the same .8 gain. When i had the sample placed in the center, they both looked equal in terms of brightness. But the BD has a slightly better black lvl. Just slighty..but still.


3. Color neutrality. The BD has a more cool color to it, tendencies towards blue.


I'm actually considering swapping my BD for a DNP, though, the BD has clearly the better light rejecting capabilities, especially when it comes to side light, and it has an amazing reduction in light scatter.

BD vs DNP, the BD has a bit more pop, and ever so slightly better blacks. But the DNP has wider viewing angle ( no vignetting), no shimmer, and its ISF certified to D65 spec.


If you are looking for the little extra in you cave I would advise you to take a look at the DNP 08-85 screen, it has the improved contrast abilities of the BD also it has good upper light rejection, no shimmer, no hotspotting, wide viewing angle and color neutrality. Ofc it also reduces light scatter, but not as much as BD and probably not needed in a batcave anyways.


If i had a batcave and were to chose between BD and DNP, the DNP would win hands down.


----------



## xtrips




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *func*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3000#post_22721446
> 
> 
> Short answer is no.
> 
> I own a BD G3 .8 screen my self, I use it in a bright living room. This is the environment the screen was made for. To achieve the light rejecting properties of the Black Diamond there are tradeoffs. Because of having the projector and screeen in a bright living room I can "live" with the tradeoffs. But in a batcave i would never use this screen.
> 
> Things you need to be aware of:
> 
> 1. There is a slight shimmer/glitter in the screen ( how much depends on how much lumens you throw at it, it seems), I've used it with both an Epson TW-9000 and a Sony HW50. The shimmer bothered me most at first, but now I dont really notice it much at all, so i guess you get used to it (its more like one of those things you get hung up on because you actively look for it). Also in my case the shimmer is not entirely even across the screen surface, it's more visible at the centre point of the light beam hitting the screen.
> 
> 2. Viewing angle. There is a drop in brightness towards the edges ( this ofcourse depends on setup, how far from screen seating is and how much to the side etc. ). To me the drop in brightness seems pretty smooth, but its there, i recently tested with a DNP 08-85 sample and put it up in the corners, and i was a bit shocked at how much brightness was lost on the BD, the DNP sample was much much brighter and they have both the same .8 gain. When i had the sample placed in the center, they both looked equal in terms of brightness. But the BD has a slightly better black lvl. Just slighty..but still.
> 
> 3. Color neutrality. The BD has a more cool color to it, tendencies towards blue.
> 
> I'm actually considering swapping my BD for a DNP, though, the BD has clearly the better light rejecting capabilities, especially when it comes to side light, and it has an amazing reduction in light scatter.
> 
> BD vs DNP, the BD has a bit more pop, and ever so slightly better blacks. But the DNP has wider viewing angle ( no vignetting), no shimmer, and its ISF certified to D65 spec.
> 
> If you are looking for the little extra in you cave I would advise you to take a look at the DNP 08-85 screen, it has the improved contrast abilities of the BD also it has good upper light rejection, no shimmer, no hotspotting, wide viewing angle and color neutrality. Ofc it also reduces light scatter, but not as much as BD and probably not needed in a batcave anyways.
> 
> If i had a batcave and were to chose between BD and DNP, the DNP would win hands down.



Very helpful.

Thank you very much.


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *xtrips*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3000#post_22722473
> 
> 
> Very helpful.
> 
> Thank you very much.



I too have a BD .8 screen that I use in a often bright room and I second what _func_ says. He accurately explains what the tradeoffs are.


If my viewing room were a bat cave, I would use a different screen.


----------



## kazkioken

...and a third confirmation with some other little bits of info:


-the 1.4 gain screen does not vignette as much as the .8, and after seeing both screens in my house (since I have both) I would have just gotten the 1.4 the first time around. The .8 is a tad darker in material but for all intents and purposes I like having the extra punch of the 1.4 - again this is in a "regular" home context, non-optimized rooms with white walls, etc. The extra gain seems to do more to extend the overall dynamic range of the image than deepening of blacks that the .8 does. Neither will be darker than the darkest light output of your projector.


-curiously, if you have a Dune HD media player as seen in my screenshots, the IR codes that the remote uses also trigger various functions that control the LED perimeter on the rear of the Zero Edge 2. So as I am navigating the menu screens the LED lights change color, go into strobe mode...no biggie I just turn on the LED's once the movie starts, just an FYI


-on the perimeter LED's white lowered in brightness about 50% is the best for "critical viewing", takes the edge off of high contrast scenes for your eyes...while the pure blue def looks the coolest from a home design perspective. I find it's fun to also match color of the led's to the content of the film, various Matrix, Dark Knight films look good with green or yellow, etc. But yeah, white is the best for any serious viewing since it won't throw your color perception of what's actually on the screen


-I understood that the perimeter light would add contrast and deepen perceptual blacks on the screen, but in action it is far more powerful than you think it will be. Best part is, you can create the same effect fairly cheaply on whatever screen you have now with the same parts from websites...but the trick is having that virtually non-existent bezel/border that presents basically a floating image


-the shimmering is more noticeable to me on wide shots where the elements on the screen are smaller and approach the size of the actual pixels from the projector...I find the whole effect to be somewhat less on the .8 screen than the 1.4 (which is what has been said by many others as well). But in general I find neither to be a real distraction, it's much less so than say, rainbows from a DLP projector


-have been glued to the living room couch for hours upon hours after installing the zero edge...again if you are in a similar non light controlled environment or want to have more of an all around screen for football movies, games, etc. then it's pretty perfect


----------



## rencan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2970#post_22439649
> 
> 
> With one of the newer JVC's you should be between 9 and 10 Foot Lamberts for 3D. In a good room that will be a lot brighter than what you see at the movie theater.


----------



## rencan

i bought a sensations 119" SI screen through Magnolia last October. Can i replace this screen material with a 1.3 gain. What i bought was a 1.0 gain screen/neutral.

I have a JVC HD350 in a light controlled room. Dark walls and ceilings in a 15 x 14 with 9' ceilings. I saw your posting about just changing the screen material and didn't know it was possible to do that.


Advise please.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rencan*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3030#post_22729334
> 
> 
> i bought a sensations 119" SI screen through Magnolia last October. Can i replace this screen material with a 1.3 gain. What i bought was a 1.0 gain screen/neutral.
> 
> I have a JVC HD350 in a light controlled room. Dark walls and ceilings in a 15 x 14 with 9' ceilings. I saw your posting about just changing the screen material and didn't know it was possible to do that.
> 
> Advise please.



Unfortunately the Sensation series frame and attachment system are not the same as the reference series so you cannot just replace the material. Our Reference screen series allows you to swap out any reference series screen material or black diamond materials.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *kazkioken*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3000#post_22692856
> 
> 
> I have a fixed frame BD .8 in the bedroom (posted pics earlier in the thread) and just installed a Zero Edge 1.4 108" in the living room. OMG. This is the best money I've spent in a long time. It's simply beautiful. How much is a 108" lcd or plasma? I've got this paired with a cheap Panasonic AR100U and even with this lower priced projector the image is amazing. I've got all sorts of light spill, reflections, silver blinds, white walls, etc. and it doesn't matter...for just plain entertainment in the living room for movies, football, etc. it's more than I expected. I will take some pictures during the day to compare, but the rear facing halo led's really do wonders for the contrast on the screen. The minimal image border, along with the led light forces your brain to compensate the contrast and you really do end up with perceived deeper blacks. If you're on the fence don't hesitate, especially if you are looking for something that is not in a dedicated theater room.



Wow, that looks amazing! And I love the egg chair.


----------



## rhrhodes

Hi Everyone,


I recently upgraded my plasma to front projection. I bought the new JVC x55. My room is small, so I was limited to 80" screen, I possibly could have gone to 92" if I replaced my tower speakers with bookshelves below the screen. I was going to buy 80" 16:9 fixed frame reference black diamond 1.4 from my dealer, when I stumbled upon a great deal on craigslist by random luck.


I found for sale, a new in the box 80" 1.4 black diamond. The seller said the screen was about 2 years, so the screen material had been sitting rolled for a couple years. I believe based on that age, it is a 2nd generation screen, and not the latest screen material. I could tell from the packaging that the screen had not been tampered with , the factory labels on the foam protecting the screen were intact. According to the seller, he got the screen as a gift, I think he said he had a family connection to someone who worked at SI.


Anyway, the screen was a total bargain compared to cost of new one, so I took a chance on buying it.


I have a few issues with the screen however, and would like to get opinions from fellow AVS members who have experience with screens, and the black diamond in particular.

The first issue is that after a couple weeks the screen is still not completely flat. When the projector is throwing an all white image, I can see some vertical bands down the screen lined up with where the bungees are putting tension on the screen. I believe this is because the screen is still a little bit curved from being rolled for so long. Do you think this will disappear over time?


The second issue, is that if I get within a foot of the screen, and look at in bright light, I can see some very fine hairline scratches. Is this normal? I can live with this as it's completely not visible from viewing distance when an image is on the screen. Although screen appeared packaged as new, I think it is possible it was some sort of demonstration screen based on label on the screen material roll.


The third and final issue is that there is 2 very small spots where it looks like there is an outward indentation in the screen material, like something has pushed on the material from the back side. I have attached a photo, the mark is about 2 inches from the bottom frame, and 6 inches from left edge of photo. This mark doesn't look pointed or sharp , so my hope is that it may disappear over time if the screen material flattens out with tension from the bungees. However, this mark is visible from viewing distance under an all white background, but not typically visible with normal material. Now that I know it's there, I occasionally notice it because I am looking for it.


Is it best to wait and see if these issues resolve themselves?


Since I am not the original owner, would SI give me any sort of support on the screen? I don't expect much, just wondering if they will answer my questions if I phone, and/or perhaps let me buy a replacement screen material without the frame.


Under worst case scenario, can I buy new screen material and reuse the existing frame. Would this be done through a dealer, or directly through SI?


Thanks for your help everyone.


Ryan


----------



## saskroadie

My screen (which I purchased used) has none of the defects which you describe. It is very flat, very smooth, with no dents/cracks of any sort. I'm sure you can purchase a replacement screen for the frame. I would wait to see is the screen smooths out however. I would also suggest a .8 gain screen from BD in your size as it is small in comparison to most projector screens and you will have better black levels....


----------



## rhrhodes

Thanks saskroadie. There's no cracks, just minor surface scratches only visible if shining a bright led flashlight on the screen from 1 foot away. I'm planning to wait and see if the screen flattens out, will give it at least a couple months before doing anything. The screen has been mounted for about 2 weeks. You recommend 0.8? I've heard 1.4 is better for 3D since you lose some brightness in 3d mode. Was your screen re-rolled when you received it, or did you transport it assembled?


----------



## saskroadie

I transported my 92" screen assembled (pain in the ass too!) but didn't want to take a chance with the surface. I have an RS40 and it's plenty bright in low lamp mode, but I must admit I've never tried 3D. Send Blake at SI a quick pm to confirm the brightness of a .8 80" for 3D watching.


----------



## dannyday2

Does anyone know if the screen material on the Black Diamond fixed series is the same as on the Black Diamond Zero Edge models? I really would prefer to buy the 1.4 gain 16:9 100" or 106" (haven't finished measuring yet) Zero Edge with the LED kit as I find it more aesthetically pleasing (that thing is just AMAZING looking), but the fixed series appears to be cheaper. With that in mind, I was wondering if at least the picture would be identical between the two if I end up having to sacrifice looks for a slightly smaller hit on my wallet. Any help would be much appreciated!!!


----------



## Andrew Jackson

So these Zero edge screens cost more then my projector 5020ub. They sure have some killer looking screens but I wonder what kind of premium they are charging for the screen to be 2K+ FRNs. I mean how much does it cost to manufacture vs what they are selling it for. Anyway the screen does look great but most people are going to drop that kind of cash on a screen.


----------



## BlakeSI

Ryan Happy to help give me a call at the factory. Blake


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dannyday2*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3030#post_22771455
> 
> 
> Does anyone know if the screen material on the Black Diamond fixed series is the same as on the Black Diamond Zero Edge models? I really would prefer to buy the 1.4 gain 16:9 100" or 106" (haven't finished measuring yet) Zero Edge with the LED kit as I find it more aesthetically pleasing (that thing is just AMAZING looking), but the fixed series appears to be cheaper. With that in mind, I was wondering if at least the picture would be identical between the two if I end up having to sacrifice looks for a slightly smaller hit on my wallet. Any help would be much appreciated!!!



The Black Diamond Zero Edge and Black Diamond fixed frame use the same materials.


----------



## dannyday2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3030#post_22774023
> 
> 
> The Black Diamond Zero Edge and Black Diamond fixed frame use the same materials.



Okay awesome! Thanks for verifying that for me Blake! Now to figure out what the exact cost difference would be and which one I can talk my wife into, lol! Does Screen innovations sell these screens directly to customers like me or should I be looking for a reseller online to purchase? I'm doubtful that I have anyone in Chattanooga, TN that sells these locally!


----------



## BYRD82

The LED effects make me want to go purchase one right now. Was the light kit an add or did it come with the screen?


----------



## 7channelfreak

I'm a little confused by the LEDs on some screens. On the SI website, they completely seems like they light up all the way around and others its only the center of all 4 sides. Does the size matter or are some of these older models?


----------



## huggerx

It's both. You can control the intensity, color, and effect with the remote.


----------



## dannyday2

Does anyone know if the LED kit is a separate piece from the screen that can be ordered after the fact? I was wondering if I could possibly buy the Zero Edge screen and then add the LEDs later if I felt the need...


----------



## func




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *7channelfreak*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3030#post_22779028
> 
> 
> I'm a little confused by the LEDs on some screens. On the SI website, they completely seems like they light up all the way around and others its only the center of all 4 sides. Does the size matter or are some of these older models?



The new G2 version of Zero Edge has a more even distribution of the light effect around the edge.


----------



## dannyday2

So, I took my wife into the new Magnolia Center they just put in our newly remodeled Best Buy earlier this afternoon in an attempt to talk her into a projector for our bedroom. They had a Sony HW30 with a motorized 92" Firehawk screen and an Epson 5020UB with a 92" Black Diamond Zero Edge with an LED kit. After about an hour of walking back and forth between the two "Studios" looking at both of them, she finally decided that she was willing to go along with the whole "projector in the bedroom" thing. She indicated that she wanted to go with the Epson projector and the Black Diamond Zero Edge screen if we were doing this, as long as it had the LED kit.


Does anyone know if Best Buy is an authorized SI dealer? I went on the SI website and I think I read that for warranty support you need to have purchased the screen from an authorized dealer, but when I used their "find a local SI dealer" tool, best buy wasn't listed, so that has me a little worried.


Also, I looked the 100" screen I think I'll end up needing on the BB website and I don't see any mention of the optional LED kit being included with the price OR a way to purchase it separately (or the cost to do so). Does anyone have any clue why it isn't listed as included OR available for purchase? She REALLY wants the BD Zero Edge with the LEDs.


Thanks in advance for any help anyone can provide. Sorry for the long post (and I'm sure I'll have more questions)...I'd just like to get this all right the first time and this will be my first projector/screen purchase (we're upgrading from an 8000-series Samsung LED and I want this to be AWESOME!!!).


----------



## Joesyah




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dannyday2*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3030#post_22788748
> 
> 
> So, I took my wife into the new Magnolia Center they just put in our newly remodeled Best Buy earlier this afternoon in an attempt to talk her into a projector for our bedroom. They had a Sony HW30 with a motorized 92" Firehawk screen and an Epson 5020UB with a 92" Black Diamond Zero Edge with an LED kit. After about an hour of walking back and forth between the two "Studios" looking at both of them, she finally decided that she was willing to go along with the whole "projector in the bedroom" thing. She indicated that she wanted to go with the Epson projector and the Black Diamond Zero Edge screen if we were doing this, as long as it had the LED kit.
> 
> Does anyone know if Best Buy is an authorized SI dealer? I went on the SI website and I think I read that for warranty support you need to have purchased the screen from an authorized dealer, but when I used their "find a local SI dealer" tool, best buy wasn't listed, so that has me a little worried.
> 
> Also, I looked the 100" screen I think I'll end up needing on the BB website and I don't see any mention of the optional LED kit being included with the price OR a way to purchase it separately (or the cost to do so). Does anyone have any clue why it isn't listed as included OR available for purchase? She REALLY wants the BD Zero Edge with the LEDs.
> 
> Thanks in advance for any help anyone can provide. Sorry for the long post (and I'm sure I'll have more questions)...I'd just like to get this all right the first time and this will be my first projector/screen purchase (we're upgrading from an 8000-series Samsung LED and I want this to be AWESOME!!!).



Sent you a PM that may help you out. Check your in box.


----------



## tiguej

dannyday2,


I had the Geek Squad out to do a proposal on my home theater and they told me they were an authorized Black Diamond dealer. They told me they order direct from Screen Innovations and the product is shipped directly to your home. I am looking at getting the Screen Innovations Black Diamond Zero Edge G2 115". I haven't made the jump yet as the cost is a little steep and i'm still looking for feedback to see if there are any better screens out there.


----------



## tiguej

I will be purchasing a BD Zero Edge 115" screen.


Question should I get a .8 or a 1.4? My projector will be an Epson PowerLite Home Cinema 5020UB. According to Screen Innovations Screen wizard my light level looks like it would be around 15 LC.Obviously I want it bright but I do not want any shimmer on the screen which I hear could happen at 1.4.

Any recommendations would be appreciated.


Thanks,


Jim


----------



## gadgetfreaky

Great thread.. I have the 100" .8 screen and reiterate the last 2 pages. It's awesome for a regular living room no light control, white ceiling, white walls room. I even have a wall to the left of it with a sliding glass screen. Most of the time I have it drawn closed w/ the vertical blinds turned a bit to still keep a well lit room to watch tv during the day for the kids. For me, I usually close the blinds but it's in no way a dark room since there's light spilling in from the kitchen as well.


At night it looks like a plasma. I have the epson 5010 and have it in ECO mode.


I would though love to know if I can add that LED kit to it after the fact?


thanks


Peter


----------



## gadgetfreaky

Great thread.. I have the 100" .8 screen and reiterate the last 2 pages. It's awesome for a regular living room no light control, white ceiling, white walls room. I even have a wall to the left of it with a sliding glass screen. Most of the time I have it drawn closed w/ the vertical blinds turned a bit to still keep a well lit room to watch tv during the day for the kids. For me, I usually close the blinds but it's in no way a dark room since there's light spilling in from the kitchen as well.


At night it looks like a plasma. I have the epson 5010 and have it in ECO mode.


I would though love to know if I can add that LED kit to it after the fact?


thanks


Peter


----------



## mbtsm

I Need Help to buy the fixed frame 2:35:1 size 92

i have panasonic ae4000 lcd lm 1600

My room white color and between projector to screen 9 feet

what the gain good for me

.8 or 1.4


----------



## natas777




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tiguej*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3030#post_22791998
> 
> 
> I will be purchasing a BD Zero Edge 115" screen.
> 
> 
> Question should I get a .8 or a 1.4? My projector will be an Epson PowerLite Home Cinema 5020UB. According to Screen Innovations Screen wizard my light level looks like it would be around 15 LC.Obviously I want it bright but I do not want any shimmer on the screen which I hear could happen at 1.8.
> 
> Any recommendations would be appreciated.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jim



I am no expert but I maybe able to steer you the right way. I don't have a 5020 but I looked into getting one (i went with sony hw50ES). Here is my take:


If you are going to calibrate your projector go with the 1.4. The 5020 when calibrated will have much lower light output calibrated.


If you do not calibrate it and use the brighter modes then go with the .8. The .8 during the day will give you deeper blacks because the base material is darker. And using the epson in its brighter modes will have plenty of light to take advantage of a .8 screen.


Now of course all of this has to do with have far you mount your projector. If you plan to mount it really far from the screen (max or close to max) you may have to go with the 1.4 no matter what


----------



## KDH

epson 5020 white walls white 200 dollar screen blacks well not good. How much will the bd help. I am not happy with the current set up. Alot of things just look washed out even in complete darkness. If the seen is real dark then the blacks look alot better but not great but close. When things get bright on screen its alot worse. Should I go with the 1.4 or .8 I like the picture to have alot of pop and on screen contrast. Is the black diamond my anser.


----------



## KDH

Im a neby in the fp world


----------



## tiguej

natas777,


Thanks for the response. I will be having the projector calibrated. It sounds like the 1.4 is the best option.



Can I ask why you choose the SonyHW 50ES over the Epson? I have been going back and forth and the decision is tough between the 2 as they both get great reviews.




Thanks for the feedback.


JT


----------



## natas777

Kdh,


From what I understand the bd will help a lot. There is a video on YouTube where they compared a normal white screen to a bd. the white screen lit up the room. The reflections from the walls and ceiling washed out the screen. They then showed the bd and that room stayed dark and the image looked great.


Have you thought about painting the room a darker color, if you could paint the ceiling as well that may solve your problem. Go with a dark flat paint.


----------



## KDH




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *natas777*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3060#post_22797743
> 
> 
> Kdh,
> 
> From what I understand the bd will help a lot. There is a video on YouTube where they compared a normal white screen to a bd. the white screen lit up the room. The reflections from the walls and ceiling washed out the screen. They then showed the bd and that room stayed dark and the image looked great.
> 
> Have you thought about painting the room a darker color, if you could paint the ceiling as well that may solve your problem. Go with a dark flat paint.




Thanks for the reply, yes I could paint the walls but they would be very cold with the divorce and all. LOL

Its a big investment and coming from a xbr65 929 dont know if it will be to much of a shock.

I could never be satisfied with this white screen.


----------



## speavler




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *KDH*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3030#post_22795013
> 
> 
> epson 5020 white walls white 200 dollar screen blacks well not good. How much will the bd help. I am not happy with the current set up. Alot of things just look washed out even in complete darkness. If the seen is real dark then the blacks look alot better but not great but close. When things get bright on screen its alot worse. Should I go with the 1.4 or .8 I like the picture to have alot of pop and on screen contrast. Is the black diamond my anser.



Have you done any calibration on your projector?


----------



## Tonyb12345

Natas777,


I'm looking at the Sony HW 50ES and the Zero Edge 1.4 108" in 16:9. Are you happy with the combination and have you been able to fine tune the projector to perfectly align the image with the Zero Edge? Also, have you experienced any bleed off or drift of the picture off the screen? Finally, how far have you mounted the projector above or below the top edge of the screen?


Many thanks.


Tonyb


----------



## natas777

Tonyb12345,


I currently have a simple elite screen right now setup. I plan to move to either a bd or firehawk in a few months. The screen I have is a 1.1 gain and looks awesome at night. During the day it's very watchable but blacks don't look as good.


I have my projector setup 13 1/2ft from the screen. Lining everything up took about 30 minutes of measuring and getting the screen up. I haven't had any bleed or drift. However I live in Dallas and around here foundations shift throughout the year so I expect to have some of that just from the house settling.


Btw this projector rocks. It's way brighter than I thought it would be, and the image is stunning.


----------



## Skylinestar






How's the life span of that bungee cords? Will it break?


----------



## Tonyb12345

natas777,


Thx. Looking forward to getting into the world of home theater. Once you make your decision, could you please us know what you think of your new setup? Thx again.


Tonyb


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dannyday2*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3030#post_22788748
> 
> 
> So, I took my wife into the new Magnolia Center they just put in our newly remodeled Best Buy earlier this afternoon in an attempt to talk her into a projector for our bedroom. They had a Sony HW30 with a motorized 92" Firehawk screen and an Epson 5020UB with a 92" Black Diamond Zero Edge with an LED kit. After about an hour of walking back and forth between the two "Studios" looking at both of them, she finally decided that she was willing to go along with the whole "projector in the bedroom" thing. She indicated that she wanted to go with the Epson projector and the Black Diamond Zero Edge screen if we were doing this, as long as it had the LED kit.
> 
> 
> Does anyone know if Best Buy is an authorized SI dealer? I went on the SI website and I think I read that for warranty support you need to have purchased the screen from an authorized dealer, but when I used their "find a local SI dealer" tool, best buy wasn't listed, so that has me a little worried.
> 
> 
> Also, I looked the 100" screen I think I'll end up needing on the BB website and I don't see any mention of the optional LED kit being included with the price OR a way to purchase it separately (or the cost to do so). Does anyone have any clue why it isn't listed as included OR available for purchase? She REALLY wants the BD Zero Edge with the LEDs.
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance for any help anyone can provide. Sorry for the long post (and I'm sure I'll have more questions)...I'd just like to get this all right the first time and this will be my first projector/screen purchase (we're upgrading from an 8000-series Samsung LED and I want this to be AWESOME!!!).



Magnolia Home Theater inside of Best Buy is an authorized SI Dealer. The LED kit is free with all Zero Edge purchases until the end of January.


----------



## BlakeSI

We get the bungees from the auto industry and I have never had one break.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mbtsm*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3030#post_22793812
> 
> 
> I Need Help to buy the fixed frame 2:35:1 size 92
> 
> i have panasonic ae4000 lcd lm 1600
> 
> My room white color and between projector to screen 9 feet
> 
> what the gain good for me
> 
> .8 or 1.4



One thing to keep in mind is viewing cone. The .8 has a 60 degree viewing cone and the 1.4 has a 120 degree viewing cone.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *7channelfreak*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3030#post_22779028
> 
> 
> I'm a little confused by the LEDs on some screens. On the SI website, they completely seems like they light up all the way around and others its only the center of all 4 sides. Does the size matter or are some of these older models?



The first gen Zero Edge used LED light bars. The new 2nd gen Zero Edge uses a 360 degree wrap of LED lighting tape that gives a much better uniformed halo effect when wall mounted and a better wash effect when mounted off the wall using our flying cable kit.

The science behind the lighting is it relaxes the eye when watching bright content in a dark room. The eye is not constantly adjusting do to brighter and darker content from tyhe screen so much less eye fatigue. There is also a very noticeable improvement in contrast with the back lighting on blacks look, well blacker.


it also looks way cool


----------



## daver27

I discovered this thread having recently emailed Screen Innovations about an issue with shimmering pixels on my Black Diamond Zero Edge screen. I see that others also seem to have this problem, to varying degrees. I am awaiting a response from SI but in the meantime thought it would be worth posting here to see whether there are any possible solutions.


My screen is the 115inch 1.4 gain and is approximately 18 ft from the projector, an Epson Powerlite Pro Cinema 6010.


Seating distance to screen is 15ft. Walls are cream colour, ceiling is white. Light control is very good.


The shimmering pixels are very noticeable and distracting. Is there any way to at least reduce this or is it an inherent charateristic of the BD Zero Edge screen, most noticeable with a bright projector?


----------



## Skylinestar

I would say it's the characteristic of the screen.


----------



## 7channelfreak




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *daver27*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3060#post_22861939
> 
> 
> I discovered this thread having recently emailed Screen Innovations about an issue with shimmering pixels on my Black Diamond Zero Edge screen. I see that others also seem to have this problem, to varying degrees. I am awaiting a response from SI but in the meantime thought it would be worth posting here to see whether there are any possible solutions.
> 
> 
> My screen is the 115inch 1.4 gain and is approximately 18 ft from the projector, an Epson Powerlite Pro Cinema 6010.
> 
> 
> Seating distance to screen is 15ft. Walls are cream colour, ceiling is white. Light control is very good.
> 
> 
> The shimmering pixels are very noticeable and distracting. Is there any way to at least reduce this or is it an inherent charateristic of the BD Zero Edge screen, most noticeable with a bright projector?



What generation do you have? I'm looking to see if this is the same with the current version.


Thanks


----------



## daver27




> Quote:
> What generation do you have? I'm looking to see if this is the same with the current version.
> 
> 
> Thanks/QUOTE]
> 
> 
> 
> I bought it in June 2012, so I assume it's the first generation. Look forward to your findings.


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *daver27*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3060#post_22861939
> 
> 
> ...........
> 
> The shimmering pixels are very noticeable and distracting. Is there any way to at least reduce this or is it an inherent charateristic of the BD Zero Edge screen, most noticeable with a bright projector?



That's just the way it is with the BD screen, Zero Edge or framed. It's slightly less with the .8 gain screen material.


----------



## daver27




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *karlsch*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3060#post_22863689
> 
> 
> That's just the way it is with the BD screen, Zero Edge or framed. It's slightly less with the .8 gain screen material.



So my only options are to live with the shimmering or replace the screen










A less bright projector won't necessarily reduce the shimmering (something like the Sony VPL-HW50ES)?


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *daver27*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3060#post_22866869
> 
> 
> So my only options are to live with the shimmering or replace the screen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A less bright projector won't necessarily reduce the shimmering (something like the Sony VPL-HW50ES)?



Before buying a new projector, reduce the light output on your 6010 to see if it makes a big enough difference to justify the extra expense.


Of course, if you do buy a less bright projector, you will have a less bright picture. Many people consider a bright projector to be a good thing.


I knew about this thread and knew about the hot spotting/sparkles/shimmering etc. before I bought my BD, but, because I'm not very fussy, I didn’t think they would bother me. Unfortunately I was wrong.


I have an Epson 5010, essentially the same projector as yours.


----------



## daver27




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *karlsch*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3060#post_22869461
> 
> 
> Before buying a new projector, reduce the light output on your 6010 to see if it makes a big enough difference to justify the extra expense.
> 
> 
> Of course, if you do buy a less bright projector, you will have a less bright picture. Many people consider a bright projector to be a good thing.
> 
> 
> I knew about this thread and knew about the hot spotting/sparkles/shimmering etc. before I bought my BD, but, because I'm not very fussy, I didn’t think they would bother me. Unfortunately I was wrong.
> 
> 
> I have an Epson 5010, essentially the same projector as yours.



I have tried turning the brightness down but it does not materially reduce the shimmering. I like the brightness of the Epson 6010, especially on 3D, and by the sounds of it replacing the projector may not reduce the shimmering to a tolerable level.


Are you planning on replacing your BD screen and, if so, what alternatives are you considering ?


----------



## DarinS

I am i the design phase of an addition to my house which will include a dedicated HT. Room dimensions will be about 18x25x9. Thinking about going with the Epson projector and a screen size in the 100-110 range with the first seat about 13 ft back (row of 4). I've read a lot of this thread and am possibly interested in the backlit BD. The photos look great, but how does the backlight look on a 16x9 screen when watching a movie in the 2.35 ratio and having the black bars? I think it looks great when the backlight is fully surrounding the picture. I guess i'm wondering if it looks weird when on the side edges of the screen the LED's are right up next to the picture but above and below the LED's are offset from the picture by the interposition of the black bars. Any thoughts? Can someone post a photo of the screen in this situation?


BTW, one of the reasons I'm thinking about the BD in the first place even in my light-controlled room is because I don't want to always feel the need to keep the room really dark. I'm sure we will be spending a lot of time in there as a family during everyday life watching sports, playing the xbox, etc.


Thanks. Any other input would be appreciated.


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *daver27*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3060#post_22871883
> 
> 
> Are you planning on replacing your BD screen and, if so, what alternatives are you considering ?



I live in a remote area so if I sold my BD screen I would have to ship it to the buyer.


Since the screen is very delicate, I feel it would be very difficult to repack it and get it to a buyer without damage. Because of this, I have decided to keep it.


----------



## though

Has anyone noticed vibration problems with their Black Diamond Screen? I just upgraded to a 130" 2.35 BD 1.4 screen from an older 120" 16:9 and the BD material even when stretched out and attached with the bunjees the screen moves and vibrates VERY easy like a long sheet of paper. I haven't mounted it yet but it just doesn't seem like the fabric is thick/heavy enough to withstand vibrations of a large subwoofer (which I have).


I really hope I am wrong about this concern


----------



## mcmountainman

OK should I jump at this deal ? I can get a .8 92in screen for 800.00 bucks It would be used with a Epson 8350 in a completely light controlled room . Right now Im just using a homemade Blackout cloth with velvet borders ( looks nice to me). Figure this may be my only chance ever to get this type of screen but is it still worth almost a grand in a DARK room ??? Would I notice a dramatic difference ?

PS - might be upgrading to a 5020 if they get the panel issues ever fixed.


----------



## though




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mcmountainman*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3060#post_22882447
> 
> 
> OK should I jump at this deal ? I can get a .8 92in screen for 800.00 bucks It would be used with a Epson 8350 in a completely light controlled room . Right now Im just using a homemade Blackout cloth with velvet borders ( looks nice to me). Figure this may be my only chance ever to get this type of screen but is it still worth almost a grand in a DARK room ??? Would I notice a dramatic difference ?
> 
> PS - might be upgrading to a 5020 if they get the panel issues ever fixed.



if you need a 92 i would say go for it. are you not sitting very far back from the screen?


----------



## mcmountainman

92in screen is just about as big as I can go ( upper floor of an older bungalow style home ) , sitting about 9ft back. If I went larger (100in) my center would be too low .Projector is at 10.5ft back so plenty bright.


----------



## adanny

If you're getting a 92" BD for under 1k, and its the right size for u, I would think twice. It is absolutely worth it. U will get a picture that is 90% equal to a 90" plasma and almost 90% as useable as a plasma in ambient light at 10% the cost.


----------



## adanny

Sorry meant to say "I would NOT think twice" in the previous email


----------



## Skylinestar




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mcmountainman*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3060#post_22882447
> 
> 
> OK should I jump at this deal ? I can get a .8 92in screen for 800.00 bucks It would be used with a Epson 8350 in a completely light controlled room . Right now Im just using a homemade Blackout cloth with velvet borders ( looks nice to me). Figure this may be my only chance ever to get this type of screen but is it still worth almost a grand in a DARK room ??? Would I notice a dramatic difference ?
> 
> PS - might be upgrading to a 5020 if they get the panel issues ever fixed.


That's a great price. May I know who's the seller? How's the price for a ~120" ?


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Skylinestar*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3060#post_22883987
> 
> 
> That's a great price. May I know who's the seller? How's the price for a ~120" ?



The screen must be used or something along those lines. Only a dealer going out of business and looking to dump a screen would be selling at that price since it is way, way below dealer cost.


----------



## jimed1

If it is the 92" that is for sale here in the AVS Classifieds, you should read the seller's posts on this forum. He bought the screen for $750, but it has a scatch on it. You should question the seller to make sure you know what you are getting .. That is probably too cheap to be a perfect screen.


----------



## though




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *though*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3060#post_22880531
> 
> 
> Has anyone noticed vibration problems with their Black Diamond Screen? I just upgraded to a 130" 2.35 BD 1.4 screen from an older 120" 16:9 and the BD material even when stretched out and attached with the bunjees the screen moves and vibrates VERY easy like a long sheet of paper. I haven't mounted it yet but it just doesn't seem like the fabric is thick/heavy enough to withstand vibrations of a large subwoofer (which I have).
> 
> 
> I really hope I am wrong about this concern



i don't like to do this but "bump"


----------



## mcmountainman




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3060#post_22885491
> 
> 
> The screen must be used or something along those lines. Only a dealer going out of business and looking to dump a screen would be selling at that price since it is way, way below dealer cost.



This screen is a clearance item from a retail store If its used I probably wont get it . According to sales someone returned it without using it but I didnt verify that yet . I'll take a hard close look at it tomorrow .If I dont buy it I'll let everyone know where and if its still available !


----------



## MikeE715

I'm an authorized SI dealer. I have the 115" zero edge with a 6010 on display. I'm in the San Diego area.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mcmountainman*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3090#post_22886624
> 
> 
> This screen is a clearance item from a retail store If its used I probably wont get it . According to sales someone returned it without using it but I didnt verify that yet . I'll take a hard close look at it tomorrow .If I dont buy it I'll let everyone know where and if its still available !



Okay, a return, falls along the lines of what I said.


----------



## 7channelfreak




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MikeE715*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3090#post_22890924
> 
> 
> I'm an authorized SI dealer. I have the 115" zero edge with a 6010 on display. I'm in the San Diego area.



Too bad I'm not there. I'd like to see it. I haven't found one on display in Houston.


----------



## mcmountainman

Clearance .8 92in screen , well I decided not to get it so if anyone living in the Detroit /AA area is interested in the details PM me . Its from a Magnolia outlet.


----------



## MikeE715

Just a reminder Thursday is the last day for the free led light kit on the zero edge. Pm me with any questions


----------



## mhaneef

Mine should arrive this Friday!


----------



## MYHOMETHEATER

Is there any place to see a bd screen in central fl? I would like to see one in action before purchasing.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *7channelfreak*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3090#post_22892549
> 
> 
> Too bad I'm not there. I'd like to see it. I haven't found one on display in Houston.



If you are ever in Austin i could show you at 115 and give you a factory tour.


----------



## 7channelfreak




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3090#post_22936134
> 
> 
> If you are ever in Austin i could show you at 115 and give you a factory tour.



I'll find a reason to come over with that invitation.



Thanks


----------



## programmergeek




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tomiy1*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2900_100#post_22235670
> 
> 
> Hey guys, so i finally took the plunge into the front projection world for my family room and I went all in with it. (Black Diamond 92" G3 w/ the Panasonic PT-AE7000U Projector)
> 
> I got REALLY lucky on the screen... I got the screen unused & un-assembled from a guy on Craigslist for $760! ...now here's the bad part....it has a minor horizontal scratch on the bottom left portion.(1/2" or so) Also, there's a few really small dents but I'm definitely not as worried about those. I wanted to get some expert opinions from seasoned veterans in the front projection world to see if these issues are worth freaking out about. I haven't installed the screen or the projector in the family room yet, but I did try the Panasonic projector on the screen and BARELY noticed the small scratch. (only saw it when brighter colors were on the screen.. and when i say "saw it", i mean i had to really look for it) What do you guys think? Is it really worth going through all the trouble of replacing the entire screen just for that? Any help/suggestions would be greatly appreciated!



Those are impact marks and not warranteeable, however we have a screen in our demo room with much worse marks and I never tell people they are there it seems like one out of every 50 people even notice it. The screen we have is totally beat up from customers touching it kids hitting it and me taping up other screen samples agents it. But when the projector is on it all seems to disappear unless you have a bright white solid scene.


But the nice thing with SI if you got it fro a authorised dealer they will sell you fabric at 50% off to replace it.


----------



## mhaneef

Hi Everyone,

After ten plus years on this forum I just wanted to take a moment to share four gems I've found. The first is AVS'r programmergeek who was recommended to me by another member here. He is an authorized dealer and all I can say is that he truly earns my highest recommendation if you are looking for a candid, knowledgable dealer with integrity,great product selection,competitive pricing and flexibility to address customers' needs (no, I don't work for him!) Give him a chance, you'll be glad you did.

The other gems (from programmergeek) are:

the amazing Black Diamond 110" Zero Edge 1.4 gain (with promo led kit ) screen, Epson 3D projector and Darby Darblet. I saw a demo of the Epson on another screen and this combo, IMHO,with the Zero Edge, absolutely blew me away with the improvement. It really must be seen to appreciate.

Thanks programmergeek, Epson, Darby and Screen Innovations for the hours of enjoyment ahead of me!


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mhaneef*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3090#post_22948162
> 
> 
> Hi Everyone,
> 
> After ten plus years on this forum I just wanted to take a moment to share four gems I've found. The first is AVS'r programmergeek who was recommended to me by another member here. He is an authorized dealer and all I can say is that he truly earns my highest recommendation if you are looking for a candid, knowledgable dealer with integrity,great product selection,competitive pricing and flexibility to address customers' needs (no, I don't work for him!) Give him a chance, you'll be glad you did.
> 
> The other gems (from programmergeek) are:
> 
> the amazing Black Diamond 110" Zero Edge 1.4 gain (with promo led kit ) screen, Epson 3D projector and Darby Darblet. I saw a demo of the Epson on another screen and this combo, IMHO,with the Zero Edge, absolutely blew me away with the improvement. It really must be seen to appreciate.
> 
> Thanks programmergeek, Epson, Darby and Screen Innovations for the hours of enjoyment ahead of me!



The free LED lighting kit promo ended the end of last month.


----------



## jimed1

Will someone that has the .8 and 1.4 gain BD screens tell me if the color shift can be calibrated out of the picture.

I have samples of each material and the 1.4 has a kind of pink tint on whites and grays.

Also, the 1.4 gain has a little shimmer to it, although that may be because I am projecting onto a relatively small screen right now (80") with a throw distance of around 14ft. My intentions would be to buy at least a 100" screen which may help out with the shimmer since the light would be focused on a larger area.

The .8 gain doesn't really shimmer, but is obviously not as bright. Also, I am not sure I could get the whites bright enought for me on the .8.

I have an Epson 5020 and it has been calibrated.

I am looking for a screen that doesn't have to be in a cave and the BD or DNP screens seem to be the best choices.


Its pretty amazing how much better the contrast is with either of these taped to my current screen with the lights on. I just don't want the shimmer or the color shift.


Thanks for any comments.




"Edited for spelling and grammer"


----------



## KDH




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jimed1*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3090#post_22950717
> 
> 
> Will someone that has the .8 and 1.4 gain BD screens tell me if the color shift can be calibrated out of the picture.
> 
> I have samples of each material and the 1.4 has a kind of pink tint on whites and grays.
> 
> Also, the 1.4 gain has a little shimmer to it, although that may be because I am projecting onto a relatively small screen right now (80") with a throw distance of around 14ft. My intentions would be to buy at least a 100" screen which may help out with the shimmer since the light would be focused on a larger area.
> 
> The .8 gain doesn't really shimmer, but is obviously not as bright. Also, I am not sure I could get the whites bright enought for me on the .8.
> 
> I have an Epson 5020 and it has been calibrated.
> 
> I am looking for a screen that doesn't have to be in a cave and the BD or DNP screens seem to be the best choices.
> 
> 
> Its pretty amazing how much better the contrast is with either of these taped to my current screen with the lights on. I just don't want the shimmer or the color shift.
> 
> 
> Thanks for any comments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Edited for spelling and grammer"



In putting a screen sample of the bd on say a white screen ther will be a opitcal illusion I guess. the color shift looks bad. I took 4 sample pecies and taped them togther for a mini screen and that color shift was not there or even close to what happens when taped on to a white screen. I now have a 115 zero edge and the color is pristine. There is no color shifting without a white screen behind it. The color is much better on the bd. They pop and are richer deeper. Also depth is much improved over a white screen. Sparklies are there and that is something to be considered. At 15 ft with the 115 it is not really an issue. 12 is a little close for me. Blacks and contrast is a hugh difference,even with alol the lights out. The room is not a bat cave so that is a factor.

I really dont think that the color shift will be a problem for anyone with just having the screen.

P.S. flesh tones were terribals and I could not get them even close when useing a sample taped to a white screen. I do not have that problem at all and flesh tones are perfect. Beautiful.


----------



## Dave447

Would like to post I recently purchased a Black Diamond screen and it arrived damaged with a dent in the metal screen material. Screen Innovations arbitrarily determined it was caused by me (which it was not) and wouldn't honor their replacement warranty. Buyer beware on these very expensive screens - you are on your own if there's a problem.


----------



## KDH




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Dave447*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3090#post_22971316
> 
> 
> Would like to post I recently purchased a Black Diamond screen and it arrived damaged with a dent in the metal screen material. Screen Innovations arbitrarily determined it was caused by me (which it was not) and wouldn't honor their replacement warranty. Buyer beware on these very expensive screens - you are on your own if there's a problem.



A video of the unboxing is a good idea.


Im about 4 days with mine and have moved back to 12. I amj not noticing the sparkels near as much. I am seeing the picture now and not the sparkles. I was so scared of them at first and I was hunting for them . Now I am not hunting and the picture is fantasic. i would never watch a white screen again its just a dull look to me. A black car for example with the white screen is more like a flat black and the bd is more like high gloss black. Like a lcd or plasma. Exactly like what I was looking for. I will report back in a few more days.


----------



## Ryan Peddle

Buying this through a physical dealer...this should not happen.


Sold a 113" BD 1.4 to a customer and it had some minor issues. I spoke with my rep...replaced. 100% no issues.


----------



## Dave447

Yes, I purchased through an authorized dealer and very glad I did. The dealer stepped up with a solution to remedy the problem even though the manufacturer walked.


----------



## Ryan Peddle

So here are some pics of my set and a quick couple of screenshots with different lighting conditions. Mits HC5 proj in use with a 100" 16:9 Black Diamond III screen with a gain of 1.4. The proj is mounted 14' from the screen and has only slight vertical lens shift used.


All pictures are of the same exact image. One right after the other, from the same exact location in the room. About 13' back from the screen. Pay attention to the room walls as well. One thing I am very happy about this this Mits/Black Diamond combo is the lack of reflected light, yet the pop to the picture.




Here is the projector mounted:

 



Screen:

 



Image on screen. From Prometheus. All 6 pot lights on, plus a high powered fluorescent work light on as well. Picture suffers slightly, and you can see the effect of the work light on the left hand side, mainly blacks, but still very watchable.

 


This is the same image with the rear pot lights off, the work light off, and the stage lights on.

 



And finally, all lights off. Completely off, only projector image reflecting of the BD screen. Very happy to say the least.

 



Let me know what you think.


----------



## Floydster

I have a dedicated theater room. Currently I'm using a 73" RP, but I would like to go to a 120" + diagonal screen front projection system.


Currently I have very diffuse low level blue light behind the TV in the ceiling so that I don't get that "staring at a bright rectangle" in the black effect. I have very low level ceiling spots that are deep red and allow enough light on my seating area to see a remote or a beer. The RP is of course very dark gray. With the set off and the lights on, I cannot detect the ambient lighting on the screen.


This would all change with a white or silver screen which I think would pick up every tiny light source. When people say Black Diamond, I was hoping they meant a screen that was very resistant to reflected light. Perhaps something that was at least as dark as a RP mat screen. Does such a screen even exist?


That variable might push me toward a 110" (hopefully) plasma. FP is new to me, so I'm trying to become educated on the subject.


Thanks,


Floyd


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Floydster*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3090#post_22977694
> 
> 
> I have a dedicated theater room. Currently I'm using a 73" RP, but I would like to go to a 120" + diagonal screen front projection system.
> 
> 
> Currently I have very diffuse low level blue light behind the TV in the ceiling so that I don't get that "staring at a bright rectangle" in the black effect. I have very low level ceiling spots that are deep red and allow enough light on my seating area to see a remote or a beer. The RP is of course very dark gray. With the set off and the lights on, I cannot detect the ambient lighting on the screen.
> 
> 
> This would all change with a white or silver screen which I think would pick up every tiny light source. When people say Black Diamond, I was hoping they meant a screen that was very resistant to reflected light. Perhaps something that was at least as dark as a RP mat screen. Does such a screen even exist?
> 
> 
> That variable might push me toward a 110" (hopefully) plasma. FP is new to me, so I'm trying to become educated on the subject.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Floyd



What would your viewing distance be and what throw distance do you have available? Also the BD 16:9 screen using the regular velvet covered frame is a max size of 113" diagonal. The 16:9 Zero Edge max size is 115" diagonal.


----------



## Floydster




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3090#post_22979452
> 
> 
> What would your viewing distance be and what throw distance do you have available? Also the BD 16:9 screen using the regular velvet covered frame is a max size of 113" diagonal. The 16:9 Zero Edge max size is 115" diagonal.



I like being really close, so say 10 to 11 feet viewing distance. The throwing distance, provided by one of the AVCS sponsors is ~ 16 feet. Thanks for the info.

The above ceiling wiring that runs the signal from the components to the projector and provides power for the projector is 16 - 17 feet from the screen position. The JVC DLA-X75R Price: $7999.95 that he recommends is supposedly perfect for the room which is about 22' x 16'. The idea of paying $6K for a screen seems atrocious to me. I can't remember what gain screen he recommended but it was low, if gain is needed. The projector is DILA, which a year or so back was the best available chip.


The theater has no windows, so when the door is closed it can be pitch black. I prefer a small amount of ambient light. So, what do you think overall. All opinions are welcome.


Floyd


----------



## natas777

Floydster,


I am getting my Black Diamond Zero Edge installed this coming Friday. Mine will be 110 inches. Your welcome to come by and check it out. I am located in Flower Mound Texas. I believe my Sony HW50ES is rated around the same Lumens as the JVC you listed. I am in a somewhat controlled lighting room, but I have white ceilings.


----------



## tiguej

Ryan,

The screen/images look awesome. Very impressed. I just had a BD Zero Edge 115" screen delivered. I still have a few items to take care of before I can install it. Looking to pair it with the Sony HW50. What speakers do you have with your system? Sub?


Thanks,


Jim


----------



## Ryan Peddle




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tiguej*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3090#post_22980518
> 
> 
> Ryan,
> 
> The screen/images look awesome. Very impressed. I just had a BD Zero Edge 115" screen delivered. I still have a few items to take care of before I can install it. Looking to pair it with the Sony HW50. What speakers do you have with your system? Sub?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Jim




Hey Jim,


My speakers are Paradigm Studio 100, CC690, ADP590 and a Sub15. Powered by a NAD M25, and my pre has recently been updated to a Anthem MRX300. Sound is sublime. Can't wait to put in some room treatments and do some better, more in depth calibration.



Here are a few recent screen shots I took using my Panasonic LX5 camera.


WALLe and EVE lightbulb
 



Last Crusade: Fedora and Grail Tablet
 



Last Crusade: Airplane bombing car
 



Last Crusade: Grail Book


----------



## TropMonk

Ugh, I ordered a used BD 1.4 113" fixed frame screen off ebay and it has two impact marks on the screen. The impact marks are on the part of the screen that we rolled on the inside of the packing cylinder so I know that it wasn't from shipping.







On top of that the screen was rolled up backwards to what the SI instructions show they ship packed up. This means I ended up putting the screen on backwards at first.


Anyhow, I did a time-lapse video of the buildup (minus the screen reversal fix) for you guys.






You can see pics of my impact marks here:
​
and
​

Thankfully it was through Ebay and Paypal so my butt is covered if I want to send it back. But I'm still sad...


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Dave447*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3090#post_22971316
> 
> 
> Would like to post I recently purchased a Black Diamond screen and it arrived damaged with a dent in the metal screen material. Screen Innovations arbitrarily determined it was caused by me (which it was not) and wouldn't honor their replacement warranty. Buyer beware on these very expensive screens - you are on your own if there's a problem.



Feel free to contact me directly to discuss. We do have to replace screens damaged in shipping, unfortunately, all to often. This is an inherent curse of shipping long squares in big, long and often heavy boxes. If your box had any shipping damage then the dealer should always refuse the order and have the shipper bring it back to the factory and we will be happy to replace the screen. Once you or the dealer has accepted the screen from the shipper then that's when it becomes difficult to ascertain when and how the damage happened. Was the screen dinged in the dealers warehouse or on the way out to the job? Was it damaged during the installation? When a customer makes a damaged screen claim we do not ever just arbitrarily decide not to replace the materials. We do require the dealer send us pictures of the damage and file an RMA request. the pictures are then shown to at least 3 staff member during from engineering, production and upper management. That team then decides what to do from there.


I am sorry you were unhappy with our decision but please understand we take each claim very seriously.


----------



## DrZaus

Any pictures of the performance series with the solar hd 1.3 4k?


----------



## DAlba

Does anyone know if it's possible/safe to ceiling mount a fixed black diamond screen besides the zero edge? I have slanted walls so I have to mount screen about two feet from the wall to have enough height clearance. I know I could build a false wall but would like to avoid that if possible. I am looking at a 133" 2.35 screen.


----------



## Floydster

I forgot to use quote. This was for the post inviting me to stop by in Texas.


I wish I could. I'm about 1500 miles from you in Idaho. I used to live in Fort Worth.


----------



## Floydster




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Ryan Peddle*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3090#post_22973300
> 
> 
> So here are some pics of my set and a quick couple of screenshots with different lighting conditions. Mits HC5 proj in use with a 100" 16:9 Black Diamond III screen with a gain of 1.4. The proj is mounted 14' from the screen and has only slight vertical lens shift used.
> 
> 
> All pictures are of the same exact image. One right after the other, from the same exact location in the room. About 13' back from the screen. Pay attention to the room walls as well. One thing I am very happy about this this Mits/Black Diamond combo is the lack of reflected light, yet the pop to the picture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is the projector mounted:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Screen:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Image on screen. From Prometheus. All 6 pot lights on, plus a high powered fluorescent work light on as well. Picture suffers slightly, and you can see the effect of the work light on the left hand side, mainly blacks, but still very watchable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is the same image with the rear pot lights off, the work light off, and the stage lights on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And finally, all lights off. Completely off, only projector image reflecting of the BD screen. Very happy to say the least.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let me know what you think.



Wow that is a great looking pic. How much does the screen weigh?


Floyd


----------



## TropMonk

it's not that heavy... My 113" fixed screen doesn't feel any heavier than 50lbs total (screen and frame). Prob much less than that.


Ah, just looked at the Magnolia site and they state my screen is 41lbs.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DAlba*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3120#post_23110442
> 
> 
> Does anyone know if it's possible/safe to ceiling mount a fixed black diamond screen besides the zero edge? I have slanted walls so I have to mount screen about two feet from the wall to have enough height clearance. I know I could build a false wall but would like to avoid that if possible. I am looking at a 133" 2.35 screen.



Feel free to contact me to discuss. I spoke to our production manager and he feels we should be able to modify one of our Zero Edge flying kits for a fixed frame. There would be some time and testing to be sure so let me know if you are interested.


blake


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *TropMonk*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3120#post_23113765
> 
> 
> it's not that heavy... My 113" fixed screen doesn't feel any heavier than 50lbs total (screen and frame). Prob much less than that.
> 
> 
> Ah, just looked at the Magnolia site and they state my screen is 41lbs.



If you use our online Screen Calculator http://www.screeninnovations.com/tools/screen-calculator/ . After you select size and material a box dimension and shipping weight will pop up below the screen cad image. If nothing pops up then the screen is custom and we don't know yet what the weight and box dims will be.


----------



## tiguej

I have a 115" BD Zero Edge with the light kit. I'm trying to decide what the best color would be for my screen wall. My first choice was to go with a dark burgundy. I am wondering if when I turn the light (kit) on will the color look ok. If any has any experience with this screen or any suggestions for the proper color it would be appreciated.

Thanks,


Jim


----------



## Floydster




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tiguej*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3120#post_23125965
> 
> 
> I have a 115" BD Zero Edge with the light kit. I'm trying to decide what the best color would be for my screen wall. My first choice was to go with a dark burgundy. I am wondering if when I turn the light (kit) on will the color look ok. If any has any experience with this screen or any suggestions for the proper color it would be appreciated.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Jim



Burgundy will work. I have blue on a dark blue wall. Any light that is not overly bright should work. The idea is to avoid the contrast of a bright rectangle against a really dark background. That causes eye strain. At least for me.


Floyd


----------



## TropMonk

The color choice for the surrounding LED's is such a personal opinion.


----------



## tiguej

Thanks. I just wanted to make sure it didn't look odd with a maroon hue around the screen.


----------



## DAlba




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3120#post_23122556
> 
> 
> Feel free to contact me to discuss. I spoke to our production manager and he feels we should be able to modify one of our Zero Edge flying kits for a fixed frame. There would be some time and testing to be sure so let me know if you are interested.
> 
> 
> blake



Thanks Blake, I am very interested and I will actually be in the Austin area in a couple of weeks so I was hoping to check out your showroom if you have one. I will contact you soon.


----------



## discodol

I am getting a Sony VPL-VW1000 to install in my living room.


I am looking for the perfect screen, of course, and am wondering if one of the Black Diamonds would work in my application.


I have venetian blinds on the windows so they only control so much of the light. I am going to need a motorized screen as I am keeping the plasma.


I am looking at around a 123" diagonal screen.


Which Black Diamond do you think would work best for me?


----------



## isisyodin

How safe is it to re-wrap a BD screen? I am planning on moving in a few months but would like to order a 106" fixed series screen soon.

I noticed that a clear film is clinged on the fabric on delivery which would not be possible to be reused. Any advise?


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *discodol*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3120#post_23190286
> 
> 
> ...I am looking at around a 123" diagonal screen.
> 
> 
> Which Black Diamond do you think would work best for me?



I think for the 16x9 format, the largest black diamond screen size is 113".


Dave


----------



## saskroadie

I covered and taped my BD screen with a lightweight poly (from the local hardware store) and rolled it up. I would be very confident of transporting the screen (myself) with it packed like this. Just work on a soft/clean surface and you'll be fine.


----------



## isisyodin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *saskroadie*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3120#post_23192472
> 
> 
> I covered and taped my BD screen with a lightweight poly (from the local hardware store) and rolled it up. I would be very confident of transporting the screen (myself) with it packed like this. Just work on a soft/clean surface and you'll be fine.



Thanks. Do you mean one of those roles of industrial cling wrap you can get at Home Depot?

I have also seen those you lay on the floor to protect from paint spills with different thickness numbers.


----------



## saskroadie

It's not cling wrap, just lightweight poly. The thinner the better. A little masking tape on the edges and roll it up. Just don't roll it too tight as to crease it...


----------



## isisyodin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *saskroadie*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3120#post_23193957
> 
> 
> It's not cling wrap, just lightweight poly. The thinner the better. A little masking tape on the edges and roll it up. Just don't roll it too tight as to crease it...



Got it.


----------



## Floydster




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3120#post_23191954
> 
> 
> I think for the 16x9 format, the largest black diamond screen size is 113".
> 
> 
> Dave



When you say 113" do you mean diagonal? Is there a formula to covert diagonal to height and width? What I'd like to do is measure the maximum distance between my speakers and pick the correct diagonal format to fill that space.


Thanks,


Floyd


----------



## BobL

Width x ~1.146


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *isisyodin*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3120#post_23190338
> 
> 
> How safe is it to re-wrap a BD screen? I am planning on moving in a few months but would like to order a 106" fixed series screen soon.
> 
> I noticed that a clear film is clinged on the fabric on delivery which would not be possible to be reused. Any advise?



Call me, I handle all the training for screen innovations so i have some tricks to re packing a screen i can share with you.


512 832 6939...If i am traveling the office will give you cell phone number.


Blake


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Floydster*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3120#post_23196148
> 
> 
> When you say 113" do you mean diagonal? Is there a formula to covert diagonal to height and width? What I'd like to do is measure the maximum distance between my speakers and pick the correct diagonal format to fill that space.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Floyd



You can print a drawing of any of our screens using our screen calculator under "tools" on the screen innovations web site. The drawings come in 1" increments. If you are having trouble with the calculator then call the factory and one of us can walk you through it or the sales team at AVS can help you. math sucks so use the calculator.


Blake


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3120#post_23191954
> 
> 
> I think for the 16x9 format, the largest black diamond screen size is 113".
> 
> 
> Dave



The largest framed BD in 16:9 is 113". The largest BD Zero Edge is 115". The largest Black Diamond motorized is currently 106" but we will have 110" soon.


In 2:35 the largest framed BD is 142" and the largest BD Zero is 144".


The limitation on the BD material is 57" in height. length is not really an issue, I can wrap a whole room in one piece of BD but I cannot make an image space taller than 57".


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *discodol*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3120#post_23190286
> 
> 
> I am getting a Sony VPL-VW1000 to install in my living room.
> 
> 
> I am looking for the perfect screen, of course, and am wondering if one of the Black Diamonds would work in my application.
> 
> 
> I have venetian blinds on the windows so they only control so much of the light. I am going to need a motorized screen as I am keeping the plasma.
> 
> 
> I am looking at around a 123" diagonal screen.
> 
> 
> Which Black Diamond do you think would work best for me?



We actually have a video of the Sony VPL 1000 shooting on a 144" (2:35 aspect ratio) Black Diamond Zero Edge in the 1.4 gain on our web site. The VPL 1000 has the memory zoom stretch feature that allows you to stretch a 2:35 movie out to fill a 2:35 screen without having to use an Anamorphic lens. So, you might want to consider a 2:35 aspect ratio an utilize the Black Diamonds ability to "automask" itself when watching 16:9 on a 2:35 screen. This will also allow you to get a bigger ULTRAWIDE movie screen.


Blake


----------



## discodol




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3120#post_23196749
> 
> 
> We actually have a video of the Sony VPL 1000 shooting on a 144" (2:35 aspect ratio) Black Diamond Zero Edge in the 1.4 gain on our web site. The VPL 1000 has the memory zoom stretch feature that allows you to stretch a 2:35 movie out to fill a 2:35 screen without having to use an Anamorphic lens. So, you might want to consider a 2:35 aspect ratio an utilize the Black Diamonds ability to "automask" itself when watching 16:9 on a 2:35 screen. This will also allow you to get a bigger ULTRAWIDE movie screen.
> 
> 
> Blake



Thanks Blake!


I have seen the video and it is one of the reasons I am on your trail!


Do you know if any of your dealers in the Ft Lauderdale area have something like this on display so I can check it out live?


----------



## dlynch34




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3120#post_23196749
> 
> 
> We actually have a video of the Sony VPL 1000 shooting on a 144" (2:35 aspect ratio) Black Diamond Zero Edge in the 1.4 gain on our web site. The VPL 1000 has the memory zoom stretch feature that allows you to stretch a 2:35 movie out to fill a 2:35 screen without having to use an Anamorphic lens. So, you might want to consider a 2:35 aspect ratio an utilize the Black Diamonds ability to "automask" itself when watching 16:9 on a 2:35 screen. This will also allow you to get a bigger ULTRAWIDE movie screen.
> 
> 
> Blake



what do you mean exactly the black diamond automask 16;9 content?


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dlynch34*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3120#post_23204109
> 
> 
> what do you mean exactly the black diamond automask 16;9 content?



Blake means the screen is already dark, so black bars do not show up as much as they do on most other screens.


----------



## vince325

Hi BLake I've looking at you screen since I saw it at a dealer and saw your you tube videos. Needless to say you sold me but recently came across some earlier post in this thread that said the Sony 50ES in not the best match. They were from a few years ago so wondering if you guys got that issue solved? Oh and are the LED kits still included in the zero edge screens or did I miss out? Thanks


----------



## mblobster

Hello folks. New guy here. Thanks btw for all the info. I am looking to get my very first projector. I have a question regarding the BD zero edge LED backlights: do the colors adjust automatically to match what is on the screen?


----------



## curtishd

I am interested in the 2.7 gain screen but need someone out there to do a test for me PLEASE:

I want to use this screen with a passive 3D set up and need to know if it will retain polarization. Can anyone test it with 2 of the cheap 3d glasses from the theater for me and report back?


----------



## Floydster




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BobL*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3120#post_23196609
> 
> 
> Width x ~1.146



Thanks!


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *discodol*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3120#post_23197375
> 
> 
> Thanks Blake!
> 
> 
> I have seen the video and it is one of the reasons I am on your trail!
> 
> 
> Do you know if any of your dealers in the Ft Lauderdale area have something like this on display so I can check it out live?





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *vince325*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3120#post_23220947
> 
> 
> Hi BLake I've looking at you screen since I saw it at a dealer and saw your you tube videos. Needless to say you sold me but recently came across some earlier post in this thread that said the Sony 50ES in not the best match. They were from a few years ago so wondering if you guys got that issue solved? Oh and are the LED kits still included in the zero edge screens or did I miss out? Thanks



Call me i can hook you up with a dealer showing a Black Diamond in FL.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *vince325*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3120#post_23220947
> 
> 
> Hi BLake I've looking at you screen since I saw it at a dealer and saw your you tube videos. Needless to say you sold me but recently came across some earlier post in this thread that said the Sony 50ES in not the best match. They were from a few years ago so wondering if you guys got that issue solved? Oh and are the LED kits still included in the zero edge screens or did I miss out? Thanks



I just finished 2 days of training useing a Sony ES 50 and I LOVE IT! Awesome projector for the money (and even more money) so i dont know why someone would say its not a good match?? I just left a room of 35 industry professionals who would strongly disagree. We pumped 20FC of light into the room and the 100" BD Zero Edge looked amazing with the ES 50 even in such a bright hotel conference room.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mblobster*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3120#post_23222837
> 
> 
> Hello folks. New guy here. Thanks btw for all the info. I am looking to get my very first projector. I have a question regarding the BD zero edge LED backlights: do the colors adjust automatically to match what is on the screen?



No the LED lights do NOT change to match the color and contrast of the image on the screen. Phillips tried that a few years back and the constantly changing lights, however suttle were still distracting. The LED lights can change colors but the way i use mine are Blue at 50% brightness for movies, Red at 100% for concert videos (i watch a lot of concert videos) and yellow ( i have tan walls so trust me in my room yellow works) but dimmed down to 40% for every day TV watching.


Here is an image of my living room BD 115" and you will notice that even with the room lights full on i leave the back lights up and i still get the cool Halo effect around the screen. This picture was taken with my Iphone and not doctored in any way.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *curtishd*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3120#post_23224196
> 
> 
> I am interested in the 2.7 gain screen but need someone out there to do a test for me PLEASE:
> 
> I want to use this screen with a passive 3D set up and need to know if it will retain polarization. Can anyone test it with 2 of the cheap 3d glasses from the theater for me and report back?



Actually your choices narrow when going with passive 3D. Passive 3D REQUIRES a polarize preserving screen so the BD 2.7 is one of a very few choices that support passive 3D. Passive also looks, well different than active 3D so i am not sure comparing a 3D active image to a 3D passive image will give you the answer you are looking for. I would suggest you have your dealer contact us for a larger sample that you can test with. Seeing is believing.


----------



## mblobster

Blake thanks for answering my question. Exactly what i was looking for. I love your setup, i was thinking about getting the 110 inch zero edge with a sony hw50es as my projector. You may have just convinced me to just go ahead a pull the trigger. Will ask for forgiveness from the wife after the fact lol


----------



## mblobster

Another question for purchasing. Does the l.e.d. kit come free with the 110 inch zero edge g2 screen? Who could i contact to order one of these? Looking to buy a.s.a.p. thanks for your help guys


----------



## gadgetfreaky

So I have a .8 103" zero edge, but one without the LED lightkit. Can I add on a light kit? Looks pretty cool. I'd love to add it to my screen.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mblobster*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150#post_23242744
> 
> 
> Another question for purchasing. Does the l.e.d. kit come free with the 110 inch zero edge g2 screen? Who could i contact to order one of these? Looking to buy a.s.a.p. thanks for your help guys



No the LED light kit adds $500 to the retail. But the LED adds a million $'s of fun







. The LED lights also make it easier on the eys iris to watch bright content in a dark room for long. Back lighting also gives a perceived improvement in contrast.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gadgetfreaky*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150#post_23247002
> 
> 
> So I have a .8 103" zero edge, but one without the LED lightkit. Can I add on a light kit? Looks pretty cool. I'd love to add it to my screen.



Yes you can add the lights later. How many strands will depend on the frame model you have. The G1 had a box frame and takes fewer lights to wrap around the box frame as the box is placed about half way from the center of the screen to the edge.. The new G2 frame has a channel built into the frame for the LED lights and runs along the edge of the screen requiring a longer strand of light tape. If you reach behind your screen and feel a 3" frame then you have the G2. if you cannot reach the frame with a finger then you have the box frame and a G1 series Zero Edge. FYI the material is the same only the frame changed.


----------



## KevinH




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150#post_23258008
> 
> 
> Yes you can add the lights later. How many strands will depend on the frame model you have. The G1 had a box frame and takes fewer lights to wrap around the box frame as the box is placed about half way from the center of the screen to the edge.. The new G2 frame has a channel built into the frame for the LED lights and runs along the edge of the screen requiring a longer strand of light tape. If you reach behind your screen and feel a 3" frame then you have the G2. if you cannot reach the frame with a finger then you have the box frame and a G1 series Zero Edge. FYI the material is the same only the frame changed.




Blake, can you check and see if you got a PM from me? If not, could you PM me please. I'm not sure mine is working. Thanks.


----------



## howletus

Can someone tell me how the black diamond has evolved over the last few years? I'm curious how a black diamond that was purchased a couple years ago is different from the current black diamond. Is there a model number somewhere on the screen that I can use to get the specs of the screen and when it was made?


Any info is appreciated.


Thanks...


----------



## Robinson ------

Hello. I am going to get my first projector & screen. I just got & really like the 64f8500, but still want a bigger screen. So, I can exchange the plasma for a projector. This is where Im at and I would appreciate any & all help on this since I dont know much about these setups.


Right know Im thinking Epson 5020 & a *110" 2:35 to 1* SI screen. I want it to be good to last longterm 5-10yrs, but dont want to spend over 2.5k on projector or 1.5k on screen. I have no idea if its better to put more $ in projector or screen (I would guess projector).


epson 5020

110" SI (what is the difference between the reference & performance)(I would love a *BD*, but their too much this time, unless a *lesser $ projector combined with a BD* screen would look better?)

Thinking *.085 grey* is best. I want lowest blacks possible & *I have the ideal viewing environment*. Ive read that a grey screen would work good with a bright projector (epson5020 is 2400 lumens).


Are their other brands that are better (I dont want to spend too much 3-4k).


If theres a better thread to get help on this, let me know. Thanks


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *howletus*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150#post_23264726
> 
> 
> Can someone tell me how the black diamond has evolved over the last few years? I'm curious how a black diamond that was purchased a couple years ago is different from the current black diamond. Is there a model number somewhere on the screen that I can use to get the specs of the screen and when it was made?
> 
> 
> Any info is appreciated.
> 
> 
> Thanks...



A lot has changed depending on the screen gain. Do you own a BD .8 or BD 1.4 or however unlikely a BD 2.7. We are now on our Black Diamond 4K material and the BD1.4 4K material is several shades darker than previous versions. Feel free to call me to chat and see what you have and how it compares to what we are now producing.


----------



## mblobster

Blake. I just ordered a BD zero edge here on AVS last week. Does this mean that I will be getting the latest version of the screen, what you said was 4K ready?


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Robinson ------*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150#post_23265698
> 
> 
> Hello. I am going to get my first projector & screen. I just got & really like the 64f8500, but still want a bigger screen. So, I can exchange the plasma for a projector. This is where Im at and I would appreciate any & all help on this since I dont know much about these setups.
> 
> 
> Right know Im thinking Epson 5020 & a *110" 2:35 to 1* SI screen. I want it to be good to last longterm 5-10yrs, but dont want to spend over 2.5k on projector or 1.5k on screen. I have no idea if its better to put more $ in projector or screen (I would guess projector).
> 
> 
> epson 5020
> 
> 110" SI (what is the difference between the reference & performance)(I would love a *BD*, but their too much this time, unless a *lesser $ projector combined with a BD* screen would look better?)
> 
> Thinking *.085 grey* is best. I want lowest blacks possible & *I have the ideal viewing environment*. Ive read that a grey screen would work good with a bright projector (epson5020 is 2400 lumens).
> 
> 
> Are their other brands that are better (I dont want to spend too much 3-4k).
> 
> 
> If theres a better thread to get help on this, let me know. Thanks



The Epson 5020 is not a good match with a 2.35 screen. The 5020 does not have lens memory, nor does it have power zoom, powered lens shift and powered focus. The JVC projectors have lens memory. Please give us a call and we can discuss specifics and pricing.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mblobster*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150#post_23268594
> 
> 
> Blake. I just ordered a BD zero edge here on AVS last week. Does this mean that I will be getting the latest version of the screen, what you said was 4K ready?



Yes you are getting the latest and greatest 4k materials.


----------



## 7channelfreak

Where do these Pure Zero Edge fit in the portfolio? What is the recommended use?


----------



## discodol




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *7channelfreak*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150#post_23273129
> 
> 
> Where do these Pure Zero Edge fit in the portfolio? What is the recommended use?



Any place you put a wall screen like http://www.avsforum.com/t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150#post_23242189


----------



## Deepsky4565

Any news on a perforated product?


----------



## gadgetfreaky




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150#post_23267355
> 
> 
> A lot has changed depending on the screen gain. Do you own a BD .8 or BD 1.4 or however unlikely a BD 2.7. We are now on our Black Diamond 4K material and the BD1.4 4K material is several shades darker than previous versions. Feel free to call me to chat and see what you have and how it compares to what we are now producing.



How do you know which screen I have? Has the BD .8 changed the last 2 years? How do I know if I have the newer or older?


----------



## gadgetfreaky




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150#post_23258008
> 
> 
> Yes you can add the lights later. How many strands will depend on the frame model you have. The G1 had a box frame and takes fewer lights to wrap around the box frame as the box is placed about half way from the center of the screen to the edge.. The new G2 frame has a channel built into the frame for the LED lights and runs along the edge of the screen requiring a longer strand of light tape. If you reach behind your screen and feel a 3" frame then you have the G2. if you cannot reach the frame with a finger then you have the box frame and a G1 series Zero Edge. FYI the material is the same only the frame changed.




There's a box frame but it's about 6" from the edge of the screen, bringing the screen 1.5" away fromt the wall. Is this the old G1?


----------



## gadgetfreaky

Also, can someone tell me if I have a bright room with windows behind, and to the side, do I get the 1.4 Gain or .8 gain? I thought reading somewhere that the Black Diamonds were opposite of what is normal screens in terms of gain?


I might be getting a larger screen since currently my throw is only 13'. In the new house my throw is 18-19 feet so looks like I'm going bigger screen. I'm currently using epson 5010. Any suggestions on what projector to use with the bigger screen?


----------



## Sean Max




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150#post_23267355
> 
> 
> A lot has changed depending on the screen gain. Do you own a BD .8 or BD 1.4 or however unlikely a BD 2.7. We are now on our Black Diamond 4K material and the BD1.4 4K material is several shades darker than previous versions. Feel free to call me to chat and see what you have and how it compares to what we are now producing.



Does the new BD 4K material have a less noticeable optical coating than the previous versions? I really like the screen but it seems to sparkle quite a bit in bright scenes in most of the demos I've had, even from quite a distance away.


----------



## howletus

This question was posed over a week ago. I'm hoping Blake of someone from SI will respond to it as I am wondering the same thing.


----------



## Steve Benkin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150#post_23271084
> 
> 
> The Epson 5020 is not a good match with a 2.35 screen. The 5020 does not have lens memory, nor does it have power zoom, powered lens shift and powered focus. The JVC projectors have lens memory. Please give us a call and we can discuss specifics and pricing.



Why not just add a panamorph lens? Even manual sled to remove it for non-2:35 material should work - yes?

I am considering getting a 2:35 with a Sony 50es (which also has no lens memory or powered zoom etc.)

My plan is get the 50es with the anamorphic manual lens and a large 2:35 BD 1.4 screen.

Won't this work?


----------



## biliam1982




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Steve Benkin*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150#post_23311709
> 
> 
> Why not just add a panamorph lens? Even manual sled to remove it for non-2:35 material should work - yes?
> 
> I am considering getting a 2:35 with a Sony 50es (which also has no lens memory or powered zoom etc.)
> 
> My plan is get the 50es with the anamorphic manual lens and a large 2:35 BD 1.4 screen.
> 
> Won't this work?



Steve, the Sony VPL-HW50ES and the Epson 5020UB don't have the vertical stretch modes to scale the image for Anamorphic Lens support. The Epson 6020 does.


You could always get an Oppo BD Player or an external VP to do the scaling.


----------



## BobL

I haven't use the Sony with an A-lens but according to Panamorph it has V-stretch mode for it.
http://www.panamorph.com/cinevista/whats_needed.html


----------



## Steve Benkin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *biliam1982*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150#post_23313667
> 
> 
> Steve, the Sony VPL-HW50ES and the Epson 5020UB don't have the vertical stretch modes to scale the image for Anamorphic Lens support. The Epson 6020 does.
> 
> 
> You could always get an Oppo BD Player or an external VP to do the scaling.



I am planning to get the OPPO.. Didn't realize it had that feature!


My point is: just because a project doesn't have power zoom/lens, doesn't mean one has to dismiss getting a 2:35 screen.


----------



## biliam1982




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BobL*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150#post_23313796
> 
> 
> I haven't use the Sony with an A-lens but according to Panamorph it has V-stretch mode for it.
> http://www.panamorph.com/cinevista/whats_needed.html



Bob, I have an email from Sony somewhere that says it doesn't. They told me one would have to step up to the VW95. If it does then that's great!


I think there's a lot of misinformation going around due to lack of crosstalk from engineers to marketing perhaps.


For instance, I was originally told by Panamoprh that the BenQ W7000 would support V-Stretch in 3D mode but it has since been verified it does not. This could be due to the updated firmware it received.


In no way am I blaming Panamorph as things could change from what was originally told to them and then specs change before product launch or firmware updates happen.


----------



## biliam1982




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Steve Benkin*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150#post_23313823
> 
> 
> I am planning to get the OPPO.. Didn't realize it had that feature!
> 
> 
> My point is: just because a project doesn't have power zoom/lens, doesn't mean one has to dismiss getting a 2:35 screen.



Steve, excellent point!


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Steve Benkin*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150#post_23311709
> 
> 
> Why not just add a panamorph lens? Even manual sled to remove it for non-2:35 material should work - yes?
> 
> I am considering getting a 2:35 with a Sony 50es (which also has no lens memory or powered zoom etc.)
> 
> My plan is get the 50es with the anamorphic manual lens and a large 2:35 BD 1.4 screen.
> 
> Won't this work?





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *biliam1982*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150#post_23313667
> 
> 
> Steve, the Sony VPL-HW50ES and the Epson 5020UB don't have the vertical stretch modes to scale the image for Anamorphic Lens support. The Epson 6020 does.
> 
> 
> You could always get an Oppo BD Player or an external VP to do the scaling.



The 5020 does not do the A-lens stretch, but the Sony HW50ES does do the A-lens stretch for 2D.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *biliam1982*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150#post_23313867
> 
> 
> Bob, I have an email from Sony somewhere that says it doesn't. They told me one would have to step up to the VW95. If it does then that's great!
> 
> 
> I think there's a lot of misinformation going around due to lack of crosstalk from engineers to marketing perhaps.
> 
> 
> For instance, I was originally told by Panamoprh that the BenQ W7000 would support V-Stretch in 3D mode but it has since been verified it does not. This could be due to the updated firmware it received.
> 
> 
> In no way am I blaming Panamorph as things could change from what was originally told to them and then specs change before product launch or firmware updates happen.



I think the confusion comes from how the question is asked. The Sony can do the vertical stretch for 2D, but can't do the vertical stretch for 3D.


----------



## mblobster

Disclaimer: Im a newb


just got my screen yesterday: black diamond zero edge 110 inches 1.4 gain. I'm using abrand new sony hw50es 16ft away., mounted on a ceiling just above the top of the screen. I sit 13 ft away.


first thing I noticed about the screen when firing up my projector, is a hot-spot the size of a soccer ball at about the center of the screen. I wasn't looking for it, it just popped out at me. it is a little disappointing. Also, The screen looks good with my my recessed lighting on fully lit, however, daytime viewing was a little bit disappointing. Maybe I had high expectations? I don't know what to do. how do I combat this sparkling nuisance? please help me out here. Thanks in advance


----------



## Xzibit190

I myself just got a zero edge 100 inch 1.4 gain with a Panasonic PT-AE8000, I sit about 15 ft away but the projector is about 13ft away from the screen. I find it to work perfectly with a well lit room but yeah the daytime viewing for me isn't the best but really depends on how much light you let in I found, I do have a lot of windows in my room though so it's probably just me. I'd think if your seeing a hotspot you'd need to move the projector back some or possibly reduce the output like mine has an eco mode which I haven't really used yet since brighter is better during the day.


You said your sitting 13ft away but is that how far the projector is away from the screen as well?


----------



## isisyodin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xzibit190*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3180#post_23322540
> 
> 
> I myself just got a zero edge 100 inch 1.4 gain with a Panasonic PT-AE8000, I sit about 15 ft away but the projector is about 13ft away from the screen. I find it to work perfectly with a well lit room but yeah the daytime viewing for me isn't the best but really depends on how much light you let in I found, I do have a lot of windows in my room though so it's probably just me. I'd think if your seeing a hotspot you'd need to move the projector back some or possibly reduce the output like mine has an eco mode which I haven't really used yet since brighter is better during the day.
> 
> 
> You said your sitting 13ft away but is that how far the projector is away from the screen as well?



SI screens work best reflecting indirect lighting. For example, if you have light sources on the ceiling and sidewalls (in both cases close to the screen). The more direct the light is to your screen the worst it will be; in fact, it will (with 1.4 gain) augment the light source just as if it were the light shooting off the projector.

As far as hot spotting, screens with high gains are prone to it (not just SI's). Your screen appears to have too much gain for your projector lumen output. I don't know much about your Sony projector (JVC guy), but it seems like it is way too bright for a 1.4 gain screen at the distance you have installed it for the size of your screen. As a rule of thumb, light reflected off the screen is combination of screen gain, screen size, projector distance and projector light output (lumen).

Yes, you can try setting the lamp mode to normal or eco mode (different names for different projector brands) or closing the iris if your projector has one. These two would be the more practical solutions. The more complex one would be to push your projector back a few feet (if you have the room and your cables reach). Also, have your projector calibrated, or get a DIY calibration disk at least. Adjusting to the proper brightness and contrast helps a lot.

Finally, if you discussed your setup with your AV dealer prior to buying your screen, I would call them up and complain about it. From your comments, it looks like a 0.8 gain should have been a better choice.


----------



## KevinH

I also just got a zero edge 110" 1.4. I haven't hung it yet because I still need to finish paint and flooring. I am using an Epson 5020UB. Throw distance is about 15'6" and I'll be sitting about 12'. Maybe Blake can chime in if he sees this. I wonder if the material is tested for hot spots after manufacture and summarily rejected if it doesn't pass or if all hot-spotting is a result of a proj/screen combo and/or set-up anamoly?


----------



## isisyodin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *KevinH*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3180#post_23322879
> 
> 
> I also just got a zero edge 110" 1.4. I haven't hung it yet because I still need to finish paint and flooring. I am using an Epson 5020UB. Throw distance is about 15'6" and I'll be sitting about 12'. Maybe Blake can chime in if he sees this. I wonder if the material is tested for hot spots after manufacture and summarily rejected if it doesn't pass or if all hot-spotting is a result of a proj/screen combo and/or set-up anamoly?



I doubt it is a manufacturing defect.

Your Epson is spec'ed out at 2400 lumens which is up there on brightness (Epson's are known for being nice and bright). I remember SI advertising one of their screens with a similar Epson (not sure which screen material nor Epson model) on a video they had on their website, so it should work OK. Now, the key will be at what throw distance.

Hopefully someone from SI will chime in and give us his opinion.


----------



## mblobster

Thanks for the help guys. I mentioned that my projector lens is 16 ft away from the screen. I have maybe 3 ft left to push my projector back, so that may be my last resort. I'll try messing around with the projectors settings first. What self calibration disc do you guys recommend?. Overall though the screen looks solid, no dings, scratches, etc. I'm happy in that regard.


----------



## Xzibit190

Good info here:
http://www.avsforum.com/t/1470226/which-setup-disc-s-do-you-use


----------



## mblobster

Isis, good call on the direct lighting on the screen. I have a standard sized window directly behind me coming from my kitchen. I decided to cover that up and that made the image a lot less washed out. thanks for that. I also have 3 big windows off to the side of the screen and that isn't as much of an issue as the window directly facing the screen.


Thanks for the link Xzibit, will check that out right now


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mblobster*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3180#post_23324005
> 
> 
> Thanks for the help guys. I mentioned that my projector lens is 16 ft away from the screen. I have maybe 3 ft left to push my projector back, so that may be my last resort. I'll try messing around with the projectors settings first. What self calibration disc do you guys recommend?. Overall though the screen looks solid, no dings, scratches, etc. I'm happy in that regard.



The minimum throw distance for your screen material is 1.2. With your 16' on a 96" wide (110" diag.) screen, your throw ratio is 2.0. Hot spotting should not be an issue. What mode are you using your projector in? Also you can't move your projector back 3'. You are already near the max long throw range of the projector. You can only move it back to 17'. The problem is something else.


----------



## gadgetfreaky




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gadgetfreaky*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150#post_23283032
> 
> 
> There's a box frame but it's about 6" from the edge of the screen, bringing the screen 1.5" away fromt the wall. Is this the old G1?





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gadgetfreaky*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150#post_23283024
> 
> 
> How do you know which screen I have? Has the BD .8 changed the last 2 years? How do I know if I have the newer or older?



would appreciate a response on this.


thanks


----------



## mnj1987




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Steve Benkin*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150_50#post_23311709
> 
> 
> Why not just add a panamorph lens? Even manual sled to remove it for non-2:35 material should work - yes?
> 
> I am considering getting a 2:35 with a Sony 50es (which also has no lens memory or powered zoom etc.)
> 
> My plan is get the 50es with the anamorphic manual lens and a large 2:35 BD 1.4 screen.
> 
> Won't this work?



I just ordered the Sony 50ES with an Prismasonic Anamorphic lens to use on a 2.35:1 Black Diamond 1.4 110" screen.

Are you saying the Sony 50ES is a bad fit for 2.35:1?


I also ordered a Cambridge Audio 751BD Universal Blu-ray Player.


----------



## Steve Benkin

just the opposite.. I thought it was a great fit.. But others were doubting if this combination would work.


I think the OPPO may be an important piece to display the movie properly and to move subtitles so they can be seen.


That being said, I have recently read some very interesting articles that Blu-ray limits the resolution when showing through an anamorphic lens. ( http://www.avsforum.com/t/1436729/anamorphic-encoded-blu-rays-on-the-horizon )


I didn't know that. This alone has changed my mind to get a 2:35 screen with an anamorphic lens.


Getting a large 16:9 screen instead.


Also rethinking about BD. Reading about people having issues with "sheen." More importantly I have just had the opportunity to see a BD live - and was not impressed. It was being fed by the Sony 30es, and it did not make me want to purchase that screen. The colors seemed dull - which makes me wonder if something was wrong with the setup. Maybe it was a BD .8? That could explain it.


However since my walls are light, I do not think I have much choice but to go with the BD 1.4.


Let me know how that Sony/BD combo works for you!!


----------



## howletus

Steve. I agree. I am rethinking the BD as well for a few reasons.


1) I still have not seen a response from Blake or SI on the questions about whether the latest material has improved performance regarding sheen or sparkling. I think we all understand this is just one of the compromises you have to make with some of the light rejecting higher gain screens but I still want to know if the new offerings perform better than the old in this regard.


2) I just don't see that these higher end screens are worth 8 to 10 times what a normal screen that is NOT optimized for bright rooms costs. At least not for someone that is on a budget.


People on this forum have taken the time to do in depth projector comparisons. I would love to see an unbiased screen comparison between a Black Diamond, DNP, Stewart Firehawk, and a normal screen that does not claim to perform well in bright rooms. A comparison that doesn't hide the fact that there is some sparkling and hot spotting on some of these screens. A comparison that shows you worst case scenarios for different room conditions AND how these screens perform at night against a normal screen. At least then you could have confidence choosing a screen based on YOUR room conditions. I just can't spend $3 to $4K or 10X more for something when I don't know what all the trade-offs are.


My search for a screen continues. I am willing to spend $4k+ on screen if it gives me a good viewing experience in my room both day and night but I have yet to find one that claims to do this AND warrants the 10X price difference over something that is a bit washed out during the day but performs comparably or better at night (no hot spotting, sparkling, color shift, poor viewing angle, etc). I think we're just not there yet for a non-dedicated room and we just live with the compromises. I welcome someone to prove me wrong though.

This is coming from someone that just compared a $4k+ screen sample with a screen that cost $400. I was ready to spend the money to get a GREAT picture but there just wasn't that much difference when all things were considered. Not for me anyway. Not in my room.


----------



## BobL


There is a difference in screens but the room plays such a big role, the screen has to be for the right application.  Take for instance a basic white screen, say under $500 which is basically cheap vinyl.  A white screen with no coating or gain will get the best performance with no lights in an all black room, preferably covered in black velvet.  In these conditions you will see the difference between the basic white screens and the more expensive models.  And these are the conditions a white screen should be considered.  As the room conditions get worse (i.e color of walls, ambient lighting) the difference between these white screens will not be as great and the picture quality will suffer.  Now, if your room is relatively dark colored and you do the most of the viewing with the lights off getting a better screen would be a good improvement.  Now, if your conditions aren't great I wouldn't recommend these white screens but if you plan to use one anyway then don't spend the extra for a high end one.

 

The high contrast screens work by helping contrast and adding a gain coating to reflect more of the light towards the audience and not scatter it everywhere.  To help with contrast we start with a gray screen, making the blacks darker gives us better perceived contrast even if the whites get reduced as well.  Then a coating for gain is applied.  Even if a screen is a negative gain, it might have a gain coating applied.  For example the BD .8 is a very dark screen and is probably a .5 or less gray screen with a coating to bring it to .8, the 2.7 is a whiter screen with a gain coating applied.  How dark of a base screen, uniformity of the base screen, how much gain is added, uniformity of gain applied, direction of gain (some do better with overhead lighting, some better from the sides, etc.) all play a part in the design decisions when manufacturing a screen.  The better screens have pretty involved processes and cost more.

 

Once a coating is applied you are bending light and some artifacts will be introduced and viewing angle will be reduced if you are reflecting more light back to the viewers.  There is no free lunch with light and physics.  The question is how noticeable are the artifacts and does the positive attributes outweigh the tradeoffs.  No one is going to recommend one of these high contrast gain screens for a screen in a reference "bat cave" type environment.  It will be easier to notice these artifacts in a reference environment but that is not the application these screens were intended.

 

Many of use our projection systems in a variety of conditions and we have to decide which attributes are most important to us and what tradeoffs we are willing to live with.  No screen is perfect for all situations.  One has to decide which screen is best for their situation.


----------



## sipester




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *howletus*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3180#post_23337047
> 
> 
> Steve. I agree. I am rethinking the BD as well for a few reasons.
> 
> 
> 1) I still have not seen a response from Blake or SI on the questions about whether the latest material has improved performance regarding sheen or sparkling. I think we all understand this is just one of the compromises you have to make with some of the light rejecting higher gain screens but I still want to know if the new offerings perform better than the old in this regard.
> 
> 
> 2) I just don't see that these higher end screens are worth 8 to 10 times what a normal screen that is NOT optimized for bright rooms costs. At least not for someone that is on a budget.
> 
> 
> People on this forum have taken the time to do in depth projector comparisons. I would love to see an unbiased screen comparison between a Black Diamond, DNP, Stewart Firehawk, and a normal screen that does not claim to perform well in bright rooms. A comparison that doesn't hide the fact that there is some sparkling and hot spotting on some of these screens. A comparison that shows you worst case scenarios for different room conditions AND how these screens perform at night against a normal screen. At least then you could have confidence choosing a screen based on YOUR room conditions. I just can't spend $3 to $4K or 10X more for something when I don't know what all the trade-offs are.
> 
> 
> My search for a screen continues. I am willing to spend $4k+ on screen if it gives me a good viewing experience in my room both day and night but I have yet to find one that claims to do this AND warrants the 10X price difference over something that is a bit washed out during the day but performs comparably or better at night (no hot spotting, sparkling, color shift, poor viewing angle, etc). I think we're just not there yet for a non-dedicated room and we just live with the compromises. I welcome someone to prove me wrong though.
> 
> This is coming from someone that just compared a $4k+ screen sample with a screen that cost $400. I was ready to spend the money to get a GREAT picture but there just wasn't that much difference when all things were considered. Not for me anyway. Not in my room.



Now that 80 - 90 inch Sharp LCD's are coming down in price, it seems that it may be better to get one of those for daytime viewing and then just get a white, drop down screen for night viewing. In that way, you essentially get the best of both worlds, and the savings on the plain white screen can help fund the purchase of the LCD. With the LCD option, you give up some size, but you still get a very respectable sized image for daytime that is likely much better at ambient light than a light-rejecting screen, and at night you also get a better image as well.


When LCD's & Plasma's were very expensive (or not widely available) in sizes above 60", then something like the Black Diamond or DNP made a lot of sense. Now it seems that the time has past for those types of screens since larger flat planels are now available.


----------



## isisyodin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BobL*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3180#post_23337336
> 
> 
> There is a difference in screens but the room plays such a big role, the screen has to be for the right application.  Take for instance a basic white screen, say under $500 which is basically cheap vinyl.  A white screen with no coating or gain will get the best performance with no lights in an all black room, preferably covered in black velvet.  In these conditions you will see the difference between the basic white screens and the more expensive models.  And these are the conditions a white screen should be considered.  As the room conditions get worse (i.e color of walls, ambient lighting) the difference between these white screens will not be as great and the picture quality will suffer.  Now, if your room is relatively dark colored and you do the most of the viewing with the lights off getting a better screen would be a good improvement.  Now, if your conditions aren't great I wouldn't recommend these white screens but if you plan to use one anyway then don't spend the extra for a high end one.
> 
> 
> The high contrast screens work by helping contrast and adding a gain coating to reflect more of the light towards the audience and not scatter it everywhere.  To help with contrast we start with a gray screen, making the blacks darker gives us better perceived contrast even if the whites get reduced as well.  Then a coating for gain is applied.  Even if a screen is a negative gain, it might have a gain coating applied.  For example the BD .8 is a very dark screen and is probably a .5 or less gray screen with a coating to bring it to .8, the 2.7 is a whiter screen with a gain coating applied.  How dark of a base screen, uniformity of the base screen, how much gain is added, uniformity of gain applied, direction of gain (some do better with overhead lighting, some better from the sides, etc.) all play a part in the design decisions when manufacturing a screen.  The better screens have pretty involved processes and cost more.
> 
> 
> Once a coating is applied you are bending light and some artifacts will be introduced and viewing angle will be reduced if you are reflecting more light back to the viewers.  There is no free lunch with light and physics.  The question is how noticeable are the artifacts and does the positive attributes outweigh the tradeoffs.  No one is going to recommend one of these high contrast gain screens for a screen in a reference "bat cave" type environment.  It will be easier to notice these artifacts in a reference environment but that is not the application these screens were intended.
> 
> 
> Many of use our projection systems in a variety of conditions and we have to decide which attributes are most important to us and what tradeoffs we are willing to live with.  No screen is perfect for all situations.  One has to decide which screen is best for their situation.



I agree to the extend that not even the same projector will work on a very bright room nor dim room; in fact, 3D is another variable for which you have to compromise. For example, I used to have an Epson which was very bright which was awesome for sports on fairly lit room; movies was another story. I went to a JVC because of the movie picture quality was much better in my opinion. Therefore, I am overall very happy with my choice which is mainly movies and TV in a dark room.

I think that if you have the space and money (4K is a good budget) I would get a retractable Firehawk G3 or similar for nigh viewing and a BD for daylight viewing. You could probably use the BD for 3D viewing as well.


----------



## mnj1987

Steve, the 751bd moves the subtitles up and down as well. My room has cream walls, but most of my viewing will be in the night time so I went with the BD with a 1.4 gain.

I guess the only thing Im worried about is if I should change from a flat to a curved screen. I will be sitting around 15' away, and my throw distance is 2.15. The projector will be directly on top of where I am sitting.


----------



## ajistheman

i'm designing a house and will either go with a dedicated theater room with NO windows in it. or go with an open rec room with a projector (with one window that will be covered with barely any light being able to pass through).


I will use it to watch tv (mostly sports), video games, and just use the room to listen to music on my speakers.


so from reading the past few pages of comments, it looks like I should go with a Black Diamond screen if I do the rec room with a projector in it.



and go with a different screen if I will have a mostly black theater, or dimmed theater so i can walk around and such in it?


price isn't a big deal to me, i would prefer 16-9 and 150 or so inches and that's not available with black diamond. but if the picture is much better i would give up.



related question. what's this 2.5:1 or whatever screen size they have. How is watching satllite or blu-rays on it, since they are both 16:9.

(Same with watching old 4:3 tv shows)?


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ajistheman*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3180#post_23338088
> 
> 
> i'm designing a house and will either go with a dedicated theater room with NO windows in it. or go with an open rec room with a projector (with one window that will be covered with barely any light being able to pass through).
> 
> 
> I will use it to watch tv (mostly sports), video games, and just use the room to listen to music on my speakers.
> 
> 
> so from reading the past few pages of comments, it looks like I should go with a Black Diamond screen if I do the rec room with a projector in it.
> 
> 
> 
> and go with a different screen if I will have a mostly black theater, or dimmed theater so i can walk around and such in it?
> 
> 
> price isn't a big deal to me, i would prefer 16-9 and 150 or so inches and that's not available with black diamond. but if the picture is much better i would give up.
> 
> 
> 
> related question. what's this 2.5:1 or whatever screen size they have. How is watching satllite or blu-rays on it, since they are both 16:9.
> 
> (Same with watching old 4:3 tv shows)?



You are asking about a scope screen. Some times called 2.35. This is the aspect ration of many movies. When you watch a movie on your HD TV and you have black bars top and bottom, the image is shown in scope format. Now imagine a great big screen like that. The draw back to a scope screen is, your 16:9 material will be much smaller. Scope format is the movie lovers screen. Also you have to select equipment to work together to produce a scope image. You can do so by using a projector that has lens memory. You can use a video processor to re-scale the image or you can use an Anamorphic lens. If you want to get into this more, shoot me an email. I sent you a PM.


----------



## howletus

So I think I've decided against the DNP 08-85 screen. I had an 80" sample for a week and I was comparing to my interim Elite Sabel 1.8 gain screen. I just didn't see much of a difference in my room between the two screens that would justify the 10X price difference. I will post this in another thread but just thought I would solicit the input of the BD owners. I think the DNP is best suited for light coming from above the screen. My problem light is from the side so It didn't perform much better than the $380 Elite screen in that regard. Also, because the Elite is listed at 1.8 gain it was much brighter than the 0.8 DNP which I preferred both for sports duing the day AND movies at night. There is a bit of hot spotting on the Elite but not terrible. Go figure. I actually preferred the $380 screen over the $3800 screen. Maybe the DNP is just not the best screen for my application. One thing I still need to see is if the DNP 08-85 material throws less light back to my room that has bright colored walls and a white ceiling. Obviously the Elite screen has its flaws which is why my search for a screen continues. At this point I am looking for something in between the two price points. Any advice is welcomed.


Projector - Sony HW50es

Screen Size - 110 to 115" max

Throw - 12'

Seating Distance - 11 to 13'

Viewing break down 40% sports, 10% hdtv, 50% movies, some 3D.

Non-dedicated living room with some ambient and room lighting from the side and opposite the screen but no light from above the screen.



I might take another look at BD because of my side ambient light issue but I can also just black out that problem window but that gets me back to ground zero in deciding on a screen. I more about getting the best screen for my room than the cost but aside from the Black Diamond side ambient like rejection, what other screen will give me the best performance overall?


----------



## Steve Benkin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *howletus*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3180#post_23337047
> 
> 
> Steve. I agree. I am rethinking the BD as well for a few reasons.
> 
> 
> 1) I still have not seen a response from Blake or SI on the questions about whether the latest material has improved performance regarding sheen or sparkling. I think we all understand this is just one of the compromises you have to make with some of the light rejecting higher gain screens but I still want to know if the new offerings perform better than the old in this regard.
> 
> 
> 2) I just don't see that these higher end screens are worth 8 to 10 times what a normal screen that is NOT optimized for bright rooms costs. At least not for someone that is on a budget.
> 
> 
> People on this forum have taken the time to do in depth projector comparisons. I would love to see an unbiased screen comparison between a Black Diamond, DNP, Stewart Firehawk, and a normal screen that does not claim to perform well in bright rooms. A comparison that doesn't hide the fact that there is some sparkling and hot spotting on some of these screens. A comparison that shows you worst case scenarios for different room conditions AND how these screens perform at night against a normal screen. At least then you could have confidence choosing a screen based on YOUR room conditions. I just can't spend $3 to $4K or 10X more for something when I don't know what all the trade-offs are.
> 
> 
> My search for a screen continues. I am willing to spend $4k+ on screen if it gives me a good viewing experience in my room both day and night but I have yet to find one that claims to do this AND warrants the 10X price difference over something that is a bit washed out during the day but performs comparably or better at night (no hot spotting, sparkling, color shift, poor viewing angle, etc). I think we're just not there yet for a non-dedicated room and we just live with the compromises. I welcome someone to prove me wrong though.
> 
> This is coming from someone that just compared a $4k+ screen sample with a screen that cost $400. I was ready to spend the money to get a GREAT picture but there just wasn't that much difference when all things were considered. Not for me anyway. Not in my room.



One thing that I thinks get lost in all of this is the color of the side walls and carpet. We seem to focus so much on "how much light do I want on when I am watching? what about the windows?" These are controllable. Turn off the lights. put black curtains on the windows.


However, it is the light bouncing off the walls (especially the side walls) and the floor that ultimately may be the 'gotcha.' I took a picture of my room with all the lights off, windows blocked. I snapped it and was FLOORED at how bright the room was with the tiny flash of the phone camera! It was as if I turned on the lights at about 50%! And that was the lumens from my phone! Imagine what the light BOUNCING OFF THE WALLS AND FLOOR will look like with a projector pumping out 1000+ lumens! I think THAT is my concern.


My prior house had black ceiling and walls, dark carpet and black chairs. About as much as a bat cave as I have been in. White screen for that room is fine.


This room? I am leaning that I don't really have a choice but to explore a BD.


To further drive home the point, I called up Carada and spoke to them about my situation and was very surprised that they said they didn't think any of their screens were best suited for my environment. They offered to send me samples, but I left the call thinking that I needed something like a BD.


I think as more of us are moving away from dedicated HT rooms, and looking more and more to having a projector/screen combo in a multi-purpose room, screen manufacturers have to come up with alternatives besides BD and Firehawk - both which are pretty expensive options. As the price of projectors come further down (even the sub $3k projectors are getting decent reviews), that we will get to a point where the screen will cost just as much - if not more - than the projector. At that point (and I think we are not that far away from there right now), we need something more affordable to meet our needs.


Just my opinion of course.. Caveat emptor, YMMV, and all that stuff.


----------



## BobL


Unfortunately, it is not cheap to make these screens well.  Some other options that are less expensive are Da-lite High Contrast Cinema Vision or Stewart Cima Tiburon.  Or for cheaper options a basic gray screen helps but you need the lumens to use them.  If you don't go too big they can work decent for not much money.


----------



## Steve Benkin

Unfortunately reviews for those cheaper screens are not encouraging.


And the BD can't go larger than a 113" 16:9 screen.


No perfect screen, that's for sure...


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Steve Benkin*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3180#post_23336914
> 
> 
> 
> That being said, I have recently read some very interesting articles that Blu-ray limits the resolution when showing through an anamorphic lens. ( http://www.avsforum.com/t/1436729/anamorphic-encoded-blu-rays-on-the-horizon )
> 
> 
> I didn't know that. This alone has changed my mind to get a 2:35 screen with an anamorphic lens.
> 
> 
> Getting a large 16:9 screen instead.




I'd say not so fast on that decision. Your post implies that you started with some interest in a 2:35:1 CIH set up, is that correct?


If so, I suggest you do a bit more research because it appears you might not have fully understood what is going on in CIH set ups. Blu-Ray doesn't "limit the resolution when showing through an anamorphic lens." You will still get exactly the same resolution in a 2:35:1 CIH set up with an A-lens as you would if you had no anamorphic lens with a 16:9 screen. In fact, with an A-lens you'll actually get more pixels on your screen for the image than if you stuck with a 16:9 screen. That is, in a 16:9 set up all the pixels that are turned "off" on your projector (projecting black) to make the black bars for a 2:35:1 image would instead, with an A-lens and anamorphic processing, be remapped to ALL your projector's pixels. It's not an increase in source detail per-se, but it can have some beneficial effects. (Sometimes increasing image brightness when compared to zooming the image out, sometimes adding a smoother more "dense" looking image with that finer pixel structure on screen).


But all that is mostly a means to the main end of a 2:35:1 CIH system over a 16:9 system: It makes CinemaScope images FAR larger (usually because you'd be buying a wider 2:35:1 screen than a 16:9 screen) and at the very least will make Scope images much more immersive than your 16:9 images. And no black bars at all for CinemaScope movies - it's hard to appreciate just how much better that is until you've lived with it, then you can't go back.


There is this issue: In a CIH system you are increasing the image size for CinemaScope content and any time you make an image bigger you put more stress on the quality of the source material. (You'd have exactly the same problem if you buy a bigger 16:9 screen instead of a scope screen). However, the quality in Blu-Ray sources generally handle being larger quite well, sometimes startlingly so (sometimes you don't know just how sharp a Blu-Ray image is until you see just how big it can get and remain that sharp). By far the vast majority of people who went with a CIH system have found any issues swamped by the satisfaction of a much larger, more immersive and cinematic CinemaScope image with no black bars (feels more professional and cinematic that way).


So, if you are intrigued by the concept of a much larger CinemaScope image with no black bars, don't give up too fast. **


Rich H


**(Of course with a CIH set up you do get black bars on the sides for 16:9/1:85:1 content, but they can usually be masked away more easily than the top bottom black bars on a 16:9 screen).


----------



## Screen Innovatio




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Steve Benkin*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3180#post_23341892
> 
> 
> Unfortunately reviews for those cheaper screens are not encouraging.
> 
> 
> And the BD can't go larger than a 113" 16:9 screen.
> 
> 
> No perfect screen, that's for sure...



115" on Zero Edge - to get an idea how a 115" looks see the video www.screeninnovations.com


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Steve Benkin*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3180#post_23339841
> 
> 
> One thing that I thinks get lost in all of this is the color of the side walls and carpet. We seem to focus so much on "how much light do I want on when I am watching? what about the windows?" These are controllable. Turn off the lights. put black curtains on the windows.
> 
> 
> However, it is the light bouncing off the walls (especially the side walls) and the floor that ultimately may be the 'gotcha.' I took a picture of my room with all the lights off, windows blocked. I snapped it and was FLOORED at how bright the room was with the tiny flash of the phone camera! It was as if I turned on the lights at about 50%! And that was the lumens from my phone! Imagine what the light BOUNCING OFF THE WALLS AND FLOOR will look like with a projector pumping out 1000+ lumens! I think THAT is my concern.
> 
> 
> My prior house had black ceiling and walls, dark carpet and black chairs. About as much as a bat cave as I have been in. White screen for that room is fine.
> 
> 
> This room? I am leaning that I don't really have a choice but to explore a BD.
> 
> 
> To further drive home the point, I called up Carada and spoke to them about my situation and was very surprised that they said they didn't think any of their screens were best suited for my environment. They offered to send me samples, but I left the call thinking that I needed something like a BD.
> 
> 
> I think as more of us are moving away from dedicated HT rooms, and looking more and more to having a projector/screen combo in a multi-purpose room, screen manufacturers have to come up with alternatives besides BD and Firehawk - both which are pretty expensive options. As the price of projectors come further down (even the sub $3k projectors are getting decent reviews), *that we will get to a point where the screen will cost just as much - if not more - than the projector.* At that point (and I think we are not that far away from there right now), we need something more affordable to meet our needs.
> 
> 
> Just my opinion of course.. Caveat emptor, YMMV, and all that stuff.



Keep in mind, Screens, amps and speakers are usually the few items in an HT that do not get upgraded often. What I mean, buy the correct screen and speakers for you and you will keep them a long time. AVR's and projectors on the other hand, get changed out often. So rather than look at the cost ratio of one projector to one screen, maybe you should look at the ratio of two or three projectors to one screen. In other words, get a good screen and you should be good for a very long time. Your projector, you will be wanting to replace it in a few years.


----------



## TropMonk

I have a 113" 1.4 Fixed frame setup with a dink in the screen. I'd be interested in getting a quote on a replacement screen for it.


Can anyone here help with that?


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *TropMonk*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3180#post_23349057
> 
> 
> I have a 113" 1.4 Fixed frame setup with a dink in the screen. I'd be interested in getting a quote on a replacement screen for it.
> 
> 
> Can anyone here help with that?



I am checking on it for you.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mblobster*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3180#post_23321056
> 
> 
> Disclaimer: Im a newb
> 
> 
> just got my screen yesterday: black diamond zero edge 110 inches 1.4 gain. I'm using abrand new sony hw50es 16ft away., mounted on a ceiling just above the top of the screen. I sit 13 ft away.
> 
> 
> first thing I noticed about the screen when firing up my projector, is a hot-spot the size of a soccer ball at about the center of the screen. I wasn't looking for it, it just popped out at me. it is a little disappointing. Also, The screen looks good with my my recessed lighting on fully lit, however, daytime viewing was a little bit disappointing. Maybe I had high expectations? I don't know what to do. how do I combat this sparkling nuisance? please help me out here. Thanks in advance



I always recommend using 3 brightness settings when using a BD. Call 1 flame thrower mode for watching in a very bright room. This is usually called Dynamic or Living room is the projectors native/factory settings. With my Epson 5020 in my living room for daytime viewing i use the living room mode. Dynamic is brighter but it crushes the whites so Living room mode is better in my living room. My daytime viewing is great but i did need to treat a window located behind the projector. No direct sunlight was coming through the window but i was getting a lot of glare from the almost white concrete on the patio reflecting (or refracting) sunlight.

In the Evening when its just room lights in my living room and no sunshine or glare then we switch to Natural. the natural setting is not as bright and also the projectors fan is not as loud.

For dark room watching i use the factory THX setting.

If you want to see my living room check out the video on the screen innovation home page.

PS. - dogs name is Scout.


The sparkle effect will happen with just about all positive gain screens. the good news is the sparkle has an optical effect of sitting in front of the actual image. So. my experience is after two weeks your eyes relax to see past the sparkle. i live with a 115" BD Zero Edge and I do not see the sparkle anymore.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mblobster*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3180#post_23321056
> 
> 
> Disclaimer: Im a newb
> 
> 
> just got my screen yesterday: black diamond zero edge 110 inches 1.4 gain. I'm using abrand new sony hw50es 16ft away., mounted on a ceiling just above the top of the screen. I sit 13 ft away.
> 
> 
> first thing I noticed about the screen when firing up my projector, is a hot-spot the size of a soccer ball at about the center of the screen. I wasn't looking for it, it just popped out at me. it is a little disappointing. Also, The screen looks good with my my recessed lighting on fully lit, however, daytime viewing was a little bit disappointing. Maybe I had high expectations? I don't know what to do. how do I combat this sparkling nuisance? please help me out here. Thanks in advance



The direction the bad light comes is likely your issue. best way to test a BD for bad light is turn off the projector and place your hand about a foot in front of the screen so you can cast a shadow on the screen with your hand. if the shadow from your hand is directly behind your hand then you have light pollution on the screen that the screen cannot reject. Or in other words the light is coming from the same direction as the projector light and the screen cannot tell the bad light from the good projector light. If your hands shadow is not directly behind and appears off center from your hand then the screen is probably doing its job and rejecting the light. Not very scientific but it works.


Your eye and brain will eventually stop seeing the sparkle. All high gain screens have sparkle to some degree. The sparkle effect seems to sit an inch or two in front of the actual image. Weird optical effect to be sure but as your eye relaxes to the image space you begin to see past the sparkle effect. i have a 115" Zero Edge at home and i do not notice sparkle. I ask my family if the sparkle bothers them and all 3 replied "what sparkle". The good new is at least it is not glass, glare from glass never goes away.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *KevinH*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3180#post_23322879
> 
> 
> I also just got a zero edge 110" 1.4. I haven't hung it yet because I still need to finish paint and flooring. I am using an Epson 5020UB. Throw distance is about 15'6" and I'll be sitting about 12'. Maybe Blake can chime in if he sees this. I wonder if the material is tested for hot spots after manufacture and summarily rejected if it doesn't pass or if all hot-spotting is a result of a proj/screen combo and/or set-up anamoly?



Check out our web site. The video was shot at my house using an Epson 5020UB and a BD Zero Edge 115" 1.4 gain. This is my daily use TV and I love it.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *7channelfreak*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150#post_23273129
> 
> 
> Where do these Pure Zero Edge fit in the portfolio? What is the recommended use?



The Pure White Zero Edge is the best white screen we have ever produced. i would say, and have often lately that the Pure White Zero Edge is for the "purist" who is looking for a reference level screening room. No lights on ever, no windows just pure dark room setting for movies. However if you have the screening room and still want to turn the lights on to watch the football game with a bunch a buds then Black Diamond would be the way to go.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *discodol*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150#post_23275482
> 
> 
> Any place you put a wall screen like http://www.avsforum.com/t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3150#post_23242189



Actually no, Pure is for dark rooms only and has no ambient light rejection ability. The picture you are referring to is a Black Diamond Zero Edge. same look different material.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gadgetfreaky*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3180#post_23331086
> 
> 
> 
> would appreciate a response on this.
> 
> 
> thanks



The box frame was a first generation Zero Edge using BD 4K materials.Same material we use today.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *howletus*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3180#post_23337047
> 
> 
> Steve. I agree. I am rethinking the BD as well for a few reasons.
> 
> 
> 1) I still have not seen a response from Blake or SI on the questions about whether the latest material has improved performance regarding sheen or sparkling. I think we all understand this is just one of the compromises you have to make with some of the light rejecting higher gain screens but I still want to know if the new offerings perform better than the old in this regard.
> 
> 
> 2) I just don't see that these higher end screens are worth 8 to 10 times what a normal screen that is NOT optimized for bright rooms costs. At least not for someone that is on a budget.
> 
> 
> People on this forum have taken the time to do in depth projector comparisons. I would love to see an unbiased screen comparison between a Black Diamond, DNP, Stewart Firehawk, and a normal screen that does not claim to perform well in bright rooms. A comparison that doesn't hide the fact that there is some sparkling and hot spotting on some of these screens. A comparison that shows you worst case scenarios for different room conditions AND how these screens perform at night against a normal screen. At least then you could have confidence choosing a screen based on YOUR room conditions. I just can't spend $3 to $4K or 10X more for something when I don't know what all the trade-offs are.
> 
> 
> My search for a screen continues. I am willing to spend $4k+ on screen if it gives me a good viewing experience in my room both day and night but I have yet to find one that claims to do this AND warrants the 10X price difference over something that is a bit washed out during the day but performs comparably or better at night (no hot spotting, sparkling, color shift, poor viewing angle, etc). I think we're just not there yet for a non-dedicated room and we just live with the compromises. I welcome someone to prove me wrong though.
> 
> This is coming from someone that just compared a $4k+ screen sample with a screen that cost $400. I was ready to spend the money to get a GREAT picture but there just wasn't that much difference when all things were considered. Not for me anyway. Not in my room.



The BD 4k material has been out a little over a year and we did reduce the the sparkle by 82%. However all positive gain screens will have some sparkle as an artifact to the light bending process. As far as an unbiased comparing Firehawk, DNP and Black Diamond I would be all over that comparison. I would love for a true comparison to come out.


There was a rare opportunity to see just about every screen and projector on the market last week at the CI shows in LA and orange County. Maybe if anyone was there they can chime in with what they were able to see. In my 5 years of trade shows this was the first time that we were placed in a lit room with a DNP right next to a Black Diamond and yes there was a difference. The Pure White Zero Edge also looked amazing in the dark room demo.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *sipester*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3180#post_23337444
> 
> 
> Now that 80 - 90 inch Sharp LCD's are coming down in price, it seems that it may be better to get one of those for daytime viewing and then just get a white, drop down screen for night viewing. In that way, you essentially get the best of both worlds, and the savings on the plain white screen can help fund the purchase of the LCD. With the LCD option, you give up some size, but you still get a very respectable sized image for daytime that is likely much better at ambient light than a light-rejecting screen, and at night you also get a better image as well.
> 
> 
> When LCD's & Plasma's were very expensive (or not widely available) in sizes above 60", then something like the Black Diamond or DNP made a lot of sense. Now it seems that the time has past for those types of screens since larger flat planels are now available.



Really!? Check out this article posted last week from Andrew Robinson.

http://www.andrew-robinson-online.com/super-size-me-why-front-projection-setups-not-larger-flat-panel-displays-are-the-way-to-go/


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Steve Benkin*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3180#post_23341892
> 
> 
> Unfortunately reviews for those cheaper screens are not encouraging.
> 
> 
> And the BD can't go larger than a 113" 16:9 screen.
> 
> 
> No perfect screen, that's for sure...



BD can go to 113" on the traditional fixed frame in 16:9. Or 115" on a Zero Edge frame(less).


142" on the fixed frame in 2:35 or 144" on the Zero Edge.


The limitation on the material is almost 57" in height.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ajistheman*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3180#post_23338088
> 
> 
> i'm designing a house and will either go with a dedicated theater room with NO windows in it. or go with an open rec room with a projector (with one window that will be covered with barely any light being able to pass through).
> 
> 
> I will use it to watch tv (mostly sports), video games, and just use the room to listen to music on my speakers.
> 
> 
> so from reading the past few pages of comments, it looks like I should go with a Black Diamond screen if I do the rec room with a projector in it.
> 
> 
> 
> and go with a different screen if I will have a mostly black theater, or dimmed theater so i can walk around and such in it?
> 
> 
> price isn't a big deal to me, i would prefer 16-9 and 150 or so inches and that's not available with black diamond. but if the picture is much better i would give up.
> 
> 
> 
> related question. what's this 2.5:1 or whatever screen size they have. How is watching satllite or blu-rays on it, since they are both 16:9.
> 
> (Same with watching old 4:3 tv shows)?



One of my favorite quotes is "up to now we have always watched home theater in the dark because we had to". So, given that is my favorite quote then you can probably guess that i prefer the multi purpose room to the dedicated theater. I am lucky enough to have both. I have a dedicated Theater upstairs and a multi purpose living room downstairs both with projection screens. I would say 80% of what we watch as a family we watch downstairs in the multi purpose room with all or some of the lights on. its just more comfortable. My 13 year old son is the only one using the dedicated theater and most of what (i think) he is doing is playing X-Box.

in our previous home we had a dedicated theater upstairs with a white screen and a 55" (the little TV) downstairs in the living room. After the newness of the theater wore off we started to migrate back downstairs to watch TV and hang out because we did not like always sitting in a dark room. Once we installed the Black Diamond and were able to turn lights on for TV watching then the theater became the TV room and even when watching a movie we often had a small lamp on so we didn't step on Coco the dog.

In short or long my advice is go multi purpose if you want to use the room to watch TV, sports, video games and movies and use a Black Diamond Zero Edge. If just watching movies in the dark only then go dedicated home theater and use a Pure White Zero Edge.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *howletus*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3180#post_23338732
> 
> 
> So I think I've decided against the DNP 08-85 screen. I had an 80" sample for a week and I was comparing to my interim Elite Sabel 1.8 gain screen. I just didn't see much of a difference in my room between the two screens that would justify the 10X price difference. I will post this in another thread but just thought I would solicit the input of the BD owners. I think the DNP is best suited for light coming from above the screen. My problem light is from the side so It didn't perform much better than the $380 Elite screen in that regard. Also, because the Elite is listed at 1.8 gain it was much brighter than the 0.8 DNP which I preferred both for sports duing the day AND movies at night. There is a bit of hot spotting on the Elite but not terrible. Go figure. I actually preferred the $380 screen over the $3800 screen. Maybe the DNP is just not the best screen for my application. One thing I still need to see is if the DNP 08-85 material throws less light back to my room that has bright colored walls and a white ceiling. Obviously the Elite screen has its flaws which is why my search for a screen continues. At this point I am looking for something in between the two price points. Any advice is welcomed.
> 
> 
> Projector - Sony HW50es
> 
> Screen Size - 110 to 115" max
> 
> Throw - 12'
> 
> Seating Distance - 11 to 13'
> 
> Viewing break down 40% sports, 10% hdtv, 50% movies, some 3D.
> 
> Non-dedicated living room with some ambient and room lighting from the side and opposite the screen but no light from above the screen.
> 
> 
> 
> I might take another look at BD because of my side ambient light issue but I can also just black out that problem window but that gets me back to ground zero in deciding on a screen. I more about getting the best screen for my room than the cost but aside from the Black Diamond side ambient like rejection, what other screen will give me the best performance overall?



Black Diamond is the only screen in existence that rejects the light from above, below AND the sides.


----------



## ivanhoek

Does that mean that one must project only head-on? Can you have a projector sending light to the screen at either an angle from above or below?


Likewise, what about horizontal lens shift?


What effect would that configuration have on the screen?


Basically, at what incidence angle is light rejected vs accepted?


Regards,


----------



## Xzibit190

Anyone seen a zero edge using the floating method and LED's on? I'm curious how they'll look but haven't been able to find any images.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ivanhoek*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3210#post_23364824
> 
> 
> Does that mean that one must project only head-on? Can you have a projector sending light to the screen at either an angle from above or below?
> 
> 
> Likewise, what about horizontal lens shift?
> 
> 
> What effect would that configuration have on the screen?
> 
> 
> Basically, at what incidence angle is light rejected vs accepted?
> 
> 
> Regards,



The rule is do not place the projector more than a foot above or below the frame of the screen. You can go a little more or less if you are the extreme long trow of your projector but i would suggest you call us to help with the math.

I would also not recommend lens shifting left or right more than 18". Again the rule can be bent but call me to talk about if the additional offset will hurt you or not. It comes down to seating position.


Your vertical ambient light rejection is 31 degrees. Horizontal depends on the Black Diamond materials you choose .8, 1.4 or 2.7 so i would suggest you check out the web site for the horizontal angles.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xzibit190*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3210#post_23368534
> 
> 
> Anyone seen a zero edge using the floating method and LED's on? I'm curious how they'll look but haven't been able to find any images.



The video we shot with Epson shows a flying 106" BD Zero Edge with lighting. The lighting is more of a wash and less of a halo effect. The video is curently not on the web site but should be back up in a week or so.


----------



## Xzibit190

Gotcha, I was wondering what happened to that vid. I noticed a couple of SI's recent good vids have gone missing. I'm a proud owner of a Zero Edge as of recently but I feel SI doesn't advertise their products very well. They need more actual images/vids of their products in different settings or compile em from users rather than the product vids that show features.


----------



## scchang

Haven't seen this info anywhere: How is the light kit powered? Specifically, trying to plan ahead for an installation of a Zero Edge and want to know if I should use a recessed receptacle behind the screen or if flush mount is okay.


----------



## Xzibit190

Light kit is powered by a standard power cord and comes with a remote. I've seen plenty of pics and vids with both recessed and flush mount, both work but flush looks better imo depending on how close the recessed wallis close to the screen on the sides. Flush creates a halo effect that looks nice.


----------



## scchang

Thanks. I was actually asking about installing the AC receptacle to power the light kit (flush v. recessed).


----------



## KevinH

Finally got my screen up and here are some sample shots. It's a BD Zero Edge 1.4 110" 16:9 with a 5020UB on out-of-the-box THX Eco mode. First one is Brave, next 3 are Prometheus and last obviously Avengers.


----------



## AV_Integrated

Kevin, those are some great shots - Would love to see how it looks with some ambient light, off-axis light, etc. with that projector. Either here or in a dedicated thread about your setup. Black screens in a light controlled room don't do much for me as the room is already dark. But, where they shine best is when those lights come on and the image retains a great deal of 'pop'. Yet, the last home theater projector I saw on a DNP screen looked so-so (at best) in a board room environment. It just didn't have the light output needed.


----------



## mnj1987

Nice photos kevin, screen looks great.


Another note, how long do these screens take to make and ship out to you? Im from australia and I've been waiting for a month for mine. The store I bought it off said it hasn't even left the states yet... screen innovations bad service?


----------



## KevinH




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV_Integrated*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3210#post_23395392
> 
> 
> Kevin, those are some great shots - Would love to see how it looks with some ambient light, off-axis light, etc. with that projector. Either here or in a dedicated thread about your setup. Black screens in a light controlled room don't do much for me as the room is already dark. But, where they shine best is when those lights come on and the image retains a great deal of 'pop'. Yet, the last home theater projector I saw on a DNP screen looked so-so (at best) in a board room environment. It just didn't have the light output needed.



I'll try at some point. The room is very dark by design. If I'm able to take some pics during the day, I will.


----------



## KevinH




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mnj1987*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3210#post_23395619
> 
> 
> Nice photos kevin, screen looks great.
> 
> 
> Another note, how long do these screens take to make and ship out to you? Im from australia and I've been waiting for a month for mine. The store I bought it off said it hasn't even left the states yet... screen innovations bad service?




Well I'm in Austin, where SI is based and they manufacture. Mine only took about 7-8 days from when I ordered it until I had it sitting in my house. My experience with them has been great. I don't know what the logistics are like with international shipping, but I'm surprised to hear it hasn't shipped in a month's time.


Blake from SI is on here. If you have your order info, try sending him a PM and see if he can investigate for you and get the ball rolling.


----------



## KevinH

Took a few more tonight. Rango, Avatar, 13 Assassins


----------



## Xzibit190




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV_Integrated*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3210#post_23395392
> 
> 
> Kevin, those are some great shots - Would love to see how it looks with some ambient light, off-axis light, etc. with that projector. Either here or in a dedicated thread about your setup. Black screens in a light controlled room don't do much for me as the room is already dark. But, where they shine best is when those lights come on and the image retains a great deal of 'pop'. Yet, the last home theater projector I saw on a DNP screen looked so-so (at best) in a board room environment. It just didn't have the light output needed.



SI is based in Austin as KevinH said, I'm in San Antonio which is about an hour away and took me about the same time 7-8 days. I'm sure it would really depend on what type of screen is made as well but definitely they offer excellent service. I even had to order the Zero Edge floating kit and basically got this within a day or two from ordering.


----------



## mnj1987

I ordered a Black Diamond 110" Fixed Screen with a 1.4 gain. Was suppose to be installed on Tuesday but now its postponed til the 21st. I was just wondering cause it apparently got order on the 11 or so of May and still hasn't left the states yet to go to Australia







.. taking so long!


----------



## Xzibit190

I'm sure you could probably call them and ask the status, they are really friendly. If anything I bet it'll be the shipping/costumes that takes the longest. Was in Sydney a few months back for awhile and OMG shipping/customs was horrible there, no offense


----------



## KevinH

Unless SI was waiting on product materials, that screen should be completely built in 4-5 days from when they received the official order. I'd give them a call as X to the Z says


----------



## BlakeV




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xzibit190*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3210#post_23368534
> 
> 
> Anyone seen a zero edge using the floating method and LED's on? I'm curious how they'll look but haven't been able to find any images.


We have loaded new videos on the web site. The Pure Zero Edge video actually shows off the led lights in the video the best.


----------



## KevinH




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeV*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3240#post_23399323
> 
> 
> We have loaded new videos on the web site. The Pure Zero Edge video actually shows off the led lights in the video the best.




Blake, is the new LED system ready?


----------



## BlakeV

We


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mnj1987*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3210#post_23397474
> 
> 
> I ordered a Black Diamond 110" Fixed Screen with a 1.4 gain. Was suppose to be installed on Tuesday but now its postponed til the 21st. I was just wondering cause it apparently got order on the 11 or so of May and still hasn't left the states yet to go to Australia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .. taking so long!


we build and ship most screens within 2 weeks of order or less. Shipping a zero to Australia simply takes a while. Feel free to email the factory and we can track the order for you.


----------



## BlakeV




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *KevinH*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3240#post_23399327
> 
> 
> Blake, is the new LED system ready?


Soon, like two or three weeks.


----------



## Jim Parys

Blake,

I just ordered BD Zero Edge 144" 1.4 gain, 2:35.1 screen yesterday. I didnt realized you all are rolling out a new LED system. Will my screen have the new LED system? Can a delay the delivery if until its ready if within the next month? Want to make sure I am getting the latest and greatest and dont miss out by a week or two? This will be my second BD and can't wait to get it up on the wall.


thx,

Jim


----------



## anthonyrachel

I joined AVSforum just for this particular thread on Black Diamond Screens ! All i can say is I am amazed by what this opulence beast can deliver. BlakeV ! I would like to order the 144" zero edge for my new home. Can you please pretty please ship it to Malaysia for me ? I am willing to pay for the shipping and whatever is required to get this amazing screen home here ! Please help me out !


----------



## Salloom

Hi

I am a new member. First post here.

*Concerning calibration of the BD*


I did both manual and auto calibration (125 pts CMS) with no problems and with excellent results.


I have a 106 inch BD zero edge 16:9 and gain is 1.4



For calibration I used:


Spectrophotometer : C6

Video processor and pattern generator: Lumagen Radiance mini 3D

Software: CalMan5 from Spectracal

Method: Rec 709

Gamma: 2.2-2.3

delta t: less than 1% (usually 3% is acceptable)


Projector: Panasonic PT-AE8000/PT-AT6000

Auto lens: Off

All other projector processing (noise reduction..etc) was turned off

Calibration was done using Rec709 setting on the projector (because it gave reading closest to the desired calibration like color temp: 6500 kelvin, gamma, ...etc)

Darbee visual enhancer was turned off during calibration

Lamp life: 800 "ish" hours

Calibration was done after 2 hours of turning everything on

Calibration was done from the screen it self (no directly from the projector lens)

To verify results i used HD709 and WOW blue ray disks

and some titles: Samsara, Avatar, nine, Batman the last knight, Wall-E and others (native 1080p and 24 fps)


Audio setup:


Speaker: KEF T series (surrounds)

Fronts and center: B and W MT60 mini home theater

Sub: B and W PV1D (pressure vessel model 1 Digital sound procesing or DSP)

Sub is sitting on: Auralux Subdude

Bass equalizer (filter): DSpeaker

Pre amp: Emotiva UMC-200 (7.1)

Power amp: Emotiva UPA-700 (7.1) 80 watts per channel (with 8 ohm load speakers)

Blue ray player: Panasonic BDT-500

Room treated with custom acoustic panels and bass trappers, diffuser, absorbers..etc.



I am currently finishing my home theater.


I will post photo as soon as i am done (showing equipment used).


thanks


----------



## KevinH




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jim Parys*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3240#post_23400921
> 
> 
> Blake,
> 
> I just ordered BD Zero Edge 144" 1.4 gain, 2:35.1 screen yesterday. I didnt realized you all are rolling out a new LED system. Will my screen have the new LED system? Can a delay the delivery if until its ready if within the next month? Want to make sure I am getting the latest and greatest and dont miss out by a week or two? This will be my second BD and can't wait to get it up on the wall.
> 
> 
> thx,
> 
> Jim



Hi Jim. In case you didn't know....the LED system is a separate item and is not included with your screen. So unless you ordered it too, you can just wait until the new LED system is ready and get it.


----------



## Jim Parys

I did order it with the screen. My dealer placed the order a couple days ago.


----------



## JBRedZ28

Anyone know any details regarding the new LED system that was mentioned to be released in a few weeks? I am looking to order a 115in zero edge soon and want to make sure I order the new LEDs along with it (assuming it is worth the wait).


----------



## KevinH




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *JBRedZ28*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3240#post_23409859
> 
> 
> Anyone know any details regarding the new LED system that was mentioned to be released in a few weeks? I am looking to order a 115in zero edge soon and want to make sure I order the new LEDs along with it (assuming it is worth the wait).




I think it will have more colors, several programming options, and include 6500 Kelvin.


----------



## Xzibit190




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeV*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3240#post_23399323
> 
> 
> We have loaded new videos on the web site. The Pure Zero Edge video actually shows off the led lights in the video the best.



SI is still missing a couple good videos they had recently put up but then no longer available... sucks cause they were really good ones. The pure zero edge vids show off the typical LED back lighting without the floating method, if they do show it then it must be very close to a wall and not what I'm looking for as I float mine in a corner which puts the screen about 2-3 ft away from the screen in areas and 4-5 ft away from a ceiling.


----------



## scchang




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jim Parys*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3240#post_23402375
> 
> 
> I did order it with the screen. My dealer placed the order a couple days ago.



Same boat only screen being delivered today (assuming LED kit will be in the same shipment). Can we exchange the old kit for new if it's unopened?


----------



## Isantus

I realize this is an amazing screen and I absolutely want it but is the Black Diamond 1.4 screen going to be worth the cost difference in a truly dedicated lights off all the time theater room over a standard screen like Carada? Is it overkill for a light controlled theater?


----------



## 7channelfreak

I'm sure others will chime in with first hand experience but what overhead, there's no reason to get this screen in a light controlled room. I'm looking as I want to as I want to have some lights on for sports and Super Bowl parties.


----------



## Isantus




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *7channelfreak*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3240#post_23429783
> 
> 
> I'm sure others will chime in with first hand experience but what overhead, there's no reason to get this screen in a light controlled room. I'm looking as I want to as I want to have some lights on for sports and Super Bowl parties.



That is kind of what had assumed. Thanks for your input.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *7channelfreak*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3240#post_23429783
> 
> 
> I'm sure others will chime in with first hand experience but what overhead, there's no reason to get this screen in a light controlled room. I'm looking as I want to as I want to have some lights on for sports and Super Bowl parties.



I've heard this a few times, but I've also heard the opposing point of view. In a light controlled room, the advantage of the BD is that it will greatly reduce the light bounced off of the screen onto the ceiling/floor/walls. Not only is that an advantage for the video experience, but it also allows for rooms that do not have dark walls, floors, and/or ceilings to have a great picture.


I helped my friend install a BD last summer, and I have to agree that I prefer that reduction of light bounced off the screen. It allowed me to be drawn in to the movie more.


Dave


----------



## isisyodin

One of the bigger issues with reflective light is that it will effectively be reflected back to the screen. The lighter your walls, ceilings and floors the worse it will be. Reflected light will wash out the main projected image. Therefore, in these situations the BD should help out even if the room is light controlled. One of my buddies has a 120" in fairly shallow room and his image looks terrible in any scene where the amount of light is significant (ie daylight scenes). I have calibrated his projector but it is still bad.

I would say, if you want to maintain your wall/ceiling/ceiling colors (and if they are light of course), you may want to consider a BD or similar which rejects off axis reflective light.


----------



## 7channelfreak

I had not thought about it that way. Interesting...


----------



## Isantus

My dedicated room includes dark brown walls and ceilings, as well as dark brown carpet. The speakers are all of course black and the two rows of theater seats are both brown. Currently the bright scenes look amazing with great contrast. I am trying to improve the dark areas of the scenes and the darker scenes but was curious if the BD will help with that. I have closed the iris on the projector down completely and it is being run on low lamp. I plan to buy a screen that has a bit of gain 1.1-1.6 and was leaning toward the Carada BW. The BD is a bit out of my price range but I believe I can get a good deal (I live in Austin where they are made).


I do not believe my room lends much reflective light currently and it will only improve as my wife has OK'ed putting up some black velvet/felt around the front 1/4 of the room. It will eventually have curtains around the screen and the first 3 feet from the screen wall to help absorb even more light. In addition it has 10 foot ceilings and so the light from the ceiling is likely not hitting the screen either.


----------



## isisyodin

It looks then like your projector is where you are hitting your limits. It may be lack of calibration or it may be inherent to the technology used in your projector. Either way, you should check your gamma. If you are loosing details in either (both as well) dark or bright scenes.

I have calibrated plasmas, LCDs front panels and LCD and DLNA projectors and having a good gamma curve makes a lot of difference in shadow detail (bright or dark). Projectors and TVs with poor gamma makes images look flat; a typical example is when you are viewing a scene where you get a person in a dark suit taking a good 40% of the screen and the suit looks flat, no detail or creases. Off course, you still need good contrast, but the gamma curve has to be around 2.2 to get optimum results.


----------



## Bardia




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeV*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3240#post_23399416
> 
> 
> We
> 
> we build and ship most screens within 2 weeks of order or less. Shipping a zero to Australia simply takes a while. Feel free to email the factory and we can track the order for you.



Blake,


When will you have the motorized 4k 1.4 offered in 2:35:1??


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Bardia*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3240#post_23438609
> 
> 
> Blake,
> 
> 
> When will you have the motorized 4k 1.4 offered in 2:35:1??



I second that question! Actually, the 4k .8 in 2:35:1...


Dave


----------



## thezaks

Blake - I'd also like to know if there are any videos that show the 1.4 material vs the .8 material? Pictures at least? I realize every setting is going to be different with differing results, but I'd still like to see an example.


Thanks,

Dave


----------



## mnj1987




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeV*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3240#post_23399416
> 
> 
> We
> 
> we build and ship most screens within 2 weeks of order or less. Shipping a zero to Australia simply takes a while. Feel free to email the factory and we can track the order for you.



Until now the supplier here in Sydney has not received the screen. The service from screen innovations on getting their screens out internationally is just not acceptable. It has taken more than 6 weeks since the order was placed for the screen, and still not installed in my media room. My screen is not even a Zero Edge, Its a 110" Fixed Frame Black Diamond 2.35:1.

On the upside I have received confirmation that the screen has left the U.S. but that was at the beginning of last week. The shipping method used was not even priority international, cause if it was I'd have it by now. What kind of service is this SI!!!!


Screen Innovations get your act together. Consumers pay top dollar for your screens here in Australia and this is how you treat them. I was expecting excellent service, but i got totally the opposite.


Sorry about the rant everyone but I just want anyone In Australia to be aware if ordering a screen from SI be ready for long wait times. Its quite ridiculous actually.


----------



## scchang

Has anyone received a BD Zero Edge with the new LED kit?


----------



## Tech5635

Which BD screen would work best. Screen will be used initially for a living room during the day and at night. At night gets pretty dark but definitely ambient light and white walls/ceilings. In a few months will be moving the screen to a poker room and of course the lights will be on. What BD screen would be the best? 1.4 Gain?


Pairing with the JVC RS60u. I heard that the RS60u is really optimal on a 100" screen. Using BD is it possible to go up to a 110" 16x9 or would you recommend staying with a 100". Any loss in picture quality by going to the 110" with this projector?


----------



## Salloom

I suggest to get the 2.7 gain. I do have 1.4 in home theater room (matt black ceiling and dark wall) and find the picture to be dim when i turn the spot lights on (using a Panasonic AET8000 projector).


I do not think you will losing much on shadow detail, especially with the JVC reference projector. On the other hand JVC projectors are known for being little dimmer so the 2.7 gain would compensate.


I would stick with 100 inch instead of the 110, going up in size does not hurt the picture quality but brightness will be lowered (because the same bulb with the same lumens output are is used to project a larger image).


Also, as you go up in size, artifacts will be more noticeable (not the projector or the player fault but of the media).


Artifacts are always present but you could not notice them because size was smaller (think of it as holding a magnifying glass or zooming in with your camera while taking a photo).


----------



## Bardia

I went to Magnolia to see the Stewart in person. They had a 130" perforated Firehwak. JVC X70 and U480 lens.


This was a total light control theater room. The blacks were good but didn't make you go WOW. Then when I put the Studiotek Sample, on the screen, blacks were pretty much gone, the image and detail, whites and colors popped. very nice but the blacks suffered. Now if this is in a dedicated theater, in my living room, it would be crushed. You could totally see a big difference from 12 feet away. To my surprise, putting a Firehawk sample next to the firehawk perforated screen, from 12 feet away, no difference.


Then I went to the other room where they had a older version of the black diamond, and WOW. Maybe the colors were not as accurate (hard to tell since the screens were not side by side), but the blacks were kinda Kuro like. This room had a galss door next to the projector so it was't even fully dark.


So it seems to me that maybe BD in this case, for my living room would be a better choice. I know the screen has a hint of blue but I'm sure it can be calibrated out.


I'm just afraid to get the studiotek and not be happy with the blacks. I guess Im used to my Kuro too much


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3240#post_23438746
> 
> 
> Blake - I'd also like to know if there are any videos that show the 1.4 material vs the .8 material? Pictures at least? I realize every setting is going to be different with differing results, but I'd still like to see an example.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Dave



I guess we're still waiting for Blake.....


Dave


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Bardia*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3240#post_23438609
> 
> 
> Blake,
> 
> 
> When will you have the motorized 4k 1.4 offered in 2:35:1??



Still waiting for Blake.......


Dave


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3270#post_23488918
> 
> 
> Still waiting for Blake.......
> 
> 
> Dave



Sent you a PM.


----------



## venkatesh_m




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *anthonyrachel*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3240#post_23401493
> 
> 
> I joined AVSforum just for this particular thread on Black Diamond Screens ! All i can say is I am amazed by what this opulence beast can deliver. BlakeV ! I would like to order the 144" zero edge for my new home. Can you please pretty please ship it to Malaysia for me ? I am willing to pay for the shipping and whatever is required to get this amazing screen home here ! Please help me out !



There is an official rep that carries BlackDiamond screens in Malaysia. PM me for details. I can pass u his contact info. There is also a place to demo a Zero Edge as well.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *KevinH*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3240#post_23399327
> 
> 
> Blake, is the new LED system ready?



yes, the new lighting is shipping.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *anthonyrachel*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3240#post_23401493
> 
> 
> I joined AVSforum just for this particular thread on Black Diamond Screens ! All i can say is I am amazed by what this opulence beast can deliver. BlakeV ! I would like to order the 144" zero edge for my new home. Can you please pretty please ship it to Malaysia for me ? I am willing to pay for the shipping and whatever is required to get this amazing screen home here ! Please help me out !



Please contact Shannon here at the factory. She can direct you to an authorized re seller in Malaysia. US re sellers are not authorized to ship internationally do to how we package.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xzibit190*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3240#post_23410517
> 
> 
> SI is still missing a couple good videos they had recently put up but then no longer available... sucks cause they were really good ones. The pure zero edge vids show off the typical LED back lighting without the floating method, if they do show it then it must be very close to a wall and not what I'm looking for as I float mine in a corner which puts the screen about 2-3 ft away from the screen in areas and 4-5 ft away from a ceiling.



All the old videos and several new ones are back up on the web site.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Isantus*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3240#post_23438163
> 
> 
> My dedicated room includes dark brown walls and ceilings, as well as dark brown carpet. The speakers are all of course black and the two rows of theater seats are both brown. Currently the bright scenes look amazing with great contrast. I am trying to improve the dark areas of the scenes and the darker scenes but was curious if the BD will help with that. I have closed the iris on the projector down completely and it is being run on low lamp. I plan to buy a screen that has a bit of gain 1.1-1.6 and was leaning toward the Carada BW. The BD is a bit out of my price range but I believe I can get a good deal (I live in Austin where they are made).
> 
> 
> I do not believe my room lends much reflective light currently and it will only improve as my wife has OK'ed putting up some black velvet/felt around the front 1/4 of the room. It will eventually have curtains around the screen and the first 3 feet from the screen wall to help absorb even more light. In addition it has 10 foot ceilings and so the light from the ceiling is likely not hitting the screen either.



You are welcome to come by the factory for a demo of both our .8 and 1.4 gain BD and feel free to bring your projector. We do not sell direct however, you would still need to buy from an authorized re seller.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Bardia*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3240#post_23438609
> 
> 
> Blake,
> 
> 
> When will you have the motorized 4k 1.4 offered in 2:35:1??



We hope to have a 2:35 ready by the end of Sept.


----------



## adanny




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3210#post_23363887
> 
> 
> 
> There was a rare opportunity to see just about every screen and projector on the market last week at the CI shows in LA and orange County. Maybe if anyone was there they can chime in with what they were able to see. In my 5 years of trade shows this was the first time that we were placed in a lit room with a DNP right next to a Black Diamond and yes there was a difference. The Pure White Zero Edge also looked amazing in the dark room demo.



Blake - you've left us with bated breath. What difference did you observe? That would be a terrific observation to read about


----------



## thezaks

Blake (or anyone else who might know) - a few questions:


1) In a dark room, what's going to be the pros/cons of the pure white zero edge vs a bd zero edge?


2) How durable is the screen material for the bd zero edge? For example, if my kids throw a nerf football that hits a fixed bd screen, it would possibly put a crease in the screen - perhaps, it might even scratch the surface. Is the zero edge any more durable? Sorry, but with two boys, anything is possible.


3) Is the screen material the same on a fixed bd screen vs a zero edge bd screen? Same color, ambient light rejection, angles, etc?


Thanks,


Dave


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3270#post_23510927
> 
> 
> Blake (or anyone else who might know) - a few questions:
> 
> 
> 1) In a dark room, what's going to be the pros/cons of the pure white zero edge vs a bd zero edge?
> 
> 
> 2) How durable is the screen material for the bd zero edge? For example, if my kids throw a nerf football that hits a fixed bd screen, it would possibly put a crease in the screen - perhaps, it might even scratch the surface. Is the zero edge any more durable? Sorry, but with two boys, anything is possible.
> 
> 
> 3) Is the screen material the same on a fixed bd screen vs a zero edge bd screen? Same color, ambient light rejection, angles, etc?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Dave



The way i have been pitching Bd Zero vs Pure White Zero is this.... If you are looking for a perfect 10 screening room, never plan on turning lights on and the room is just for watching movies in the dark then that is a room for a Pure White Zero Edge. If you are willing to live with a 9.5 in a dark room and get a 9.5 with the lights on then that is a Black Diamond room.


The material is actually very durable to hands with peanut butter and yes my 13 year old son and i have shot nurf "bullets?" at the screen with no scratching. The screen can be dented so i would not drive a golf ball or even a nurf golf ball at it but a nurf football or nurf basketball should be ok. As far as cleaning we do ship all screens with a screen cleaner. You can also use a very hi tech system called water and soft rag or shamWOW!


The BD Zero Edge, BD Fixed frame, BD motorized, BD tiles, BD Venue all use the same Black Diamond materials.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *adanny*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3270#post_23510163
> 
> 
> Blake - you've left us with bated breath. What difference did you observe? That would be a terrific observation to read about



I am going to polity decline to answer you simply because i don't want to to be seen as bad mouthing our competition. I felt the BD looked better than the DNP but Jesse, the national sales manager for DNP would probably disagree.


----------



## Bardia

Blake, there are no picture of the BD Motorized trap door. Can you please post a pic so we can see what the flush install would look like? Thank you!


----------



## enricoclaudio

Hi Blake,


This is what I have in my room:


Sony VPL-VW40 (Possible upgrade to HW50 or HW55ES)

Carada 88" Cinema White screen

Viewing distance: 9 feet

Throw distance: 14 feet

A lot ambient light during the day. I just love watch movies with my side lamp ON.

 

 

 

 


Sorry I painted the front stage and now it looks this way:

 



I'm very sensible to hotspots and texture on screens materials. Do you think that a Black Diamond 92" fixed frame with 4K 1.4 gain will work for me?


Thanks for your help!!!


----------



## adanny




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3270#post_23511408
> 
> 
> I am going to polity decline to answer you simply because i don't want to to be seen as bad mouthing our competition. I felt the BD looked better than the DNP but Jesse, the national sales manager for DNP would probably disagree.



I respect that


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3270#post_23511350
> 
> 
> The way i have been pitching Bd Zero vs Pure White Zero is this.... If you are looking for a perfect 10 screening room, never plan on turning lights on and the room is just for watching movies in the dark then that is a room for a Pure White Zero Edge. If you are willing to live with a 9.5 in a dark room and get a 9.5 with the lights on then that is a Black Diamond room.
> 
> 
> The material is actually very durable to hands with peanut butter and yes my 13 year old son and i have shot nurf "bullets?" at the screen with no scratching. The screen can be dented so i would not drive a golf ball or even a nurf golf ball at it but a nurf football or nurf basketball should be ok. As far as cleaning we do ship all screens with a screen cleaner. You can also use a very hi tech system called water and soft rag or shamWOW!
> 
> 
> The BD Zero Edge, BD Fixed frame, BD motorized, BD tiles, BD Venue all use the same Black Diamond materials.



Excellent information Blake - thanks so much! In general, is the zero edge more durable than the fixed edge? Is it a hard backing behind the screen? I'm asking, because I know how the fixed screen arrives in the box, but the zero edge seems to come in a box that is fully assembled, so I wasn't sure if the back was solid, or if it's still just screen material mounted on a frame??


By the way, on your website, it would be nice to know more information about the BD's for each video. For example, in the Sony one (with Amy I think?) with the zero edge, is that a .8 or a 1.4 or ? What's the size? Same question for the video with the Digital Projections guy for the projector that does the different aspect ratios.


Thanks,

Dave


----------



## Bardia




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3270#post_23511408
> 
> 
> I am going to polity decline to answer you simply because i don't want to to be seen as bad mouthing our competition. I felt the BD looked better than the DNP but Jesse, the national sales manager for DNP would probably disagree.



Blake, will you offer a 120" motorized 2:35:1 BD?


----------



## Screen Innovatio




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Bardia*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3270#post_23521585
> 
> 
> Blake, will you offer a 120" motorized 2:35:1 BD?



September!


----------



## Bardia




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Screen Innovatio*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3270#post_23534770
> 
> 
> September!


Just want to make sure it will be offered at 120" diagonal...can't wait


----------



## Screen Innovatio




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Bardia*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3270#post_23534937
> 
> 
> Just want to make sure it will be offered at 120" diagonal...can't wait



You bet.


----------



## space2001

Can any of you guys get me a sample to test.


Thanks.


----------



## Farayar

Hello to everybody,


A question for people that own a Black Diamond 4k 1.4


How much do you notice sparkling (screen texture) and hotspotting on the screen?


I am planning to buy one of this screens to be used with a JVC RS48 projector.


Thanks, John.


----------



## Xzibit190

I myself have had a 100" BD Zero Edge 1.4 for about 3-4 months now, using a Panasonic PT-AE8000. Projector is about 12ft from the screen and I sit about 13ft away, I notice no hot spotting and very little sparkling. You really have to be looking for the sparkling in my setup as no one that's seen my screen says they see it even when I point it out. After using it so long I don't even notice it myself most of the time. A friend of mine went with the same setting but his projector is further back around 20ft I believe and he says he notices no sparkling at all.


Great company and awesome products I'd highly recommend!


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3270#post_23511781
> 
> 
> Excellent information Blake - thanks so much! In general, is the zero edge more durable than the fixed edge? Is it a hard backing behind the screen? I'm asking, because I know how the fixed screen arrives in the box, but the zero edge seems to come in a box that is fully assembled, so I wasn't sure if the back was solid, or if it's still just screen material mounted on a frame??
> 
> 
> By the way, on your website, it would be nice to know more information about the BD's for each video. For example, in the Sony one (with Amy I think?) with the zero edge, is that a .8 or a 1.4 or ? What's the size? Same question for the video with the Digital Projections guy for the projector that does the different aspect ratios.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Dave



In the Sony video we are using a 1.4 gain.


the Zero edge is a solid surface and ships in a giant pizza box. It is a little more durable than most screens and very easy to clean.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *enricoclaudio*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3270#post_23511588
> 
> 
> Hi Blake,
> 
> 
> This is what I have in my room:
> 
> 
> Sony VPL-VW40 (Possible upgrade to HW50 or HW55ES)
> 
> Carada 88" Cinema White screen
> 
> Viewing distance: 9 feet
> 
> Throw distance: 14 feet
> 
> A lot ambient light during the day. I just love watch movies with my side lamp ON.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry I painted the front stage and now it looks this way:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm very sensible to hotspots and texture on screens materials. Do you think that a Black Diamond 92" fixed frame with 4K 1.4 gain will work for me?
> 
> 
> Thanks for your help!!!



I would actually recommend you consider the .8 gain. Given the size of the screen, narrow viewing cone and brightness of the projector. Feel free to call me at the factory to discuss.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3270#post_23551322
> 
> 
> I would actually recommend you consider the .8 gain. Given the size of the screen, narrow viewing cone and brightness of the projector. Feel free to call me at the factory to discuss.



I agree with Blake. The 40 was a pretty dim projector and the 1.4 worked well with it, but the 50 and 55 will be much brighter than the 40. The 0.8 gain looks like a much better choice.


----------



## avsdilettante

First I would like to thank Mike Garret from AV Science sales for all of his help. Mike was extremely informational, prompt to reply, accommodated special needs and had the best price. That is extremely difficult to find within e-commerce this day in age.


After looking into the cost of renting a projector and screen for my wedding, I decided to purchase the setup myself. I purchased an Epson 6020 based on good reviews and quick availability. The hard part was finding a screen locally in time for my wedding. Thats where Mike came in.


My needs

I am not a cinefile. I just want something that looks amazing to the average person that pops onto google and searches a great projector/screen combo.

I want great movies in the dark.

I want sports and everyday tv with indirect light in the room



Mike contacted screen innovations directly and had a zero edge delivered in less than a week. Just in time for my wedding!!! (side note- it went amazing, each song was a video and people loved the video dance party!!!)


Then it got boxed back up and delivered to my house.


I have my Epson 6020 17 feet away from my 115" black diamond zero edge 1.4 screen.


I watched some blu-ray movies in a light controlled room. (white ceiling and carpet, dark red walls.)

It looked amazing!!!

I personally don't notice any sparkling.


Then I watched some sports and everyday tv in daylight. This is where the Black Diamond really made me happy with my purchase. WOW

In demo rooms all of the other screens I saw looked washed with any light in the room.

WIth my 1.4 zero edge its like watching a tv but .. .better. I have a 64 inch PN64D8000 higher end samsung plasma and now it seems microscopic.


When I start my car and hear the 500hp rumble at the exhaust I get a school boy giggle and smile. I get the same kind of joy firing up my screen for the big game.


----------



## smuggymba

^^


Did you get the 16:9 or 2:35:1?


Does it come with the backlit LED lights?


----------



## Stiltz

If anyone in Portland, OR (or close to Portland) has a Black Diamond please let me know.

Thanks!


----------



## MoonLaf

Hi,


I'm building my own villa, and I'm planning to have a dedicated Home Theater Room.


I want to know the dimensions that I should choose for this room, after taking into consideration the below:


I'm thinking of getting the below Zero Edge BD screen:


Black Diamond 4K .8

56.3" x 132.6"

144"

SBZ144BD8


As for the projector, I'm thinking of:


Epson 5020UB Home Cinema 3D HDMI, 1080p 3LCD Projector


There will be 2 rows of (4) + (4) seats.


Appreciate your suggestions and comments.


Kind Regards,

Mouna.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MoonLaf*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3300#post_23595481
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> 
> I'm building my own villa, and I'm planning to have a dedicated Home Theater Room.
> 
> 
> I want to know the dimensions that I should choose for this room, after taking into consideration the below:
> 
> 
> I'm thinking of getting the below Zero Edge BD screen:
> 
> 
> Black Diamond 4K .8
> 
> 56.3" x 132.6"
> 
> 144"
> 
> SBZ144BD8
> 
> 
> As for the projector, I'm thinking of:
> 
> 
> Epson 5020UB Home Cinema 3D HDMI, 1080p 3LCD Projector
> 
> 
> There will be 2 rows of (4) + (4) seats.
> 
> 
> Appreciate your suggestions and comments.
> 
> 
> Kind Regards,
> 
> Mouna.



Sent you a PM.


----------



## BlakeSI

Do you have an anamorphic lens picked out to make your Epson do 2:35? The Epson 5020 will not stretch the image to fill a 2:35 aspect ratio without an anamorphic lens.


----------



## biliam1982




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3300#post_23605867
> 
> 
> Do you have an anamorphic lens picked out to make your Epson do 2:35? The Epson 5020 will not stretch the image to fill a 2:35 aspect ratio without an anamorphic lens.



Blake, couldn't he zoom it manually depending on the projector placement? I thought the 5020 has a decent amount of zoom, 2.10:1.


Also, wouldn't he need an external scaler of some sort to do the vertical stretching as the 5020 doesn't do it?


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3300#post_23605867
> 
> 
> Do you have an anamorphic lens picked out to make your Epson do 2:35? The Epson 5020 will not stretch the image to fill a 2:35 aspect ratio without an anamorphic lens.



Update: i checked with my buddy Jeff at Epson, the 5020 will not support anamorphic.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *biliam1982*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3300#post_23607007
> 
> 
> Blake, couldn't he zoom it manually depending on the projector placement? I thought the 5020 has a decent amount of zoom, 2.10:1.
> 
> 
> Also, wouldn't he need an external scaler of some sort to do the vertical stretching as the 5020 doesn't do it?



I would move up to a 6020 that can support anamorphic. Panamorph has a fixed lense for under $2000 that will work with the Epson 6020 and you maintain resolution. You do need to place the projector in the perfect spot to avoid "lens bow" in the image.


I would avoid doing the zoom thing with an Epson. I have a 5020 in my house so I can tell you manually zooming between 16:9 and 2:35 would be a bit tricky. You cannot just Zoom, you have to lens shift the image also. This is all don manually with the 5020 and the lens shift works a lot like a echa-sketch up kind of goes up right and left kind of goes left down so not something i would want to have to do every time i watch a 2:35 movie.


For 16:9 viewing the Epson line is one of my absolute favorites but not so much for 2:35 zoom viewing. Add an anamorphic lens and you have a great anamorphic system that can work with the lights on.


----------



## BlakeSI

BTW- Screen Innovations will show a Black Diamond motorized 132" in 2:35 at CEDIA in Denver.


----------



## MoonLaf




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3300#post_23608182
> 
> 
> I would move up to a 6020 that can support anamorphic. Panamorph has a fixed lense for under $2000 that will work with the Epson 6020 and you maintain resolution. You do need to place the projector in the perfect spot to avoid "lens bow" in the image.
> 
> 
> I would avoid doing the zoom thing with an Epson. I have a 5020 in my house so I can tell you manually zooming between 16:9 and 2:35 would be a bit tricky. You cannot just Zoom, you have to lens shift the image also. This is all don manually with the 5020 and the lens shift works a lot like a echa-sketch up kind of goes up right and left kind of goes left down so not something i would want to have to do every time i watch a 2:35 movie.
> 
> 
> For 16:9 viewing the Epson line is one of my absolute favorites but not so much for 2:35 zoom viewing. Add an anamorphic lens and you have a great anamorphic system that can work with the lights on.



Hi,


Thanks for the heads up Blake.


So, you would advise me to go for this projector:

http://www.amazon.com/Epson-PowerLite-Projector-Glasses-Ceiling/dp/B00AQ95DAC 


and get lenses from Panamorph to achieve the required resolution.


Couldn't there be a Projector that would do the job without adding the lenses?


----------



## Threefiddie

at that price for the 6020, I would just go with a sony hw50es, but that's just my opinion


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MoonLaf*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3300#post_23608846
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> 
> Thanks for the heads up Blake.
> 
> 
> So, you would advise me to go for this projector:
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Epson-PowerLite-Projector-Glasses-Ceiling/dp/B00AQ95DAC
> 
> 
> and get lenses from Panamorph to achieve the required resolution.
> 
> 
> Couldn't there be a Projector that would do the job without adding the lenses?



Yes, but keep in mind you do not maintain full chip resolution or lamp brightness when zooming the image. On a smaller 2:35 screen like a 110" or 120" it looks fine but if you are going with a 144" you will notice the image is not as sharp or bright as your 115" 16:9 image on the same screen ( a 144: 2:35 is the same height as a 115" 16:9).


The panasonic 8000 works great with zoom memory in a bright room and is also LCD like the Epson. JVC projectors also do zoom and have the best black of an projector on the market but they are a little more expensive and not as bright as the Epson or Panasonic so best used in a light controlled room with little or no windows. Sony, JVC and Epson will all be announcing new models at CEDIA and i have it on good information that zoom memory will be a popular feature in projectors this year.


My philosophy has been and always will be "buy when ready because if you wait for the perfect wave you will never surf". However my other rule is "its never always but its always sometimes". Meaning there are a bunch of new projectors launching at CEDIA the last week of Sept.


I believe this will be the most exciting year yet for two piece projection.


----------



## Bardia

Blake is the Pure White screen superior to the Solar screen? Is there less sheen and sparkles on the pure white?


Also, are the LEDs offered only on the wall mounted zero edge or are they also available on the wire suspended version as well?


Thanks


----------



## BlakeSI

Yes Pure White is superior to any white screen i have seen including our Solar. Less sparkle and super smooth image. 8K rated due to our ability to totally control the emboss pattern to be 9x finer than any screen material because we are not using screen material.


http://www.screeninnovations.com/screen-materials/pure-4k-1-3-white/#SliderNav0


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Threefiddie*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3300#post_23609271
> 
> 
> at that price for the 6020, I would just go with a sony hw50es, but that's just my opinion



i have been hearing very cool things about the new 55 as well that i believe Sony will show at CEDIA.


----------



## MoonLaf




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3300#post_23609579
> 
> 
> Yes, but keep in mind you do not maintain full chip resolution or lamp brightness when zooming the image. On a smaller 2:35 screen like a 110" or 120" it looks fine but if you are going with a 144" you will notice the image is not as sharp or bright as your 115" 16:9 image on the same screen ( a 144: 2:35 is the same height as a 115" 16:9).
> 
> 
> The panasonic 8000 works great with zoom memory in a bright room and is also LCD like the Epson. JVC projectors also do zoom and have the best black of an projector on the market but they are a little more expensive and not as bright as the Epson or Panasonic so best used in a light controlled room with little or no windows. Sony, JVC and Epson will all be announcing new models at CEDIA and i have it on good information that zoom memory will be a popular feature in projectors this year.
> 
> 
> My philosophy has been and always will be "buy when ready because if you wait for the perfect wave you will never surf". However my other rule is "its never always but its always sometimes". Meaning there are a bunch of new projectors launching at CEDIA the last week of Sept.
> 
> 
> I believe this will be the most exciting year yet for two piece projection.



Thanks for the information Blake.


I'm going to wait a little bit then, since it will take at least 1 year to build the villa.


Most probably, I'll go for JVC projector as the home theater setup will be in the basement (light controlled environment with no windows)


Appreciate if you could advise me with best dimensions for the planned room based on my suggested setup here .


----------



## chad2282

Love this thread! I am in the middle of building my movie room (see link to image..  ) right now. This pic faces what will be the front of the room where the screen will go. I am undecided about which screen to buy or even if I should just paint it with Screen Goo. I am planning to use an Epson 5020UB and with a Pure Zero Edge, I could max out the space at a 114" diagonal screen. My theater room is very light controlled but I do plan to use it for some TV (sports) viewing but the main purpose will be movies. Here are my questions after reading the entire thread:


1. If I didn't want to spring for the BD screen, are the Pure Zero Edge screens any better at minimizing problems with ambient light (like when I want to watch sports with the lights on) than any other non-SI BD screen or Screen Goo? I didn't see anything on the SI website about the Pure screens being able to diffuse ambient light.

2. If I went with the Pure Zero Edge screen, in a very light controlled room like I'll have, and a very bright projector in the Epson 5020, would I want to go with the Pure White 1.3 gain screen or the Pure Gray .85 gain screen? Would one minimize the "sparkling" and hotspotting that I have read about in this thread with BDs and Pure zero edges? Would the Pure Gray .85 help out at all with the lights when I want to watch sports on the screen?

3. If the Pure Zero Edge screens are truly a reference screen for only dark room movie viewing, as has been suggested in this thread, what are my options if I want to watch a little TV (but mostly movies) but not spend the $$ for BD (nor would the BD allow me to maximize the screen size).


Thanks again for everyone contributing to this thread. It has helped but has also left me with some fundamental questions.


Thanks in advance for your insights.


----------



## isisyodin

Nice room. I just moved to south Florida and will be adding a room for my HT hopefully within the next year. Compared to Texas where I had a dedicated room, everything is tiny and expensive over here.

In any case, my suggestions are the following:

Don't use paint. First, you'll be surprised how hard it is to get a perfect even surface; even with someone very experienced with mudding and taping; in addition the 2x4s used in framing are never perfect with slight bends and twists; drywall is somewhat flexible and you'll see this on your wall hence the texture that is added to cover up these imperfections.

As far as BDs if you want to use lighting during your projector viewing it is one of the better options; Firehawks are also pretty good. One of the keys in getting the best results is to be sure to place your room lighting as far as you can from the center viewing axis as possible. If you are going with an Epson which is very bright maybe a 0.8 will give you the optimal results and possibly eliminate all the hotspotting; your throw distance is also important as the closer you'll be the more light intensity will be projected into the screen.

The material you are looking for is the black diamond regardless if it's a zero edge or conventional frame.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *chad2282*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3300#post_23619914
> 
> 
> Love this thread! I am in the middle of building my movie room (see link to image..  ) right now. This pic faces what will be the front of the room where the screen will go. I am undecided about which screen to buy or even if I should just paint it with Screen Goo. I am planning to use an Epson 5020UB and with a Pure Zero Edge, I could max out the space at a 114" diagonal screen. My theater room is very light controlled but I do plan to use it for some TV (sports) viewing but the main purpose will be movies. Here are my questions after reading the entire thread:
> 
> 
> 1. If I didn't want to spring for the BD screen, are the Pure Zero Edge screens any better at minimizing problems with ambient light (like when I want to watch sports with the lights on) than any other non-SI BD screen or Screen Goo? I didn't see anything on the SI website about the Pure screens being able to diffuse ambient light.
> 
> 2. If I went with the Pure Zero Edge screen, in a very light controlled room like I'll have, and a very bright projector in the Epson 5020, would I want to go with the Pure White 1.3 gain screen or the Pure Gray .85 gain screen? Would one minimize the "sparkling" and hotspotting that I have read about in this thread with BDs and Pure zero edges? Would the Pure Gray .85 help out at all with the lights when I want to watch sports on the screen?
> 
> 3. If the Pure Zero Edge screens are truly a reference screen for only dark room movie viewing, as has been suggested in this thread, what are my options if I want to watch a little TV (but mostly movies) but not spend the $$ for BD (nor would the BD allow me to maximize the screen size).
> 
> 
> Thanks again for everyone contributing to this thread. It has helped but has also left me with some fundamental questions.
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance for your insights.



I heard a great quote that I want to share.


"You date your projector but you marry your screen". This is soooo true when you think about it. Pure Zero Edge as well as Black Diamond Zero Edge are both 8K rated. So pick one and it will probably be the same screen for your first 1080P projector, your second 4K projector and even your 3rd 8K projector. After that we all have google eyeballs installed and all screens become obsolete.

The point is a screen is a long term investment so if you plan to watch some content with the lights on then buy a screen that was designed to work with both the lights on and the lights off. If you plan on building a reference screening room and watching all content in the dark then buy a Pure White.

White screens are built for dark rooms and loose shadow detail when just a tiny bit of ambient light is in the room. Without shadow detail you get a flat image with no depth of field because of the loss of shadow detail. So given how long you will own a screen be sure to pick one that meets all of your needs. Life is to short to have to live with a poor image.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3300#post_23644531
> 
> 
> I heard a great quote that I want to share.
> 
> 
> "You date your projector but you marry your screen". This is soooo true when you think about it. Pure Zero Edge as well as Black Diamond Zero Edge are both 8K rated. So pick one and it will probably be the same screen for your first 1080P projector, your second 4K projector and even your 3rd 8K projector. After that we all have google eyeballs installed and all screens become obsolete.
> 
> The point is a screen is a long term investment so if you plan to watch some content with the lights on then buy a screen that was designed to work with both the lights on and the lights off. If you plan on building a reference screening room and watching all content in the dark then buy a Pure White.
> 
> White screens are built for dark rooms and loose shadow detail when just a tiny bit of ambient light is in the room. Without shadow detail you get a flat image with no depth of field because of the loss of shadow detail. So given how long you will own a screen be sure to pick one that meets all of your needs. Life is to short to have to live with a poor image.



So true. Usually screens and speakers are long term investments. Projectors and AVR's change as advancements are made and features added.


----------



## scchang

Anyone with the new light kit figured out how to save the set color on the DIY buttons on the remote? Also, what do the quick and slow buttons do? The included documentation was, uh, sparse...


----------



## bennutt




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Stiltz*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3270#post_23573497
> 
> 
> If anyone in Portland, OR (or close to Portland) has a Black Diamond please let me know.
> 
> Thanks!



Best Buy in Tualatin (Magnolia section of course) has a black diamond zero edge on the showroom wall now.

J


----------



## scchang

Have a couple LED kit issues:


1. LEDs flicker while watching 3D with Sony VPL-HW50ES. Any solution other than to turn them off?


2. I have a 115" diagonal BD ZE 1.4 surface mounted on an 8' x 14' wall and find the LED wash on the ceiling and walls a bit bright and distracting. I'd rather have an isolated halo effect. Any thoughts on minimizing the wash?


Thanks!


----------



## marlo24

Hello All,


I am 100% new to the projector/projection screen world. I am in the process of finishing my basement and am looking for a kickass setup. The Basement is pretty much completely open and has 7 large windows. I will have blackout shades but would love to have the ability to watch sports/tv shows with the shades open. The screen will be in a built in area with walls about 25inches deep. I will also be painting the built in area black or dark brown (hoping this would help with the color bleeding over).


Throw ratio 12ft

View distance 14ft

projector will be mounted about 6" higher than the top of the screen.

max screen size i can fit is 106" 16:9


For projector I was leaning towards the Sony HW50ES but this might be out of my budget.


With the Sony and my distances, would I be better off going with the Black Diamond 1.4 or .8?


Any help is much appreciated!!


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *marlo24*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3300#post_23698345
> 
> 
> Hello All,
> 
> 
> I am 100% new to the projector/projection screen world. I am in the process of finishing my basement and am looking for a kickass setup. The Basement is pretty much completely open and has 7 large windows. I will have blackout shades but would love to have the ability to watch sports/tv shows with the shades open. The screen will be in a built in area with walls about 25inches deep. I will also be painting the built in area black or dark brown (hoping this would help with the color bleeding over).
> 
> 
> Throw ratio 12ft
> 
> View distance 14ft
> 
> projector will be mounted about 6" higher than the top of the screen.
> 
> max screen size i can fit is 106" 16:9
> 
> 
> For projector I was leaning towards the Sony HW50ES but this might be out of my budget.
> 
> 
> With the Sony and my distances, would I be better off going with the Black Diamond 1.4 or .8?
> 
> 
> Any help is much appreciated!!



Sent you a PM with my recommendation.


----------



## smuggymba

Can someone post an image of a black Diamond with LED lights that is showing content with black bars.


I want to see how black bars look with LED back lights.


----------



## adanny

Hi folks


FYI, have cross posted this question in the projectors forum but figured i would ask here from the BD veterans...


I have recently upgraded to a new 144" diagonal, scope, curved, 1.4 gain, screen innovations black diamond screen. Love the screen. Running it with my ancient but still good pioneer elite FPJ1 projector. Projector is quite obviously not bright enough, especially since I often (usually) watch with some lights on. The room is a multi use, movies, pool, games and TV room. It can be made pitch black if requid for serious movie watching. Walls are black or deep grey. But like I said, 60% or more of the use is with lights on, weekend football, kids movies and documentaries etc.


I was pretty much set on a Sony vw1000es, with a panamorph DC1 lens, auto sled, for the obvious reasons of picture, image, and overall sex appeal. That said, it is a ~$25k+ package and I am asking myself the age old question: "how much better" will the picture be versus a capable, top of the line cheap projector?


For large BD screens, say 130 diagonal and larger, what projectors are other using, with auto zoom and 3d?


The projector MUST deliver capable brightness (ie 2000 lumens although all the projectors notoriously over report), with good contrast and blacks and MUST have lens memory for zoom, and 3d. I know I could get one of the DP cine or projectiondesign entry level projectors for under 10k if I punt the 3d requirement t I've decided not to do that.


If Sony had a NON 4k projector that put out 2k lumens, and didn't cost 25k msrp, I would have bought that in a heart beat! If JVC's best was as bright as the panny or the epson 5020/6020, I would have bought that in a heartbeat as well.


What do the gurus recommend? How bright REALLY is the brightest JVC?


----------



## gec5741

OK I have could use some expertise reccomendatios here as well. I am also in the process of finishing my basement which will include a "media" room. My room demensions will be about 16 feet deep by 14 feet wide. I won't have row seating really but have been contenplating building in a narrow counter that would be a few feet out from the back row with just enough room for some bar stools. Then a couch will back up to that. The counter will not be fixed so when not needed I'd be able to slide it against the wall flush and move my couch back a few feet. So my seating would be somewhere in the neighborhood of 13 feet down to around 10 feet from screen. the room will be light controlled however I plan to watch a lot of sports down there so I will want some controlled lights on and not sit in the dark all the time. I was thinking I can get away with a 120 inch 16:9 diag screen? I don't have the drywall up yet but I did my best to mock up the screen with painters tape and while it's hard to tell for sure it didn't seem to bad from my closest sitting distance. I am looking at getting an epson 5020ub for my price range for my first projector as this is a pretty bright projector and seems to get good reviews.


Now a couple things that throw me off with this whole 16:9 and 2.4 screen dimensions are just how will it look on a 120 inch 16:9 screen if I'm watching something in 2.4 with the black bars. My thoughts is I deal with it now with a 55 inch led tv and I forget about the bars after a few minutes of watching. Now with the much larger 120 inch screen will it really even matter if I get black bars?? Again I want my sports to look the best they can so for HDTV watching 16:9 seems the way to go.


I guess I would like some suggestions for what would be the best options for my room. Again...


HD sports watching with lights (controlled) on.

watching wide format movies on a 16:9 screen

120" diag screen with sitting distance 10 - 13 feet away

Placement of the projector? 15 feet from lense to screen ok? I can go closer I suppose had planned for the electric to be on back wall.

Would the epson 6020ub be much better then the 5020ub?


I'm really leaning and thinking my best option would be a BD Zero Edge with the LED light kit. My plan however is to get the room done, Get the projector and then use the wall and play around with the settings. However I'll have to wire the room for projector placement before hand and my first thought was to use the back wall and a shelf. So my throw would be between 15-16'.


Again thank you for any suggesstions you can provide me! I want to make sure I do it right and I'm on the right path.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *h00kemh0rns*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations#post_13073260
> 
> 
> Looks like I'll be one of the lucky ones that will get to view this in person at the SI office. I'm impressed by the video and want to see if it lives up to expectations. I'll be candid in my opinion and hopefully I can see a side by side with other screens (i.e. silhouette, visage, etc.)
> 
> 
> 
> I'm hoping this thing really lives up to the video and hype. And I'm sure SI is as I'll be first in line to buy the BD.



I would love to show off our stuff at the factory! Contact me after Oct 1st and we can get together then. We are currently packing up for CEDIA (sept 26-28) so my demo room is full of trade show stuff.


----------



## Salloom




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *scchang*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3300#post_23696881
> 
> 
> Have a couple LED kit issues:
> 
> 
> 1. LEDs flicker while watching 3D with Sony VPL-HW50ES. Any solution other than to turn them off?
> 
> 
> 2. I have a 115" diagonal BD ZE 1.4 surface mounted on an 8' x 14' wall and find the LED wash on the ceiling and walls a bit bright and distracting. I'd rather have an isolated halo effect. Any thoughts on minimizing the wash?
> 
> 
> Thanks!


BEFORE I:
 


BEFORE II:
 

AFTER I
 

AFTER II


----------



## scchang




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Salloom*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3300#post_23718120
> 
> BEFORE I:
> 
> 
> 
> BEFORE II:
> 
> 
> AFTER I
> 
> 
> AFTER II



Yes! How did you achieve this?


----------



## Salloom

PM sent


----------



## adanny

How to reduce visible texture?


Hi folks


So I've got a 144" diagonal, BD, 1.4 gain, curved, scope. I am currently projecting it with a old pioneer elite FPJ1 projector. Have purchased and will be upgrading to a sonyvw1000es n a week or so.


Challenge is, how much ever I might try to deny it, I can see significant visible texturing. Not sparkles, unless they are the same thing. The screen just has a soft texture to it on white, bright scenes. Don't get me wrong. Love the screen etc. amazing with lights. But can I do something to play with the texture?


Screen is installed 4' of the ground, slightly angled down. It's angled because the top is on the installation hooks and the bottom is not.

Viewing distance is 15'. Throw is 14'. Top of screen level with projector.


Will it make a difference if I lower the screen, increase the throw, or get rid of the slight angle?


----------



## Salloom




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *adanny*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3330#post_23740285
> 
> 
> How to reduce visible texture?
> 
> 
> Hi folks
> 
> 
> So I've got a 144" diagonal, BD, 1.4 gain, curved, scope. I am currently projecting it with a old pioneer elite FPJ1 projector. Have purchased and will be upgrading to a sonyvw1000es n a week or so.
> 
> 
> Challenge is, how much ever I might try to deny it, I can see significant visible texturing. Not sparkles, unless they are the same thing. The screen just has a soft texture to it on white, bright scenes. Don't get me wrong. Love the screen etc. amazing with lights. But can I do something to play with the texture?
> 
> 
> Screen is installed 4' of the ground, slightly angled down. It's angled because the top is on the installation hooks and the bottom is not.
> 
> Viewing distance is 15'. Throw is 14'. Top of screen level with projector.
> 
> 
> Will it make a difference if I lower the screen, increase the throw, or get rid of the slight angle?




i have BD zero edge 1.4 and see no texture at all. i advise you to slide you hands on the screen. you will feel no texture just flat surface.


in my opinion, because your projector is old, you are seeing the screen-door effect (small squares like you looking thru a screen door).


newer projector greatly reduced this problem (even greater for LCOS type projectors like Sony and JVC). And even greater for 4K projectors like the Sony you intend to buy.


----------



## adanny




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Salloom*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3330#post_23740823
> 
> 
> i have BD zero edge 1.4 and see no texture at all. i advise you to slide you hands on the screen. you will feel no texture just flat surface.
> 
> 
> in my opinion, because your projector is old, you are seeing the screen-door effect (small squares like you looking thru a screen door).
> 
> 
> newer projector greatly reduced this problem (even greater for LCOS type projectors like Sony and JVC). And even greater for 4K projectors like the Sony you intend to buy.




Hope you're right. Will know in 2 weeks and will post back.


Any other suggestions or reflections welcome. While I'm at it, I have total flexibility on where to put the projector both in terms of height and throw. Ay reason not to do the following:

1. Height exactly at the top of the screen, maybe even a foot lower

2. Throw at ~19' which is exactly the mid point of the zoom according to the projector pro app for the vw1000es.


Blake/others, for this projector and this screen, any reason to deviate from relatively standard installation norms?


----------



## Matrixfan

You can check for screendoor by putting an A4 paper on the screen. If you still can see the pattern on it then it's screendoor. Honestly I don't think so, the Pioneer elite is based on a JVC model of some kind, and I also saw the texture sometimes on the BD 1.4 at bright parts.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *adanny*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3330#post_23741431
> 
> 
> Hope you're right. Will know in 2 weeks and will post back.
> 
> 
> Any other suggestions or reflections welcome. While I'm at it, I have total flexibility on where to put the projector both in terms of height and throw. Ay reason not to do the following:
> 
> 1. Height exactly at the top of the screen, maybe even a foot lower
> 
> 2. Throw at ~19' which is exactly the mid point of the zoom according to the projector pro app for the vw1000es.
> 
> 
> Blake/others, for this projector and this screen, any reason to deviate from relatively standard installation norms?



How old is the screen? 1st and 2nd generation BD 1.4 had noticeable sparkle however G3 and 4K fixed that issue.

Feel free to call me 512 832 6939 to discuss trouble shooting. I happen to have 2 VPL 1000 in my factory but we are about to ship them off to CEDIA.

I also just called my buddy Tom at Sony who has a VPL 1000 and a BD 1.4 gain 4K screen material on a curved frame 129". He doesn't see sparkle.


----------



## BlakeSI

LED will flicker on all active 3D systems. It's an active glasses thing. Turning the LED lights off is the only option. You can leave the LED lights on with Passive 3D.


----------



## adanny

Hi


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3330#post_23748050
> 
> 
> How old is the screen? 1st and 2nd generation BD 1.4 had noticeable sparkle however G3 and 4K fixed that issue.
> 
> Feel free to call me 512 832 6939 to discuss trouble shooting. I happen to have 2 VPL 1000 in my factory but we are about to ship them off to CEDIA.
> 
> I also just called my buddy Tom at Sony who has a VPL 1000 and a BD 1.4 gain 4K screen material on a curved frame 129". He doesn't see sparkle.



Hi Blake


Screen is brand new. Just got installed last week. Note that I don't have the vw1000 yet. The texture I am seeing is from my old pioneer elite fpj1


Sony comes here in a few weeks.


----------



## BlakeV




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *adanny*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3330#post_23748510
> 
> 
> Hi
> 
> Hi Blake
> 
> 
> Screen is brand new. Just got installed last week. Note that I don't have the vw1000 yet. The texture I am seeing is from my old pioneer elite fpj1
> 
> 
> Sony comes here in a few weeks.



Ahhh...Its the old Jvc (pioneer) optics caused interesting issues with all optical screens. JVC has resolved that issue.


----------



## bumeibuhuo


I remember someone from SI telling me the two gains are 1.4 and .85 and the half gain angle is 45.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bumeibuhuo*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3330#post_23798148
> 
> 
> I remember someone from SI telling me the two gains are 1.4 and .85 and the half gain angle is 45.



We actually have 3 Black Diamond materials. .8 gain, 1.4 gain and 2.7 gain. .8 gain and 1.4 gain are best for home use. 1.4 and 2.7 gain are best for commercial use.


----------



## wagnerc

I wanted a black screen 16x9 133", but they appear not to come in sizes over 120".


----------



## though

look at the Stewart Firehawk G3. SI BD is overrated.


----------



## anthonyrachel

i cant wait to get my hands on the black diamond 144. I have finally got my house renovation done and now im in the midst of working on my living room. I have checked with several dealers in Malaysia and the price is insanely over priced.


Would someone here be kind enough help me to purchase the Screen form the states and have it air or sea shipped to me in Malaysia ? Really appreciate if one of you amazing dudes could help me out.


----------



## anthonyrachel

And this is my living room in which I plan to hang the screen on the wall where the door opens into. The only source of light is from the main door when its open and the windows as seen. I will be adding curtains to control the light. What do you guys think of the position.


----------



## adanny




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeV*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3330#post_23751086
> 
> 
> Ahhh...Its the old Jvc (pioneer) optics caused interesting issues with all optical screens. JVC has resolved that issue.



So I have the Sony 4K projector up. Looks great BUT....must say i still see visible "texture" on bright scenes. I just do. What can I do to reduce it or eliminate it of others are convinced this screen has no texture?


Projector is installed ~14' from a 142" diagonal screen. BTW, is that the right distance or do you recommend going further back (which will reduce brightness, of course). Picture looks great. Will test more over the weekend


----------



## vm8444




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *adanny*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3330#post_23827197
> 
> 
> So I have the Sony 4K projector up. Looks great BUT....must say i still see visible "texture" on bright scenes. I just do. What can I do to reduce it or eliminate it of others are convinced this screen has no texture?
> 
> 
> Projector is installed ~14' from a 142" diagonal screen. BTW, is that the right distance or do you recommend going further back (which will reduce brightness, of course). Picture looks great. Will test more over the weekend



I'd be frustrated too,


Have you tried a different hdmi cable on the ground hooked up to pj and different source?


Maybe go further back on the throw..

Say middle of range to give it a shot.

Does seem close.


----------



## adanny

Yes, tried 2 brands of cables.

Haven't moved the projector back yet. It's a pain to do that plus the 14' location is better for many other reasons


----------



## discodol




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *adanny*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3330#post_23827197
> 
> 
> So I have the Sony 4K projector up. Looks great BUT....must say i still see visible "texture" on bright scenes. I just do. What can I do to reduce it or eliminate it of others are convinced this screen has no texture?



Have you tried looking at samples of other screen company's material to rule out your screen as the problem?


----------



## though




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *discodol*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3330#post_23830050
> 
> 
> Have you tried looking at samples of other screen company's material to rule out your screen as the problem?



the 'textured' screen look is a flaw of the Black Diamond screens. if you need similar ambient light reducing characteristics as the BD, go for the Stewart Firehawk G3.


----------



## Salloom

Do you mind posting a photo of the texture you are seeing?

Because the screen is expensive to replace, i would suggest trouble shooting other components (blue ray player, maybe change the blue ray disk, and change the setting on the Sony to reduce the problem.

Here is a link that shows the new Sony 4K projector and also JVC with the BD zero edge, with no visible texture (doubt that SI manipulated the image digitally to hide the texture in the video). In the Sony video, you can see dust particles on the projector, if you can see that, then if the screen had texture it should be visible, but i did see no texture. smooth goergous picture.



But i believe that you might be a bit be too critical ( i mean you have the creme of the crop here a $25K highly praised Sony ultra high definition projector that can beautifully upscale any source material to 4K resolution and the black diamond.


As for me, two years ago, i did not even think about going thru the pain of building a home theater. Once I browsed SI website and saw a video (helicopter in Snow Mountains). I was never the same after that; I wanted to build a home theater around a BD zero edge screens. I believe that the black diamond did to the projector screen industry what apple did with the iphone to the smart phone industry. It made the projector screen setup more main stream by the ability to watch gigantic size TV in ambient light conditions and in semi clarity of the plasma (or even better in my book) at a fraction of the cost and with size unattainable by LCD/CRT/LED panels for home use. You also add the benefit of less energy to power up a projector, less heat generated, and that you are looking at a projected image reflected not direct as normal TV panels so that’s good for your eyes, plus no pressure on the eye muscle to squint at the smaller size of the normal TV panels.

http://www.screeninnovations.com/videos/sony-screen-innovations-show-off-4k-projection/ 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alfZQdKFslU


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *though*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3330#post_23830103
> 
> 
> the 'textured' screen look is a flaw of the Black Diamond screens. if you need similar ambient light reducing characteristics as the BD, go for the Stewart Firehawk G3.



It is now the FireHawk G4 and a better material.


----------



## though




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3330#post_23844805
> 
> 
> It is now the FireHawk G4 and a better material.



yes you're correct. i stand corrected!


----------



## Littlemagellan


Hello,

I was out TV shopping today and came to the realisation that I would be better off buying a projector. I don't want to spend a whole lot of money, decided on the BenQ W1070 as it seems to be the best bang for your buck around the 1k mark. Is getting a black diamond overkill for an entry level projector like this? I was blown away by the videos on the SI site.


----------



## though




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Littlemagellan*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3330#post_23862769
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I was out TV shopping today and came to the realisation that I would be better off buying a projector. I don't want to spend a whole lot of money, decided on the BenQ W1070 as it seems to be the best bang for your buck around the 1k mark. Is getting a black diamond overkill for an entry level projector like this? I was blown away by the videos on the SI site.



it really depends on the room your equipment is going in. i normally do not recommend the SI BD unless it's for non-critical commercial environments.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *though*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3330#post_23862808
> 
> 
> it really depends on the room your equipment is going in. i normally do not recommend the SI BD unless it's for non-critical commercial environments.



What would you recommend?


Dave


----------



## though

i would need to know room specifics and approximate budget.


----------



## FATHERFORD

Is the turn around on SI screens still 1-2 weeks? I bought a 110" 1.4 BD with stand from a best buy in Katy, Texas and I'm getting anxious.


----------



## Littlemagellan


$1000. I sit about 9 feet from my TV, have a bookshelf behind my couch (2 feet behind) that I could put the projector on, or ceiling mount.


----------



## FATHERFORD




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Littlemagellan*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3330#post_23864898
> 
> 
> $1000. I sit about 9 feet from my TV, have a bookshelf behind my couch (2 feet behind) that I could put the projector on, or ceiling mount.



$1000 for projector and screen or just projector?


I think the cheapest BD screen is 2699.


----------



## Littlemagellan


$1000 for the screen... I saw in the thread a guy bought one for $750 on craigslist. that must have been quite the grab!


----------



## FATHERFORD




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Littlemagellan*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3330#post_23864969
> 
> 
> $1000 for the screen... I saw in the thread a guy bought one for $750 on craigslist. that must have been quite the grab!



Just checked our Craigslist in Houston. Cheapest used one I saw listed was a 92" .8 gain for 1200. Heck of a discount. Wish I thought to buy used.


I just bought a 110" for $3100 new.



I thought it was ridiculous to pay that much, but a worst buy about 50 minutes from me had a 100" .8 BD with a Epson 5020 projector. Even with all the lights on in the room, 4 other tv's, and the doors wide open it still looked nearly as good as my LG THX 60" plasma.


An hour later I now have 36months at 0% to pay off a epson 5030, 110" BD screen, and stand(I don't want to mount the screen on my real wood walls).


----------



## Littlemagellan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *FATHERFORD*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3330#post_23864983
> 
> 
> 
> Just checked our Craigslist in Houston. Cheapest used one I saw listed was a 92" .8 gain for 1200. Heck of a discount. Wish I thought to buy used.
> 
> 
> I just bought a 110" for $3100 new.
> 
> 
> 
> I thought it was ridiculous to pay that much, but a worst buy about 50 minutes from me had a 100" .8 BD with a Epson 5020 projector. Even with all the lights on in the room, 4 other tv's, and the doors wide open it still looked nearly as good as my LG THX 60" plasma.
> 
> 
> An hour later I now have 36months at 0% to pay off a epson 5030, 110" BD screen, and stand(I don't want to mount the screen on my real wood walls).


There's one for $700 in North Austin.  http://austin.craigslist.org/ele/4112923157.html


----------



## FATHERFORD

Aren't there different gens of these screens? Sounds like that might be an older one.


Either way, it never dawned on me to check Craigslist.


----------



## kjlewie




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *FATHERFORD*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3330_90#post_23864683
> 
> 
> Is the turn around on SI screens still 1-2 weeks? I bought a 110" 1.4 BD with stand from a best buy in Katy, Texas and I'm getting anxious.



What type/brand of stand did you buy?


----------



## FATHERFORD




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *kjlewie*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3360#post_23868437
> 
> 
> What type/brand of stand did you buy?



I just bought the one SI sells. it was $499...


Way to much I'm sure for what it is, debated on making my own. Probably should have considering I have a full machine shop.


I'll make sure and take pics, as I searched all over the net and never found any good ones.


----------



## kjlewie

I'd be interested in pics when you get your screen and have a chance. I can't seem to find any on the net, either. Thanks.


----------



## adanny




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *discodol*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3330#post_23830050
> 
> 
> Have you tried looking at samples of other screen company's material to rule out your screen as the problem?



Haven't gone down the sampl route but have seen scores of screens at dealers. How would seeing samples of other screens rule out this screen as the problem?


----------



## adanny




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *though*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3330#post_23830103
> 
> 
> the 'textured' screen look is a flaw of the Black Diamond screens. if you need similar ambient light reducing characteristics as the BD, go for the Stewart Firehawk G3.



I don't find the G3 to be nearly as effective at ambient light rejection. Not even close.


----------



## adanny




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Salloom*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3330#post_23839499
> 
> 
> Do you mind posting a photo of the texture you are seeing?
> 
> Because the screen is expensive to replace, i would suggest trouble shooting other components (blue ray player, maybe change the blue ray disk, and change the setting on the Sony to reduce the problem.
> 
> Here is a link that shows the new Sony 4K projector and also JVC with the BD zero edge, with no visible texture (doubt that SI manipulated the image digitally to hide the texture in the video). In the Sony video, you can see dust particles on the projector, if you can see that, then if the screen had texture it should be visible, but i did see no texture. smooth goergous picture.
> 
> 
> 
> But i believe that you might be a bit be too critical ( i mean you have the creme of the crop here a $25K highly praised Sony ultra high definition projector that can beautifully upscale any source material to 4K resolution and the black diamond.
> 
> 
> As for me, two years ago, i did not even think about going thru the pain of building a home theater. Once I browsed SI website and saw a video (helicopter in Snow Mountains). I was never the same after that; I wanted to build a home theater around a BD zero edge screens. I believe that the black diamond did to the projector screen industry what apple did with the iphone to the smart phone industry. It made the projector screen setup more main stream by the ability to watch gigantic size TV in ambient light conditions and in semi clarity of the plasma (or even better in my book) at a fraction of the cost and with size unattainable by LCD/CRT/LED panels for home use. You also add the benefit of less energy to power up a projector, less heat generated, and that you are looking at a projected image reflected not direct as normal TV panels so that’s good for your eyes, plus no pressure on the eye muscle to squint at the smaller size of the normal TV panels.
> 
> http://www.screeninnovations.com/videos/sony-screen-innovations-show-off-4k-projection/
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alfZQdKFslU




I don't have a very good camera but will try to post a picture.


I saw the videos you posted but it's impossible to make any conclusion from such videos because you are looking at a picture through a camera and then on an iPad or another sreen. Too many translations and transcriptions to capture the fine texture I a referring to.


Of course I am critical. For the top1% most expensive screen and projector combo, I should expect every customer especially on this crazy forum to be critical. Am I too critical? Not sure what that means! "Too" is too subjective a word!


----------



## adanny




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Salloom*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3330#post_23839499
> 
> 
> 
> As for me, two years ago, i did not even think about going thru the pain of building a home theater. Once I browsed SI website and saw a video (helicopter in Snow Mountains). I was never the same after that; I wanted to build a home theater around a BD zero edge screens. I believe that the black diamond did to the projector screen industry what apple did with the iphone to the smart phone industry. It made the projector screen setup more main stream by the ability to watch gigantic size TV in ambient light conditions and in semi clarity of the plasma (or even better in my book) at a fraction of the cost and with size unattainable by LCD/CRT/LED panels for home use. You also add the benefit of less energy to power up a projector, less heat generated, and that you are looking at a projected image reflected not direct as normal TV panels so that’s good for your eyes, plus no pressure on the eye muscle to squint at the smaller size of the normal TV panels.
> 
> http://www.screeninnovations.com/videos/sony-screen-innovations-show-off-4k-projection/
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alfZQdKFslU




I don't disagree with your statement. And don't get me wrong - I love my SI BD screen and what it has allowed me to do. I will post pics in my build thread soon.


No question about it: this is a great screen in ambient light. probably the best screen in real world watching conditions - although I haven't seen a DNP due to their abysmal sales and distribution model. And it's a good screen in dark conditions as well. But it is not without flaws and there is one teeny weeny flaw that I have observed which is the texture in bright scenes.


I am glad you see no flaw in your screen. Neither does my wife and most of the time neither do I.


I've tried all the ideas suggested here so far except moving the PJ back from 14". Having already spent more than a 100k on this room (and gladly so!), I am loath to experiment much more stuff that involves more cutting and moving and labour. Plan is to sit and enjoy teh room for a few months










Once I get the sony 4k server later this year, I will get a pro calibrator in here and get their help to try and eliminate or reduce the texture. In the meantime, all other suggestions and observations of your texture challenges welcome


Anyone in NJ welcome to come visit if calendars match


----------



## Skylinestar




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *FATHERFORD*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3360#post_23868473
> 
> 
> I just bought the one SI sells. it was $499...
> 
> 
> Way to much I'm sure for what it is, debated on making my own. Probably should have considering I have a full machine shop.
> 
> 
> I'll make sure and take pics, as I searched all over the net and never found any good ones.


Kindly post a photo of the stand.


----------



## FATHERFORD




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Skylinestar*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3360#post_23880045
> 
> 
> Kindly post a photo of the stand.



Will do. My screen shipped by the stand didn't. I'm supposed to get it on Nov 1st.


----------



## Salloom

Adanny



You are right, I take what I said back. If you spend that much money and went through the trouble, you should be happy with your screen with no visible texture.

I looked closely at my screen and did not see texture. By the way: they have different generations of the BD screens (G2 and G3). Which one is yours?

You can find out from the model number.


Maybe calibration would do the trick. I have a lumagen mini with the C6 meter and use calman5. Lumagen has a nice plethora of tricks and tweaks that every home theater owner should get especially for projectors.


One feature I like is size ratio: I can go from 16:9 (used for cable TV) to 1:2.35 without stretching or compressing the picture to eliminate black bars when watching blue rays. my screen is 16:9 but background wall is black intentionally for this purpose. The new lumagen model is native 4K output. You can also use their picture enhancement settings that can eliminate mosquito something artifacts (for SD).


I use it as a pattern generator as well for calman. I do not work for lumagen. Once had a problem with my lumagen emailed them and the president of the company replied and immediately fixed the problem for me.


one advice, if i may, if you do not use them already, spot lights and LED instead of halogen lighting: as they work best because they emit directional light so you can still have light but you can aim them away from the light path of the projector. Halogens diffuse light all over the room and some will interfere with the light emitted from the projector on the screen losing PQ. I have the best of both worlds. I use LED bulbs in my spot lights with dimmer and color temperature of natural light (4000-4500 Kelvin) not too traditional yellow and not too office light white. LEDs use one sixth the power of normal halogens. They emit no heat (nothing) so they do not add to the heat generated by all your equipment and the projector. They dont burn out. They last long time (after 10 years they lose approx. 30% of their brightness but do not burn out).

good luck with your setup.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *adanny*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3360#post_23878058
> 
> 
> I don't disagree with your statement. And don't get me wrong - I love my SI BD screen and what it has allowed me to do. I will post pics in my build thread soon.
> 
> 
> No question about it: this is a great screen in ambient light. probably the best screen in real world watching conditions - although I haven't seen a DNP due to their abysmal sales and distribution model. And it's a good screen in dark conditions as well. But it is not without flaws and there is one teeny weeny flaw that I have observed which is the texture in bright scenes.
> 
> 
> I am glad you see no flaw in your screen. Neither does my wife and most of the time neither do I.
> 
> 
> I've tried all the ideas suggested here so far except moving the PJ back from 14". Having already spent more than a 100k on this room (and gladly so!), I am loath to experiment much more stuff that involves more cutting and moving and labour. Plan is to sit and enjoy teh room for a few months
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once I get the sony 4k server later this year, I will get a pro calibrator in here and get their help to try and eliminate or reduce the texture. In the meantime, all other suggestions and observations of your texture challenges welcome
> 
> 
> Anyone in NJ welcome to come visit if calendars match



Adanny,


I'm sorry to say it but I would not get your hopes up. You can't "calibrate away" screen texture (except if you just drop picture brightness so low you can't see the screen or something).


I just watched the Sony VW1000 on the SI BD 1.4 gain screen a couple days ago. I walked out of that demo thinking two things:


1. The VW1000 is an incredible display, in terms of image intensity, contrast, "pop," sharpness and resolving detail.


2. I couldn't imagine choosing to pair the VW1000 with that screen, unless there was absolutely no other choice. The screen speckly structure was so pronounced IMO that it was hard to even evaluate the sony for image noise (e.g. it's reality creation) because any attempt to really take in fine detail was marred by the speckly screen structure overlaying the image. I just could never buy a projector whose raison d'etre was reproducing the finest detail possible, only to have it against a bed of screen induced image noise.


Now, some people are not so sensitive to screen texture, which is fine, and it's why the BD have their place for dealing with tough environments. But...you do seem already sensitive to it. And one of the features of the Sony you bought is it's high brightness, which will only exacerbate seeing the screen texture. You don't want to have to fight your new projector, calibrate away that gorgeous brightness and the vividness it brings, just to fight the artifacts of your screen. Do you really need that particular screen? Are you watching in a bright room? Lights on? Reflective surfaces or something?


I always say, the BD screens are amazing for what they are made to do: very effectively combat non-optimal room conditions. But since such screens tend to have certain compromises (screen artifacts, uneven illumination, color shift etc), it's good to consider a wider range of more neutral screens if you don't need the ambient-light fighting capabilities.

(But...then...if you've already bought a BD screen it's probably because it's doing something you want in terms of room conditions. But that being the case, just don't expect miracles to alleviate seeing screen texture).


----------



## FATHERFORD

For the people asking about the SI Stand.

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1497951/living-room-projection-setup-build


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *though*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3330#post_23830103
> 
> 
> the 'textured' screen look is a flaw of the Black Diamond screens. if you need similar ambient light reducing characteristics as the BD, go for the Stewart Firehawk G3.



Really? My suggestion would be to view a Black Diamond next to a Firehawk and then make an informed decision.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *adanny*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3330#post_23741431
> 
> 
> Hope you're right. Will know in 2 weeks and will post back.
> 
> 
> Any other suggestions or reflections welcome. While I'm at it, I have total flexibility on where to put the projector both in terms of height and throw. Ay reason not to do the following:
> 
> 1. Height exactly at the top of the screen, maybe even a foot lower
> 
> 2. Throw at ~19' which is exactly the mid point of the zoom according to the projector pro app for the vw1000es.
> 
> 
> Blake/others, for this projector and this screen, any reason to deviate from relatively standard installation norms?



Not sure what you are referring to as Texture but here is a trouble shoot i can offer. Tom has just re joined our SI tech team after spending two years working with Sony and specifically on the 4K projectors including the VPL 1000, VPL1100 and VPL 600. Call in to the factory and chat with Tom who has both a VPL1100 and a Black Diamond 1.4 gain screen and he can trouble shoot your issue with you LIVE on the phone and even facetime if need be.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *FATHERFORD*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3360#post_23882649
> 
> 
> Will do. My screen shipped by the stand didn't. I'm supposed to get it on Nov 1st.



Sorry about that. We were wiped out of stands due to CEDIA loaners to other manufactures.


----------



## wagnerc

The stands look like 80/20 parts.


----------



## adanny




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3360#post_23909801
> 
> 
> Not sure what you are referring to as Texture but here is a trouble shoot i can offer. Tom has just re joined our SI tech team after spending two years working with Sony and specifically on the 4K projectors including the VPL 1000, VPL1100 and VPL 600. Call in to the factory and chat with Tom who has both a VPL1100 and a Black Diamond 1.4 gain screen and he can trouble shoot your issue with you LIVE on the phone and even facetime if need be.



Will do. Thanks a bunch, Blake


----------



## adanny




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3360#post_23901796
> 
> 
> Adanny,
> 
> 
> I'm sorry to say it but I would not get your hopes up. You can't "calibrate away" screen texture (except if you just drop picture brightness so low you can't see the screen or something).
> 
> 
> I just watched the Sony VW1000 on the SI BD 1.4 gain screen a couple days ago. I walked out of that demo thinking two things:
> 
> 
> 1. The VW1000 is an incredible display, in terms of image intensity, contrast, "pop," sharpness and resolving detail.
> 
> 
> 2. I couldn't imagine choosing to pair the VW1000 with that screen, unless there was absolutely no other choice. The screen speckly structure was so pronounced IMO that it was hard to even evaluate the sony for image noise (e.g. it's reality creation) because any attempt to really take in fine detail was marred by the speckly screen structure overlaying the image. I just could never buy a projector whose raison d'etre was reproducing the finest detail possible, only to have it against a bed of screen induced image noise.
> 
> 
> Now, some people are not so sensitive to screen texture, which is fine, and it's why the BD have their place for dealing with tough environments. But...you do seem already sensitive to it. And one of the features of the Sony you bought is it's high brightness, which will only exacerbate seeing the screen texture. You don't want to have to fight your new projector, calibrate away that gorgeous brightness and the vividness it brings, just to fight the artifacts of your screen. Do you really need that particular screen? Are you watching in a bright room? Lights on? Reflective surfaces or something?
> 
> 
> I always say, the BD screens are amazing for what they are made to do: very effectively combat non-optimal room conditions. But since such screens tend to have certain compromises (screen artifacts, uneven illumination, color shift etc), it's good to consider a wider range of more neutral screens if you don't need the ambient-light fighting capabilities.
> 
> (But...then...if you've already bought a BD screen it's probably because it's doing something you want in terms of room conditions. But that being the case, just don't expect miracles to alleviate seeing screen texture).



Thanks Richard. Agree with you. I chose that screen (and in fact tested it with that projector) because I have moved away from dark rooms to a multi use room where I can watch with some light eg sports parties,, while playing pool, while dancing etc.

Will post pics in my build thread this weekend . I bought the screen aware of its shortcomings and advantages and after extensive (over!) researching


But the texture or speckljng or whatever it is , ended up to my eye way more pronounced "in house" than it was in all the dealer showrooms I saw it in earlier. Sounds to me like I should talk to tom, as Blake suggested, and see what he suggests. I do so think that putting the projector on the front end of its distance range must be exacerbating the problems and I should look into moving it back a bit.


----------



## adanny




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Salloom*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3360#post_23892080
> 
> 
> Adanny
> 
> 
> 
> You are right, I take what I said back. If you spend that much money and went through the trouble, you should be happy with your screen with no visible texture.
> 
> I looked closely at my screen and did not see texture. By the way: they have different generations of the BD screens (G2 and G3). Which one is yours?
> 
> You can find out from the model number.
> 
> 
> Maybe calibration would do the trick. I have a lumagen mini with the C6 meter and use calman5. Lumagen has a nice plethora of tricks and tweaks that every home theater owner should get especially for projectors.
> 
> 
> One feature I like is size ratio: I can go from 16:9 (used for cable TV) to 1:2.35 without stretching or compressing the picture to eliminate black bars when watching blue rays. my screen is 16:9 but background wall is black intentionally for this purpose. The new lumagen model is native 4K output. You can also use their picture enhancement settings that can eliminate mosquito something artifacts (for SD).
> 
> 
> I use it as a pattern generator as well for calman. I do not work for lumagen. Once had a problem with my lumagen emailed them and the president of the company replied and immediately fixed the problem for me.
> 
> 
> one advice, if i may, if you do not use them already, spot lights and LED instead of halogen lighting: as they work best because they emit directional light so you can still have light but you can aim them away from the light path of the projector. Halogens diffuse light all over the room and some will interfere with the light emitted from the projector on the screen losing PQ. I have the best of both worlds. I use LED bulbs in my spot lights with dimmer and color temperature of natural light (4000-4500 Kelvin) not too traditional yellow and not too office light white. LEDs use one sixth the power of normal halogens. They emit no heat (nothing) so they do not add to the heat generated by all your equipment and the projector. They dont burn out. They last long time (after 10 years they lose approx. 30% of their brightness but do not burn out).
> 
> good luck with your setup.



Like the lighting with led suggestion. I also have 80% LEDs and spots, but have 8 high hat halogens left. Will swap those out as well with LEDs now...


----------



## Salloom

For the LED bulbs: I just want to add that there are types of LED bulbs (that can fit into spot light housing)

some LED bulbs act as halogen where they diffuse light all over the room (these bulbs usually have white or milky plastic or glass do diffuse LED light uniformly across the room. Other types of LED bulbs (the one that i am using) have a clear lens concaved to focus the light on one spot (that’s also what they use in movie theaters or museums.


Each type has plus and minuses. Spot LED bulbs are better for projector screens like I mentioned earlier. They also look more elegant (like an art exhibit). I think also they add another dimension (layer) to the room in terms of design (because you will notice dark and bright spots).


On the other hand, Spot LED bulbs have disadvantages: light is very bright directly beneath the spot light and very dim in others. Not to mention you can not look at them directly as they are very blinding. When I clean the room I have to use an external light.


So depending on your needs.



Also, some LEDs bulbs are dimmable, and some are not (not dimmable ones usually flash when used with a dimmer). So read the specs of the bulb.


----------



## stlcity

Are there any masking systems that fit the BD screen? I have a 142" 2.35:1: was looking to see it there is one that can mask to 16:9 and back. Thanks.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *stlcity*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3360#post_23926437
> 
> 
> Are there any masking systems that fit the BD screen? I have a 142" 2.35:1: was looking to see it there is one that can mask to 16:9 and back. Thanks.



There is really no need to mask a BD. I have a 2:35 Bd in my theater and when i show 16:9 content i don't see Black bars I see nothing, a complete absence of light.


----------



## Skylinestar




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3360#post_23967949
> 
> 
> There is really no need to mask a BD. I have a 2:35 Bd in my theater and when i show 16:9 content i don't see Black bars I see nothing, a complete absence of light.


May I know what is the gain? No black bars on 1.4 gain?


----------



## stlcity




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3360#post_23967949
> 
> 
> There is really no need to mask a BD. I have a 2:35 Bd in my theater and when i show 16:9 content i don't see Black bars I see nothing, a complete absence of light.




True specially when I watch movies that are 16:9. Problem is when we have people over for football, my wife loves to have some light left on in the theater. The gray bars are slightly visible on either side. Does not bother me much....I was just curious if there was a masking system out there.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Skylinestar*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3360#post_23971867
> 
> 
> May I know what is the gain? No black bars on 1.4 gain?



I use the new BD 1.4 gain. Its almost as dark as the .8 but has twice the viewing cone and a "poppier" image.


----------



## gadgetfreaky

I currently have the 100" zero edge 0.8 gain screen. I had the Epson 5010 projector which looked good even with lots of ambient light (color wasn't incredibly accurate on torch mode)


Now I'm thinking of getting the Sony HW55, but it's not as bright as the Epson, calibrated it puts out 1,000 lumens. Do you think it'll look good or should I go with the Epson 5030?


Also, how much better off am I if I upgrade to a 1.4 gain screen? Is it that much brighter on the black diamond screens? I might try to sell my 0.8 at some point to my brother then maybe go 110" 1.4?


What's the pros/cons of 1.4 vs. 0.8?


How would the Sony look on a 1.4 vs. 0.8


thanks!!


----------



## kubadebe


Hi guys,

 

I'm new on this forum. Can someone help me?

Currenty I have Sony HW55 and I would like to buy SI projector screen.

Can someone tell me the difference in performance between SI BD fixed frame 1.4 and SI BD zero edge 1.4.

What I have understand both of them have the same screen materials. I live in Germany thus I can't see this in action. Thanks in advance for your help.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *kubadebe*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3360#post_24006561
> 
> 
> Hi guys,
> 
> 
> I'm new on this forum. Can someone help me?
> 
> Currenty I have Sony HW55 and I would like to buy SI projector screen.
> 
> Can someone tell me the difference in performance between SI BD fixed frame 1.4 and SI BD zero edge 1.4.
> 
> What I have understand both of them have the same screen materials. I live in Germany thus I can't see this in action. Thanks in advance for your help.



Both the fixed frame and Zero Edge get the Black Diamond material from the same role. There is no difference in picture quality.


----------



## gadgetfreaky




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3270#post_23506113
> 
> 
> You are welcome to come by the factory for a demo of both our .8 and 1.4 gain BD and feel free to bring your projector. We do not sell direct however, you would still need to buy from an authorized re seller.



Where's the factory? What demo rooms with what projectors do you have setup?


----------



## Neil Joseph

I thought I would chime in here. I recently updated my screen and projector. I previously made my own DIY 100" screen which was paired with the Sony VPL-VW11HT projector.


3 months ago, I got the Screen Innovations Black Diamond 106" screen with 1.4 gain. Also picked up the Panasonic PT-AE8000 projector. I am loving it. My room was troublesome in that I have an ambient light situation which limited my viewing even when trying to control the room light. Now I can watch with the lights on and the contrast is pretty much preserved.

http://www3.bell.net/josephneil/~orange1/htpics/ for more info


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Neil Joseph*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3390#post_24026543
> 
> 
> I thought I would chime in here. I recently updated my screen and projector. I previously made my own DIY 100" screen which was paired with the Sony VPL-VW11HT projector.
> 
> 
> 3 months ago, I got the Screen Innovations Black Diamond 106" screen with 1.4 gain. Also picked up the Panasonic PT-AE8000 projector. I am loving it. My room was troublesome in that I have an ambient light situation which limited my viewing even when trying to control the room light. Now I can watch with the lights on and the contrast is pretty much preserved.
> 
> http://www3.bell.net/josephneil/~orange1/htpics/ for more info



Nice picks man!


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gadgetfreaky*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3390#post_24024848
> 
> 
> Where's the factory? What demo rooms with what projectors do you have setup?



We are in Austin and have Epson 6030, Sony VPL1000, JVC, Panasonic 8000U, and a few others.


----------



## ch1sox

Does anyone know the difference between the Pure Zero Edge and the Black Diamond Zero Edge? Is the Pure for dark environments and the Black Diamond for lighter environments?


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ch1sox*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3390#post_24039311
> 
> 
> Does anyone know the difference between the Pure Zero Edge and the Black Diamond Zero Edge? Is the Pure for dark environments and the Black Diamond for lighter environments?



Pure White or Gray Zero Edge is for dark room viewing only. Pure Zero Edge has the same frame design and zero edge bezel as the BD Zero Edge. The optional LED back lighting is also available.

Black Diamond zero edge works with the lights on or off and also has an optional LED back lighting system.


----------



## ch1sox




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3390#post_24039512
> 
> 
> Pure White or Gray Zero Edge is for dark room viewing only. Pure Zero Edge has the same frame design and zero edge bezel as the BD Zero Edge. The optional LED back lighting is also available.
> 
> Black Diamond zero edge works with the lights on or off and also has an optional LED back lighting system.



Right on, thanks for clearing that up.


----------



## menglish6

I am thinking about getting one of the Zero Edge screens for a basement half playroom / half theater set up. However the specific location were I'd like to put the screen is a little complicated in terms of mounting options. The screen location is in front of a blackout curtain (so standard wall mount is not an option) and directly above is an air duct (so I think the flown mounts are also not possible).


What other options do I have here? Is it feasible to build something against the wall above the blackout curtains to mount the flown mounts about ~5 inches off the wall? How much weight would such a contraption need to support for a ~100" screen w/ LEDs?


Are there stands which can be used to place a Zero Edge screen on? I thought I read in one of the reviews that these were used for reviewing purposes, and I have a very large and sturdy Standout Designs media center which my current TV is on.


Thanks in advance for any thoughts or ideas.


----------



## gadgetfreaky

I have a 100" .8 gain zero edge screen, and it's pretty awesome. I had the 5010 on it, and at night it looked like a plasma, best part was it didn't deflect light onto the walls & ceilings.


I'm about to upgrade my projector, to either the 5030 or HW55.. My brother is also setting up his home theater as well.


So my question is when is it appropriate to get the .8 gain vs. 1.4? What are the pros/cons of one vs. the other. I've been on this thread for a while but I don't think Blake or anyone has really listed it out. I'm assuming .8 is better for night watching since 1.4 might have hot spots? and 1.4 is for really bright ambient light daytime?


Everyone talks about the 1.4, so I'm wondering why a .8 even exists?


The .8 I had during the day looked pretty good, albeit the 5010 was a light canon and if I had blinds open watching football I put it on torch mode.


Contemplating selling my brother my .8 screen and moving to a 1.4, possibly even going a bit bigger







Just not sure the $$ would be worth the switch since I'm not sure the difference would be. I do have LOTS of windows in my new place.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *menglish6*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3390#post_24053081
> 
> 
> I am thinking about getting one of the Zero Edge screens for a basement half playroom / half theater set up. However the specific location were I'd like to put the screen is a little complicated in terms of mounting options. The screen location is in front of a blackout curtain (so standard wall mount is not an option) and directly above is an air duct (so I think the flown mounts are also not possible).
> 
> 
> What other options do I have here? Is it feasible to build something against the wall above the blackout curtains to mount the flown mounts about ~5 inches off the wall? How much weight would such a contraption need to support for a ~100" screen w/ LEDs?
> 
> 
> Are there stands which can be used to place a Zero Edge screen on? I thought I read in one of the reviews that these were used for reviewing purposes, and I have a very large and sturdy Standout Designs media center which my current TV is on.
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance for any thoughts or ideas.



We have a flying kit for the zero Edge family of products. We use thin aircraft rated cables to "fly" the screen from the ceiling.


----------



## gadgetfreaky




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gadgetfreaky*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3390#post_24055361
> 
> 
> I have a 100" .8 gain zero edge screen, and it's pretty awesome. I had the 5010 on it, and at night it looked like a plasma, best part was it didn't deflect light onto the walls & ceilings.
> 
> 
> I'm about to upgrade my projector, to either the 5030 or HW55.. My brother is also setting up his home theater as well.
> 
> 
> So my question is when is it appropriate to get the .8 gain vs. 1.4? What are the pros/cons of one vs. the other. I've been on this thread for a while but I don't think Blake or anyone has really listed it out. I'm assuming .8 is better for night watching since 1.4 might have hot spots? and 1.4 is for really bright ambient light daytime?
> 
> 
> Everyone talks about the 1.4, so I'm wondering why a .8 even exists?
> 
> 
> The .8 I had during the day looked pretty good, albeit the 5010 was a light canon and if I had blinds open watching football I put it on torch mode.
> 
> 
> Contemplating selling my brother my .8 screen and moving to a 1.4, possibly even going a bit bigger
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just not sure the $$ would be worth the switch since I'm not sure the difference would be. I do have LOTS of windows in my new place.



Bump










Although, anyone looking to buy a 100" .8 gain Zero Edge? PM me, local pickup in manhattan beach, CA . Was thinking of selling it for $1,800 ? Is that a good price? Bestbuy new is $3300. I'll post to classified as well.

This'll give me the chance to upgrade to a bit bigger and 1.4 gain


----------



## ch1sox




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gadgetfreaky*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3390#post_24079289
> 
> 
> Bump
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Although, anyone looking to buy a 100" .8 gain Zero Edge? PM me, local pickup in manhattan beach, CA . Was thinking of selling it for $2K? Is that a good price? I'll post to classified as well.
> 
> This'll give me the chance to upgrade to a bit bigger and 1.4 gain


I'm hoping to get my 1.4 gain 133" in the next couple weeks and I'll update here with my impressions. The .8 gain is more for dim/dark rooms from my understanding. So if you're like me and have lights on sometimes, the 1.4 is the way to go.


----------



## jacksojm

We're moving into a new house and I had to leave my projector and screen behind.


I purchased the Panasonic 8000u around Black Friday with the rebate deal and now I'm looking for a screen. I've got a potential deal for a new in the box 95" 16:9 Reference Series (Solar HD 1.3) screen. This is through a private party that went with another option. Not sure what this screen would retail for.


I'm going to go back through and read the whole thread, but I'm curious if this is a good screen for this projector. Very dark room, though not totally light controlled, throw distance is about 14 feet (not quite finished moving in yet).


Thanks in advance!


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jacksojm*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3390#post_24080117
> 
> 
> We're moving into a new house and I had to leave my projector and screen behind.
> 
> 
> I purchased the Panasonic 8000u around Black Friday with the rebate deal and now I'm looking for a screen. I've got a potential deal for a new in the box 95" 16:9 Reference Series (Solar HD 1.3) screen. This is through a private party that went with another option. Not sure what this screen would retail for.
> 
> 
> I'm going to go back through and read the whole thread, but I'm curious if this is a good screen for this projector. Very dark room, though not totally light controlled, throw distance is about 14 feet (not quite finished moving in yet).
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance!



Our Solar 1.3 will look great in a completely light controlled "dark" room paired with the pany 8000U. You can also do a 2:35 aspect ratio with that projector without the need of a lense so something to consider.


----------



## TL5

Blake - what is the gain of the new Slate material?


----------



## JRW2

I am building a new home and will have a dedicated home theater with no windows. I will be able to control the lights, going from near zero lighting to dimmed lighting from side pilasters. The walls and ceiling will be painted a neutral gray color.


I am looking for some feedback from owners of the black diamond 2:35 1.4 gain screen who use it in a similar light-controlled home theater. Is it the right type of screen for this application? How happy are you with your screen?


Thanks.


----------



## gadgetfreaky

So I got my Sony HW55 hooked up to my 100" .8 gain screen. The picture looks amazing.. Although during the day it's washed out, even with Sony on "game" mode. It's decently watchable (I don't have drapes on the windows directly behind the projector yet. At night though it's BRIGHT in reference mode. I'm wondering how much brighter the 1.4 would be in a dark room. My throw is a little over 13'. Some scenes it's almost too bright and I could see once in a while a little hot spot in the center of the screen. Great thing is my room is not a dedicated room and this thing absorbs and doesn't reflect light. Gray walls but light gray almost white ceiling and not much light reflects off that. I'll try to take a picture that accurately represents it at night.


The combo makes it look like a 100" plasma at night







but with a better non reflective picture (no glass of course) and a more film like quality.


----------



## ch1sox




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gadgetfreaky*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3390#post_24129804
> 
> 
> So I got my Sony HW55 hooked up to my 100" .8 gain screen. The picture looks amazing.. Although during the day it's washed out, even with Sony on "game" mode. It's decently watchable (I don't have drapes on the windows directly behind the projector yet. At night though it's BRIGHT in reference mode. I'm wondering how much brighter the 1.4 would be in a dark room. My throw is a little over 13'. Some scenes it's almost too bright and I could see once in a while a little hot spot in the center of the screen. Great thing is my room is not a dedicated room and this thing absorbs and doesn't reflect light. Gray walls but light gray almost white ceiling and not much light reflects off that. I'll try to take a picture that accurately represents it at night.
> 
> 
> The combo makes it look like a 100" plasma at night
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but with a better non reflective picture (no glass of course) and a more film like quality.



The .8 gain is more for darker rooms which is why it might be slightly washed out during the day. I should be getting my 1.4 gain screen hopefully soon so I'll report back with my thoughts.


----------



## gadgetfreaky




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ch1sox*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3390#post_24130077
> 
> 
> The .8 gain is more for darker rooms which is why it might be slightly washed out during the day. I should be getting my 1.4 gain screen hopefully soon so I'll report back with my thoughts.




yes, I know, just wondering with either then 5030 or the sony 55 the 1.4 might be too bright in a dark room given how bright it is already at .8. Although I guess you can't really have it too bright since you can dial it back on the projector...


----------



## KevinH




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gadgetfreaky*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3390#post_24132320
> 
> 
> yes, I know, just wondering with either then 5030 or the sony 55 the 1.4 might be too bright in a dark room given how bright it is already at .8. Although I guess you can't really have it too bright since you can dial it back on the projector...



I have the 1.4 in 110" with a 5020 in THX Eco mode and sit a tad under 13' and it's plenty bright but not too bright at all.


----------



## JRW2

Blake suggested I go with the 1.4 even in a dedicated theater as he said you can always dial back the projector. In fact he said that they might end up discontinuing the 0.8 at some point.


----------



## though




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gadgetfreaky*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3390#post_24132320
> 
> 
> yes, I know, just wondering with either then 5030 or the sony 55 the 1.4 might be too bright in a dark room given how bright it is already at .8. Although I guess you can't really have it too bright since you can dial it back on the projector...



i don't mean to "thread crap" but you should seriously consider checking out the Stewart Firehawk G4. it's the closest you are going to get for THX certification.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gadgetfreaky*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3390#post_24129804
> 
> 
> So I got my Sony HW55 hooked up to my 100" .8 gain screen. The picture looks amazing.. Although during the day it's washed out, even with Sony on "game" mode. It's decently watchable (I don't have drapes on the windows directly behind the projector yet. At night though it's BRIGHT in reference mode. I'm wondering how much brighter the 1.4 would be in a dark room. My throw is a little over 13'. Some scenes it's almost too bright and I could see once in a while a little hot spot in the center of the screen. Great thing is my room is not a dedicated room and this thing absorbs and doesn't reflect light. Gray walls but light gray almost white ceiling and not much light reflects off that. I'll try to take a picture that accurately represents it at night.
> 
> 
> The combo makes it look like a 100" plasma at night
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but with a better non reflective picture (no glass of course) and a more film like quality.



Your washed out comes from the light behind the projector. The light is coming from the same direction as the projector light and the screen cannot tell the difference. Cover those windows and your wash out issue will be fixed.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *TL5*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3390#post_24119706
> 
> 
> Blake - what is the gain of the new Slate material?



Slate lands between 1.2 and 1.3 gain. We should have a new video in a week or so featuring slate.


----------



## programmergeek




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *JRW2*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3400_100#post_24132498
> 
> 
> Blake suggested I go with the 1.4 even in a dedicated theater as he said you can always dial back the projector. In fact he said that they might end up discontinuing the 0.8 at some point.



I agree we almost never install any .8 anymore. The black levels on the projectors are so good infact on the new Epson 6030/5030 and a BD1.4 I can't tell where the black ends from the picture and the screen is anymore on a 2:35 displaying 16:9 the blacks are so good. Besides it's nice to have the extra light for dark movies, games or 3d. Also it is nice and the I would say to correct thing to have some ambient light on in the room it helps you brain and eyes the whole bat cave thing came about because of dim projectors so extra projector light and gain are great as long as it does not hurt your blacks and contrast.


----------



## elmalloc

I bought an Epson 8350 for a gaming room. The room is on the first floor and experiences some ambient light from the sides and off angles. The picture still looks pretty good with dynamic mode on, but of course I have no blacks whatsoever.


I'm thinking about a 16x9 110" BD Zero 1.4. Where do I get the best price on this screen?


What is this new slate material? How would a customer know which one to choose?


I'm pretty happy with the brightness (in dynamic mode) of the Epson 8350 on a white wall, I'm looking for more contrast though and a little better blacks during the day.


Thanks,

ELmO


----------



## ch1sox




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *elmalloc*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3390#post_24159079
> 
> 
> I bought an Epson 8350 for a gaming room. The room is on the first floor and experiences some ambient light from the sides and off angles. The picture still looks pretty good with dynamic mode on, but of course I have no blacks whatsoever.
> 
> 
> I'm thinking about a 16x9 110" BD Zero 1.4. Where do I get the best price on this screen?
> 
> 
> What is this new slate material? How would a customer know which one to choose?
> 
> 
> I'm pretty happy with the brightness (in dynamic mode) of the Epson 8350 on a white wall, I'm looking for more contrast though and a little better blacks during the day.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> ELmO



Send a PM to Mike, here. http://www.avsforum.com/u/8367889/av-science-sales-5 He should be able to help you with a quote and any questions you might have. We're waiting to to hear more about the Slate. Blake said there should be a new video this month about it. It seems to be a budget friendly screen material from what I've read.


----------



## menglish6




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *programmergeek*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3390#post_24141697
> 
> 
> The black levels on the projectors are so good infact on the new Epson 6030/5030 and a BD1.4 I can't tell where the black ends from the picture and the screen is anymore on a 2:35 displaying 16:9 the blacks are so good.



I'm curious what one of these 2.35 screens with the LED look like when showing 16:9 content. Have you seen this situation before? or better yet, do you know where to find a picture...my Google-fu is weak and I can't seem to find any pictures.


----------



## ch1sox




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *menglish6*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3390#post_24171950
> 
> 
> I'm curious what one of these 2.35 screens with the LED look like when showing 16:9 content. Have you seen this situation before? or better yet, do you know where to find a picture...my Google-fu is weak and I can't seem to find any pictures.


I have a 133" 2.35 with LED arriving in a couple days. I'll try to get pictures. ...that's if it fits down my stairs, lol. It should be okay as I made a 1:1 replica with rigid foam. That's assuming my calculations were correct.


----------



## thezaks

Is there any difference between the BDIII and the BD4K, or was the BDIII just renamed to BD4K?


Dave


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3390#post_24135974
> 
> 
> Slate lands between 1.2 and 1.3 gain. We should have a new video in a week or so featuring slate.



Hi Blake,


In the video, is the BD material 1.4 or .8? When looking at the comparison, I would definitely want the BD material over the Slate, but I imagine Slate gets you some of the way there for a lesser price.



Dave


----------



## ch1sox




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3390#post_24176384
> 
> 
> Is there any difference between the BDIII and the BD4K, or was the BDIII just renamed to BD4K?
> 
> 
> Dave


The G2 4k is the newer material which added 4k (and 8k?) capabilities and possibly some other features.

Edit: They might be the same, just different names. I'm not sure.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ch1sox*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3420#post_24177040
> 
> 
> The G2 4k is the newer material which added 4k (and 8k?) capabilities and possibly some other features.



Wow, so they are already on G2 of the 4K material? My friend ordered a new BD a year and a half ago, and it was a BDIII at that time. I'd like to know the differences/benefits of the BDIII vs the current 4K material.



Thanks,

Dave


----------



## Mike Garrett

I have a sample of the slate. I will throw it up on my screen and see how it looks, then report back. From the video that I saw, it looked pretty good.


----------



## baloo_btru

Here is a video on the slate: http://www.screeninnovations.com/news/slate-projection-screen/ 


And spec info: http://www.screeninnovations.com/screen-materials/slate/ 


Projector Types All

Gain 1.2

Half Gain 50

Minimum Throw Distance 1.2 x image width

Color Gunmetal

Ambient Light Resistance Good

Edge Blend Properties No

3D Active

Resolution >4K

Opacity 100%

Size 12′ x 330′ / larger seamed

Formats Fixed & Motorized

Hot Spot Low

Texture No

Clean Microfiber

Transport Rolled 3″ Core


----------



## ch1sox




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3420#post_24179743
> 
> 
> Wow, so they are already on G2 of the 4K material? My friend ordered a new BD a year and a half ago, and it was a BDIII at that time. I'd like to know the differences/benefits of the BDIII vs the current 4K material.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Dave



They might be the same, I think G2 4k is just the current name.


----------



## gadgetfreaky

So after going to CES & seeing 4K as well as Samsung's curved 105" screen I already am itching to upgrade.. Would love to get some advice on which screen size for 2.35.


Sony HW55ES projector, and I'm convinced next year sometime I'm upgrading to a 4K projector. Currently 100" 0.8 gain black diamond.


I think I'm getting the Panamorph ultrawide lens for 2.35 http://www.panamorph.com/?page_id=2171 


Still figuring out if I need something like the Lumagen (any help here would be great)


Throw is 13'7". Seating distance right at 14'6".


In using the projectorcentral calculator which has the HW50, it says 129" max? Still doing research on 2.35 screens. How big of a 16:9 picture do I get at that size?


Also, I noticed on screen innovations site I can get a curved screen as well, do I calculate that the same or different since with the curve the actual width is different. Pros/cons on curved?


Here are pics of my room. As you can see. LOTS of windows. In a few weeks the french doors in that room will have black out curtains. But during the day I still will get light coming in from the dining room where the front door is all glass as well as the french doors in the dining room which will not have any drapes. So yes, lots of ambient light during the day even if I close the drapes. Hoping 1.4 will help.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gadgetfreaky*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3420#post_24201861
> 
> 
> So after going to CES & seeing 4K as well as Samsung's curved 105" screen I already am itching to upgrade.. Would love to get some advice on which screen size for 2.35.
> 
> 
> Sony HW55ES projector, and I'm convinced next year sometime I'm upgrading to a 4K projector. Currently 100" 0.8 gain black diamond.
> 
> 
> I think I'm getting the Panamorph ultrawide lens for 2.35 http://www.panamorph.com/?page_id=2171
> 
> 
> Still figuring out if I need something like the Lumagen (any help here would be great)
> 
> 
> Throw is 13'7". Seating distance right at 14'6".
> 
> 
> In using the projectorcentral calculator which has the HW50, it says 129" max? Still doing research on 2.35 screens. How big of a 16:9 picture do I get at that size?
> 
> 
> Also, I noticed on screen innovations site I can get a curved screen as well, do I calculate that the same or different since with the curve the actual width is different. Pros/cons on curved?
> 
> 
> Here are pics of my room. As you can see. LOTS of windows. In a few weeks the french doors in that room will have black out curtains. But during the day I still will get light coming in from the dining room where the front door is all glass as well as the french doors in the dining room which will not have any drapes. So yes, lots of ambient light during the day even if I close the drapes. Hoping 1.4 will help.



With a 13'-6" throw, you would need a curved screen. A flat screen using that throw onto a 129" wide screen would have a lot of pincushion. You would not need to use a video processor, but you would not be able to stretch scope 3D movies since the 55 can only do the required stretch for 2D. Adding a Lumagen would allow you to stretch 3D content for your lens. Give us a call if you would like to discuss.


Added:


Nice looking room.


----------



## gadgetfreaky




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3420#post_24203199
> 
> 
> With a 13'-6" throw, you would need a curved screen. A flat screen using that throw onto a 129" wide screen would have a lot of pincushion. You would not need to use a video processor, but you would not be able to stretch scope 3D movies since the 55 can only do the required stretch for 2D. Adding a Lumagen would allow you to stretch 3D content for your lens. Give us a call if you would like to discuss.
> 
> 
> Added:
> 
> 
> Nice looking room.



thanks Mike.. that's the chief mount you sold me










ugh, I was just researching that I need something like the lumagen mini -3D. For the $1500 or so for that, am I better off upgrading my projector to maybe the new JVC? or getting the epson 6030 instead?


----------



## isisyodin

What are the standard sizes of the motorized?


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *isisyodin*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3420#post_24211292
> 
> 
> What are the standard sizes of the motorized?



Measured diagonally


16:9 aspect ratio: 80", 92", 100", 106" and 110"


2.35 aspect ratio: 110", 120", 132" and 138"


Note that 138" is only available in 1.4 gain material. All other sizes are available in 0.8, 1.4 and 2.7 gain. If you would like help with selecting what screen works best for you, give us a call or shoot us an email.


----------



## isisyodin

Thanks. For a JVC RS4810, living room setup, mostly dim to dark (night viewing) with some off axis lighting. What screen material do you recommend? Also, is the iPhone app light meter any good to give you the measurements? Any demo rooms in the Miami-Ft Lauderdale Area?


----------



## gadgetfreaky




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3420#post_24213681
> 
> 
> Measured diagonally
> 
> 
> 16:9 aspect ratio: 80", 92", 100", 106" and 110"
> 
> 
> 2.35 aspect ratio: 110", 120", 132" and 138"
> 
> 
> Note that 138" is only available in 1.4 gain material. All other sizes are available in 0.8, 1.4 and 2.7 gain. If you would like help with selecting what screen works best for you, give us a call or shoot us an email.



Are there "standard" sizes for the regular BD? On their site, there seems to be every increment by 1"?
http://www.screeninnovations.com/tools/screen-calculator/BZ/


----------



## mrunctarheels

Hi Mike, wondering what your thoughts of of the slate screen sample. Have you had the opportunity to check it out yet? It's an intriguing products but no reviews or places to see it in person yet. I just happen to be in market for a screen.


----------



## ch1sox

My mount should be arriving any day now so I wanted to double check on the projector placement. With this screen (BD) should I center the projector with as little lens shift as possible? My projector has lens shift, but if it will impact the picture because of the screens rejection properties than I'll just try to center it.


----------



## shnxx


Is it possible to hang these on a ceiling from top?

 

Or would you recommend to get a false wall? 

Has anyone ever installed these off the ceiling or on a false wall?


----------



## Get Wirattinan


What kind of hardware or software are you using to make all titles appear like that?? PLS!!


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mrunctarheels*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3420#post_24247008
> 
> 
> Hi Mike, wondering what your thoughts of of the slate screen sample. Have you had the opportunity to check it out yet? It's an intriguing products but no reviews or places to see it in person yet. I just happen to be in market for a screen.



I'm curious too. Unusual for Mike to not respond....


Dave


----------



## elmalloc

Slate seems like a very good price, I would like samples of BD and slate to make a decision. Unfortunately a lot of my light comes fro behind the projector area so I think it may not work out perfectly for me, so Slate might be a good medium option since it's much cheaper than BD - and surely better than my white wall.


ELmO


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gadgetfreaky*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3420#post_24213926
> 
> 
> Are there "standard" sizes for the regular BD? On their site, there seems to be every increment by 1"?
> http://www.screeninnovations.com/tools/screen-calculator/BZ/



The BD screens can be purchased in 1" increments.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mrunctarheels*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3420#post_24247008
> 
> 
> Hi Mike, wondering what your thoughts of of the slate screen sample. Have you had the opportunity to check it out yet? It's an intriguing products but no reviews or places to see it in person yet. I just happen to be in market for a screen.



I have a decent size sample of slate. It looks pretty good. A lot like the BD, but not as bright. Should be a good choice for a room with ambient light, if you are not wanting to spend the money for a BD screen.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3420#post_24272450
> 
> 
> I'm curious too. Unusual for Mike to not respond....
> 
> 
> Dave



Lot of territory to cover.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *shnxx*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3420#post_24258113
> 
> 
> Is it possible to hang these on a ceiling from top?
> 
> 
> Or would you recommend to get a false wall?
> *Has anyone ever installed these off the ceiling or on a false wall?*



People use a screen like this all the time on a false wall. As for hanging, SI does not offer that as an option, so would either have o see if they can do this or you would have to do it yourself. Should not be that hard to do.


----------



## gadgetfreaky




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3420#post_24307825
> 
> 
> I have a decent size sample of slate. It looks pretty good. A lot like the BD, but not as bright. Should be a good choice for a room with ambient light, if you are not wanting to spend the money for a BD screen.



would you say the slate looks more like the BD 0.8 gain? via the website videos, it reminds me of my 0.8 BD


----------



## gadgetfreaky




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gadgetfreaky*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3420#post_24201861
> 
> 
> So after going to CES & seeing 4K as well as Samsung's curved 105" screen I already am itching to upgrade.. Would love to get some advice on which screen size for 2.35.
> 
> 
> Sony HW55ES projector, and I'm convinced next year sometime I'm upgrading to a 4K projector. Currently 100" 0.8 gain black diamond.
> 
> 
> I think I'm getting the Panamorph ultrawide lens for 2.35 http://www.panamorph.com/?page_id=2171
> 
> 
> Still figuring out if I need something like the Lumagen (any help here would be great)
> 
> 
> Throw is 13'7". Seating distance right at 14'6".
> 
> 
> In using the projectorcentral calculator which has the HW50, it says 129" max? Still doing research on 2.35 screens. How big of a 16:9 picture do I get at that size?
> 
> 
> Also, I noticed on screen innovations site I can get a curved screen as well, do I calculate that the same or different since with the curve the actual width is different. Pros/cons on curved?
> 
> 
> Here are pics of my room. As you can see. LOTS of windows. In a few weeks the french doors in that room will have black out curtains. But during the day I still will get light coming in from the dining room where the front door is all glass as well as the french doors in the dining room which will not have any drapes. So yes, lots of ambient light during the day even if I close the drapes. Hoping 1.4 will help.



After hosting a superbowl party, I'm rethinking a 2.35 screen. Thinking now a 115" 16:9 screen is the way to go? Wait for my upgrade in a year or 2 to the 4K sony or JVC which then keeps me from buying both the lens & lumagen, which adding to the sony hw55 starts closing the gap to a 4k projector before I go 2.35


Although 129" curved screen in my living room does sound appealing & would look pretty amazing when watching a movie! Anyone have the curved screen or a large 2.35 BD? How's the 16:9 stuff look on it? black bars on the sides..


----------



## elmalloc

I have a 2.35 setup with one of my projectors, and when I watched 16x9 content on it, I actually zoomed/cropped to make it fill the screen. That's how much I didn't care about 16x9 movies (lol!). Once you go scope you don't go back. The problem is HDTV...


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gadgetfreaky*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3420#post_24308620
> 
> 
> would you say the slate looks more like the BD 0.8 gain? via the website videos, it reminds me of my 0.8 BD



Brighter than the 0.8 and a wider viewing angle. The 0.8 looks very good, as long as you have enough light to light it up.


----------



## Kukulcan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3420#post_24311142
> 
> 
> Brighter than the 0.8 and a wider viewing angle. The 0.8 looks very good, as long as you have enough light to light it up.



Hi,


and what about sparkling? Some people still see minimum sparkling even on the 0.8, but the Slate? How does it behave?


I'm asking it because specs of 0.8 says micro texture, while specs of Slate says no texture at all. And I've always read that texture causes sparkling...


Thanks


----------



## gdfein

I have a new BD zero edge. What should I clean the screen with?


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kukulcan*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3420#post_24313775
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> 
> and what about sparkling? Some people still see minimum sparkling even on the 0.8, but the Slate? How does it behave?
> 
> 
> I'm asking it because specs of 0.8 says micro texture, while specs of Slate says no texture at all. And I've always read that texture causes sparkling...
> 
> 
> Thanks



Good question, because I see it on the 1.4 too.


Dave


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gdfein*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3420#post_24313981
> 
> 
> I have a new BD zero edge. What should I clean the screen with?



A wet sham wow or micro fiber cloth is all you need.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3420#post_24176401
> 
> 
> Hi Blake,
> 
> 
> In the video, is the BD material 1.4 or .8? When looking at the comparison, I would definitely want the BD material over the Slate, but I imagine Slate gets you some of the way there for a lesser price.
> 
> 
> 
> Dave



1.4 gain is what we are featuring in the video.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3420#post_24179743
> 
> 
> Wow, so they are already on G2 of the 4K material? My friend ordered a new BD a year and a half ago, and it was a BDIII at that time. I'd like to know the differences/benefits of the BDIII vs the current 4K material.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Dave



The G3 BD and the 4K BD are the same. We made a marketing decision to capitalize on the fact that at the time BD was one of very few 4K rated materials. since we are on topic BD and Slate are both actually 8K rated now but we really do not have much of a reason to market that....yet...


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *elmalloc*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3420#post_24299953
> 
> 
> Slate seems like a very good price, I would like samples of BD and slate to make a decision. Unfortunately a lot of my light comes fro behind the projector area so I think it may not work out perfectly for me, so Slate might be a good medium option since it's much cheaper than BD - and surely better than my white wall.
> 
> 
> ELmO



BD will actually hold onto its contrast longer than Slate with light coming from behind the projector.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *shnxx*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3420#post_24258113
> 
> 
> Is it possible to hang these on a ceiling from top?
> 
> 
> Or would you recommend to get a false wall?
> 
> Has anyone ever installed these off the ceiling or on a false wall?



We offer a wire hanging kit for Black Diamond Zero Edge, Slate Zero Edge and the Pure Zero Edge.


----------



## programmergeek

you may want to contact SI or Blake may chime in I think they have a solutions but we use a DRY Swiffer works great just to remove the dust and oil etc. A micro fiber cloth will also work.


----------



## programmergeek

I went both ways unless you watch 90% of your content one way, get the biggest screen you can to fit the wall/room some are limited by with some by height. Either way you will have black bars for one of the formats. But after viewing 2:35 I would never go back just fits the field of vision better. I also get more people saying "WOW" when they see the 2:35 vs the 16:9.


----------



## elmalloc

It depends on a couple things IMO.


If you have an anamorphic lens to blow up 2.35.
If you don't care about black bars or zooming for any other ratio.



Personally in a theater environment, I also elect for 2.35. In a non theater environment, gaming/HDTV/TV shows/etc, I elect for 1.78/16x9.


ELmO


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *programmergeek*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3450#post_24329611
> 
> 
> you may want to contact SI or Blake may chime in I think they have a solutions but we use a DRY Swiffer works great just to remove the dust and oil etc. A micro fiber cloth will also work.



That should work pretty well as long as you don't use the dry Swiffer "juice" .


----------



## cchrono

Anybody have anymore thoughts on Slate vs Black Diamond. The idea of no texture on the slate sounds nice as that seems to be a complaint of black diamond. Has anybody seen how it performs as to masking the black bars away on 2:35 content compared to black diamond which performs well with this. The idea of being able to get a screen bigger than 115" with similar performance to black diamond is making me think twice.


----------



## elmalloc

I just got small samples of Slate (1.2) and Black Diamond (1.4) and I will describe my thoughts vs. them on a white wall, soon.


If these are exact material samples, Slate is a flimsy material and BD is rigid and "shinier" (without projecting on to them to see their image quality).


Not sure how much rigidity matters, but you can see the BD is curving upwards (won't lay flat).


Mike (AVS) sent the to me.


Thanks!


ELmO

*EDIT:* This was taken with my windows phone and white balance is off, slate is not that dark in real life. Look a few posts down to see my nikon picture which is slightly more accurate.


----------



## cchrono

Cool let me know what you think. It's strange how dark the slate looks in that picture. What are your thoughts on the texture of them?


----------



## Bluescale




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *cchrono*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3450#post_24345783
> 
> 
> Cool let me know what you think. It's strange how dark the slate looks in that picture. What are your thoughts on the texture of them?



I'm assuming that's just a matter of white balance. The Black Diamond looks purple in that photo. If you look at the SI site the slate looks just a touch lighter than the Black Diamond 1.4

http://www.screeninnovations.com/screen-materials/slate/#SliderNav1


----------



## elmalloc

EDIT: Here's a shot with my nikon, slate is not as dark as my earlier windows phone picture took. These are much more accurate.

 

 


It's difficult to get the BD sample flat on the wall because of its rigidity and it's not a perfectly straight sample.


The bend to the BD definitely affects the picture quality, it needs to be flat and direct light properly - the slate material is flimsy so it hangs flat by itself.


I can see what people have said about BD texture. BD seems to product a brighter image than slate (as expected). The samples aren't huge so it's hard to compare, but they both definitely have a much better black level than my white wall. I don't really see any texture or shimmering on the slate material, but it also doesn't seem as bright either (tradeoff expected?).


Both seem to maintain good contrast ratio even with ambient light behind my projector - where the white wall begins to wash out.


It's difficult to want to buy a screen when you haven't seen how it truly looks in your environment. It's almost like you want an hour with different screen manufacturer's in your environment to make a quick decision.


The BD looks purple in the original photo but in real life, there is a visible difference between the darkness of each. When flat and not projecting anything, BD is easily the darker material. I'll try to take the photos of just the material again, with my nikon. You can see how any kind of curvature to either sample affects the properties, which leads us to believe there is an off axis change in picture quality.


Both samples seem to create a sharper picture than what's on my wall (using pattern tests off the projector). I'm trying to pair it with a cheapo Epson 8350 in a tweaked dynamic mode.


That's all my thoughts for now. Mike can send you samples as well I'm sure.


At this time with only 10 minutes of using it with my projector, I have come to no conclusion. Slate doesn't have any of the shiny-ness/slight shimmering that may be because I can't straighten my BD sample on the wall, but I think I like the BD brightness/contrast overall better.


Thanks,

ELmO


----------



## Kukulcan

Thanks for your report! of course it's hard to imagine how could be a whole screen on the base of these 2 small samples. But it's very interesting the information about lack of shimmering on the Slate.


----------



## cchrono

Awesome thanks for the thoughts. What's your impressions between the two when the room is dark, I know the black diamond will perform better with the lights on just wondering if the performance is similar with the lights off. The no texture no shimmering appeals to me with the slate but the bright room performance of black diamond is also appealing just trying to decide which I would prefer. Haven't found a dealer with both screens on display left and also haven't purchased projector yet so getting samples won't help out either.


----------



## jsil

Anyone have the Screen Innovations - Sensation 106" Fixed Projector Screen.


----------



## cchrono




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *elmalloc*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3450#post_24346498
> 
> 
> 
> At this time with only 10 minutes of using it with my projector, I have come to no conclusion. Slate doesn't have any of the shiny-ness/slight shimmering that may be because I can't straighten my BD sample on the wall, but I think I like the BD brightness/contrast overall better.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> ELmO



Another question about the shimmering would you compare to what rear projection sxrd/dlp tvs look like? I use to have a 60" sxrd xbr2 tv and the screen texture never really bothered me at all but I know it did with others.


----------



## gadgetfreaky

Blake, I emailed support but didn't hear back. Can I buy a box for my 100" Black Diamond zero edge? I found a possible buyer for it, but I have to ship it


----------



## elmalloc




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *cchrono*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3450_50#post_24350707
> 
> 
> Another question about the shimmering would you compare to what rear projection sxrd/dlp tvs look like? I use to have a 60" sxrd xbr2 tv and the screen texture never really bothered me at all but I know it did with others.



Hi,


I will test them in the dark soon, work is just creaming me (wtf). I'm working from 4AM to 8PM every day, ridiculous.


I would say yes, BD looks like a rear projection/DLP looks like. Slight grain to it's picture or shimmer. Hard to explain, but I think you nailed the description.


I would say there is definitely off axis stuff going on, but I feel like many screen materials have that problem - there are sweet spots for sitting but that could be because I'm dealing with a small sample...


ELmO


----------



## cchrono

Sorry to hear about work I know how that can be. Appreciate your feedback so far for sure.


----------



## PENDRAG0ON

Can someone send me a quote on Slate in sizes 100" 110" and 120"?


I am seriously considering going projection to take over for my 70" Sharp which is starting to feel small. The room gets fairly bright in the afternoon so a regular screen probably won't cut it.


----------



## cchrono




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *PENDRAG0ON*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3450#post_24359559
> 
> 
> Can someone send me a quote on Slate in sizes 100" 110" and 120"?
> 
> 
> I am seriously considering going projection to take over for my 70" Sharp which is starting to feel small. The room gets fairly bright in the afternoon so a regular screen probably won't cut it.


 http://www.projectorpeople.com/screens/screendtls.asp?manu=Screen+Innovations&itmname=Black%20Diamond%20Zero%20Edge


----------



## PENDRAG0ON




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *cchrono*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3450#post_24359686
> 
> http://www.projectorpeople.com/screens/screendtls.asp?manu=Screen+Innovations&itmname=Black%20Diamond%20Zero%20Edge



Thanks, those are about the prices I was hoping for compared to Black Diamond. Now I just have to wait for some 1080p LED projectors to hit the market and I can move the Sharp to a bedroom.


----------



## elmalloc

Contact AVS for pricing, Pendra, you spoony bard. I'm guessing you've played Bravely Default?


----------



## PENDRAG0ON




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *elmalloc*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3450#post_24364539
> 
> 
> Contact AVS for pricing, Pendra, you spoony bard. I'm guessing you've played Bravely Default?



Started the AVS topic for it in the Nintendo sub board.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gadgetfreaky*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3450#post_24351222
> 
> 
> Blake, I emailed support but didn't hear back. Can I buy a box for my 100" Black Diamond zero edge? I found a possible buyer for it, but I have to ship it



Sure you can. email [email protected] ..


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *PENDRAG0ON*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3450#post_24359559
> 
> 
> Can someone send me a quote on Slate in sizes 100" 110" and 120"?
> 
> 
> I am seriously considering going projection to take over for my 70" Sharp which is starting to feel small. The room gets fairly bright in the afternoon so a regular screen probably won't cut it.



Sent you a PM.


----------



## cokenfries

I am building home theatre and right now evaluating my options. Is it possible to get samples for BD and Slate?


The screen I am looking for is about 135 inch, would be used in purpose build home theatre setup.


Thanks


----------



## ch1sox




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *cokenfries*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3450#post_24390669
> 
> 
> I am building home theatre and right now evaluating my options. Is it possible to get samples for BD and Slate?
> 
> 
> The screen I am looking for is about 135 inch, would be used in purpose build home theatre setup.
> 
> 
> Thanks


Speak with Mike (AV Science Sales 5), he can help.


----------



## cchrono

I pulled the trigger today on the 110" black diamond zero edge w/ floating wire kit and jvc rs57 can't wait to see it all.


----------



## llang269

Congrats! You have to post pics once you get it installed. I was thinking about the jvc rs4910 and the bd 1.4 zero edge in 106"


----------



## KevinH




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *cchrono*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3480#post_24392037
> 
> 
> I pulled the trigger today on the 110" black diamond zero edge w/ floating wire kit and jvc rs57 can't wait to see it all.



You'll love it. I have the BD 1.4 110" paired with an Epson 5020 and it's awesome


----------



## cchrono




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *KevinH*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3480#post_24392239
> 
> 
> You'll love it. I have the BD 1.4 110" paired with an Epson 5020 and it's awesome





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *llang269*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3480#post_24392226
> 
> 
> Congrats! You have to post pics once you get it installed. I was thinking about the jvc rs4910 and the bd 1.4 zero edge in 106"



Yeah can't wait also got the hanging wire kit so it will hang and float from ceiling.


----------



## llang269

So what made you go with the bd or the slate material?


----------



## cchrono




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *llang269*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3480#post_24392407
> 
> 
> So what made you go with the bd or the slate material?



Well I wasn't ever able to see the slate material in person. The black diamond is suppose to be better so that's ultimately why I choose it. The price was also better than expected ordering from Craig at avscience.


----------



## westcott2010


I just installed a 115" black diamond zero edge with an Epson 6030 and It's hard to know what to think.

 

I researched these for over 6 months (prior to and during a remodel) and went to about 5 media stores in the Dallas area and talked to everyone I could about them during my reviews.  I also spoke to SI many times because I kept hearing excellent things then others would say don't do it.  I ended up buying it because I have a bright room and work from home during the day and here are my questions after having it for 48 hours.

 

I'm noticing a lot of bright crystals (not sure  what to call it) when the picture is on a solid color.  When watching the Olympics I find my eyes focusing on the sparkly spots on the snow scenes or on the hockey rink or an up close shot with a solid red color etc and it's starting to get annoying.    Is this normal with a black diamond because I don't remember seeing it in the stores and I put down a lot of money for this thing.   

 

I have to have it in dynamic mode to see the picture in the day time w/ a bright room and lots of ambient light which I wasn't expecting.   Any help or suggestions on this would be useful but I will also try and call SI on Monday to see what they say.


----------



## KevinH




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *westcott2010*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3480#post_24395153
> 
> 
> I just installed a 115" black diamond zero edge with an Epson 6030 and It's hard to know what to think.
> 
> 
> I researched these for over 6 months and went to about 5 media stores in the Dallas area and talked to everyone and reviewed them.  I also spoke to SI many times because I kept hearing excellent things then others would say don't do it.  I ended up buying it and here are my questions after having it for 48 hours.
> 
> 
> I'm noticing a lot of bright crystals (not sure  what to call it) when the picture is on a solid color.  When watching hte olympics I find my eyes focusing on the sparkly spots on the snow scenes or on the hockey rink or an up close shot with a solid red color etc and it's starting to get annoying.    Is this normal with a black diamond because I don't remember seeing it in the stores and I put down a lot of money for this thing.
> 
> 
> I have to have it in dynamic mode to see the picture in the day time w/ a bright room and lots of ambient light which I wasn't expecting.   Any help or suggestions on this would be useful but I will also try and call SI on Monday to see what they say.



I see a bit in white scenes, bright blue sky scenes etc......but it is small and bothers me less and less. Pretty much any positive gain screen will have this effect to some degree.....just the nature of a reflective material. Some notice or focus on it more than others.


----------



## westcott2010




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *KevinH*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3480#post_24392239
> 
> 
> 
> You'll love it. I have the BD 1.4 110" paired with an Epson 5020 and it's awesome


Do you notice any crystallization when looking at the picture on a solid color?  I'm using it in dynamic/eco mode.


----------



## westcott2010




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *KevinH*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3480#post_24395166
> 
> 
> 
> I see a bit in white scenes, bright blue sky scenes etc......but it is small and bothers me less and less. Pretty much any positive gain screen will have this effect to some degree.....just the nature of a reflective material. Some notice or focus on it more than others.


Do you work for SI - I notice you are in Austin?


----------



## KevinH




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *westcott2010*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3480#post_24395180
> 
> 
> 
> Do you work for SI - I notice you are in Austin?



No, just a customer. BlakeSI does and is a forum member.....he posts in here pretty often.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *KevinH*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3480#post_24395166
> 
> 
> I see a bit in white scenes, bright blue sky scenes etc......but it is small and bothers me less and less.



I was told by SI that after a few weeks to a month, most folks adjust and find that it doesn't bother them as much over time. They find that the benefits outweigh things like this. I think there is truth to the compromises involved with these types of screens.


Dave


----------



## truwarrior22

Is the SLATE the new best bang for the buck? Any intro prices available?


----------



## KevinH




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3480#post_24401499
> 
> 
> I was told by SI that after a few weeks to a month, most folks adjust and find that it doesn't bother them as much over time. They find that the benefits outweigh things like this. I think there is truth to the compromises involved with these types of screens.
> 
> 
> Dave



It's true. I don't notice much anymore except for a small circle Again, I think any positive gain screen hotspot in white scenes........it's not distracting, I just notice. Otherwise the picture, color and black levels are terrific. Again I think that most any positive gain screen will exhibit this to some degree.


----------



## zikky


Nice view and pictures. Which projector are you using?


----------



## robininni

I bought and installed this 1.4 black diamond zero edge 120" 2.35 screen about 7 months ago. I am using a panasonic PT-AE8000 and I have been extremely happy with it. Sorry the picture is a little fuzzy.


Rob


----------



## llang269

Wow!! Picture looks great. Congrats really nice set up


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *robininni*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3480#post_24457063
> 
> 
> I bought and installed this 1.4 black diamond zero edge 120" 2.35 screen about 7 months ago. I am using a panasonic PT-AE8000 and I have been extremely happy with it. Sorry the picture is a little fuzzy.
> 
> 
> Rob



Whoa. A backlit projected image. You don't see that very often.


No light washout from light scatter in the room? I guess if you are going to choose a screen to be used with backlighting, a black diamond type would be the way to go.


Do you notice any improvements in contrast/apparent black levels when having your image backlit? Or is that just for show and you have the lights off for watching?


----------



## PENDRAG0ON

Pictures like that are what would sell people on projection. It is tempting me yet again.


----------



## robininni

Rich,


The back lighting is not just for show. It actually makes the picture 'easier' to see when the lights are out (how most of us would be using a projector). It sort of makes the picture 'pop' and frames it nicely. Of course with the black diamond 1.4 screen, I can watch during daytime or with all the lights on too without distracting levels of picture degradation but the back lighting doesn't do much in those situations. I'll let you judge for yourself with my pictures below if you think the back light helps in the dark.


First, here's 3 pics with all the lights on full, one with no back light, one with it on its lowest setting and one with it on its highest setting. I'm using my favorite color, orange.

 
 
 


Here's 3 pics with no lights on (well the hall way is lit). This is a relatively bright image and again you have no BL, low BL, and high BL.

 
 
 


Here's 3 pics with no lights on. This is a relatively faint image and again you have no BL, low BL, and high BL.

 
 
 


Here's some pics of a few of the preprogrammed color choices. You can have any color you by mixing the red, green, and blue LED lights in any variation/intensity.

 
 
 
 
 



It also serves another purpose and that is, when on full brightness (any color), it completely masks the faint 'black bar' light that would be seen below my screen with no back lighting as you will see in pictures I will provide.


This was my first 2.35 screen set up. I previously had a 1.78 screen. After understanding how the projector gets the 2.35 content to fill the screen (zoom/refocus), I became concerned as to whether I would see light above and/or below my screen from the now larger black bars since the content is really formatted as 1.78 for playback meaning the black bars are actually 'lit' with projector light. With the zero edge, you have no border to speak of to absorb any or this and you don't want to mask it as that would look retarded and defeat the purpose of the zero edge. I asked whether I would see this black bar light and SI said I wouldn't. The people I bought the screen and projector from thought I might if I recall, but that it would be barely noticeable. Well I purchased the set up anyway hoping it would work as I expected.


Because my projector height is at the top edge of my screen I don't get a top black bar above my screen when zoomed in for 2.35 content. Instead a get one very large black bar below the screen. Now because the Panasonic PT-8000AE is so good, it is noticeable but not distracting at all. But I bought the zero edge black diamond hoping the LED back lights would hide this completely and it does.


Here are 3 pictures showing the shadow of my head in the 'black bar light' area below the screen. You can see the effect the back lighting has on it.

 
 
 


Lastly, here is a pic of my projector.

 


I hope this helps







.


Rob


----------



## Gooddoc

Thanks for those pics. It seems like the bias lighting makes the white lights on the image take on that color. I think it might be a perceptual issue, not an actual change in color, but I definitely see it. The star field pics are remarkably different with the bias lighting. I wonder how much of the difference between the pics is camera exposure? Are they accurate to what your eyes are seeing?


Also, is that your primary TV and an every day kind of room that you're watching daily TV on, or is it primarily used for movies?


----------



## robininni




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Gooddoc*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3480#post_24461804
> 
> 
> Thanks for those pics. It seems like the bias lighting makes the white lights on the image take on that color. I think it might be a perceptual issue, not an actual change in color, but I definitely see it. The star field pics are remarkably different with the bias lighting. I wonder how much of the difference between the pics is camera exposure? Are they accurate to what your eyes are seeing?
> 
> 
> Also, is that your primary TV and an every day kind of room that you're watching daily TV on, or is it primarily used for movies?



The camera I used isn't doing a great job. This back lighting doesn't affect the color of the image at all. It only shines on the wall behind the frame. I think the auto exposure selections my camera is using may make you feel that way (although I really don't see it in the pictures as you do) and the camera is definitely not an accurate representation of what my eyes see, but it does give you an idea if you are considering such a screen.


And yes, this is not a theater room, this is my living room! This room has windows to the backyard (covered by porch) and a front door with windows. The ambient light comes in at roughly 90 degree angles to the screen and the black diamond handles it very well. You can easily watch tv/movies during the day with the projector I use (Panasonic PT-AE8000) which occurs all the time with the kids watching stuff during the day.


Rob


----------



## kevings

Rob, great post! Thx u


----------



## simpleHT




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *robininni*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3480#post_24461882
> 
> 
> The camera I used isn't doing a great job. This back lighting doesn't affect the color of the image at all. It only shines on the wall behind the frame. I think the auto exposure selections my camera is using may make you feel that way (although I really don't see it in the pictures as you do) and the camera is definitely not an accurate representation of what my eyes see, but it does give you an idea if you are considering such a screen.
> 
> 
> And yes, this is not a theater room, this is my living room! This room has windows to the backyard (covered by porch) and a front door with windows. The ambient light comes in at roughly 90 degree angles to the screen and the black diamond handles it very well. You can easily watch tv/movies during the day with the projector I use (Panasonic PT-AE8000) which occurs all the time with the kids watching stuff during the day.
> 
> 
> Rob


Great posts! Just curious. Why you choose to drop down your Panasonic 8000 to line up with the screen instead of employing its vertical lens shift?


----------



## robininni




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *simpleHT*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3480#post_24462638
> 
> 
> Great posts! Just curious. Why you choose to drop down your Panasonic 8000 to line up with the screen instead of employing its vertical lens shift?



I AM using the lens shift feature, however, as a minimum, the projector can be located no higher than the top screen edge or you will not be able to shift it low enough to put your 2.35 AND 1.78 picture where you need to. Doing this automatic zoom/reposition/refocus method of switching back and forth between 1.78 and 2.35 requires a very 'tight' installation unlike positioning your projector to simply do 1.78 format all the time. I tried but failed to get my projector lined up perfectly horizontally with my screen and the result is that my 1.78 content has slightly unequal left and right black pillars. I cannot digitally center the image left and right without immediately cropping one or the other side. You have to start with the 2.35 image centered using the manual lens shift 'stick' and then see where your 1.78 image lands. You have a bit of room with the vertical digital shifting to get the 2.35 where it needs to be but no room with the digital left/right shifting. The closer you are to the center of the screen with your projector position, the easier time you will have getting the 1.78 and 2.35 content to fit perfectly on the screen. It was actually quite stressful and I was glad it worked out right for me in the end. There were a few panic moments of thinking I was going to need to raise my screen.


Rob


----------



## Gooddoc




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *robinQ'si*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3480#post_24461882
> 
> 
> And yes, this is not a theater room, this is my living room! This room has windows to the backyard (covered by porch) and a front door with windows. The ambient light comes in at roughly 90 degree angles to the screen and the black diamond handles it very well. You can easily watch tv/movies during the day with the projector I use (Panasonic PT-AE8000) which occurs all the time with the kids watching stuff during the day.
> 
> 
> Rob



I have been seriously considering doing this, but after some feedback in other threads I've been hesitant. My primary concerns are:
1)That my JVC 4910 may not have the light output to deal with the daytime viewing

2) some have brought up the issue of frequent on-off cycling of the PJ may cause some picture denigration over time(I forget the term for it) and multiple bulb "strikes" will significantly degrade bulb life

3) During normal use and room traffic with casual viewing shadows from people walking in front of the screen


Since you've been living with this setup for a time, any thoughts on these things? Also, did this replace a good flat panel and any regrets or complaints from wife or family?


Sorry for all the Q's, but you're a goldmine of info for me.


----------



## cchrono




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Gooddoc*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3480#post_24465571
> 
> 
> I have been seriously considering doing this, but after some feedback in other threads I've been hesitant. My primary concerns are:
> 1)That my JVC 4910 may not have the light output to deal with the daytime viewing
> 
> 2) some have brought up the issue of frequent on-off cycling of the PJ may cause some picture denigration over time(I forget the term for it) and multiple bulb "strikes" will significantly degrade bulb life
> 
> 3) During normal use and room traffic with casual viewing shadows from people walking in front of the screen
> 
> 
> Since you've been living with this setup for a time, any thoughts on these things? Also, did this replace a good flat panel and any regrets or complaints from wife or family?
> 
> 
> Sorry for all the Q's, but you're a goldmine of info for me.



I'll have my black diamond and jvc rs57 soon as a full time living room setup I will let you know my thoughts as well.


----------



## robininni




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Gooddoc*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3480#post_24465571
> 
> 
> I have been seriously considering doing this, but after some feedback in other threads I've been hesitant. My primary concerns are:
> 1)That my JVC 4910 may not have the light output to deal with the daytime viewing
> 
> 2) some have brought up the issue of frequent on-off cycling of the PJ may cause some picture denigration over time(I forget the term for it) and multiple bulb "strikes" will significantly degrade bulb life
> 
> 3) During normal use and room traffic with casual viewing shadows from people walking in front of the screen
> 
> 
> Since you've been living with this setup for a time, any thoughts on these things? Also, did this replace a good flat panel and any regrets or complaints from wife or family?
> 
> 
> Sorry for all the Q's, but you're a goldmine of info for me.



1. Not sure about your JVC 4910 but I simply used this wonderful calculator to design my system and apparently, based upon my screen size and throw range, 23 fL is adequate for this sort of setup as it works great.


2. I don't know about this and haven't read anything about it but I guess it's possible that a projector used this way may be 'overworked' but I highly doubt it.


3. My top screen edge is 79" from the floor and the center of my projector lens is 76" from the floor. Shadows are not a problem unless someone is walking close enough to the screen that it would block at large LCD as well. There also is not through traffic in between my projector and screen unless you are going to the backyard. I think a major key is don't mount the projector too low and apparently 6+ ft high works well.


As far as family acceptance and general thoughts. I really like it and so do the wife and kids (although the kids are too young--oldest is 4--to really care either way). There is a small delay to turning on the projector versus an LCD but it is almost no worse than a DLP TV. I've had a 60" DLP as the living room TV and a 55" LCD and this is, of course, much better! I love being able to watch movies too in 2.35 appearance right in our living room rather than going to some dark-far off theater room. Sure at night you can turn off the lights and make it practically like a theater room, but you don't have too as you can watch with the lights on too just about as easily (small picture degradation depending on the lighting intensity, but nothing like a 'washed out' picture you would get with a typical non-black diamond screen). It's really incredible. So no regrets except I had a big psychological hurdle to paying $4200 for a screen when my first EZ frame 120" 1.78 aspect ratio screen cost me $500







.


Here are some 'real life' living room pictures for you and notice how that sweet 5.1 audio with awesome projector and screen fits in wonderfully









 
 
 




By the way, I also use this: DVDO DVDOAir-P Wireless for HDMI Connection System which works extremely well LoS. It sometimes has difficultly establishing an initial connection when the system is first turned on (not always) but I have found when it does this to just press a 'reconnect' type button on the back of the component down by my receiver under the screen and it will connect in seconds. This saved me a messy, expensive HDMI cable run installed through a fireblocked wall.


Rob


----------



## simpleHT

I also have decided to make my projector setup to replace family room TV. I have placed order for BD 115" 16:9, because my family mostly watches DishNetwork. I currently have an entry level projector, and the screen costs almost 4 times of the projector







. Long story short, I got the projector as an experimental project. I like it so much that I decided to have the setup replace my family room plasma. Once I get the screen and hang it up, I will upgrade the projector as needed. Hope my wife and I will like it and don't have to go back to plasma or lcd


----------



## Defconadmin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *westcott2010*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3480#post_24395153
> 
> 
> 
> I just installed a 115" black diamond zero edge with an Epson 6030 and It's hard to know what to think.
> 
> 
> 
> I researched these for over 6 months (prior to and during a remodel) and went to about 5 media stores in the Dallas area and talked to everyone I could about them during my reviews.  I also spoke to SI many times because I kept hearing excellent things then others would say don't do it.  I ended up buying it because I have a bright room and work from home during the day and here are my questions after having it for 48 hours.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm noticing a lot of bright crystals (not sure  what to call it) when the picture is on a solid color.  When watching the Olympics I find my eyes focusing on the sparkly spots on the snow scenes or on the hockey rink or an up close shot with a solid red color etc and it's starting to get annoying.    Is this normal with a black diamond because I don't remember seeing it in the stores and I put down a lot of money for this thing.
> 
> 
> 
> I have to have it in dynamic mode to see the picture in the day time w/ a bright room and lots of ambient light which I wasn't expecting.   Any help or suggestions on this would be useful but I will also try and call SI on Monday to see what they say.


I even called and asked multiple times before pulling the plug and ordering one.  When we spend $4k on one of these I would hope for a little honesty.  I wouldn't simply have chosen another SI product.  I'm working on resolving with SI now, but the process has put me outside of my return policy where I purchased and the one they and I am leaning towards is almost $1500 less MSRP.


----------



## Defconadmin


I should've also mentioned I have a JVC X75 and HW55ES.   They both look equally terrible in very bright scenes.


----------



## robininni




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *westcott2010*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3480#post_24395153
> 
> 
> I just installed a 115" black diamond zero edge with an Epson 6030 and It's hard to know what to think.
> 
> 
> I researched these for over 6 months (prior to and during a remodel) and went to about 5 media stores in the Dallas area and talked to everyone I could about them during my reviews.  I also spoke to SI many times because I kept hearing excellent things then others would say don't do it.  I ended up buying it because I have a bright room and work from home during the day and here are my questions after having it for 48 hours.
> 
> 
> I'm noticing a lot of bright crystals (not sure  what to call it) when the picture is on a solid color.  When watching the Olympics I find my eyes focusing on the sparkly spots on the snow scenes or on the hockey rink or an up close shot with a solid red color etc and it's starting to get annoying.    Is this normal with a black diamond because I don't remember seeing it in the stores and I put down a lot of money for this thing.
> 
> 
> I have to have it in dynamic mode to see the picture in the day time w/ a bright room and lots of ambient light which I wasn't expecting.   Any help or suggestions on this would be useful but I will also try and call SI on Monday to see what they say.



The bright crystals that you notice or 'sparkles' as some people call them are 'hot spots' and it has to do with a high projector output coupled with a high screen gain and I believe the black diamond material is also susceptible to this in its own right. I have barely noticed these with all white portions of scenes and they don't bother me a bit (or occur very often or with enough clarity to disturb me). I chose the 1.4 gain screen but had I chose the 2.7 gain screen I am sure they would be very noticeable and disturbing. What is your screen gain? Of course it also matters what fL your projector generates with the screen factored in and so your projector, screen size and throw distance all matter. You have provided all of the info needed to put it in a calculator except your screen gain and throw distance.


Also, are you only seeing the sparklies at night or do you see this is in the day too? I would think only at night if you feel you can't adequately see the picture in the day time unless the projector is putting out all she can but you didn't say.


I used the projector in full power mode (normal and dynamic) for day time use and then, unless I am too lazy to change it, I will put it on eco (still dynamic) for night time use. I like a bright picture!


For my setup I should produce about 21 fL in 2.35 mode and 26fL in 1.78 mode on my 2.35 screen and this works very well for my moderately ambiently lit room (no direct sun, only 3 sources of incoming light with windows facing northwest and southeast).


Assuming you have a throw distance of 15 ft, and Epson 6030ub, and a 1.4 gain 115" BD ZE than you should have a reasonable 25fL and shouldn't be having trouble with sparklies. If your screen is the 2.7 gain version I would not be surprised to have these problems based upon the almost doubling of the fL that would cause.


Lastly, something else that may be affecting the situation which I noticed: If your screen is dirty, the dust on it DOES show up quite well in bright-white scenes. This may be contributing to the look of sparkle by the way the image is reflecting off of the dust rather than the screen beneath it. Just a thought. Clean the screen often as I have found the picture looks much better on my clean Black Diamond zero edge (I never cleaned my EZframe 1.1 gain cinewhite screen and never noticed a picture degradation with my Sony VPL-HW15).


Good luck to you!


Rob


----------



## Defconadmin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *robininni*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3510#post_24474443
> 
> 
> 
> The bright crystals that you notice or 'sparkles' as some people call them are 'hot spots' and it has to do with a high projector output coupled with a high screen gain and I believe the black diamond material is also susceptible to this in its own right. I have barely noticed these with all white portions of scenes and they don't bother me a bit (or occur very often or with enough clarity to disturb me). I chose the 1.4 gain screen but had I chose the 2.7 gain screen I am sure they would be very noticeable and disturbing. What is your screen gain? Of course it also matters what fL your projector generates with the screen factored in and so your projector, screen size and throw distance all matter. You have provided all of the info needed to put it in a calculator except your screen gain and throw distance.
> 
> 
> Also, are you only seeing the sparklies at night or do you see this is in the day too? I would think only at night if you feel you can't adequately see the picture in the day time unless the projector is putting out all she can but you didn't say.
> 
> 
> I used the projector in full power mode (normal and dynamic) for day time use and then, unless I am too lazy to change it, I will put it on eco (still dynamic) for night time use. I like a bright picture!
> 
> 
> For my setup I should produce about 21 fL in 2.35 mode and 26fL in 1.78 mode on my 2.35 screen and this works very well for my moderately ambiently lit room (no direct sun, only 3 sources of incoming light with windows facing northwest and southeast).
> 
> 
> Assuming you have a throw distance of 15 ft, and Epson 6030ub, and a 1.4 gain 115" BD ZE than you should have a reasonable 25fL and shouldn't be having trouble with sparklies. If your screen is the 2.7 gain version I would not be surprised to have these problems based upon the almost doubling of the fL that would cause.
> 
> 
> Lastly, something else that may be affecting the situation which I noticed: If your screen is dirty, the dust on it DOES show up quite well in bright-white scenes. This may be contributing to the look of sparkle by the way the image is reflecting off of the dust rather than the screen beneath it. Just a thought. Clean the screen often as I have found the picture looks much better on my clean Black Diamond zero edge (I never cleaned my EZframe 1.1 gain cinewhite screen and never noticed a picture degradation with my Sony VPL-HW15).
> 
> 
> Good luck to you!
> 
> 
> Rob


Rob

 

I have a .8 Gain screen and see the same hot spotting to the point of annoyance.  I've looked at mine for dust and thats definitely not the case.  There is clearly some variance in the screen gains and a variance across the screen as a whole in the amount of hotspotting.


----------



## Kukulcan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Defconadmin*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3510#post_24478004
> 
> 
> 
> Rob
> 
> 
> There is clearly some variance in the screen gains and a variance across the screen as a whole in the amount of hotspotting.



Which is the ratio between projection distance/screen width?


----------



## robininni




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Defconadmin*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3510#post_24478004
> 
> 
> 
> Rob
> 
> 
> I have a .8 Gain screen and see the same hot spotting to the point of annoyance.  I've looked at mine for dust and thats definitely not the case.  There is clearly some variance in the screen gains and a variance across the screen as a whole in the amount of hotspotting.



Well, I don't know. I thought the sparklies were related to hot spotting which is related to how bright the image is in certain portions of the screen which screen gain is a factor of. However, I have two other theories: One is that it could be that the sparklies are an inherent feature of the black diamond material and have nothing to do with hot spots and the darker the screen material, the more sparklies. The .8 gain is darker than the 1.4 gain material. Theory two is it IS related to the brightnessness/gain/hot spotting and it depends on what angle the screen reflects light back to the watcher which depends upon the position of the projector in relation to the screen and where you are watching from.. My projector is near the very top of my screen, and my head is usually 3.5 feet or so below being in line with near the bottom of the screen. It would seem with this setup, the projector beams always shine at a big angle down to the screen and I will never get as intense direct bounce back light as I might if the projector were centered in the middle of my screen. Where is your projector in relation to your screen's surface area? Just a thought.


Rob


----------



## robininni

Someone posted this on page 93:


"I hate to say it, but it's unlikely to solve your sparkly issue. The sparkly texture you see on your current BD screen is due to the optical coating added to the screen, which increases the screen brightness (from the viewing position). The .8 version of the BD screen also has an optical coating to do the same thing. Both 1.4 and .8 BD screen therefore suffer from the sparkly artifacts. How much this is noticeable varies from person to person. But if it bothers you on your current BD screen, then it's likely to bother you on the .8 gain screen as well."


So maybe it is just the material the screen is made from? Like I said, I can see them in very bright white scenes but they don't jump out at me or distract me. It seems they are not all over the screen either, but just one small area but I couldn't tell you where as it has been a while since I even noticed any.


Maybe it really is an individual's perception thing?


Rob


----------



## PillPu$her

Should I even consider getting a Black Diamond screen if I have a dedicated home theater with no ambient light? I like the contemporary style of the zero edge, but would I gain anything else over a regular white or gray screen? The only thing I can think of is that I might not need masking because the screen is so dark already. For reference, I'm planning on pairing the screen with a JVC DLA-X500R projector.


----------



## drjay71

I have the same question as PillPu$her


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *PillPu$her*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3510#post_24482080
> 
> 
> Should I even consider getting a Black Diamond screen if I have a dedicated home theater with no ambient light? I like the contemporary style of the zero edge, but would I gain anything else over a regular white or gray screen? The only thing I can think of is that I might not need masking because the screen is so dark already. For reference, I'm planning on pairing the screen with a JVC DLA-X500R projector.



I think for that situation, SI recommends their Pure White Zero Edge 1.3 screen or the Pure Gray Zero Edge .85 screens.


Dave


----------



## gdfein

Ditto. The zero edge can be done in other screen materials than the just the 3 BD formats if you like the ZE look.


----------



## Defconadmin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kukulcan*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3510#post_24478101
> 
> 
> 
> Which is the ratio between projection distance/screen width?


Bout 1.4


----------



## Defconadmin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gdfein*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3510#post_24483982
> 
> 
> Ditto. The zero edge can be done in other screen materials than the just the 3 BD formats if you like the ZE look.


Yes they offer them in Zero Edge.   SI wants to swap my BD for a pure white as of right now.   The problem I have with that is the BD costs $1200 more than the pure white.  I love the fact that they will stand by the product and make you happy but where does my $1200 vanish into?   Thin air?  Slush fund? 

 

I bought my screen through our local Magnolia Best Buy.  I had 45 days to return it or exchange per best buy's policy.  SI wanted me to keep the screen for a few months and see if I quit noticing the hot spotting.  Well I did that and its no less noticable.  Not realizing it and obeying SI's wishes, I completely screwed myself with Best Buy (per policy of exchange).

 

What do I do?  Losing the $1200 price difference is counter productive in my opinion!


----------



## simpleHT




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Defconadmin*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3510#post_24485539
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they offer them in Zero Edge.   SI wants to swap my BD for a pure white as of right now.   The problem I have with that is the BD costs $1200 more than the pure white.  I love the fact that they will stand by the product and make you happy but where does my $1200 vanish into?   Thin air?  Slush fund?
> 
> 
> I bought my screen through our local Magnolia Best Buy.  I had 45 days to return it or exchange per best buy's policy.  SI wanted me to keep the screen for a few months and see if I quit noticing the hot spotting.  Well I did that and its no less noticable.  Not realizing it and obeying SI's wishes, I completely screwed myself with Best Buy (per policy of exchange).
> 
> 
> What do I do?  Losing the $1200 price difference is counter productive in my opinion!


Do you think the Slate will have lesser sparkling/texturing issues since it has lower gain and more flexible material?


----------



## Defconadmin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *simpleHT*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3510#post_24485770
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think the Slate will have lesser sparkling/texturing issues since it has lower gain and more flexible material?


I have slate product panels and I don't think it looks any better


----------



## robininni




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Defconadmin*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3510#post_24485539
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they offer them in Zero Edge.   SI wants to swap my BD for a pure white as of right now.   The problem I have with that is the BD costs $1200 more than the pure white.  I love the fact that they will stand by the product and make you happy but where does my $1200 vanish into?   Thin air?  Slush fund?
> 
> 
> I bought my screen through our local Magnolia Best Buy.  I had 45 days to return it or exchange per best buy's policy.  SI wanted me to keep the screen for a few months and see if I quit noticing the hot spotting.  Well I did that and its no less noticable.  Not realizing it and obeying SI's wishes, I completely screwed myself with Best Buy (per policy of exchange).
> 
> 
> What do I do?  Losing the $1200 price difference is counter productive in my opinion!




I guess this is one of those situations where you knew you had a window for full money back and you weren't happy and so you should have acted on that.. You entertained the manufacturer's idea that with more use you would likely adjust and everything would be okay, but they weren't offering the money back guarantee, Best Buy was. So you let Best Buy off the hook by ignoring your gut feeling and uneasiness with a super expensive screen that wasn't performing to your satisfaction because the manufacturer was optimistic you'd adjust and begin enjoying your screen.


I can't blame the manufacturer for trying to get you okay with their BD product. Its sad that you could have spent $1200 less from the start but it's nice that the manufacturer is going to work with you to get you something you are happy with. From their standpoint the existing BD screen is not resalable so they are eating into their profit on the first sale by giving you a new screen for the same initial revenue they received.


I guess a lesson for all to learn from this is when you're not 100% happy with an audio/video product and can return it, return it because you likely won't be any happier with it down the road as time heals a lot of things, but not expensive audio/video products!


Rob


----------



## Defconadmin


Its not that they wanted to adjust to it.  They believe the benefits outweigh the negatives and that I would come to realization with that.


----------



## Skylinestar




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *PillPu$her*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3510#post_24482080
> 
> 
> Should I even consider getting a Black Diamond screen if I have a dedicated home theater with no ambient light? I like the contemporary style of the zero edge, but would I gain anything else over a regular white or gray screen? The only thing I can think of is that I might not need masking because the screen is so dark already. For reference, I'm planning on pairing the screen with a JVC DLA-X500R projector.


Black Diamond = No.

Gray screen = Yes.


----------



## Gooddoc




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *cchrono*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3480#post_24465942
> 
> 
> I'll have my black diamond and jvc rs57 soon as a full time living room setup I will let you know my thoughts as well.



Thanks! Interested to hear your impressions.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *robininni*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3480#post_24465961
> 
> 
> 1. Not sure about your JVC 4910 but I simply used this wonderful calculator to design my system and apparently, based upon my screen size and throw range, 23 fL is adequate for this sort of setup as it works great.
> 
> 
> 2. I don't know about this and haven't read anything about it but I guess it's possible that a projector used this way may be 'overworked' but I highly doubt it.
> 
> 
> 3. My top screen edge is 79" from the floor and the center of my projector lens is 76" from the floor. Shadows are not a problem unless someone is walking close enough to the screen that it would block at large LCD as well. There also is not through traffic in between my projector and screen unless you are going to the backyard. I think a major key is don't mount the projector too low and apparently 6+ ft high works well.
> 
> 
> As far as family acceptance and general thoughts. I really like it and so do the wife and kids (although the kids are too young--oldest is 4--to really care either way). There is a small delay to turning on the projector versus an LCD but it is almost no worse than a DLP TV. I've had a 60" DLP as the living room TV and a 55" LCD and this is, of course, much better! I love being able to watch movies too in 2.35 appearance right in our living room rather than going to some dark-far off theater room. Sure at night you can turn off the lights and make it practically like a theater room, but you don't have too as you can watch with the lights on too just about as easily (small picture degradation depending on the lighting intensity, but nothing like a 'washed out' picture you would get with a typical non-black diamond screen). It's really incredible. So no regrets except I had a big psychological hurdle to paying $4200 for a screen when my first EZ frame 120" 1.78 aspect ratio screen cost me $500
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> Here are some 'real life' living room pictures for you and notice how that sweet 5.1 audio with awesome projector and screen fits in wonderfully
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By the way, I also use this: DVDO DVDOAir-P Wireless for HDMI Connection System which works extremely well LoS. It sometimes has difficultly establishing an initial connection when the system is first turned on (not always) but I have found when it does this to just press a 'reconnect' type button on the back of the component down by my receiver under the screen and it will connect in seconds. This saved me a messy, expensive HDMI cable run installed through a fireblocked wall.
> 
> 
> Rob



Rob,


Thanks so much for your impressions! My PJ will be in the middle of my room and I think I'll need a PJ lift into the ceiling. Between the screen and the lift I'm looking at least around 8k. When I bought my PJ I gave very little thought to screen/mounting costs and not sure I would have made the PJ purchase if I knew it was going to run me 12k in equipment costs....


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Defconadmin*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3510#post_24485539
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they offer them in Zero Edge.   SI wants to swap my BD for a pure white as of right now.   The problem I have with that is the BD costs $1200 more than the pure white.  I love the fact that they will stand by the product and make you happy but where does my $1200 vanish into?   Thin air?  Slush fund?
> 
> 
> I bought my screen through our local Magnolia Best Buy.  I had 45 days to return it or exchange per best buy's policy.  SI wanted me to keep the screen for a few months and see if I quit noticing the hot spotting.  Well I did that and its no less noticable.  Not realizing it and obeying SI's wishes, I completely screwed myself with Best Buy (per policy of exchange).
> 
> 
> What do I do?  Losing the $1200 price difference is counter productive in my opinion!



That's a tough spot to be in for sure. Have you mentioned to SI that listening to them caused you to lose your ability to return the screen? Perhaps they might be able to help. Worst case, you swallow the $1200 and it's a lesson learned. If it were me, I'd definitely want to try the Pure White or Pure Gray Zero Edge screens, because the texture/hot spotting is supposed to be non-existent.


Dave


----------



## Kukulcan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Defconadmin*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3510#post_24485519
> 
> 
> 
> Bout 1.4



I think it's a bit lower recommended minimum value (1.8). Low values cause more hotspotting


----------



## Defconadmin


They said just stay above 1.2x width.  So thats where it went!


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *PillPu$her*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3510#post_24482080
> 
> 
> Should I even consider getting a Black Diamond screen if I have a dedicated home theater with no ambient light? I like the contemporary style of the zero edge, but would I gain anything else over a regular white or gray screen? The only thing I can think of is that I might not need masking because the screen is so dark already. For reference, I'm planning on pairing the screen with a JVC DLA-X500R projector.





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *drjay71*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3510#post_24482217
> 
> 
> I have the same question as PillPu$her



It comes down to how you want to use your room. Is your room light controlled? Light controlled means along with controlling light from getting into the room. It also means controlling the light from the biggest light source in the room and that is the screen. That means you need dark non reflective paint on the walls and ceiling. Also means dark flooring. Next question. How do you want to use your room? Are you planning on watching the projector in the dark or are you wanting to do lots of lights on viewing? If watching movies with the family, then that will probably be lights off. If you plan on having people over for sports events and gaming or entertaining, then that most likely means lights on viewing.


In a light controlled room and viewing in the dark, then I would look at one of SI's screens with Solar HD fabric. If you do not have good light control or if you wish to do lights on viewing, then I would consider the Black Diamond. If we can help you, give us a call.


----------



## jrm21




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Defconadmin*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3510#post_24485539
> 
> 
> 
> Yes they offer them in Zero Edge.   SI wants to swap my BD for a pure white as of right now.   The problem I have with that is the BD costs $1200 more than the pure white.  I love the fact that they will stand by the product and make you happy but where does my $1200 vanish into?   Thin air?  Slush fund?
> 
> 
> I bought my screen through our local Magnolia Best Buy.  I had 45 days to return it or exchange per best buy's policy.  SI wanted me to keep the screen for a few months and see if I quit noticing the hot spotting.  Well I did that and its no less noticable.  Not realizing it and obeying SI's wishes, I completely screwed myself with Best Buy (per policy of exchange).
> 
> 
> What do I do?  Losing the $1200 price difference is counter productive in my opinion!



Who says you lose the $1200? IMO, that's the wrong attitude.


I see several reasonable options:


1. Try to return at BB anyway. If they question the time, tell them your story about waiting on SI's instructions. If still a problem, see if you can get an exchange (or even store credit).

2. SI refunds you the difference in cost. Explain the them that the only reason you didn't return in the BB policy window was their suggestion and your willingness to work with them on the issue.

3. SI arranges the return/exchange through BB. As the manufacturer, it they agree to accept the return through BB, BB might be able/willing to make a policy exception. Difficult with a large chain, but not unheard of.


Squeaky wheels do get the grease.


If you have $1200 to blow, go ahead. Better yet, let me talk the parties involved and handle the exchange for you - I could always use an extra $1200.


----------



## realmensrea

Which screen to get?


I have an Epson 6030UB. Basement entertainment space. Lights can be controlled, but primary use (parties, get-togethers, family time with kids) will mean at least some ambient lighting and ideally brighter setting. Light sources are ceiling puck lights and a few wall lights. Walls and ceiling are white though.


Space is 17 x 21. Throw is relatively short at 13-14ft. Screen size is under 100". This suggests to me the Epson might be too bright for a BD 1.4 gain (ie increased hotspotting).


SI rep agreed on the possible brightness/hotspotting and suggested Pure Gray 0.85 gain, instead of BD 1.4 or Pure White 1.3. But I'm worried that's compensating too much for the brightness/hotspotting and will mean I won't be able to turn lights on (especially for 3D).


Anyone have experience with the Epson 6030UB who can provide some recommendations on this?


----------



## gadgetfreaky




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *realmensrea*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3510#post_24530180
> 
> 
> Which screen to get?
> 
> 
> I have an Epson 6030UB. Basement entertainment space. Lights can be controlled, but primary use (parties, get-togethers, family time with kids) will mean at least some ambient lighting and ideally brighter setting. Light sources are ceiling puck lights and a few wall lights.
> 
> 
> Space is 17 x 21. Throw is relatively short at 13-14ft. Screen size is under 100". This suggests to me the Epson might be too bright for a BD 1.4 gain.
> 
> 
> SI rep agreed on the possible brightness and suggested Pure Gray 0.85 gain, instead of BD 1.4 or Pure White 1.3. But I'm worried that's compensating too much for the brightness and will mean I won't be able to turn lights on (especially for 3D).
> 
> 
> Anyone have experience with the Epson 6030UB who can provide some recommendations on this?



I had the epson 5030 & currently have the sony hw55, I have the Black Diamond 0.8 gain. I have dark gray walls, (light ceiling though) at night it's pretty dark. I do like watching TV during the day or tv at night with lights on as it's also my family room. I regret a bit not having a 1.4 gain, & don't imagine it could ever be "too bright" as you could always do low lamp mode. During the day I am on torch mode, at night i'm "eco" low power mode & pic looks like a plasma at night with a bit of wash out during the day (this is where I wish I had 1.4 gain)


If you want bright 3D and some lights on or daytime viewing, definitely do the BD. Yes, you might get a little sparkles but honestly no guest or wife/kids would ever notice and I've gotten used to it and almost never even notice it unless i'm looking for it. I'd rather have super bright. As it stands I think even at night the sony hw55 isn't bright enough for 3D on a 0.8 gain screen.


----------



## realmensrea

Thanks. I should have clarified that the issue with the 6030ub's brightness (together with the short throw and smaller screen) is that it may exacerbate even more hotspotting than usual if projected onto a BD 1.4. The brightness itself is fine of course. I've edited my original post in the forum to indicate that it's the hotspotting that's the issue with the extra brightness and not the brightness of the image itself, which is a positive thing.


I'm basically trying to make a choice among BD 1.4 vs BD .8 vs Pure Gray .85 vs Pure White 1.3. It comes down to choosing which compromises maximize my satisfaction with the screen. BD 1.4 obviously for the ambient light rejection (allowing normal light viewing, but at the cost of hotspotting and perhaps a minor dip in image quality compared to the Pure White), Pure White 1.3 tops image quality (but at cost of restricted normal light viewing, and perhaps minor hotspotting due to positive gain), while Pure Gray .85 appears to have no hotspotting issues (but at cost of dimmer screen image overall, so normal light viewing may be restricted even more so than the Pure White 1.3). Not sure where the BD .8 fits in with regards to pros and cons, although perhaps less hotspotting, at expense of slightly inferior ambient light rejection...?


I think the point of the SI rep's recommendation of the Pure Gray .85 is that given all the extra brightness of my set up (ie Epson 6030ub at 2400 lumens + short throw distance + under 100" screen), that those elements may suffice to overcome the deficiencies of the Pure Gray .85 (ie mainly a dimmer screen so can't watch with normal lighting) while being able to take advantage of the Pure Gray's strength (ie no hotspotting).


Any further thoughts?


In your case, gadget, the Sony hw55 doesn't throw out as much lumens as an Epson 6030ub, so I'm not sure your experience is applicable to my scenario. Did you try your BD .8 screen with your Epson 5030? That would be a closer comparison I think given the light output for that model and my 6030 are identical. If so, what was that like? Still think BD 1.4 would be better than the BD .8?


Edit: Also I should note that the fact that you don't notice much hotspotting on your BD .8 may have something to do with the fact that it's a negative gain screen (although still a BD, so there will be a de minimus amount of hotspotting regardless). It's possible you may notice more hotspotting in a BD 1.4... Just speculating of course.


----------



## gadgetfreaky

yes, sorry when I mentioned I had the 5020, I meant that I also used it on my BD 0.8 gain before i switched to the sony hw55. I have 100" btw and when I had the 5020 it was at a 12' throw, i'm currently at 14.5' throw.


At night at 12' throw it definitely looked like a plasma with the epson. The sony i like as the colors & the smoothness of the image just seems a bit sharper. Neither the sony or the epson did i notice huge hotspotting, i probably noticed it a few times in the 2 years i've had it. I think the brighter image and flexibility of a BD screen outweights any cons.


where are you located? i was thinking of selling my 0.8 gain and go to 1.4 gain since i'm in a living room with windows everywhere during the day!


----------



## space2001

quick question but I can't seem to find the answer on the slate screens. How much are they? and what size does it go up to?



Projector I have right now is a JVC x3


----------



## drjay71

From what I can tell, the Zero Edge BD goes up to 115" in a 16:9 aspect ratio but the Zero Edge Slate goes up to 120" diagonal in 16:9. Is that correct?


----------



## space2001




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *drjay71*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3510#post_24541409
> 
> 
> From what I can tell, the Zero Edge BD goes up to 115" in a 16:9 aspect ratio but the Zero Edge Slate goes up to 120" diagonal in 16:9. Is that correct?



There website says up to 200" but when I try to do the screen calculator it only goes to 120.


I have a 120" Da-lite Cinema 1.1 now. My whole thought is go bigger later this year. Trying to find which screen to go for and I like the idea even though I have a light controlled room my walls are not dark.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *space2001*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3510#post_24541532
> 
> 
> There website says up to 200" but when I try to do the screen calculator it only goes to 120.
> 
> 
> I have a 120" Da-lite Cinema 1.1 now. My whole thought is go bigger later this year. Trying to find which screen to go for and I like the idea even though I have a light controlled room my walls are not dark.



115" 16:9 regular and 120" 16:9 Zero Edge are the largest available. You can go to a scope screen and get a larger scope image and the same size 16:9 screen. If we can help you, let us know.


----------



## Skylinestar

How's the acoustic transparency of the Black Diamond?

Has anyone tried placing a center speaker behind the screen?

How much is the high frequency roll off?


----------



## gdfein

BD is not recommended as an AT screen material.


----------



## scooter_29

Finally getting my small theater room built out after waiting 8 months and am trying to figure out if I can use the BD or slate screen. Are there restrictions on the angle of the projector to the SI screens? I am looking at a ~110" 16:9 screen with the front of the projector lens approx 13' back. The ceiling is 8'10" but the projector needs to be close to the ceiling so somebody can walk underneath the projector.


----------



## drjay71




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/2970#post_22433410
> 
> 
> There is no need to mask a Black Diamond. The materials are self masking. Check out the video for the Zero Edge and you will see a 2:35 screen, back-lit with 16:9 content and I am sure you will deduce there is not need to mask.



Even though this may be true, are there any masking systems for the Black Diamond Zero Edge? Something perhaps that one could hang on the left and right to mask the black bars while watching 16:9 content on a 2.35:1 screen?


Thanks


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *drjay71*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3540#post_24596467
> 
> 
> Even though this may be true, are there any masking systems for the Black Diamond Zero Edge? Something perhaps that one could hang on the left and right to mask the black bars while watching 16:9 content on a 2.35:1 screen?
> 
> 
> Thanks



I would find a dealer with a demo screen and see for yourself. you really do not need additional masking with a Black Diamond 1.4 or .8 gain material.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *scooter_29*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3540#post_24596410
> 
> 
> Finally getting my small theater room built out after waiting 8 months and am trying to figure out if I can use the BD or slate screen. Are there restrictions on the angle of the projector to the SI screens? I am looking at a ~110" 16:9 screen with the front of the projector lens approx 13' back. The ceiling is 8'10" but the projector needs to be close to the ceiling so somebody can walk underneath the projector.



You do not want to place the projector more than 12" above the screen frame or the bottom of the screen will reject the projectors light making for a dimmer bottom of screen vs the top of the screen.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *PENDRAG0ON*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3480#post_24457881
> 
> 
> Pictures like that are what would sell people on projection. It is tempting me yet again.



Then you should check out the SI gallery. We have lots and lots of REAL images that ARE NOT photo shopped in anyway.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *scooter_29*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3540#post_24596410
> 
> 
> Finally getting my small theater room built out after waiting 8 months and am trying to figure out if I can use the BD or slate screen. Are there restrictions on the angle of the projector to the SI screens? I am looking at a ~110" 16:9 screen with the front of the projector lens approx 13' back. The ceiling is 8'10" but the projector needs to be close to the ceiling so somebody can walk underneath the projector.



Yes, there are restrictions on the BD screens. If the angle is too much, then the light from the projector hitting the bottom of the screen starts getting rejected. You also need to look at the available lens shift of the projector. Never use all of the vertical lens shift, if you do not have to and try to avoid using any horizontal lens shift.


----------



## RDP

Still wondering why I can't get one in Japan. Your one dealer seems to be in a business not related in any way to HT.


RDP


----------



## ROfu


Hey folks,

 

I had a demo of the BD 0.8 G3 screen over the weekend, and was under impressed by the ambient light performance. If someone wouldnt mind giving a little advice.

 

Would the 1.4 gain perform better with ambient light ? how much brighter is the screen material - as wouldn't the brighter material negate any contrast benifit the 1.4 gain would give? (in an ambiently lit room).

Sadly the light control in the room i would like to use is horrible. so I'm looking for the best of a bad situation.

 

Cheers

Tim


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ROfu*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3540#post_24656867
> 
> 
> Hey folks,
> 
> 
> I had a demo of the BD 0.8 G3 screen over the weekend, and was under impressed by the ambient light performance. If someone wouldnt mind giving a little advice.
> 
> 
> Would the 1.4 gain perform better with ambient light ? how much brighter is the screen material - as wouldn't the brighter material negate any contrast benifit the 1.4 gain would give? (in an ambiently lit room).
> 
> Sadly the light control in the room i would like to use is horrible. so I'm looking for the best of a bad situation.
> 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Tim



I believe the .8 will have better contrast performance vs. the 1.4. The 1.4 will be brighter, but may also look more washed out than the .8. What projector was used with the .8? It's possible the projector may not have had enough lumens for the .8.


Honestly for my preferences, I've found that (for day time performance) ambient light screens are much better than white screens; however, they're still not as good as a TV. Yes, the projector/screen combo is bigger, but the lack of wash out is better on a TV. "Acceptable" day time performance is just not acceptable for me. I want good to excellent performance for day time.


Dave


----------



## ROfu

Thanks for the response Dave,


I'm going to get a demo of the 0.8 and 1.4 in my place so I can see exactly what I can expect.

But I might have to start considering alternatives to the black diamond, or consider darkening my room somewhat - the one thing I was trying to avoid.


Cheers

Tim


----------



## thezaks

I'm actually to the point of considering a TV for day time/kids use, and the projector/motorized screen for evening use with and without some recessed lighting. I'll still need to use an ambient light screen for that, to help with the recessed lights, but also because I have an off-white ceiling and tan (a bit of a darker tan) walls.



Dave


----------



## ROfu

Dave can I ask what projector your running or more importantly what lumens? The one I saw at the demo room was a Panasonic PT5000 with a 2000 lumens. I'm currently running an Epson 6100W with 2300 lumens.. So having a more lumens might make the 0.8 more feasible.


Cheers

Tim


----------



## thezaks

Hi Tim,


I don't have a projector, as of yet. I have a 14 year old 64" Pioneer Elite Pro-710HD rear projection TV. Just about 20 months ago, I helped one of my friends install a BD III 1.4 106" screen with a Sony HW30ES projector. He uses that setup as his TV in his family room. Since then, I have been researching a bunch of options, including the Stewart Firehawk, DNP Supernova, and Draper React screens. I've also been considering the Sony HW55ES and the JVC RS4910 projectors.



Dave


----------



## ROfu


Have you found any better alternatives in your searches? a few folks have mentioned the DNP Supernova, and the Firehawk G3 - but i can never find a honest side by side comparisons, I was a sent a great link from these forums (another thread) comparing the BD2 with a white screen. This seemed to confirm my demo experience. I do have a fairly bright projector so maybe a 0.8 screen would be more suited. The only option is to get the 0.8 screen in my place and demoed.

 

appreciate all the advise and opinions.

 

Cheers

Tim


----------



## thezaks

Hi Tim,


I'm waiting on a few things right now, and then I'll be a little better informed:


1) I've seen the most recent 1.4 BD screen. I have not seen the .8.


2) I've seen a couple of Firehawks.


3) I'm waiting on some screen materials - the 08-85 DNP material, and the Draper React 1.0 material. I plan on taking these to a local store to compare to a BD and a FH. I should have these materials by next week (hopefully). The local store has a Sony HW55ES and a Sony 1000ES.


4) Another AVS'er is going to be getting a DNP 23-23 screen and using that for his living room screen, with a JVC X700 projector. He will document all the pros/cons. He is moving into a new house so he should have everything documented by the end of May.


Again, for daylight, I'm not satisfied with an "acceptable" picture. Take for example the SI video where blake shows the BD in his house. It may seem acceptable for some, but not for me - it definitely looks faded. A TV will look much better - albeit, smaller too. I've found in my research over the last 3-4 years that I do tend to prefer quality over quantity (size). Some folks are probably the opposite - meaning that they are willing to compromise daytime performance, in exhange for size.


Dave


----------



## gdfein

FWIW - Back in February I went with the BD 0.8 Zero Edge (110"). I debated between this, the BD 1.4 and the Firehawk G4. I went through the same process you are discussing, reading whatever I could. At that time G4 was very new and most showrooms near me had FH G3 on display...this was also nice. I am a fan of both products and if I was doing a full on dedicated / light controlled HT, I'd probably go with the Stewart ST130.


Ultimately, I made my decision to go with the BD zero edge product due to mine and WAF's preference for the "TV-like" look of the zero edge.


I then debated on the 0.8 for better ambient light rejection vs the 1.4 for a brighter image.


Darkening the wall color was not an option (beige walls with white crown and base trim) and room layout has a window with blinds within 8' of the screen, so I felt that I needed to prioritize light rejection over brightness, thus choosing 0.8.


I was very concerned considering these materials was also the dreaded "sparklies" you no doubt are reading about. I didn't want to get my room finished and find this was a problem and everything I read was that the higher gain ambient light rejecting screens will make the manifestation of these more pronounced. This was a point in favor of the 0.8.


Another consideration that I didn't appreciate while shopping (this was my first front PJ setup) was that I originally thought I wanted the PJ to be mounted close to the ceiling to allow my multi-purpose room to feel more open and that I would just use lens shift to lower the image onto the screen. The more I learned about ambient light rejecting screen materials, the more I learned they will be very sensitive to the geometry of the projected image and the more you can minimize using lens shift the better. So my PJ is on a 30" drop pole from the ceiling (brings the PJ to about 6' off the floor). It hangs more into the room than I'd like, but it is along the back wall and over seating so its not a hazard to anyone bumping it.


My PJ is the 600ES. My throw distance is approx 12' lens to screen, with the lens 10-12" below the upper screen edge. I usually use low lamp setting and at that setting I am getting 17 FL of light. I'm pleased with the result. The day time image is not as bright as my Panny VT50 plasma, but even still for watching the big game on Sunday's I prefer the 110" vs the 65". For movies that we generally watch at night, we have pretty good light control with the ceiling cans off and the blinds pulled.


I'm not into 3D but if you are that should be a consideration that might point you towards higher gain material.


Some pics of my screen at http://www.avsforum.com/t/1514667/gdfeins-media-room-thread#post_24324654 


If interested I can take some day time light pictures and post those as well. Just PM me.


Hopefully these comments are helpful.


Greg


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3540#post_24661870
> 
> 
> Hi Tim,
> 
> 
> I'm waiting on a few things right now, and then I'll be a little better informed:
> 
> 
> 1) I've seen the most recent 1.4 BD screen. I have not seen the .8.
> 
> 
> 2) I've seen a couple of Firehawks.
> 
> 
> 3) I'm waiting on some screen materials - the 08-85 DNP material, and the Draper React 1.0 material. I plan on taking these to a local store to compare to a BD and a FH. I should have these materials by next week (hopefully). The local store has a Sony HW55ES and a Sony 1000ES.
> 
> 
> 4) Another AVS'er is going to be getting a DNP 23-23 screen and using that for his living room screen, with a JVC X700 projector. He will document all the pros/cons. He is moving into a new house so he should have everything documented by the end of May.
> 
> 
> Again, for daylight, I'm not satisfied with an "acceptable" picture. Take for example the SI video where blake shows the BD in his house. It may seem acceptable for some, but not for me - it definitely looks faded. A TV will look much better - albeit, smaller too. I've found in my research over the last 3-4 years that I do tend to prefer quality over quantity (size). Some folks are probably the opposite - meaning that they are willing to compromise daytime performance, in exhange for size.
> 
> 
> Dave



The Black Diamond setup at my house is a much better image than the anything I had in the exact spot before. At first I had a Sony 55 Rear pro and it was unwatchable from 3ish to 5ish in the afternoon do to glair from the windows. So, we would close the wood shutters (fancy mini blinds







and then i would see horizontal lines of light across the screen.

I then tried an 80" piece of glass and the glass was worse than the lexan screen from the rear pro. Even when the lighting was not an issue the 80" image was less than except able.

With an Epson 5020UB (livingroom mode for day time viewing) and a Black Diamond 115" my image is much better and I believe the best image that the room will allow for now.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3540#post_24662890
> 
> 
> The Black Diamond setup at my house is a much better image than the anything I had in the exact spot before. At first I had a Sony 55 Rear pro and it was unwatchable from 3ish to 5ish in the afternoon do to glair from the windows. So, we would close the wood shutters (fancy mini blinds
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and then i would see horizontal lines of light across the screen.
> 
> I then tried an 80" piece of glass and the glass was worse than the lexan screen from the rear pro. Even when the lighting was not an issue the 80" image was less than except able.
> 
> With an Epson 5020UB (livingroom mode for day time viewing) and a Black Diamond 115" my image is much better and I believe the best image that the room will allow for now.



I agree that your 115" BD does look tons better than a white screen would ever look in that room! Same with my friend's BD that I helped him to install. For me though the image from a flat panel looks better in the day time. In fact, my Pioneer Elite Pro-710HD rear projection TV looks better in the daytime than any projector/screen that I've seen. The extra light actually helps to provide extra brightness for the TV, while still maintaining an extra good amount (more than any projector/screen combo) of blacks. At night, I plan to have a motorized ambient light screen. Again, my preference. Many folks would be perfectly happy with that 115" screen for full time use.



Dave


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3420#post_24176401
> 
> 
> Hi Blake,
> 
> 
> In the video, is the BD material 1.4 or .8? When looking at the comparison, I would definitely want the BD material over the Slate, but I imagine Slate gets you some of the way there for a lesser price.
> 
> 
> 
> Dave


The screen at my house is a Black Diamond 115" Zero Edge, 1.4 gain material. TBZ115BD14 with LED lights.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gdfein*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3540#post_24662779
> 
> 
> If interested I can take some day time light pictures and post those as well. Just PM me
> 
> 
> Greg



Thanks Greg. I'm confused on the day time light pictures you mentioned - are you posting those, or should we PM you? Day light pictures would be useful, as that is the primary reason for an ambient light screen.



Thanks,

Dave


----------



## ROfu

Cheers for the link Greg, very nice setup - daytime with the blinds open pics would be massively helpful if you have the time







will PM.


so your using the 1.4 gain Blake ? What was the biggest reason for this? The additional brightness during the day or a personal preference.

What would you recommend for a very ambiently lit room the 0.8 or the 1.4.


I'm very envious of anyone with the zero edge, I simply can't get it to the room I want so have to opt for a fixed frame and build in the room or a motorised.



Cheers for the comments


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gdfein*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3540#post_24662779
> 
> 
> FWIW - Back in February I went with the BD 0.8 Zero Edge (110"). I debated between this, the BD 1.4 and the Firehawk G4. I went through the same process you are discussing, reading whatever I could. At that time G4 was very new and most showrooms near me had FH G3 on display...this was also nice. I am a fan of both products and if I was doing a full on dedicated / light controlled HT, I'd probably go with the Stewart ST130.
> 
> 
> Ultimately, I made my decision to go with the BD zero edge product due to mine and WAF's preference for the "TV-like" look of the zero edge.
> 
> 
> I then debated on the 0.8 for better ambient light rejection vs the 1.4 for a brighter image.
> 
> 
> Darkening the wall color was not an option (beige walls with white crown and base trim) and room layout has a window with blinds within 8' of the screen, so I felt that I needed to prioritize light rejection over brightness, thus choosing 0.8.
> 
> 
> I was very concerned considering these materials was also the dreaded "sparklies" you no doubt are reading about. I didn't want to get my room finished and find this was a problem and everything I read was that the higher gain ambient light rejecting screens will make the manifestation of these more pronounced. This was a point in favor of the 0.8.
> 
> 
> Another consideration that I didn't appreciate while shopping (this was my first front PJ setup) was that I originally thought I wanted the PJ to be mounted close to the ceiling to allow my multi-purpose room to feel more open and that I would just use lens shift to lower the image onto the screen. The more I learned about ambient light rejecting screen materials, the more I learned they will be very sensitive to the geometry of the projected image and the more you can minimize using lens shift the better. So my PJ is on a 30" drop pole from the ceiling (brings the PJ to about 6' off the floor). It hangs more into the room than I'd like, but it is along the back wall and over seating so its not a hazard to anyone bumping it.
> 
> 
> My PJ is the 600ES. My throw distance is approx 12' lens to screen, with the lens 10-12" below the upper screen edge. I usually use low lamp setting and at that setting I am getting 17 FL of light. I'm pleased with the result. The day time image is not as bright as my Panny VT50 plasma, but even still for watching the big game on Sunday's I prefer the 110" vs the 65". For movies that we generally watch at night, we have pretty good light control with the ceiling cans off and the blinds pulled.
> 
> 
> I'm not into 3D but if you are that should be a consideration that might point you towards higher gain material.
> 
> 
> Some pics of my screen at http://www.avsforum.com/t/1514667/gdfeins-media-room-thread#post_24324654
> 
> 
> If interested I can take some day time light pictures and post those as well. Just PM me.
> 
> 
> Hopefully these comments are helpful.
> 
> 
> Greg




Thanks so much Greg! I've seen the BD 1.4, but not the .8 version. The football pictures look really good, so I'm looking forward to seeing your daylight pics.


BLAKE: what projector do you recommend for the .8 version of the screen? I can only imagine it needs to be a projector with a lot of lumens, because you had the 2400 lumen Epson in high lamp mode on your BD 1.4, and I imagine that the .8 would need even more lumens.



Thanks,

Dave


----------



## gdfein

My pleasure. I'm traveling this week for work but I can post daytime pics by Saturday.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gdfein*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3540#post_24662779
> 
> 
> FWIW - Back in February I went with the BD 0.8 Zero Edge (110"). I debated between this, the BD 1.4 and the Firehawk G4. I went through the same process you are discussing, reading whatever I could. At that time G4 was very new and most showrooms near me had FH G3 on display...this was also nice. I am a fan of both products and if I was doing a full on dedicated / light controlled HT, I'd probably go with the Stewart ST130.
> 
> 
> Ultimately, I made my decision to go with the BD zero edge product due to mine and WAF's preference for the "TV-like" look of the zero edge.
> 
> 
> I then debated on the 0.8 for better ambient light rejection vs the 1.4 for a brighter image.
> 
> 
> Darkening the wall color was not an option (beige walls with white crown and base trim) and room layout has a window with blinds within 8' of the screen, so I felt that I needed to prioritize light rejection over brightness, thus choosing 0.8.
> 
> 
> I was very concerned considering these materials was also the dreaded "sparklies" you no doubt are reading about. I didn't want to get my room finished and find this was a problem and everything I read was that the higher gain ambient light rejecting screens will make the manifestation of these more pronounced. This was a point in favor of the 0.8.
> 
> 
> Another consideration that I didn't appreciate while shopping (this was my first front PJ setup) was that I originally thought I wanted the PJ to be mounted close to the ceiling to allow my multi-purpose room to feel more open and that I would just use lens shift to lower the image onto the screen. The more I learned about ambient light rejecting screen materials, the more I learned they will be very sensitive to the geometry of the projected image and the more you can minimize using lens shift the better. So my PJ is on a 30" drop pole from the ceiling (brings the PJ to about 6' off the floor). It hangs more into the room than I'd like, but it is along the back wall and over seating so its not a hazard to anyone bumping it.
> 
> 
> My PJ is the 600ES. My throw distance is approx 12' lens to screen, with the lens 10-12" below the upper screen edge. I usually use low lamp setting and at that setting I am getting 17 FL of light. I'm pleased with the result. The day time image is not as bright as my Panny VT50 plasma, but even still for watching the big game on Sunday's I prefer the 110" vs the 65". For movies that we generally watch at night, we have pretty good light control with the ceiling cans off and the blinds pulled.
> 
> 
> I'm not into 3D but if you are that should be a consideration that might point you towards higher gain material.
> 
> 
> Some pics of my screen at http://www.avsforum.com/t/1514667/gdfeins-media-room-thread#post_24324654
> 
> 
> If interested I can take some day time light pictures and post those as well. Just PM me.
> 
> 
> Hopefully these comments are helpful.
> 
> 
> Greg



Hi Greg,


I'm confused...You mention you have a .8 BD screen in your above post, but in the gdfeins-media-room-thread, you mention that you got the 1.4 BD. Which is it?


Thanks, Dave


----------



## gdfein

Dave, thanks for catching that. I did go .8. I debated forever and a day between the two. Corrected the build thread.


----------



## animageofmine


Just bought BD 100" screen with frame. It looks amazing @ BestBuy. Hope it actually lives upto the expectations. Are you guys paying retail for the screen or any discounts available?


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *animageofmine*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3540#post_24671252
> 
> 
> Just bought BD 100" screen with frame. It looks amazing @ BestBuy. Hope it actually lives upto the expectations. Are you guys paying retail for the screen or any discounts available?



Congratulations on the new screen. Just FYI - AV Science sells Screen Innovations screens. You can always give us a call for a quote!


----------



## animageofmine


Thanks Craig. I wasn't aware of that. I just joined for more education, discussion and sharing.


----------



## drjay71

BD owners,


I recently saw the 1.4 game Zero Edge screen at a showroom and it looked amazing. I thought it looked really nice with the lights on but so much better with the lights off as is the case with any kind of screen. I'm wondering if it is overkill to go with such a screen in a dedicated space where most of viewing will be with lights off completely or sconces up around 25%. I really like the thin bezel. Are there any other less expensive options. So far all I have come up with are the Pure Zero Edge, Slate Zero Edge and the Da-Lite Ultra Thin Bezel


Thanks


----------



## gdfein

Dave and Rofu - As requested I have full light daytime pics loaded in my build thread.


There is no question that the image is impacted by all the ambient light my room gets in the daytime but I think that is the case with any front PJ setup and the BD I felt was a very good choice for me given my desire to have a multi-purpose space. Even with all the light I introduced in the photos, my picture is still watchable.


In my personal circumstances, we mostly watch movies or DVR'd programs in the evening after 830p so it is already dark outside.


Those times when I'm in the room watching say a daytime NFL game with a noon CT start, I would always close the blinds just to improve the picture and if it was me watching alone, I'd have the lights off for same reason. If we had guests watching I'd probably have the lights dimmed to 20-30%.


For how we watch and when we watch, I am pleased.


Hopefully my experiences are helpful to you.


Greg


----------



## elmalloc

Greg,


Thanks for the pictures.


I just ordered a pure white zero edge for my room which has some amount of ambient light. It might may not be right for the application, but I'm one of the few who likes a brighter white screen to attempt to create a usable image (even though black level will be higher).


I'll let you know how it turns out,

ELmO


----------



## ROfu

Thank you very much Greg,


These are exactly what I wanted to see, I never expected the picture to be perfect in these conditions and it's great to see how it holds up next to a proper window not just lights turned up, as there is huge difference between full bright indoor illumination and bounced/ difused sunlight.


Did you ever sample a 1.4 gain material? I know for your room the 0.8 was the best suit, but curious if you ever sampled or made your choice through deductive reasoning










From the images I'll definitely be joining you and many others with a BD screen, It's a shame that screen innovations don't show these kinda of pictures on their site, as most people spending the kind of money for these screens are unlikely to be stupid and understand things aren't going to be perfect. If I had seen those kinda image on their site, I would have already bought one.


Again thanks very much for showing some honest unbiased images - nice to see folks don't need to drink the coolade to still appreciate the worth of a screen.


Cheers

Tim


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3540#post_24663793
> 
> 
> Thanks so much Greg! I've seen the BD 1.4, but not the .8 version. The football pictures look really good, so I'm looking forward to seeing your daylight pics.
> 
> 
> BLAKE: what projector do you recommend for the .8 version of the screen? I can only imagine it needs to be a projector with a lot of lumens, because you had the 2400 lumen Epson in high lamp mode on your BD 1.4, and I imagine that the .8 would need even more lumens.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Dave



You must always, no wait never....no always, ya always You must always consider three things when doing two piece projection.

1. Size of screen

2. how much ambient light is in the room. We have a free light meter available for android or apple phones. room light is measured in Foot Candles (FC)

3. How many lumans you need to fill that size screen in that lighting environment.


We have a tool on the Screen innovations web site called the Screen Wizard that will take all 3 into account and help you pick the right materials.


You can also always call me or Tom at the SI factory.


----------



## ROfu

Blake a quick question for you,


On your BD motorised, the mounting brackets can be slid in between 6inch and a foot, is this a hard limitation (there is only enough slide on the mount) or a recommended distance ?

I am unfortunate in having the chimney Breast on the wall I want to hang the screen. So could ideally put the mounts further inward than the 12"

What would you suggest ?


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ROfu*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3570#post_24675337
> 
> 
> Blake a quick question for you,
> 
> 
> On your BD motorised, the mounting brackets can be slid in between 6inch and a foot, is this a hard limitation (there is only enough slide on the mount) or a recommended distance ?
> 
> I am unfortunate in having the chimney Breast on the wall I want to hang the screen. So could ideally put the mounts further inward than the 12"
> 
> What would you suggest ?



The most important thing is to be sure to anchor the "L" brackets into a stud. If you need a 3rd bracket we are happy to provide it.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *drjay71*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3570#post_24672010
> 
> 
> BD owners,
> 
> 
> I recently saw the 1.4 game Zero Edge screen at a showroom and it looked amazing. I thought it looked really nice with the lights on but so much better with the lights off as is the case with any kind of screen. I'm wondering if it is overkill to go with such a screen in a dedicated space where most of viewing will be with lights off completely or sconces up around 25%. I really like the thin bezel. Are there any other less expensive options. So far all I have come up with are the Pure Zero Edge, Slate Zero Edge and the Da-Lite Ultra Thin Bezel
> 
> 
> Thanks



Keep in mind Black Diamond improves contrast by a published 900% and reduces light scatter in the room by 75%. So is it over kill, only if you want AWSOME!


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *drjay71*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3570#post_24672010
> 
> 
> BD owners,
> 
> 
> I recently saw the 1.4 game Zero Edge screen at a showroom and it looked amazing. I thought it looked really nice with the lights on but so much better with the lights off as is the case with any kind of screen. I'm wondering if it is overkill to go with such a screen in a dedicated space where most of viewing will be with lights off completely or sconces up around 25%. I really like the thin bezel. Are there any other less expensive options. So far all I have come up with are the Pure Zero Edge, Slate Zero Edge and the Da-Lite Ultra Thin Bezel
> 
> 
> Thanks



We have the Zero Edge frame style available in Slate, Pure White, Pure Gray and Black Diamond all available up to 120" in 16:9 and 150" in 2:35.


----------



## BlakeSI

Black Diamond is now available in 120" 16:9 Zero Edge up from 115".


Also available in 150" 2:35 up from 144".


----------



## gec5741

I would absolutely love a BD zero edge but I don't think I'll be able to get it down in my basement due to a nasty turn at the top of my stair case







. I want to go at least 120 inches down there when the time comes for a screen. Just out of curiosity how do you know what is best for your room between the slate, pure white, pure gray and black diamond?


----------



## elmalloc

blake can you contact TX and tell them to expedite my pure white zero edge order? xD I can't wait!


----------



## drjay71




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3570#post_24675461
> 
> 
> Keep in mind Black Diamond improves contrast by a published 900% and reduces light scatter in the room by 75%. So is it over kill, only if you want AWSOME!



Thanks Blake. I actually had a 2.35:1 traditional Black Diamond (BDII) in my old home and it was great. I am sure the ZE with 4K screen technology would be even better. I am just debating between the Slate and the Black Diamond right now but leaning toward BD. I am glad I can go up to 120" diagonal now


----------



## DenisG




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ROfu*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3570#post_24675337
> 
> 
> Blake a quick question for you,
> 
> 
> On your BD motorised, the mounting brackets can be slid in between 6inch and a foot, is this a hard limitation (there is only enough slide on the mount) or a recommended distance ?
> 
> I am unfortunate in having the chimney Breast on the wall I want to hang the screen. So could ideally put the mounts further inward than the 12"
> 
> What would you suggest ?


The case and screen are very, very heavy, so they really need to be mounted into solid studs. Studs in the walls are generally x inches apart that's why there is the foot of play on either side.


----------



## ROfu

Cheers for the reply Denis,


I'm living in the UK, London, so don't need to worry about stud walls, they are all old Victorian buildings, so all the walls are brick/block.

I was hopping to mount on a chimney breast which will be about 2/3rds the size of the screen so would need to have the brackets more than 1ft in from the edge. I'm trying to find out how the bracket/frame is constructed to see if that 1ft is a true maximum or just recommended as it's more likely it'll need to go in between 1 1/2ft and 2ft from its edge, or that's even possible.


Cheers

Tim


----------



## elmalloc

Any pictures of the chimney


----------



## ROfu




 

This is the base room - as you can see littles been started yet - But if you look above the upside down temporary screen there are two mounting holes (these were from my old 60" LCD. 

I am considering getting a fixed frame BD and mounting it on a TV stand instead - after working out some sizes and weights. 

Of note, that screen is a 92inch optima generic white screen. 

You can also see from this room why i need a good ambient rejecting screen.


----------



## DenisG




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ROfu*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3570#post_24680467
> 
> 
> Cheers for the reply Denis,
> 
> 
> I'm living in the UK, London, so don't need to worry about stud walls, they are all old Victorian buildings, so all the walls are brick/block.
> 
> I was hopping to mount on a chimney breast which will be about 2/3rds the size of the screen so would need to have the brackets more than 1ft in from the edge. I'm trying to find out how the bracket/frame is constructed to see if that 1ft is a true maximum or just recommended as it's more likely it'll need to go in between 1 1/2ft and 2ft from its edge, or that's even possible.
> 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Tim


The brackets will fit any where on the back of the case because the slots run down the whole backside of the case.


----------



## ROfu

Fantastic, thanks for the info.

Motorised it'll be then, only need to see the 1.4 sample against the 0.8 (0.8 sounds like the most suitable thus far) in my room then it'll be ordered.


Appreciate all the help from everyone. I'll post some pics when it's all installed.


Cheers

Tim


----------



## elmalloc

from this thread, I was gathering many people don't order the 0.8 gain material - doesn't mean it won't work for you though.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gdfein*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3570#post_24674878
> 
> 
> Dave and Rofu - As requested I have full light daytime pics loaded in my build thread.
> 
> 
> There is no question that the image is impacted by all the ambient light my room gets in the daytime but I think that is the case with any front PJ setup and the BD I felt was a very good choice for me given my desire to have a multi-purpose space. Even with all the light I introduced in the photos, my picture is still watchable.
> 
> 
> In my personal circumstances, we mostly watch movies or DVR'd programs in the evening after 830p so it is already dark outside.
> 
> 
> Those times when I'm in the room watching say a daytime NFL game with a noon CT start, I would always close the blinds just to improve the picture and if it was me watching alone, I'd have the lights off for same reason. If we had guests watching I'd probably have the lights dimmed to 20-30%.
> 
> 
> For how we watch and when we watch, I am pleased.
> 
> 
> Hopefully my experiences are helpful to you.
> 
> 
> Greg



Thanks so much! The pictures - both daylight ones and night ones - are exactly what I wanted to see. That screen does look absolutely amazing at night!


Dave


----------



## drjay71




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3570#post_24675483
> 
> 
> Black Diamond is now available in 120" 16:9 Zero Edge up from 115".
> 
> 
> Also available in 150" 2:35 up from 144".



Just decided to get a 120" Black Diamond Zero Edge 1.4 gain screen with the LED lighting kit. Going to pair it with a Sony VPL-HW55ES. My room does have 2 windows which we will cover with black out shades and most viewing will be during the evening with the lights out. I do like the idea of being able to watch during the day, however, with the windows open. Just gives us much more flexibility with the room. I had a fixed Black Diamond II 2.35 aspect screen at 144" paired with a JVC HD950 in my old home and it was a great combo. I am especially excited to see how sleek but massive the 120" ZE will look with the LED lights. Hoping it looks like a giant plasma


----------



## Xer0dIn

Does anyone know what the largest size is for 2.35 and also 16:9 you can get that won't have a seam for residential? I know at one time Blake from SI had mentioned that 57" height was the max without a seam for 16:9 screens. I think I saw the 57" height restriction on the Black Diamond Venue which is for commercial applications. If this has been answered elsewhere, I haven't found it and do apologize.


----------



## drjay71




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xer0dIn*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3570#post_24702086
> 
> 
> Does anyone know what the largest size is for 2.35 and also 16:9 you can get that won't have a seam for residential? I know at one time Blake from SI had mentioned that 57" height was the max without a seam for 16:9 screens. I think I saw the 57" height restriction on the Black Diamond Venue which is for commercial applications. If this has been answered elsewhere, I haven't found it and do apologize.



I believe it is


16:9 - 120" diagonal

2.35:1 -150" diagonal


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *drjay71*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3570#post_24701962
> 
> 
> Just decided to get a 120" Black Diamond Zero Edge 1.4 gain screen with the LED lighting kit. Going to pair it with a Sony VPL-HW55ES. My room does have 2 windows which we will cover with black out shades and most viewing will be during the evening with the lights out. I do like the idea of being able to watch during the day, however, with the windows open. Just gives us much more flexibility with the room. I had a fixed Black Diamond II 2.35 aspect screen at 144" paired with a JVC HD950 in my old home and it was a great combo. I am especially excited to see how sleek but massive the 120" ZE will look with the LED lights. Hoping it looks like a giant plasma



I had a chance to see a 106" BD ZE 1.4 paired with a Sony VPL-HW55ES (high lamp mode) at a store in town. The sun shines through the windows through the front of the store, and this room was inside the store, with window wall open to the front of the store. The window wall is on the left side of the room. When viewing something darker than an animated movie (which they usually show in that room) - in this case Iron Man 2 - the BD does a decent job, when sitting in the prime position centered with the screen. Moving to the left side of the seating - close to the window wall - the picture looked the best. However, moving to the right of center - lined up with the right side of the screen, the picture was not good at all. It was very washed out. Seems like the light coming through the window is kind of angled out towards the right side, but even as close as the right edge of the screen, it looks pretty bad.


At home, we also have windows on the left side of the room. My wife was sitting in the seat lined up with the right side of the screen, so after we left the store, she shared her thumbs down on the screen. I think I've given up on a projector/screen for a TV. I'll either end up with a larger TV, or a TV for day time and a motorized screen/projector for night time.



Dave


----------



## elmalloc

My Screen Innovations Pure White Zero edge arrived for my video game room!


Blake - are the suspension cables for ZE screens in stock? Will they ship quickly vs. the screen shipment timing? I'm pretty sure I'll need to ceiling mount.


My room is not fully dark, but I'm going with my gut here - instead of a Black Diamond I'm giving the Pure White a shot based on my personal preferences.


Thanks,

ELmO


----------



## thezaks

Please post some pictures, when you have a chance. With a little ambient light would be cool too. I've always wondered how this screen would look..



Thanks,


Dave


----------



## mylan

Wondering why you didn't go with at least Slate with some ambient light, but yes, post some photos.


----------



## elmalloc

The way I have it situated, I don't think I'll have a ton of ambient light.


I haven't seen a full BD screen in action, the sample I had seemed to vary a little bit based on where I was sitting. This is actually my first projection screen (I've been spray painting DIY before this). I want consistent off axis viewing angles, or something I can't easily tell changes if I stand up/sit down.


I think that is probably not as visible on a full screen, but I don't know right now. I also saw a bit of screen texture, maybe because my projector has a little too much light output - and because it's mounted high on the ceiling. Slate did not have any shimmering to my eye.


In a perfect world we can all have full screens in our house for free and choose which one we like.


I'm going on my gut, I played a lot of Zelda with the BD and Slate samples up on my wall, and there was an increase in contrast, but it wasn't as much as I thought - and it's because I think I don't have that much ambient light in the room as other people.


The pure screen sold me on its lack of visible texture. I want a very flat surface with no shimmering that I can pixel focus on.


I need the suspension cables in order to install it, so it might be a bit before I can see it in action.


I don't think many people own pure white zero edges, especially with a non dedicated/non-fully controlled environment.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3570#post_24710175
> 
> 
> I had a chance to see a 106" BD ZE 1.4 paired with a Sony VPL-HW55ES (high lamp mode) at a store in town. The sun shines through the windows through the front of the store, and this room was inside the store, with window wall open to the front of the store. The window wall is on the left side of the room. When viewing something darker than an animated movie (which they usually show in that room) - in this case Iron Man 2 - the BD does a decent job, when sitting in the prime position centered with the screen. Moving to the left side of the seating - close to the window wall - the picture looked the best. However, moving to the right of center - lined up with the right side of the screen, the picture was not good at all. It was very washed out. Seems like the light coming through the window is kind of angled out towards the right side, but even as close as the right edge of the screen, it looks pretty bad.
> 
> 
> At home, we also have windows on the left side of the room. My wife was sitting in the seat lined up with the right side of the screen, so after we left the store, she shared her thumbs down on the screen. I think I've given up on a projector/screen for a TV. I'll either end up with a larger TV, or a *TV for day time and a motorized screen/projector for night time.*
> 
> 
> 
> Dave



That is what I do in my family room. I have a TV for daytime and a drop down screen for night time use. Makes for a good setup, since nearly all of the movie watching was done at night. No hope for projector use in the daytime in my family room, unless I get a projector with 5,000 lumens. I have 400SF of glass area in my family room and no curtains.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3600#post_24722263
> 
> 
> That is what I do in my family room. I have a TV for daytime and a drop down screen for night time use. Makes for a good setup, since nearly all of the movie watching was done at night. No hope for projector use in the daytime in my family room, unless I get a projector with 5,000 lumens. I have 400SF of glass area in my family room and no curtains.



Epson has the G6900 available with 6000L for around $6000. Pair the G series with a Black Diamond 115" Zero Edge and you have a 11K, 115" TV in your living room. We used 2 G series projectors at a very bright trade show recently on a 120" Black Diamond and a 120" Slate and I was amazed at the picture quality.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3600#post_24740095
> 
> 
> Epson has the G6900 available with 6000L for around $6000. Pair the G series with a Black Diamond 115" Zero Edge and you have a 11K, 115" TV in your living room. We used 2 G series projectors at a very bright trade show recently on a 120" Black Diamond and a 120" Slate and I was amazed at the picture quality.



Hi Blake,


Two questions:


1) Was the 120" BD the .8 or the 1.4?


2) Pictures and/or video???



Thanks,

Dave


----------



## drjay71

  


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3600#post_24741061
> 
> 
> Hi Blake,
> 
> 
> Two questions:
> 
> 
> 1) Was the 120" BD the .8 or the 1.4?
> 
> 
> 2) Pictures and/or video???
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Dave


1780004_707644769256258_124659511_o.jpg 156k .jpg file


This is in Dallas where I believe it is one of the bright new Epson projectors (G6900?) paired with a Zero Edge BD with tons of ambient light. It does look like a huge flat panel


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *drjay71*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3600#post_24742113
> 
> 1780004_707644769256258_124659511_o.jpg 156k .jpg file
> 
> 
> This is in Dallas where I believe it is one of the bright new Epson projectors (G6900?) paired with a Zero Edge BD with tons of ambient light. It does look like a huge flat panel



Is it the .8 or the 1.4 BD?


Dave


----------



## drjay71




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3600#post_24742219
> 
> 
> Is it the .8 or the 1.4 BD?
> 
> 
> Dave



Not sure but I believe it is the 1.4


----------



## ROfu


Unbiased Opinon of the 1.4 BD.

 

After looking at the videos for the BD for a few years and always wanting a giant screen, last month I finally decided the time was right to invest in a projector and a screen. Knowing I was going to be spending the better part of £3500 for the screen alone, I chose a good but not expensive projector - Epson 6100W (think its the same as the 5020 in the US?).

While i was mulling over the possibilities of the BD screen: 0.8. 1.4, 2.7, Slate and then the options of Zero Edge, Fixed frame, motorized.. I bought a very very cheap Optima 92" White 1.1 gain screen. I would have just used the wall but with alcoves next to the projected area, it wouldn't have been large enough.

I am in the unfortunate position of having windows directly to the side of the wall i want to project on. I also have no intention of sitting in a pitch black room with the summer upon us. I have entirely white walls and a white ceiling with a dark wood block floor. Due to this being a room we like to sit in of an evening (irrelevant to watching TV), I didn't want to paint it a dark colour just to assist a projector which might not even be on.

 

After searching around, I finally found a dealer who had a 1.4 Gain 103inch BD screen in their demo room (which in the UK was almost a miracle - especially being so close). The Dealer was mainly a High end Audio place, who just happened to have an Owner who was interested in Video as well - they didn't have a range of projectors nor a range of screens. the little cinema room they have setup is, in fairness a fairly honest example or how a home cinema would be. Spot lights above the screen a few standard lamps and a door on the back wall. This should have been an almost perfect showcase for the BD.

They turned on their projector (Panasonic PT-AT5000 1800-2000 normal/eco lumens) and played a blu-ray of the Dark Knight. This was a great example to test, lots and lots of dark shots.

Expecting the Moon, i was confronted by what to me seemed like a pretty bland and not very detailed image. The blacks were there and the Whites were there, but the subtleties in-between were flat - I will point out that the door was open letting in a fair amount of light and all the top and side lights were on - bright enough to read a book but not so much that it was even close to an ambiently lit room from a window during the day (the door at the back led to another room not the outside).

Being slightly disappointed but still very interested, I requested we move the screen to their audio demo Room, which had a nice bright window to the side (much like the room i wanted to use it in). Thankfully they had a Zero Edge (which looks stunning in its design) so picking it off the wall and moving it was a cake walk. we moved the projector into the other room too and powered it all up. again was very disappointed.

 

The images gdfein posted earlier:

http://www.avsforum.com/g/a/2328801/gdfeins-media-room-thread/

 

are a fair take on what i experienced as well. There is No way these screens can live up to the 900% contrast Hype.

I requested they bring a sample to my place to put against the white screen so i could fully make an educated decision on whether to get one or not.

 

We put the sample against the white £100 screen - and to my surprise initially it was hard to see much difference. The screen material being a mid grey made the black obviously darker, and the 1.4 gain kept the whites matching the high values of the 1.1 white screen. The problem was there was almost no image difference and detail between the mid values on both the cheap white screen and the 30 times more expensive BD. This caused a massive concern considering anything that wasn't either super bright or very very dark all mushed into a very flat looking image.

The biggest advantage the BD screen has is its Polarising effect. The best way i can describe it is, where you would normally be getting a reflective Sheen on a white (or other normal material) screen from the ambient light it was Matte - This does help a huge amount for seeing the little detail that was available, but even with this the remaining diffuse light was still enough to muddy the image so much it would be un-watchable for a good movie experience in the day.

 

Bizarrely to some, I am still interested in the BD screen, as with light control the extra details and contrast become visible, and the matte finish of the screen is very enticing. I am now at a point where I am going to have to spend some money doing exactly what i wanted to avoid - light controlling my room a fair amount.

 

Also I didn't notice any hot-spotting on the screen, but this might have been down to a fairly moderate lumen projector rather than the light cannons some folks have.

 

for anyone interested the amount of light in the room while I tested the screen was between 23-50 foot candles (the curtains are quite thin so light transmission varied a fair amount based on the sun position).

 

Cheers

Tim


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ROfu*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3600#post_24743142
> 
> 
> They turned on their projector (JVC 1800-2000 normal/eco lumens can't remember the Model off hand)...



Does JVC have any projectors that exceed 1300 lumens?


Dave


----------



## ROfu


My mistaked it was a PT-AT5000, for some reason i thought it was JVC but in actuality its a Panasonic. Edited post


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ROfu*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3600#post_24743142
> 
> 
> Unbiased Opinon of the 1.4 BD.
> 
> 
> After looking at the videos for the BD for a few years and always wanting a giant screen, last month I finally decided the time was right to invest in a projector and a screen. Knowing I was going to be spending the better part of £3500 for the screen alone, I chose a good but not expensive projector - Epson 6100W (think its the same as the 5020 in the US?).
> 
> While i was mulling over the possibilities of the BD screen: 0.8. 1.4, 2.7, Slate and then the options of Zero Edge, Fixed frame, motorized.. I bought a very very cheap Optima 92" White 1.1 gain screen. I would have just used the wall but with alcoves next to the projected area, it wouldn't have been large enough.
> 
> I am in the unfortunate position of having windows directly to the side of the wall i want to project on. I also have no intention of sitting in a pitch black room with the summer upon us. I have entirely white walls and a white ceiling with a dark wood block floor. Due to this being a room we like to sit in of an evening (irrelevant to watching TV), I didn't want to paint it a dark colour just to assist a projector which might not even be on.
> 
> 
> After searching around, I finally found a dealer who had a 1.4 Gain 103inch BD screen in their demo room (which in the UK was almost a miracle - especially being so close). The Dealer was mainly a High end Audio place, who just happened to have an Owner who was interested in Video as well - they didn't have a range of projectors nor a range of screens. the little cinema room they have setup is, in fairness a fairly honest example or how a home cinema would be. Spot lights above the screen a few standard lamps and a door on the back wall. This should have been an almost perfect showcase for the BD.
> 
> They turned on their projector (Panasonic PT-AT5000 1800-2000 normal/eco lumens) and played a blu-ray of the Dark Knight. This was a great example to test, lots and lots of dark shots.
> 
> Expecting the Moon, i was confronted by what to me seemed like a pretty bland and not very detailed image. The blacks were there and the Whites were there, but the subtleties in-between were flat - I will point out that the door was open letting in a fair amount of light and all the top and side lights were on - bright enough to read a book but not so much that it was even close to an ambiently lit room from a window during the day (the door at the back led to another room not the outside).
> 
> Being slightly disappointed but still very interested, I requested we move the screen to their audio demo Room, which had a nice bright window to the side (much like the room i wanted to use it in). Thankfully they had a Zero Edge (which looks stunning in its design) so picking it off the wall and moving it was a cake walk. we moved the projector into the other room too and powered it all up. again was very disappointed.
> 
> 
> The images gdfein posted earlier:
> http://www.avsforum.com/g/a/2328801/gdfeins-media-room-thread/
> 
> 
> are a fair take on what i experienced as well. There is No way these screens can live up to the 900% contrast Hype.
> 
> I requested they bring a sample to my place to put against the white screen so i could fully make an educated decision on whether to get one or not.
> 
> 
> We put the sample against the white £100 screen - and to my surprise initially it was hard to see much difference. The screen material being a mid grey made the black obviously darker, and the 1.4 gain kept the whites matching the high values of the 1.1 white screen. The problem was there was almost no image difference and detail between the mid values on both the cheap white screen and the 30 times more expensive BD. This caused a massive concern considering anything that wasn't either super bright or very very dark all mushed into a very flat looking image.
> 
> The biggest advantage the BD screen has is its Polarising effect. The best way i can describe it is, where you would normally be getting a reflective Sheen on a white (or other normal material) screen from the ambient light it was Matte - This does help a huge amount for seeing the little detail that was available, but even with this the remaining diffuse light was still enough to muddy the image so much it would be un-watchable for a good movie experience in the day.
> 
> 
> Bizarrely to some, I am still interested in the BD screen, as with light control the extra details and contrast become visible, and the matte finish of the screen is very enticing. I am now at a point where I am going to have to spend some money doing exactly what i wanted to avoid - light controlling my room a fair amount.
> 
> 
> Also I didn't notice any hot-spotting on the screen, but this might have been down to a fairly moderate lumen projector rather than the light cannons some folks have.
> 
> 
> for anyone interested the amount of light in the room while I tested the screen was between 23-50 foot candles (the curtains are quite thin so light transmission varied a fair amount based on the sun position).
> 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Tim



I say this all the time Its Black Diamond not Black Magic. A 2000L projector on a 103" Black Diamond 1.4 gain screen requires 3000 lumens in order to maintain a recommended 30:1 contrast ratio. I know this because I used our screen wizard and the screen wizard recommended 3000L with a 1.4 gain Black Diamond material. So yes the image should have looked washed out with 30FC to 50FC (very very bright) and only 2000L projector. Use our tools on the web site as the tools always take into account the size of the screen, the amount of light in the room and the amount of lumens you will need in order to reach a recommended minimum contrast ratio given your type of project.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *drjay71*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3600#post_24742917
> 
> 
> Not sure but I believe it is the 1.4



That is a 106" Black Diamond Zero Edge with 1.4 gain materials. The projector is an Epson 6030UB. The cookies are chocolate chip and oatmeal raison and they are AWSOME!!


The picture doesn't sell it but that is a pretty bright room. The floors at Starpower are pearl white and highly reflective with light coming in from the front entrance. You can see the three hanging lights in the image but behind the 3 lights, the back wall also has multi colored LED lights. We also have bright TV's left of the image yet still a very good glare free image on the BD.


----------



## BlakeSI




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3600#post_24741061
> 
> 
> Hi Blake,
> 
> 
> Two questions:
> 
> 
> 1) Was the 120" BD the .8 or the 1.4?
> 
> 
> 2) Pictures and/or video???
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Dave



The BD was 1.4 gain. I only use .8 in a 2:35 aspect ratio for dedicated theaters.

Both movies and still pictures were used.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BlakeSI*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3600#post_24765096
> 
> 
> The BD was 1.4 gain. I only use .8 in a 2:35 aspect ratio for dedicated theaters.
> 
> Both movies and still pictures were used.



Hi Blake,


I think you may have misunderstood. I was wondering if there are any pictures and/or videos of the projector/screen combo that you had mentioned.


Thanks,

Dave


----------



## ROfu


Hi Blake,

 

I appreciate your response.

Like i mentioned i also tested a sample in my living space with a 2300 lumens projector and a 92inch screen, Using the tool on your website and taking an average 25 foot candles of light (based on my personal room tests) According to the tool both for the projector and screen size - there should be more than enough Lumens coming from the projector (34:1 which is higher than your recommended 30:1) I agree when the room was very ambiently lit @ 50FC then I expected a drop in perceived contrast - but even at 30FC its still 28:1 rated.. this surely shouldn't have look washed out?

I wasn't expecting Black Magic, I was expecting better than what I saw. To reiterate though, there are very few products on the market that are comparable which is why i am still seriously considering buying one, I'm just not as in Awe as some people seem to have been previously in the thread.

 

Cheers

Tim


----------



## Mike Garrett

Now have pricing on the new 120" 16:9 and 150" 2.35 Black Diamond and Black Diamond Zero Edge.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ROfu*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3600#post_24766810
> 
> 
> Hi Blake,
> 
> 
> I appreciate your response.
> 
> Like i mentioned i also tested a sample in my living space with a 2300 lumens projector and a 92inch screen, Using the tool on your website and taking an average 25 foot candles of light (based on my personal room tests) According to the tool both for the projector and screen size - there should be more than enough Lumens coming from the projector (34:1 which is higher than your recommended 30:1) I agree when the room was very ambiently lit @ 50FC then I expected a drop in perceived contrast - but even at 30FC its still 28:1 rated.. this surely shouldn't have look washed out?
> 
> I wasn't expecting Black Magic, I was expecting better than what I saw. To reiterate though, there are very few products on the market that are comparable which is why i am still seriously considering buying one, I'm just not as in Awe as some people seem to have been previously in the thread.
> 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Tim



I did some testing with the 1.4 material and a 4500 lumen projector (with a brand new bulb), comparing with a 120" Da-Lite white screen. From the center seat, the BD 1.4 looked terrific! However, whether lights on or off, when sitting at one end of the screen, the other end looks dark. I can't even see text at the other end of the screen. I have to move towards the middle of the screen to see it. This is one of two things that I did not like about the BD. The other was that if a window is on one side of the room, then viewing from the end of the screen on the opposite side was not even viewable. That's what killed it for my wife, as she was sitting in that seat.


Dave


----------



## simple0621

Hello Experts,

I am in similar situation and looking for help.


I have a dedicated media room with dark carpet and dark walls. I can only go with a scree size of 92 inch as my room is relatively small. Would you recommend to use black diamond or would any screen be ok? I will be watching movies 50%, sports 20% and music 30%. Will there be a lot of difference between SI Slate or white screen VS black diamond?


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *simple0621*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3600#post_24768804
> 
> 
> Hello Experts,
> 
> I am in similar situation and looking for help.
> 
> 
> I have a dedicated media room with dark carpet and dark walls. I can only go with a scree size of 92 inch as my room is relatively small. Would you recommend to use black diamond or would any screen be ok? I will be watching movies 50%, sports 20% and music 30%. Will there be a lot of difference between SI Slate or white screen VS black diamond?



Sent you a PM.


----------



## DavidHir




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *simple0621*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3600#post_24768804
> 
> 
> Hello Experts,
> 
> I am in similar situation and looking for help.
> 
> 
> I have a dedicated media room with dark carpet and dark walls. I can only go with a scree size of 92 inch as my room is relatively small. Would you recommend to use black diamond or would any screen be ok? I will be watching movies 50%, sports 20% and music 30%. Will there be a lot of difference between SI Slate or white screen VS black diamond?



I would talk to Mike Garrett - he has a ton of experience and knowledge with this stuff.


----------



## Ftoast




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *simple0621*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3600#post_24768804
> 
> 
> Hello Experts,
> 
> I am in similar situation and looking for help.
> 
> 
> I have a dedicated media room with dark carpet and dark walls. I can only go with a scree size of 92 inch as my room is relatively small. Would you recommend to use black diamond or would any screen be ok? I will be watching movies 50%, sports 20% and music 30%. Will there be a lot of difference between SI Slate or white screen VS black diamond?


In a dark room with good light control, a low gain. 8-1.1 white screen will provide the best color and viewing angles. If you really want that specific zero edge look there are few options, but if a standard fixed-frame screen is acceptable there's little reason to spend a lot when the best option in a dark room is also one of the least expensive.


Likewise, if you have ambient light problems such as a window or lights coming from behind the projector or fairly near it, not even a specialty screen can help.


----------



## simple0621

Thanks for the reply, How about contrast, would that still be the same with a white Vs Grey or Black screen? I definitely love the zero edge look and want to go with a product like that., are there any alternatives than Screen innovations for small edge screens?


----------



## Ftoast




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *simple0621*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3600#post_24771048
> 
> 
> Thanks for the reply, How about contrast, would that still be the same with a white Vs Grey or Black screen? I definitely love the zero edge look and want to go with a product like that., are there any alternatives than Screen innovations for small edge screens?


In a dedicated room such as yours the contrast will be the same or better with a white screen.

The contrast boost from a specialty screen such as the BD only happens in rooms with light/ambient-light near sides/ceiling/floor that would otherwise wash out the image by hitting the screen and ruining your dark scenes. The BD (and others like it) use narrow viewing angles so that light from other sources reflect off toward the opposite side instead of toward the middle seat where the viewer likely is.

In your room, you don't have a bunch of extra light washing out your dark scenes, so the BD has nothing to assist..and its relatively narrow viewing angles can make those sitting to one side or the other have a bad movie experience. Even the center seat can notice a bit of darkening at the sides and especially the corners of some images.


The thin black bezel is probably not too hard to find, but the free-standing, dark-ish look it has when lights are on will likely not be found elsewhere. The thing is, your room sounds like it's more dedicated to having a great "lights off/down" movie experience, rather than a pre-movie "that's a cool looking room" followed by a compromised picture.

The DB ZE in white probably offers a good theater white screen AND that ultra-thin bezel you are looking for. However, do you think that thin bezel will look as nice surrounding a plain white screen as it does around their dark screens? I believe a white screen will look pretty bland with lights on no matter what the bezel looks like, BUT it WILL provide the best movie experience.


In short, I wouldn't compromise the picture when you've already done so much for your room, you won't see the bezel when lights are dimmed, and it won't look nearly as stylish on a white screen anyway..so I wouldn't worry about the bezel specifics.


----------



## simple0621




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Ftoast*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3600#post_24771396
> 
> 
> In a dedicated room such as yours the contrast will be the same or better with a white screen.
> 
> The contrast boost from a specialty screen such as the BD only happens in rooms with light/ambient-light near sides/ceiling/floor that would otherwise wash out the image by hitting the screen and ruining your dark scenes. The BD (and others like it) use narrow viewing angles so that light from other sources reflect off toward the opposite side instead of toward the middle seat where the viewer likely is.
> 
> In your room, you don't have a bunch of extra light washing out your dark scenes, so the BD has nothing to assist..and its relatively narrow viewing angles can make those sitting to one side or the other have a bad movie experience. Even the center seat can notice a bit of darkening at the sides and especially the corners of some images.
> 
> 
> The thin black bezel is probably not too hard to find, but the free-standing, dark-ish look it has when lights are on will likely not be found elsewhere. The thing is, your room sounds like it's more dedicated to having a great "lights off/down" movie experience, rather than a pre-movie "that's a cool looking room" followed by a compromised picture.
> 
> The DB ZE in white probably offers a good theater white screen AND that ultra-thin bezel you are looking for. However, do you think that thin bezel will look as nice surrounding a plain white screen as it does around their dark screens? I believe a white screen will look pretty bland with lights on no matter what the bezel looks like, BUT it WILL provide the best movie experience.
> 
> 
> In short, I wouldn't compromise the picture when you've already done so much for your room, you won't see the bezel when lights are dimmed, and it won't look nearly as stylish on a white screen anyway..so I wouldn't worry about the bezel specifics.



Thanks for the info. Will i be able to add the LED back lights on a regular bezel screen? I liked the floating effect and contrast help for black bars (when not playing in 16:9) which the LED lights provide on the zero edge screens.


----------



## Ftoast




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *simple0621*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3600#post_24771481
> 
> 
> Thanks for the info. Will i be able to add the LED back lights on a regular bezel screen? I liked the floating effect and contrast help for black bars (when not playing in 16:9) which the LED lights provide on the zero edge screens.


Oh definitely. Lots of folks have enjoyed backlights behind and/or around screens of all kinds. Once again, your dark colored room should make that backlight look really nice.


If the backlight/thin-bezel look is hard to find at a reasonable price, you might try finding a bezel-less white screen and either adding your own very thin felt bezel OR letting the backlights hide the tiny bit of overspray (something backlights do very well) and having an absolutely floating look to your screen with no visible bezel.


----------



## krkeegan

I just purchased a 120 inch BD 1.4 zero edge to go with my Epson 5030.


The walls in my projector room are not completely square. Due to an oddity in the design of my house the projector wall is about 2.5 degrees out of perpendicular from the long axis of my viewing room.


The throw distance of my projector is about 18 feet. If I want to place the projector directly in line with the screen, the PJ is about 9 inches out of line with the center of the viewing location in order to compensate for this angle.


My question is, given these limitations, am I better placing the projector exactly in the middle of the viewing location and using the image shift to correct for the 9 inch difference? Or am I better off placing the projector at dead center without any image shift? I guess I am wondering how accurate a retro-reflector the screen is?


I hope this makes sense. I realize that 2.5 degrees is not likely to have a big effect, but I have complete control over the placement right now, so I would like to get it right.


----------



## armbradbury


I've been researching projector screens for my BenQ1070, but feel totally overwhelmed by the choices. I presently have a Draper Luma matt white screen which is now too small because of the short throw of the BenQ

 

Here are my requirements:

12' wide screen (don't mind if 4:3 or 16:9)

Projector is just behind and 1-2' above our heads, and the projection angle is completely adjustable vertically

Has to be manual pull down

Screen hangs from ceiling on small chains so can be any height

Throw is 14'

The room has very light walls which cannot be changed

Usually used at night, so not too much external ambient light, although we do sometimes do daylight viewing

Budget


----------



## ROfu


You might want to start a different thread armbradbury - as I'm guessing only people who have or are interested in Black Diamond screens will respond in this thread (as thats what its about) I don't think there are any of the black diamond screens that come even close too $1000 at the size you want, also due to the nature of the black diamond and its relative screens they don't perform best on a short throw.


----------



## kronik

I really wish SI would come out with a projector screen akin to the dnp Supernova Flex Classic. The admittedly awesome wire suspension motorized model is fantastic but at the price point, I suspect quite a few customers looking for ambient light solutions would like the performance of the BD in a less expensive package.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *kronik*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3600#post_24787209
> 
> 
> I really wish SI would come out with a projector akin to the dnp Supernova Flex Classic. The admittedly awesome wire suspension motorized model is fantastic but at the price point, I suspect quite a few customers looking for ambient light solutions would like the performance of the BD in a less expensive package.



I absolutely agree!! I'm probably going to go with a TV for daytime use, and an ambient light screen w/projector for evening and night time use. That means I need a motorized screen. A DNP motorized 100" .85 screen is less than 1/2 the cost of the BD motorized screen. I don't care about the fancy wires - just give me a typical motorized screen for much less $$$. Without that option, I think SI is losing some of that business.


Dave


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3600#post_24790122
> 
> 
> I absolutely agree!! I'm probably going to go with a TV for daytime use, and an ambient light screen w/projector for evening and night time use. That means I need a motorized screen. A DNP motorized 100" .85 screen is less than 1/2 the cost of the BD motorized screen. I don't care about the fancy wires - just give me a typical motorized screen for much less $$$. Without that option, I think SI is losing some of that business.
> 
> 
> Dave



Part of the problem, to get a less expensive screen, you get rid of the tab tensioning system. That means that you can expect wrinkling and curling of the screen. So there are trade offs to get that lower price point.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3600#post_24791888
> 
> 
> Part of the problem, to get a less expensive screen, you get rid of the tab tensioning system. That means that you can expect wrinkling and curling of the screen. So there are trade offs to get that lower price point.



I don't think I mentioned that they need to get rid of a tab tensioning system. I was asking if they can do a standard screen drop, like most motorized screens, instead of the fancy wire system. That should certainly drop some cost... It doesn't have to be exactly the same as the DNP Flex Classic (no tab tensioning), BTW.


Dave


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thezaks*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3630#post_24800170
> 
> 
> I don't think I mentioned that they need to get rid of a tab tensioning system. I was asking if they can do a standard screen drop, like most motorized screens, instead of the fancy wire system. That should certainly drop some cost...
> 
> 
> Dave



When a screen fabric rolls up, if the surface it rolls over is not smooth, any irregularities will be transmitted into the screen fabric. I think that is the problem with what you are asking. No good way to transition from the BD material to another material smoothly and may not be able to make the BD material 60" taller. If they could easily make the BD material taller, then SI would not be limited to 115 (now 120") diagonal size.


----------



## thezaks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3630#post_24800190
> 
> 
> When a screen fabric rolls up, if the surface it rolls over is not smooth, any irregularities will be transmitted into the screen fabric. I think that is the problem with what you are asking. No good way to transition from the BD material to another material smoothly and may not be able to make the BD material 60" taller. If they could easily make the BD material taller, then SI would not be limited to 115 (now 120") diagonal size.



That's certainly unfortunate, and the price of the SI BD motorized is unfortunate as well...


Dave


----------



## simple0621

Does anyone know places in or around Houston where they would have a SI BD on display? I tried bestbuys for last 2 weeks but no one had an SI screen on their floor.


----------



## gdfein




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *simple0621*  /t/932169/black-diamond-from-screen-innovations/3630#post_24800648
> 
> 
> Does anyone know places in or around Houston where they would have a SI BD on display? I tried bestbuys for last 2 weeks but no one had an SI screen on their floor.



Home Entertainment Inc. On I45 near Rayford/Sawdust roads. Has a BD display.


----------



## simple0621

Experts, 
So i was finally able to find a local seller who can has BD 1.4 screen 106 inch for $1500. Given that 1.4 gain screen can send back more light will a 2000 lumen projector be able to produce a bright image? (like benq 1070 or epson 3020) or do i need to look for a projector with more light output? I barely watch 3D.


----------



## Mike Garrett

simple0621 said:


> Experts,
> So i was finally able to find a local seller who can has BD 1.4 screen 106 inch for $1500. Given that 1.4 gain screen can send back more light will a 2000 lumen projector be able to produce a bright image? (like benq 1070 or epson 3020) or do i need to look for a projector with more light output? I barely watch 3D.


Since that is well below cost, what is the catch? Is it an older version? A 106" 1.4 gain screen will be very bright with either of those projectors.


----------



## simple0621

AV Science Sales 5 said:


> simple0621 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Experts,
> So i was finally able to find a local seller who can has BD 1.4 screen 106 inch for $1500. Given that 1.4 gain screen can send back more light will a 2000 lumen projector be able to produce a bright image? (like benq 1070 or epson 3020) or do i need to look for a projector with more light output? I barely watch 3D.
> 
> 
> 
> Since that is well below cost, what is the catch? Is it an older version? A 106" 1.4 gain screen will be very bright with either of those projectors.
Click to expand...

It is a used screen, i think its about an year old one.


----------



## simple0621

simple0621 said:


> Experts,
> So i was finally able to find a local seller who can has BD 1.4 screen 106 inch for $1500. Given that 1.4 gain screen can send back more light will a 2000 lumen projector be able to produce a bright image? (like benq 1070 or epson 3020) or do i need to look for a projector with more light output? I barely watch 3D.


Dear Experts, 
Any suggestions on my question? I am trying to decide if i should go with a simple projector like Benq 1070 or should look for more light output ones like Epson 5030? Also would there be a lot of diff in the picture given the prices diff?


----------



## Ftoast

simple0621 said:


> Dear Experts,
> Any suggestions on my question? I am trying to decide if i should go with a simple projector like Benq 1070 or should look for more light output ones like Epson 5030? Also would there be a lot of diff in the picture given the prices diff?


Not really a question for the screen forum, but yes there will be a big contrast level difference between the $2100-$2500 Epson5030 and the projectors under $1000. Because you aren't specifically after 3D, if you can afford the 5030 and darken your room well, you should give the Sony hw40es a look. It's the same price range as the 5030, but has slightly better picture qualities, less visible pixels and runs quieter.

If you can't afford the hw40es or can't darken your room (which I'm guessing is the case because you're in the BlackDiamond thread) the w1070 will still give a very good picture for 1/3 the price.

Unless you need something special for a very specific situation, those two will be your best choices..unless you can really darken your room well and afford a JVC.


----------



## CSMartins

Hello guys, given the size of my room I'll be getting a BENQ W1080ST, I'll be doing something around 80/85''. It is my first projector, coming from a 50'' plasma and I do like to do some tv watching with the lights on at some points so I'm kinda unsure on what screen to get. Do you think it is worth to get one of these screens? Given how cheap the projector itself is. It doesn't have great blacks, although given the price range I keep hearing they are fairly acceptable, I'm just not sure on whether such expensive screen is worth it considering the projector. I'll be viewing from around 7 and a half ft. Don't recommend buying a TV please, as those come at 5k+ € for 75'' where I live  That is the reason why I'd rather get a projector.

Thanks!


----------



## Ftoast

You will not have good results pairing any short-throw projector with a reflective screen that is specifically designed for light-room use. The screen works by redirecting room light that hits the screen off toward the opposite side instead of toward the seated viewer, while reflecting most of the centered projector image back toward the center (where the seated viewer is) which both darkens some angles of ambient light while increasing the mostly straight angle of projector light.

The problem is that short-throw projectors have to use wider angles of light (hitting a bigger area from a shorter distance) so the top/bottom and sides of the image will be noticeably dimmer than the very middle. This affect already happens to longer throw projectors paired with this screen, but it will become VERY exaggerated by using a short-throw PJ.

You should either consider a less reflective screen for the w1080, or a longer throw projector (if possible) with the reflective screen.

Also remember that the blackdiamond can't help against light that is coming from anywhere near the seating area or above it..so if that is a significant source of light, you'll be better off using a less reflective screen and trying to block or turn down some of that light, or repositioning everything until it isn't a significant source.

In your specific case with the w1080 and a 80-85" screen which will provide about 60-65footlambert, you'll be bright enough to simply use a plain screen or white wall and have good results for daytime television/gaming.


----------



## DenisG

Ftoast said:


> You will not have good results pairing any short-throw projector with a reflective screen that is specifically designed for light-room use. The screen works by redirecting room light that hits the screen off toward the opposite side instead of toward the seated viewer, while reflecting most of the centered projector image back toward the center (where the seated viewer is) which both darkens some angles of ambient light while increasing the mostly straight angle of projector light.
> 
> The problem is that short-throw projectors have to use wider angles of light (hitting a bigger area from a shorter distance) so the top/bottom and sides of the image will be noticeably dimmer than the very middle. This affect already happens to longer throw projectors paired with this screen, but it will become VERY exaggerated by using a short-throw PJ.
> 
> You should either consider a less reflective screen for the w1080, or a longer throw projector (if possible) with the reflective screen.
> 
> Also remember that the blackdiamond can't help against light that is coming from anywhere near the seating area or above it..so if that is a significant source of light, you'll be better off using a less reflective screen and trying to block or turn down some of that light, or repositioning everything until it isn't a significant source.
> 
> In your specific case with the w1080 and a 80-85" screen which will provide about 60-65footlambert, you'll be bright enough to simply use a plain screen or white wall and have good results for daytime television/gaming.


http://vimeo.com/67762493 They think otherwise.
My short throw works great on mine.


----------



## Ftoast

DenisG said:


> http://vimeo.com/67762493 They think otherwise.
> My short throw works great on mine.


You do realize that link is talking about the w1070 which is a standard throw projector and NOT the w1080 which is the short-throw version. Is yours the w1070 or w1080? Also, watch that video and look at how dim the corners are (especially near the end of the video) and remember that's with a standard throw PJ. With a short-throw it's very possible that the entire image will be that dark because it will all be reflected downwards so it hits the floor about 5-6ft from the screen.

It is most likely, because most/all current short-throws sit above or below the screen, that anyone using a ST with this screen (in grey or black) is wasting most of the projector's light on the ceiling or the floor.

If your short-throw is ceiling mounted, you should try looking at your screen from a very low angle (about 2feet up from the floor or less) from directly under the projector. This should give you an idea of how bright the screen COULD be from your center seat if you were using a longer throw projector that was properly setup for that reflective screen.

I can't tell you what to like or not to, but I can tell you that if you like how a shortthrow looks on a reflective screen you'll REALLY like how that screen looks paired with a projector with a longer throw. Especially if everything is aimed properly so the center gives its full brightness.


----------



## DenisG

Ftoast said:


> You do realize that link is talking about the w1070 which is a standard throw projector and NOT the w1080 which is the short-throw version. Is yours the w1070 or w1080?
> 
> It is most likely, because most/all current short-throws sit above or below the screen, that anyone using a ST with this screen (in grey or black) is wasting most of the projector's light on the ceiling or the floor.
> 
> If your short-throw is ceiling mounted, you should try looking at your screen from a very low angle (about 2feet up from the floor or less) from directly under the projector. This should give you an idea of how bright the screen COULD be from your center seat if you were using a longer throw projector that was properly setup for that screen.


I should have looked it up. I didn't realize it was that short of a throw distance. I have a bad habit of thinking 12-13 feet as short throw which is where I'm at.


----------



## Ftoast

DenisG said:


> I should have looked it up. I didn't realize it was that short of a throw distance. I have a bad habit of thinking 12-13 feet as short throw which is where I'm at.


It's an easy thing to get mixed up when the model names are so similar too. The BD definitely looks more evenly lit the longer the throw-distance is, and like you found, the w1080 is really short.

I really wish there were more screen salesmen that provided honest information about their products' limitations. I'm not meaning to point fingers here, but I've certainly met my share of careless sharks in stores that are more than willing to sell you the more expensive product even if it's clearly the wrong one for your application.


----------



## Xer0dIn

Ftoast said:


> It's an easy thing to get mixed up when the model names are so similar too. The BD definitely looks more evenly lit the longer the throw-distance is, and like you found, the w1080 is really short.
> 
> I really wish there were more screen salesmen that provided honest information about their products' limitations. I'm not meaning to point fingers here, but I've certainly met my share of careless sharks in stores that are more than willing to sell you the more expensive product even if it's clearly the wrong one for your application.


Are the JVC's (RS49 and up) and Sony 600ES considered short throw or standard throw? Looking at purchasing screen and projector down the road. What do you think of one of those projectors with a 144" 2.35:1 1.4 gain BD at about 15.5 feet away?


----------



## DenisG

Ftoast said:


> It's an easy thing to get mixed up when the model names are so similar too. The BD definitely looks more evenly lit the longer the throw-distance is, and like you found, the w1080 is really short.
> 
> I really wish there were more screen salesmen that provided honest information about their products' limitations. I'm not meaning to point fingers here, but I've certainly met my share of careless sharks in stores that are more than willing to sell you the more expensive product even if it's clearly the wrong one for your application.


Think the curved would work better. 

"SI’s 35′ Zero Edge Curve gives you the most immersive experience available. Curved screens do have some distinct advantages, especially in installations where the throw is very short (1.6 or less) and pincushion distortion becomes an issue. "


----------



## Xer0dIn

DenisG said:


> Think the curved would work better.
> 
> "SI’s 35′ Zero Edge Curve gives you the most immersive experience available. Curved screens do have some distinct advantages, especially in installations where the throw is very short (1.6 or less) and pincushion distortion becomes an issue. "


I talked with SI and a sales rep told me that unless you get below that 15 foot mark and/or have an anamorphic lens they didn't recommend the curved screen.


----------



## Xer0dIn

I should also add that was with the JVC RS49 and 144" 2.35:1 screen that it wasn't recommended to get a curved screen unless you get below the 15' mark. Which you can't get that close of a throw to fill the screen anyways.


----------



## Ftoast

Xer0dIn said:


> Are the JVC's (RS49 and up) and Sony 600ES considered short throw or standard throw? Looking at purchasing screen and projector down the road. What do you think of one of those projectors with a 144" 2.35:1 1.4 gain BD at about 15.5 feet away?


I haven't seen any JVC or Sony hometheater models that are short-throw. 

As a general guideline many projectors can throw roughly 10" diagonal for every foot of distance..so 100" at 10ft. There are still plenty of models that require a slightly farther placement though. Most higher-end models can create that same size screen at 1.6-2X that distance with their ample zoom ranges.

Short-throw is often about half that distance, so you'll get a 100" image around 5-6feet away. There are also ultra ST that will halve that distance once again!


----------



## Ftoast

The grey screens (or darker) are mostly used to darken blacks slightly for projectors with poor black levels and to deflect ambient light from near-screen sources to assist in poor rooms. In a decently darkened room using a projector with respectable black levels the grey screens don't have anything to really improve, so they mostly just bring negative aspects such as color problems, sparkle artifacts, narrower viewing angles, more noticeable grain/texture, or higher than average price. They all suffer at least some small degree of most of these problems..even if it is very little. While a smooth white screen will suffer none, and work just as well or better in a decent room with a solid projector.

Both the JVC and the Sony are great projectors that deserve a fairly darkened room to appreciate.

The other problem is that the darker/reflective screens can only fight light from closer/sharp angles, so overhead cans or lamps near the seating (where it makes the most sense to help you see) will still hurt the grey screen's contrast and black level just as badly as they would a white screen.


----------



## Mike Garrett

Xer0dIn said:


> Are the JVC's (RS49 and up) and Sony 600ES considered short throw or standard throw? Looking at purchasing screen and projector down the road. What do you think of one of those projectors with a 144" 2.35:1 1.4 gain BD at about 15.5 feet away?


The JVC and Sony have a lot of range with the throw. They can be short throw and approach a fairly long throw also. In other words they have plenty of throw range to work well with an SI Black Diamond screen. We are dealers for Sony, JVC and SI. Let us know if we can help you.


----------



## Mike Garrett

Xer0dIn said:


> I should also add that was with the JVC RS49 and 144" 2.35:1 screen that it wasn't recommended to get a curved screen unless you get below the 15' mark. Which you can't get that close of a throw to fill the screen anyways.


 Curved screen are best used with an anamorphic lens, especially with shorter throws. The curve helps with reducing or getting rid of the pincushion. As for how short a throw using a JVC shooting onto a 144" 2.35 SI screen. Using zoom method, the minimum throw is 15'-2", but if you are using an A-lens, the minimum throw distance would be 11'-4". At that short a throw distance you are going to have hot spotting problems and would be a bad setup.


----------



## Mike Garrett

Xer0dIn said:


> I should also add that was with the JVC RS49 and 144" 2.35:1 screen that it wasn't recommended to get a curved screen unless you get below the 15' mark. Which you can't get that close of a throw to fill the screen anyways.


With an A-lens, you can easily get closer than that. Not saying that short throw is a good idea, just that you can do it.


----------



## CSMartins

Thanks for your input Ftoast, highly valued to me! I can also get the W1070, which would give me a max of 90'' for my room from 7.6 feet. Does it sound better? I'm thinking of getting a plain white screen just to test out the picture quality on the projector itself, since those screens are rather cheap, before considering the black diamond. Also my sitting distance would be more or less the same, 7 and a half feet, would I see any artifacts sitting that close to a 80~90'' screen from screen innovations? Thank you so much for your input!


----------



## Ftoast

CSMartins said:


> Thanks for your input Ftoast, highly valued to me! I can also get the W1070, which would give me a max of 90'' for my room from 7.6 feet. Does it sound better? I'm thinking of getting a plain white screen just to test out the picture quality on the projector itself, since those screens are rather cheap, before considering the black diamond. Also my sitting distance would be more or less the same, 7 and a half feet, would I see any artifacts sitting that close to a 80~90'' screen from screen innovations? Thank you so much for your input!


I think you'll find the 1070 on a 90" or smaller screen to be bright enough to look decent in most situations and a simple set of curtains will handle the rest. The more light (especially bright sunlight) you keep off the screen will make a huge difference while still allowing you to have a comfortable amount of light in the room for walking around, snacking, or talking with company. 

The 1070 will make a useable picture on the BD screen but a longer throw (not possible with the 1070) can perform even better..the Benq might still do well enough for you not to be bothered by it though.

In my opinion the BD screens seem to have more problems with color shifting and sparkles than other grey screens I've seen, but some people don't seem to mind them at all, so it largely depends on you. I will post a couple pictures to show some rough examples. Much of the BD promo material itself shows dimming in the corners.

Is your room easy enough to darken if you need/want to? It'll help (even using the BD) for really dark movies if you can close curtains and turn off lights near the screen. You might even consider something as silly as a couple table-lamps with a bit of cooking foil used inside part of the shade to direct more light toward your seating and away from your screen.


----------



## Ftoast

Here are a couple screenshots from a BD promo video. Noting that the both are from the same scene, see how the image changes depending on the viewing angle? When viewed straight-on the top corners are much darker than the rest of the image, but when viewed slightly from the left the top/left corner brightens as the top/right darkens further. Look how dingy and dirty the mountain on the right side looks in the angled shot compared to the straight one. This problem with viewing angles on the BD screen material will happen no matter what your room's lighting situation is.


















Here is a rough example of what can be expected with a plain white screen/wall in a somewhat dimly lit room. This is using a screen-size larger than yours (105"-110") and a much dimmer 400lumen projector.
The darker parts of the image are still fairly discernible, the only artifacts present are from a small bit of sunlight directly hitting the right side of the screen, and it costs about $2000 less, as will a fixed-frame smooth white screen.



























With the 1070 and a 90" screen, you can expect to be about 4X brighter than this.


----------



## cchrono

Anybody have any ideas on how to remove light surface scratches/marks? Not sure how they got there but I can see them from certain angles.


----------



## Mike Garrett

CSMartins said:


> Thanks for your input Ftoast, highly valued to me! I can also get the W1070, which would give me a max of 90'' for my room from 7.6 feet. Does it sound better? I'm thinking of getting a plain white screen just to test out the picture quality on the projector itself, since those screens are rather cheap, before considering the black diamond. Also my sitting distance would be more or less the same, 7 and a half feet, would I see any artifacts sitting that close to a 80~90'' screen from screen innovations? Thank you so much for your input!



You will get hot spotting, shooting onto a 90" diag. 16:9 BD screen from 7'-6" of throw. Minimum throw distance for that size screen is 9'-9"


----------



## Mike Garrett

Ftoast said:


> *Here are a couple screenshots from a BD promo video. Noting that the both are from the same scene, see how the image changes depending on the viewing angle? When viewed straight-on the top corners are much darker than the rest of the image, but when viewed slightly from the left the top/left corner brightens as the top/right darkens further. Look how dingy and dirty the mountain on the right side looks in the angled shot compared to the straight one. This problem with viewing angles on the BD screen material will happen no matter what your room's lighting situation is.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a rough example of what can be expected with a plain white screen/wall in a somewhat dimly lit room. This is using a screen-size larger than yours (105"-110") and a much dimmer 400lumen projector.
> The darker parts of the image are still fairly discernible, the only artifacts present are from a small bit of sunlight directly hitting the right side of the screen, and it costs about $2000 less, as will a fixed-frame smooth white screen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With the 1070 and a 90" screen, you can expect to be about 4X brighter than this.


You can't judge that from screen shots. The light hitting the camera from the second location is different from the light hitting the camera in the first location. That alone will change the image being shot.


----------



## Ftoast

AV Science Sales 5 said:


> You can't judge that from screen shots. The light hitting the camera from the second location is different from the light hitting the camera in the first location. That alone will change the image being shot.


That would be true if I was comparing the second set to the first, but I am not. 

The first is comparing the two shots of the BD to show how viewing angle changes (even very small ones) affect its corner and edge dimming characteristics. Help those that haven't seen one in person get an idea of how spotlight-y they tend to look. The lighting situation is inconsequential, I just needed a shot of the same scene from two different angles (though using the sun as a backlight in a dark surrounding room is easy for any screen as it isn't fighting any light against the surface).

The second set is just a rough example of a simple white screen in a totally non-light-controlled room, for which the previous poster can expect various improvements due to their combination of more lumens, smaller screen, and advanced curtain technology. ..or simple curtain technology. ..any, really.

If upon a second look you still think having both sets in the same post is a bit misleading or might confuse people, let me know and I'll split it up as two separate posts.


----------



## thezaks

I have to agree with Ftoast, after seeing a few BD's in person. In fact, it's easily seen with samples as well. If I am sitting in a seat that aligns with the left side of the screen (at viewing distance), the right side of the screen will be darkened. As I move to the center, the right side is lightened and becomes clearer. 

Dave


----------



## Mike Garrett

Ftoast said:


> That would be true if I was comparing the second set to the first, but I am not.
> 
> The first is comparing the two shots of the BD to show how viewing angle changes (even very small ones) affect its corner and edge dimming characteristics. Help those that haven't seen one in person get an idea of how spotlight-y they tend to look. The lighting situation is inconsequential, I just needed a shot of the same scene from two different angles (though using the sun as a backlight in a dark surrounding room is easy for any screen as it isn't fighting any light against the surface).
> 
> The second set is just a rough example of a simple white screen in a totally non-light-controlled room, for which the previous poster can expect various improvements due to their combination of more lumens, smaller screen, and advanced curtain technology. ..or simple curtain technology. ..any, really.
> 
> If upon a second look you still think having both sets in the same post is a bit misleading or might confuse people, let me know and I'll split it up as two separate posts.


I am not talking about the first set of pictures vs the second set of pictures. I am talking about the first picture vs the second picture. One is taken from a different location. The second picture has a lot more light hitting the camera lens, so adjustment to the camera is different. Look out the window in both of those two pics. In the second one, everything outside is washed out. The exposure is different in those two pics. Only time you can use pics to demonstrate anything, is if everything is identical. Clearly in this case, they are not. 

I am not saying that the image does not look different as you view it off angle. That happens with any screen with gain. Just that you can't go by these pics and say that it clearly shows this.


----------



## Mike Garrett

thezaks said:


> I have to agree with Ftoast, after seeing a few BD's in person. In fact, it's easily seen with samples as well. If I am sitting in a seat that aligns with the left side of the screen (at viewing distance), the right side of the screen will be darkened. As I move to the center, the right side is lightened and becomes clearer.
> 
> Dave


I agree. That happens with any screen with gain. My disagreement is the pictures will be different due to the light difference hitting the lens of the camera. Now if the room was a light controlled room and the picture was taken from the side, then it would be less of an issue. Just look outside in the second pic. Everything is washed out.


----------



## thezaks

AV Science Sales 5 said:


> I agree. That happens with any screen with gain. My disagreement is the pictures will be different due to the light difference hitting the lens of the camera. Now if the room was a light controlled room and the picture was taken from the side, then it would be less of an issue. Just look outside in the second pic. Everything is washed out.


Actually, the 2.3 gain screen from DNP is nearly devoid of that issue. It's amazing how good the .8 and the 2.3 DNP screens are in this regard.

Dave


----------



## Mike Garrett

thezaks said:


> Actually, the 2.3 gain screen from DNP is nearly devoid of that issue. It's amazing how good the .8 and the 2.3 DNP screens are in this regard.
> 
> Dave


The 0.8 is not a screen with gain. It is below 1. The 2.3 does a good job, but like any screen with gain, off axis effects it also.


----------



## Ftoast

AV Science Sales 5 said:


> I agree. That happens with any screen with gain. My disagreement is the pictures will be different due to the light difference hitting the lens of the camera. Now if the room was a light controlled room and the picture was taken from the side, then it would be less of an issue. Just look outside in the second pic. Everything is washed out.


This light-controlled shot shows the same behavior where even a very slight shift to one side makes the opposite side noticeably dimmer while shifting the hotspot towards the viewer. I understand this is a somewhat common quality of HIGH gain screens, but the point is that not only do different gain variations behave better/worse but so do different brands and builds. The BD is one of the worse performers in this area.
I believe the user that posted this picture earlier stated the projector was outputting around 800lumens, not exactly a light cannon.
The BlackDiamond material is especially prone to viewing angle problems. It is the nature of a high-gain screen, especially using a dark base and it is required for it to fight room lights from the near left/right. It is a viable choice for those with a situation (with too much non-switchable non-dimming light from the near sides), but a VERY poor thing to suggest to anyone that can control ambient light from the near sides.

There are screen materials made to primarily fight light from above (where most fixtures are located) that do not suffer side viewing angle problems nearly this bad.

There are slightly lesser gain and/or lighter-base screens (by SI too, obviously) that offer a less compromised image.

I firmly and wholly believe that anyone suggesting the BD material be used in a light-controlled room is performing a massive disservice to any reader either new or naive enough to listen.









I wish I had different angles for this same shot. Nevertheless, it looks like there's a giant spotlight on the field, the far side is dingy compared to the closer and the corners are fading to black.

I'm sorry to get so worked up over such a simple thing as a screen, but these are NOT inexpensive and there are some unknowing folks with decent rooms getting taken for a lot of money.
The BD is possibly one of the most niche tuned screens out there and instead of being used and sold to its purpose, it's being marketed like some magical "everyman" device which it simply and very much is not.


----------



## thezaks

I might be wrong, but I thought the above image was with the .8 BD screen and the Sony VW600ES projector.

Dave


----------



## gdfein

thezaks - You are correct. Ftoast is using a picture I posted.

All; please keep in mind the photo is taken with my iphone. It is 0.8 BD ZE. 

See thread -> http://www.avsforum.com/forum/15-ge...rooms/1514667-gdfein-s-media-room-thread.html


----------



## Ftoast

Ah, in that case it I should probably correct an earlier misconception, there IS such a thing as a below 1 screen WITH high gain and the BD at .8 is a good example that it exists.

Think of it in terms of two equally dark surfaces where one is flat black and the other is a higher-gloss black. The gloss black will have a much brighter on-axis picture because of its increased gain (even though it is still darker than a neutral white screen when both are on-axis), and it will have terrible hotspotting problems.

If a screen has no added gain properties, a very light grey (off-white) will have a .8 gain surface. Because most "grey" screens are dark enough to visually recognize as grey, yet it is very uncommon to see a screen below .8 it can be concluded that a majority of grey screens (including those of .8) DO have gain and will exhibit a certain amount of high-gain properties.

It is important to realize that gain in relation to a lambertian (flat) surface has more of a logarithmic falloff as the surface becomes darker. A perfect white reflects 100% of light hitting it (real world white will reach the low 90%'s), a middle grey that appears halfway between black and white only reflects around 18% of light hitting it (that's .18 gain) which means it requires an enormous gain boost of 400% to get near a reading of .8 gain! Some of these darker screens are starting with a base that's even lower. Think of it in terms of a bright white screen that has a gain around 4 or 5 and you'll start to have an idea of what you're dealing with.

By the way gdfein, I may not think the BD makes sense in a dark room but that backlighting still looks pretty nice.


----------



## thezaks

I agree - grey screens with less than 1 gain probably still have to add gain to get to .8. Makes you wonder how the DNP folks do it with their .8 screen - it's off axis is absolutely amazing, with nearly zero hotspotting. Their 2.3 screen is nearly as good too. Both are much better than the BD in this regard. I wish that DNP had a screen between the .8 and the 2.3 - it would be the sweet spot.

Dave


----------



## Ftoast

thezaks said:


> I agree - grey screens with less than 1 gain probably still have to add gain to get to .8. Makes you wonder how the DNP folks do it with their .8 screen - it's off axis is absolutely amazing, with nearly zero hotspotting. Their 2.3 screen is nearly as good too. Both are much better than the BD in this regard. I wish that DNP had a screen between the .8 and the 2.3 - it would be the sweet spot.
> Dave


I'm not sure which method DNP uses, but it is possible with reflective particle alignment, filter/lensing, and careful texturing (any single one or a combination) to attain most/all of a screen's gain from the vertical axis rather than limiting viewing angles of both horizontal and vertical. I have an antique rollup that uses a dead simple combination of silver reflective particles and a vertical wave (tight and shallow enough to rarely cause artifacts) so it spreads its horizontal viewing area while keeping a high gain (and dark surface) from its limited vertical angles which only affects viewing when you stand out of a chair or sit on the floor (neither recommended for prolonged viewing..so it's a smart trade-off). 

With a wider side-viewing angle you lose much of the ability to fight lights from near sides, but it's fairly uncommon to have a near-side lighting problem in any indoor location that isn't an office building. Most theater rooms will have lamps or cans near the seating and pointed specifically away from the screen in the first place. You DO retain the added brightness from a high gain screen as well as the ability to fight near, overhead lighting.


----------



## elmalloc

I ceiling hung my pure white zero edge yesterday, 110" 16x9. 

It's in a room where no ambient light hits it directly. I am happy with its performance, no hot spotting, sharp/clear image with my cheapo Epson 8530 LCD. Gaming setup.


----------



## thezaks

Looks great! What color are your walls/ceiling in that room? How does it look with any room lighting?

Thanks,
Dave


----------



## elmalloc

Hi Dave,

I'll take pictures when I get home.

It's not my main theater room setup, basically a dedicated gaming setup. 



Walls have floor to ceiling drapes (the front 3ft is beige, the rest is burgundy/dark red). Ceiling is white!
I'll take a picture withlighting on, but the Black Diamond is meant for setups like that
The back wall has no drapes, it's white. I will consider putting drapes there, but I'll have to get creative with the design so the projector doesn't overheat
The front wall has the screen hanging just off the corner lip, I don't think I have enough room to hang drapes behind the screen. It might make the room basically almost fully enclosed from ambient light (from the foyer). Thoughts on how to do that?

Thanks,
ELmO


----------



## ConradC

I just finished updating our media room. Here it is during the day with all the lights on.











Another view


----------



## Mike Garrett

ConradC said:


> I just finished updating our media room. Here it is during the day with all the lights on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another view


Conrad, it looks very nice. Looks like you have a 115" flat panel on the wall.


----------



## ConradC

AV Science Sales 5 said:


> Conrad, it looks very nice. Looks like you have a 115" flat panel on the wall.


Thanks Mike and thanks for the great deal! This little project of mine catapulted in to updating our first floor decor just to match our updated media room.


----------



## thezaks

What screen/projector do you have? Is the lamp in high or low lamp mode?

Thanks,
Dave


----------



## eydsamoht

That's the best I've ever seen a BD display look. What is your lens to screen throw distance? Looks like an Epson 5030UB that you're using?


----------



## ConradC

thezaks said:


> What screen/projector do you have? Is the lamp in high or low lamp mode?
> 
> Thanks,
> Dave


I've have the Black Diamond 1.4 gain and Epson 5030UB. In the photo, I believe I have the lamp on Normal (there's an Eco mode) and the Color Mode is on Living Room.



eydsamoht said:


> That's the best I've ever seen a BD display look. What is your lens to screen throw distance? Looks like an Epson 5030UB that you're using?


Thanks. The screen works well in my environment. Love it! The projector is 16.5' from the screen. Original plan was for 15' but I encountered some strange ceiling studs patterns.


----------



## thezaks

ConradC said:


> ...Epson 5030UB...I have the lamp on Normal (there's an Eco mode) and the Color Mode is on Living Room.


How's the fan noise on the projector in that mode?

Dave


----------



## eydsamoht

thezaks said:


> How's the fan noise on the projector in that mode?
> 
> Dave


Not silent. It's white noise fortunately, and not buzzy like some computer CPU fans. When I run in "normal" mode the fan is obvious. For a multipurpose living room, it's acceptable but you're reminded in any quiet scene that the projector is on. For a dedicated theater, I would strongly consider a hush box for the 5030UB. When I run in "eco" mode, the noise is pretty forgettable and I don't have any complaints.


----------



## drjay71

Here a few pics of my new screen. It's a 120" 16:9 BD Zero Edge with the LED kit. I have it paired with a Sony VPL-HW55ES projector. The pics are terrible and the picture quality even with drapes wide open and tons of sunlight is nothing short of stunning.


----------



## Law Jolla

I have searched all over to no avail... Does anyone have an aftermarket LED suggestion? I'm a sucker... But not a $500 SI light kit sucker. 

Thank you!


----------



## thezaks

Law Jolla said:


> I have searched all over to no avail... Does anyone have an aftermarket LED suggestion? I'm a sucker... But not a $500 SI light kit sucker.
> 
> Thank you!


You should PM the user named MississippiMan. I've seen him mention some suggestions for the light kits.

Dave


----------



## Law Jolla

thezaks said:


> You should PM the user named MississippiMan. I've seen him mention some suggestions for the light kits.
> 
> Dave


Thanks Dave. I ended up ordering a $30 kit from Newegg... It even comes with the same Lumina remote as the SI kits. 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...&cm_re=Led_strip_light-_-03-193-013-_-Product

I'll report back. For $30, it was more than worth the chance. Hopefully the LEDs have some uniformity.


----------



## ConradC

I can't seem to program my remote for the LED. I'm not exactly sure how to read the HEX codes that come with documentation. Does anyone have the full HEX codes (properly formatted and ready to go)?  Thanks so much in advance!!

BTW, this is what I've tried.


For example to power on the LED it states to use:
20 13 40 BF

So I assume it would be:
900A 006D 0000 0001 2013 40BF

Or something EventGhost can use:
0000 006C 0022 0002 015B 00AD 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0041 0016 0016 0016 0041 0016 0699 015B 0057 0016 0EA3​

Am I doing this correctly or am I completely off?


----------



## gonzalc3

How does the pure white 1.3 screen compares to the stewart studiotek130?

Thanks,

Chris


----------



## Mike Garrett

gonzalc3 said:


> How does the pure white 1.3 screen compares to the stewart studiotek130?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Chris


Stewart is a little bit smoother. Not talking a huge difference here.


----------



## ewshook

Hi all,


I am new to the forum but certainly would appreciate help with your input as I build my home theater. I have decided on an Epson 5030 projector and considering a slate Screen Innovation screen, 110". Although it will primarily be a movie theater room with light control, I would also like to use for watching football games with some lights on as well. Does anyone have experience with this screen or other suggestions? Also, if you have your choice of AT (not this screen) or not, what would you choose?


----------



## deewan

ewshook said:


> Hi all,
> 
> 
> I am new to the forum but certainly would appreciate help with your input as I build my home theater. I have decided on an Epson 5030 projector and considering a slate Screen Innovation screen, 110". Although it will primarily be a movie theater room with light control, I would also like to use for watching football games with some lights on as well. Does anyone have experience with this screen or other suggestions? Also, if you have your choice of AT (not this screen) or not, what would you choose?


I have the SI Pure Gray in a light controlled room. I can't recommend it enough. It is insanely good! IMO with a light controlled room you don't need to worry about the slate or black diamond features.


----------



## Mike Garrett

ewshook said:


> Hi all,
> 
> 
> I am new to the forum but certainly would appreciate help with your input as I build my home theater. I have decided on an Epson 5030 projector and considering a slate Screen Innovation screen, 110". Although it will primarily be a movie theater room with light control, I would also like to use for watching football games with some lights on as well. Does anyone have experience with this screen or other suggestions? Also, if you have your choice of AT (not this screen) or not, what would you choose?


In a light controlled room, I generally would go with a white screen. Gray will help with black levels, but would need to size screen and projector to work with the room. Give us a call and we can discuss what would work well for you and provide pricing.


----------



## Law Jolla

I received a few PMs for the DIY LEDs. Here's what I did.

I bought the HitLights IP-65 kit from Newegg:
*link blocked*

and the 5M extension:
*link blocked*

The kit includes the AC transformer, IR receiver, and remote.

It's important to buy the outdoor, IP-65s because their backing is stronger and they're a bit wider, so the press fit into the zero edge's channel. I learned the hard way by starting with the indoor. 

I started the strip under the SI logo at the bottom of the screen. The transformer will hide in the rails behind the screen. I mounted the IR receiver just above the SI logo. The receiver is not visible, and it likely works for me because my walls are white. Black walls may need to hang it a bit lower.

Simply press fit the strip all the way around. Total cost: About $60.

(The pictures show my strip started on the left side of the screen.. this is when I transitioned from the indoor to outdoor strips. Half were indoor, half outdoor. The pictures show the outdoor strips only. The LEDs are also on their dimmest setting)

** I don't have enough posts, so I cannot post links. Awesome.**


----------



## Mike Garrett

deewan said:


> I have the SI Pure Gray in a light controlled room. I can't recommend it enough. It is insanely good! IMO with a light controlled room you don't need to worry about the slate or black diamond features.


Nice job on the speakers.


----------



## deewan

AV Science Sales 5 said:


> Nice job on the speakers.


Thanks..They turned out exactly as I wanted them too. But now I have another idea for a cabinet design so I have the speakers up for sale. This hobby never ends.


----------



## Mike Garrett

The Black Diamond fixed and Zero Edge screens are now available in sizes up to 150".  Call us for details and pricing.


----------



## ConradC

AV Science Sales 5 said:


> The Black Diamond fixed and Zero Edge screens are now available in sizes up to 150".  Call us for details and pricing.


Trade-ins? :laugh:


----------



## Mike Garrett

ConradC said:


> Trade-ins? :laugh:


Just a reminder. SI's price increase goes into effect, end of the month.


----------



## hendry98

AV Science Sales 5 said:


> The Black Diamond fixed and Zero Edge screens are now available in sizes up to 150".  Call us for details and pricing.


is the black diamond zero edge available in 135 inch ? their website is only showing up to 120" for 16:9.

why they have not updated their website


----------



## major_theater

These look gorgeous. Definitely a contender for my new screen.


----------



## BlakeV

hendry98 said:


> is the black diamond zero edge available in 135 inch ? their website is only showing up to 120" for 16:9.
> 
> why they have not updated their website



Up to 120" in 16:9 and 150" in 2:35 aspect ratio.


----------



## Mike Garrett

hendry98 said:


> is the black diamond zero edge available in 135 inch ? their website is only showing up to 120" for 16:9.
> 
> why they have not updated their website


In 16:9 120" diagonal is the largest. They can go to 150" diagonal 2.35.

Added
This is what happens when you get busy and finish your reply several hours later.  Blake's reply was not there when I started this post this morning.


----------



## hendry98

BlakeV said:


> Up to 120" in 16:9 and 150" in 2:35 aspect ratio.


Thanks for the reply.

Knowing the size of my room which is quite deep (26 ft.). and the seating distance stars from 16 ft., i think 120" Bd would be kinda small!

My new dedicated HT (with controlled lighting and no windows), its walls and carpet will not be that dark (but absolutely not white, maybe cream or light grey) as i hate dark colors, and i know BD can work pretty well in such environment because i have seen it in my friend's house.

In addition, i intend to watch live NFL with friends with some light on.

So, since i cannot get BD above 120", will Slate 135" do the job in such environment? and how to add the cool effect of LED to the Slate 135" screen?


----------



## BlakeV

Law Jolla said:


> I received a few PMs for the DIY LEDs. Here's what I did.
> 
> I bought the HitLights IP-65 kit from Newegg:
> *link blocked*
> 
> and the 5M extension:
> *link blocked*
> 
> The kit includes the AC transformer, IR receiver, and remote.
> 
> It's important to buy the outdoor, IP-65s because their backing is stronger and they're a bit wider, so the press fit into the zero edge's channel. I learned the hard way by starting with the indoor.
> 
> I started the strip under the SI logo at the bottom of the screen. The transformer will hide in the rails behind the screen. I mounted the IR receiver just above the SI logo. The receiver is not visible, and it likely works for me because my walls are white. Black walls may need to hang it a bit lower.
> 
> Simply press fit the strip all the way around. Total cost: About $60.
> 
> (The pictures show my strip started on the left side of the screen.. this is when I transitioned from the indoor to outdoor strips. Half were indoor, half outdoor. The pictures show the outdoor strips only. The LEDs are also on their dimmest setting)
> 
> ** I don't have enough posts, so I cannot post links. Awesome.**


This has nothing to do with the lighting kit. I noticed the bottom of your screen is a bit off the wall. That usually means your wall brackets are to tight or the wall is not even and is pushing the screen off the wall. You might think of spacing the bracket off the wall 3 or 4 washers deep to help.


----------



## BlakeV

hendry98 said:


> Thanks for the reply.
> 
> Knowing the size of my room which is quite deep (26 ft.). and the seating distance stars from 16 ft., i think 120" Bd would be kinda small!
> 
> My new dedicated HT (with controlled lighting and no windows), its walls and carpet will not be that dark (but absolutely not white, maybe cream or light grey) as i hate dark colors, and i know BD can work pretty well in such environment because i have seen it in my friend's house.
> 
> In addition, i intend to watch live NFL with friends with some light on.
> 
> So, since i cannot get BD above 120", will Slate 135" do the job in such environment? and how to add the cool effect of LED to the Slate 135" screen?


Check out our screen wizard and free light meter app. Run the screen wizard and if you have any questions you can call me at the factory 512 832 6939. http://www.screeninnovations.com/tools/screen-wizard/ ...The wizard will want to know the lumens of the projector you are going with and the Foot Candle (FC) reading for the ambient light in the room. 

The size of the room is not really as important as to the seating distance from the screen. You rm may be 26' deep but if you only sit 16ft from the screen then a 120" is what SMPTE would recommend.


----------



## jaychatbonneau

BlakeV said:


> Check out our screen wizard and free light meter app. Run the screen wizard and if you have any questions you can call me at the factory 512 832 6939. http://www.screeninnovations.com/tools/screen-wizard/ ...The wizard will want to know the lumens of the projector you are going with and the Foot Candle (FC) reading for the ambient light in the room.
> 
> The size of the room is not really as important as to the seating distance from the screen. You rm may be 26' deep but if you only sit 16ft from the screen then a 120" is what SMPTE would recommend.


I am having a BD Zero Edge delivered this week. How do I install it on a concrete wall?


----------



## Mike Garrett

jaychatbonneau said:


> I am having a BD Zero Edge delivered this week. How do I install it on a concrete wall?


Go buy some concrete screws that are 1.25" to 1.5" long. Also get the drill bit that goes with these. Lowes, Home Depot and places like that sell these. You will need a hammer drill to install.


----------



## robininni

*SI Zero Edge LED backlighting won't come on! HELP!*

So the remote doesn't appear to work (I've changed the battery with no luck). When I unplug the light kit from the wall outlet and plug it back in the lights flash one time and then they are unresponsive. Any idea what is going on or how to fix this? I think this started with the lights being on one night and then the next morning they were just off, but I didn't think much about it until several days later when I tried to turn them back on and they wouldn't. Thanks!


----------



## ConradC

robininni said:


> So the remote doesn't appear to work (I've changed the battery with no luck). When I unplug the light kit from the wall outlet and plug it back in the lights flash one time and then they are unresponsive. Any idea what is going on or how to fix this? I think this started with the lights being on one night and then the next morning they were just off, but I didn't think much about it until several days later when I tried to turn them back on and they wouldn't. Thanks!


I'm almost sure it's the controller. I've actually gone through 2 of them already. For some reason or another, it would just stop working. Contact SI and let them know your issue. They are very good at sending you a replacement controller. I'm starting to wonder if this is a common issue.


----------



## sebberry

I'm not buying anything for a while, but what's the chance that I could get a decent quality 90" 16:9 pull-down screen for ~$1000?

Watching movies in the winter and the room is mostly light controlled (some reflections from ceiling and left wall. In the summer the picture looks a little washed out on my plain white vinyl screen. 

Viewsonic Pro 8100 projector is about 12-14' away. 

Cheers.


----------



## DAlba

*Zero Edge Flex*

I just read about the new Zero Edge Flex screen line. This is very interesting to me as I currently have a 133" Zero Edge screen and move a lot. I am dreading having to move my current screen. We were barely able to fit it around corner and up the stairs. I am afraid we may move somewhere and not be able to fit it.

Does anyone know how the screen assembles? Are there any drawbacks to this new design?


----------



## AnnapolisSony

eydsamoht said:


> Not silent. It's white noise fortunately, and not buzzy like some computer CPU fans. When I run in "normal" mode the fan is obvious. For a multipurpose living room, it's acceptable but you're reminded in any quiet scene that the projector is on. For a dedicated theater, I would strongly consider a hush box for the 5030UB. When I run in "eco" mode, the noise is pretty forgettable and I don't have any complaints.


Did someone say hush box for a 5030??? 



















BTW, ConradC, your BD screen is absolutely STUNNING!


----------



## ConradC

AnnapolisSony said:


> BTW, ConradC, your BD screen is absolutely STUNNING!


 Thanks a bunch!


----------



## NextLevel217

*Need help!!*

Is 10ft to close for a slate screen? I really want a projector and I'm leaning towards a Jvc and slate combo. This is for a living room setup


----------



## zen313

I currently have the option of purchasing a 133" 2.35 ratio Pure White Zero Edge for $1600, with the LED kit.... from a local buyer selling his "old" one.... Not sure if it's overkill for my room (19 feet deep by 16 feet wide, seating at 14 feet)... I feel like it might be. The screen would only leave 3 feet on each side, barely enough room for the speakers.

The bigger problem might be moving it into the house...

Thoughts from the AVS group? Part of me wants to get it just because it's such a killer deal on the screen, despite the unwieldy size for my room.

I actually don't know what the going rate on the PW ZE are right now...


----------



## ben38

NextLevel217 said:


> Is 10ft to close for a slate screen? I really want a projector and I'm leaning towards a Jvc and slate combo. This is for a living room setup


It depends on the size of your screen. Screen Innovations recommends for the Slate a minimum throw distance of 1.5 times the screen width. So, for example, if your screen is 100 inches wide, the minimum recommended throw is 150 inches.(or 12.5 feet)


----------



## Ftoast

zen313 said:


> I currently have the option of purchasing a 133" 2.35 ratio Pure White Zero Edge for $1600, with the LED kit.... from a local buyer selling his "old" one.... Not sure if it's overkill for my room (19 feet deep by 16 feet wide, seating at 14 feet)... I feel like it might be. The screen would only leave 3 feet on each side, barely enough room for the speakers.
> 
> The bigger problem might be moving it into the house...
> 
> Thoughts from the AVS group? Part of me wants to get it just because it's such a killer deal on the screen, despite the unwieldy size for my room.
> 
> I actually don't know what the going rate on the PW ZE are right now...


While I'll argue that $1600 is still a lot of money to spend on a borderless white screen, deal or not, I do think you'll find that size to be a lot of fun at 14ft..not too big at all (assuming you can fit it around any necessary corners and whatnot to get it into the room).

Grab another person and a tape-measure and extend it to ~10ft and see if you can safely navigate from the outside all the way to your theater without having to bend it. Remember it'll also be over 4ft tall, so you'll have to keep the measure about 5ft below ceilings and doorways at all times.


----------



## NextLevel217

ben38 said:


> It depends on the size of your screen. Screen Innovations recommends for the Slate a minimum throw distance of 1.5 times the screen width. So, for example, if your screen is 100 inches wide, the minimum recommended throw is 150 inches.(or 12.5 feet)


So is that measuring the width or diagonal? I was told that I could fit a 100" screen in the space I have


----------



## ben38

NextLevel217 said:


> So is that measuring the width or diagonal? I was told that I could fit a 100" screen in the space I have


 Measuring the width of the screen. A 100 inch diagonal 16:9 screen is 87.2 inches wide. So your minimum throw for a slate screen should be just under 11 feet. (10.9 feet or 130.8 inches)


----------



## NextLevel217

ben38 said:


> Measuring the width of the screen. A 100 inch diagonal 16:9 screen is 87.2 inches wide. So your minimum throw for a slate screen should be just under 11 feet. (10.9 feet or 130.8 inches)


Ok thats good to know. Now to call AVS and see how much a flex zero edge will cost


----------



## ConradC

I just shot a quick video of the screen in action (on my iPhone 6). I turned on the room lights, opened the curtains and rolled up the window shade. I moved side to side and tried to keep the windows in the shot to show that there was light coming from the outside in. Hope the video helps.


----------



## charlievoviii

ConradC said:


> I just shot a quick video of the screen in action (on my iPhone 6). I turned on the room lights, opened the curtains and rolled up the window shade. I moved side to side and tried to keep the windows in the shot to show that there was light coming from the outside in. Hope the video helps.
> 
> http://youtu.be/Zxd7apF7NOk


 very nice what gain ?


----------



## ConradC

charlievoviii said:


> very nice what gain ?


1.4


----------



## thezaks

ConradC said:


> I just shot a quick video of the screen in action (on my iPhone 6). I turned on the room lights, opened the curtains and rolled up the window shade. I moved side to side and tried to keep the windows in the shot to show that there was light coming from the outside in. Hope the video helps.


Looks like it was overcast outside. It would be interesting to see how the screen does when it is sunny outside...

Dave


----------



## charlievoviii

ConradC said:


> 1.4


 thanks


----------



## AidenL

I'm thinking about changing my Draper Screen to a Black Diamond - the room wis 146" wide - I was hoping to squeeze in a 155" diagonal 2.35:1 which would be 143.5" wide from the SI screen calculator tool - would you think this is too tight and that the LEDs would overspill onto the side walls?

My current screen - not the one shown in the pic is 16:9 and gives me a 134" diagonal in 2.35:1, but it would be the same image size as my old 2.35:1 actually shown. 

I have a 65" plasma behind the screen which is motorised and tab tensioned, but I was thinking bout going with a fixed Black Diamond and ditching the plasma totally, as we watch 90% movies in the living room.

Its just the two of us, no kids, and herself has given the green light to go with a wall mounted screen. I thought it could be a nice feature in the room with the backlighting.

Seating distance would be 14 feet and the throw distance would be 19feet.

How does that sound to you guys?


----------



## thezaks

AidenL said:


> I'm thinking about changing my Draper Screen to a Black Diamond - the room wis 146" wide - I was hoping to squeeze in a 155" diagonal 2.35:1 which would be 143.5" wide from the SI screen calculator tool - would you think this is too tight and that the LEDs would overspill onto the side walls?
> 
> My current screen - not the one shown in the pic is 16:9 and gives me a 134" diagonal in 2.35:1, but it would be the same image size as my old 2.35:1 actually shown.
> 
> I have a 65" plasma behind the screen which is motorised and tab tensioned, but I was thinking bout going with a fixed Black Diamond and ditching the plasma totally, as we watch 90% movies in the living room.
> 
> Its just the two of us, no kids, and herself has given the green light to go with a wall mounted screen. I thought it could be a nice feature in the room with the backlighting.
> 
> Seating distance would be 14 feet and the throw distance would be 19feet.
> 
> How does that sound to you guys?


In looking at your picture, I'm guessing that you would need to raise the screen by at least a foot, so that the 155" diagonal screen is above the speakers. My preference would be to have a smaller screen that is closer to the floor, for purposes of immersion. Plus, your screen will be closer to the ceiling and side walls, which may cause more unwanted reflections. Just my .02 

Dave


----------



## AidenL

thezaks said:


> In looking at your picture, I'm guessing that you would need to raise the screen by at least a foot, so that the 155" diagonal screen is above the speakers. My preference would be to have a smaller screen that is closer to the floor, for purposes of immersion. Plus, your screen will be closer to the ceiling and side walls, which may cause more unwanted reflections. Just my .02
> 
> Dave


Hiya and thanks for the reply.

I'll keep the screen lower, I'll change the floor standers to low mounted on wall speakers so height wouldn't be a problem. Id chase the cables in. Something like MK MP300s perhaps, or MP 150s, they seem to be living room friendly.


----------



## bytebuster

Question for folks who are using a fixed screen. How do u guys maintain it
I currently have a motorized electric screen. It doesn't end up collecting much dust since its rolled up when not in use
Worried about how I would maintain a fixed screen


----------



## Mike Garrett

bytebuster said:


> Question for folks who are using a fixed screen. How do u guys maintain it
> I currently have a motorized electric screen. It doesn't end up collecting much dust since its rolled up when not in use
> Worried about how I would maintain a fixed screen


Screens are vertical, so dust is usually not much of a problem. A BD screen can be wiped off. Just don't want to scratch it.


----------



## ben38

bytebuster said:


> Question for folks who are using a fixed screen. How do u guys maintain it
> I currently have a motorized electric screen. It doesn't end up collecting much dust since its rolled up when not in use
> Worried about how I would maintain a fixed screen


 First thing. I made it an absolute rule with my 8 year old son that he never even thinks of touching the screen. Not only does he heed my wishes, but he makes sure no one else gets near it also. (good kid) 

If you're at all concerned when not in use, just cover the screen with a large black curtain or something when not in use. Mine is always out in the open and occasionally gets a pass with a feather duster. That's it.


----------



## mhariush

Hey guys, I'm changing up my set up and I have a 92" 1.4 Zero Edge with LED edge light for sale in Los Angeles. PM me for details. I could ship, but no longer have the original box so we'd have to figure out shipping solutions.


----------



## deewan

bytebuster said:


> Question for folks who are using a fixed screen. How do u guys maintain it
> I currently have a motorized electric screen. It doesn't end up collecting much dust since its rolled up when not in use
> Worried about how I would maintain a fixed screen


I helped install a Black Diamond last Friday and SI is now including some sort of spray cleaner. I didn't pay much attention to the brand, but it was in a clear and orange plastic bag. Not sure when SI started including that. Hadn't installed a Black Diamond for about 6 months so sometimes recently.

For my PureGray screen I simply use a damp (not wet) microfiber cloth. I first wipe side to side them go over it again wiping vertically.


----------



## Mike Garrett

ben38 said:


> First thing. I made it an absolute rule with my 8 year old son that he never even thinks of touching the screen. Not only does he heed my wishes, but he makes sure no one else gets near it also. (good kid)
> 
> If you're at all concerned when not in use, just cover the screen with a large black curtain or something when not in use. Mine is always out in the open and occasionally gets a pass with a feather duster. That's it.


I did that with my son when he was 6 or 7 years old and he never touched the screen. Told him that touching the screen would mess it up and then we would not be able to have the large screen for movies. He never messed with the screen. Much better kid than I was at his age. He is 15 now and still a great kid. So far being a teenager has not corrupted him.


----------



## AidenL

Is the recommended throw for a Slate screen 1.5 times screen width, same as for Black Diamond, or could it be less?


----------



## ben38

AidenL said:


> Is the recommended throw for a Slate screen 1.5 times screen width, same as for Black Diamond, or could it be less?


 1.5 times, no less. I'm told even 1.5 is a little short, so you should try to get more throw.


----------



## deming44

ConradC said:


> Hope the video helps.



nice setup.  Can't PM you, got no enough messages count. If it is not a secret, did you order it directly from SI or from retailer? Thanks in advance.


----------



## Mk3_wagen

Is the Black Diamond worth the price difference compared to the Slate?


----------



## BillY2KFRC

Mk3_wagen said:


> Is the Black Diamond worth the price difference compared to the Slate?


I don't actually think one is "better" than the other. I think it depends on how much ambient light you have to fight against. Black Diamond is better in a super bright room, but has more artifacts like sparkles and narrower viewing cone than the Slate. Black Diamond is also possibly better if your projector doesn't put out as much light as the 5030ub I am using.

I recently installed the Slate (posted a review in the Slate thread) and am very impressed by how well it works with the lights on. Sun light seems to affect it the most, but if I close my wooden blinds in my living room, the picture is very watchable during the daytime. And at night, it's amazing, even with a couple of lights on. Been watching for 4 days now and am just blown away.


----------



## ConradC

deming44 said:


> nice setup.  Can't PM you, got no enough messages count. If it is not a secret, did you order it directly from SI or from retailer? Thanks in advance.


I purchased it right here through AV Science. Mike Garrett helped me out. You can get his info from his signature in this post: http://www.avsforum.com/forum/23-sc...mond-screen-innovations-123.html#post26279105


----------



## deming44

ConradC said:


> You can get his info from his signature in this post:


Thank you very much. Very helpful.


----------



## Sam Ash

I'm sure someone here (like AidenL) can help. How does the Draper ReAct 2.1 compare to the Black Diamond 1.4 in real world and practical terms. I know the ReAct 2.1 is very popular in Sweden and Europe generally and some people say it comes very close to the Black Diamond 1.4. Others say the Black Diamond 1.4 is much better in terms of image quality and light rejection ability. Then there are those that say the Black Diamond suffers from screen-shimmer / sparklies.

What is the bottom line ? I'd love to hear from users of both screens who have had the opportunity to test or demo both.

AidenL, did you finally buy a Black Diamond Screen ? What is your opinion on the matter ?

Anyone here seen both in action side by side or had the opportunity to see both in action consecutively at a trade show ?


----------



## Sam Ash

Anyone here using an Optoma HD25-LV with a Black Diamond 1.4 screen (113 inch diagonal or a notch bigger) ?


----------



## Mike Garrett

deming44 said:


> Thank you very much. Very helpful.


Happy to help you.


----------



## Sam Ash

AV Science Sales 5 said:


> Happy to help you.


Hi Mike, you might be able to provide some credible guidance. I've come to find out that the SI BD 1.4 screen has been through 2 improvements in the last 2 years and SI keep on improving them. A lot of people in dated (old) forums have said that the BD1.4 suffers from problems like sparklies and hot-spotting which I believe may be true but probably only associated with the first generation BD screens. Could you kindly clarify that for me.

There is a lot of positive talk about the Draper ReAct 2.1 screen which apparently is very popular in Sweden and Europe and some people say it comes very close to the results provided by SI BD1.4. What is your honest and unbiased opinion of that ?

Also, have issues like viewing cone been addressed by SI in the current version of the BD1.4 ? Is light rejection better. Are there any colour or contrast shifts when the screen is viewed from the corners ?

I've been searching for clear-cut answers but there are so many varied opinions on the net. You seem to represent many screen manufacturers and brands, so I'm hoping you will be able to clarify things for me for once and for all.


----------



## thezaks

I've got samples of the Draper ReAct 2.1, among many other samples. Honestly, the Draper ReAct 2.1 is consistently my least favorite of all the Ambient Light screen samples. One of the guys here at work, who has a projector setup at home, looked at the screen samples, without knowing which was which. He did not like the ReAct 2.1 at all, and he also rated it last.

I also have a sample of the Draper XS850E, which was also near at the bottom of the heap. I don't understand the excitement over the Draper screens vs other screens. I know there's a dealer who used to have DNP and now pushes the Draper ReAct. Just from the pictures he posted (in another forum) of both screens, I can see that the DNP is clearly better. I would recommend the Seymour ambient light screens, but they are not at all scratch resisitant. I'm not sure how those can be used in a motorized format. 

Overall, a DNP (.85 or 2.3) or an Elite Screens Darkstar (1.4 or .9) would be my favorites, of the screen samples I've collected.

Dave


----------



## Sam Ash

Thank you for your kind input Dave, much appreciated. Any news or reviews of the current version of Black Diamond 1.4 ? From what I've learnt, SI has improved the product.

I was hoping to hear back from Ricky as he deals with a plethora of screens.


----------



## Sam Ash

Dave, does that mean you have not reached a decision yet for your own needs ?


----------



## Sam Ash

Sorry Dave, forgot to mention - I've read good things about DNP but the fact that they reject light from above and below only and not from the left and right does limit their use in real world situations.


----------



## thezaks

Sam Ash said:


> Dave, does that mean you have not reached a decision yet for your own needs ?


Hi Sam Ash,

That is a great question! Actually, my favorite screen material is the Darkstar 1.4. However, my room is not a dedicated space. It's a "great" room that has a family room, dining area and kitchen, all in one open space. There's windows,etc. I'm not sure if I want to have projector+screen as a full time TV. No matter how good the screen, it's not going to be as good, in the daytime, as a regular TV. Not sure if I can live with that compromise. I'm waiting on a larger sample of the Darkstar, so that I can make that decision. 

If I don't want to use projector+screen as a full time TV, then I'll either want a larger screen TV, or, option B would be to have a TV for daytime and an ambient light screen+projector for evening/night time viewing. Option B would be more expensive. And, the Darkstar is not yet available in a motorized version. 

The dilemma for me continues....


Thanks,
Dave


----------



## thezaks

Sam Ash said:


> Thank you for your kind input Dave, much appreciated. Any news or reviews of the current version of Black Diamond 1.4 ? From what I've learnt, SI has improved the product.
> 
> I was hoping to hear back from Ricky as he deals with a plethora of screens.


I don't like the off angle viewing of the SI 1.4. I have a sample, and just moving over 3'-5' to one side of it shows too much of a compromise. I helped a friend install his 1.4 (current generation), and overall, I was not impressed.

Dave


----------



## thezaks

Sam Ash said:


> Sorry Dave, forgot to mention - I've read good things about DNP but the fact that they reject light from above and below only and not from the left and right does limit their use in real world situations.


Rejecting light from the side, like a window, is difficult for any ambient light screen. Some may do it a little better than others, but it's still a compromise nonetheless. That's why I don't think I can live with any screen+projector for daytime use.

Dave


----------



## Sam Ash

thezaks said:


> I don't like the off angle viewing of the SI 1.4. I have a sample, and just moving over 3'-5' to one side of it shows too much of a compromise. I helped a friend install his 1.4 (current generation), and overall, I was not impressed.
> 
> Dave


Hi Dave, can you kindly explain why you were not happy with the current generation of the Black Diamond 1.4 screen ?

What have SI fixed in the current version ? Any sign of sparklies / shimmer ?

Any improvement to ambient light rejection and viewing cone ?

Is the image quality better on the current version ?


----------



## thezaks

Sam Ash said:


> Hi Dave, can you kindly explain why you were not happy with the current generation of the Black Diamond 1.4 screen ?
> 
> What have SI fixed in the current version ? Any sign of sparklies / shimmer ?
> 
> Any improvement to ambient light rejection and viewing cone ?
> 
> Is the image quality better on the current version ?


Hi Sam Ash,

Sure. So far, I have not been looking for sparklies/shimmer, so I don't have a comment there. I've been looking for contrast, clarity, ambient light capabilities, and angles - so I'll comment on those. This is based upon my friend's BD 1.4, which I installed for him 2.5 years ago. It was a BD III, which SI claims to be the same as their current gen material. It's also based upon a brand new BD 1.4, which is setup at a store here in Phoenix (Scottsdale actually) with a Sony HW55ES.

Contrast - actually, no complaints here, the contrast is great. The only ambient light screen I've seen with better contrast is the Elite Prime Vision Darkstar.

Clarity - I noticed a bit of grain on my friend's BD 1.4, but the one at the store seemed to be better. Did they make some improvements? Not sure. Still, the Darkstar produces a clearer picture than the new BD 1.4.

Ambient Light capabilities - both BD 1.4 screens that I've seen do very well with ceiling mounted recessed lights. However, daylight coming in from a side window has a big impact on the picture. Yes, it is better than a white screen, but still not great in my opinion. In the store, you see the TV's getting more daylight than anything else, and they look much better than the BD with much less daylight hitting it. 

Angles - at the store, there's a glass wall to the left side, and if I sit in line with the left side of the screen, it's not too bad - still compromised compared to no daylight, but OK. This is a 106" 16:9 screen, and I tried different distances from the screen - basically from 8' to 14' from the screen. Moving to the middle seat, it's gotten worse. By the time I get to the right side of the screen, it's awful (in my opinion). Contrast is gone. In a dark room it's not as compromised at an angle, but it's still noticeable. 

The new one looks great overall, and without a comparison to the Darkstar, it should make for a nice ambient light screen - as long as we're talking room lighting. I still think that daylight brings to much compromise (for me) to a BD 1.4 + projector.

Dave


----------



## Sam Ash

Hi Dave, thank you for your informative and detailed input. Is the Darkstar better at rejecting ambient light coming from the sides ? Do you think it is clearly the best optical screen that you've experienced so far in terms of contrast, clarity and image fidelity when placed in typical room ambience environments ?

Any excellent online reviews and comparisons apart from the common youtube videos ?


----------



## thezaks

Sam Ash said:


> Hi Dave, thank you for your informative and detailed input. Is the Darkstar better at rejecting ambient light coming from the sides ? Do you think it is clearly the best optical screen that you've experienced so far in terms of contrast, clarity and image fidelity when placed in typical room ambience environments ?
> 
> Any excellent online reviews and comparisons apart from the common youtube videos ?


Hi Sam Ash,

Based upon screen samples, I think that the Darkstar is much better with angles than the BD 1.4. However, since I have not seen a full size screen of the Darkstar (I hope to see one in the coming months), I hesitate to comment on its capability for ambient light from the side. However, in terms of contrast and clarity (and resistance to scratches), I prefer the Darkstar. 

If you look on youtube, you can find Andrew Robinson's 8 minute review of the Darkstar.

Thanks,
Dave


----------



## Mike Garrett

Sam Ash said:


> Hi Mike, you might be able to provide some credible guidance. I've come to find out that the SI BD 1.4 screen has been through 2 improvements in the last 2 years and SI keep on improving them. A lot of people in dated (old) forums have said that the BD1.4 suffers from problems like sparklies and hot-spotting which I believe may be true but probably only associated with the first generation BD screens. Could you kindly clarify that for me.
> 
> There is a lot of positive talk about the Draper ReAct 2.1 screen which apparently is very popular in Sweden and Europe and some people say it comes very close to the results provided by SI BD1.4. What is your honest and unbiased opinion of that ?
> 
> Also, have issues like viewing cone been addressed by SI in the current version of the BD1.4 ? Is light rejection better. Are there any colour or contrast shifts when the screen is viewed from the corners ?
> 
> I've been searching for clear-cut answers but there are so many varied opinions on the net. You seem to represent many screen manufacturers and brands, so I'm hoping you will be able to clarify things for me for once and for all.


SI has improved the screen, but these improvements, like everything in HT are small subtle improvements. You are not going to get the pristine image from a BD or any other light rejecting screen with gain, that you would get in a good room with a white 1.0 gain screen. There is always some trade off to the image to be able to get the screen to work better with ambient light. So you either make the room an environment perfect for front projection or you get a screen that works in your room, with the realization that the image will not be perfect. That is not to say, that the image will not be good. It will be very good and much better than what you would get if you used a white screen in the room with ambient light. 

I am not trying to dance around the question, but it is hard to answer. Some people look at these speciality screens and see a fantastic image, ignoring or not noticing the trade offs and others look for and see the trade offs to get this type of image in ambient light. So as said above, either fix the room or except the trade off of the speciality screen. In most cases, the better option is the speciality screen, since most people do not have dedicated rooms.


----------



## adam320

I am new to the world of projection and I am getting ready to move into a house with a dedicated media room with no windows.. I have had an installer recommend the 100 inch black diamond at $3900 and the SI slate at $2900. It is hard to find pricing on these online are these prices reasonable?

Also being in a light controlled environment are these higher end screens overkill?

Thanks,


----------



## Ftoast

adam320 said:


> I am new to the world of projection and I am getting ready to move into a house with a dedicated media room with no windows.. I have had an installer recommend the 100 inch black diamond at $3900 and the SI slate at $2900. It is hard to find pricing on these online are these prices reasonable?
> 
> Also being in a light controlled environment are these higher end screens overkill?
> 
> Thanks,


Assuming you can make the dedicated theater's walls/ceiling darker colored with either paint or fabric, those screens aren't overkill because of their prices, they are inappropriate for a dedicated room..high-end or low-end.

A dedicated room with darker surfaces won't get any benefits from a light-rejecting screen like those, so a matte-white screen will work just as well while also giving a crisper image with better color, better uniformity, less artifacts like grain and shimmer, and a wider viewing-cone.
The matte-white will also be available in more size options that may better fit your seating-distance; 100" is on the small side if you'll be sitting farther than 9'-10' back.


----------



## Andrew67

adam320 said:


> ...a house with a dedicated media room with no windows.. I have had an installer recommend the 100 inch black diamond at $3900 and the SI slate at $2900.


Wow, this is why I fear installers. No reason for an installer to recommend a black diamond for a dedicated media room. Has there been no discussion of alternatives, trade-offs, and room design?


----------



## adam320

Ftoast said:


> Assuming you can make the dedicated theater's walls/ceiling darker colored with either paint or fabric, those screens aren't overkill because of their prices, they are inappropriate for a dedicated room..high-end or low-end.
> 
> A dedicated room with darker surfaces won't get any benefits from a light-rejecting screen like those, so a matte-white screen will work just as well while also giving a crisper image with better color, better uniformity, less artifacts like grain and shimmer, and a wider viewing-cone.
> The matte-white will also be available in more size options that may better fit your seating-distance; 100" is on the small side if you'll be sitting farther than 9'-10' back.





Andrew67 said:


> Wow, this is why I fear installers. No reason for an installer to recommend a black diamond for a dedicated media room. Has there been no discussion of alternatives, trade-offs, and room design?


Thank you for your comments guys... I asked him if the black diamond was necessary for a light controlled room. His response was that I will not always be wanting to watch TV in a dark room.. He has a point there. I will be using this room for most all of my TV watching not only movies.. If I have some guys over to watch the game then I doubt we'll have the lights out and door closed. It still won't be a bright room but it won't be pitch black either.. Does that change what I need to be looking at screen wise? I guess my thoughts are sports bars use projectors and they look fine and I doubt they have these expensive light rejecting screens. 

I'm looking at the Epson 6030 if that makes a difference.


----------



## Ftoast

I've got a video somewhere of my matte-white screen in the dedicated room when lights are on.
It's bright enough to read a book in there but because the lights face away from the screen, it still looks great.
In a dark-colored room, your lights stay where you want them instead of bouncing all around the room from the walls and ceiling reflections..because dark surfaces absorb light instead of reflecting it everywhere.

A few dollars worth of dark paint or fabric and spotlight-style bulbs or a few directional lamps can make a huge improvement to your lights-on viewing. More than any screen in most cases. 

In my room's case, the lights aren't even spot nor particularly directional..you've got plenty of opportunity to best what's shown in the video.

Here it is:





If you've got a dedicated theater room, or really even just the freedom to go a little darker in a family room with something removable such as curtains over walls that can simply be tied back when not in use, treating the room should be a first priority when possible.


----------



## ADMama

*Planning for the gray screen*



deewan said:


> I have the SI Pure Gray in a light controlled room. I can't recommend it enough. It is insanely good! IMO with a light controlled room you don't need to worry about the slate or black diamond features.


Hi Deewan,
I am new to home theater. I am planning to buy all equipments one by one and researching on the screen. My plan is for a 120" screen. BestBuy guy suggested for the Screen Innovation 5 series Pure Gray screen. I have ordered this and it woill take about two weeks to get it. 

I am glad to see that you have a similar screen and need your suggestion. Should I go for hite instead. My home theater would be in an underground basement. I will prefer little bit of ambient light so kids can play around instead of making it a dark place. My only concern is that the fray screen wouldn't be very bright enough. also, someone mentioned that the gray screen a bluiesh tint. Plaese sen dyou suggestion if i should go for a white screen instead. Or your experience of the gray screen.

Thanks in advance.


----------



## deewan

ADMama said:


> Hi Deewan,
> I am new to home theater. I am planning to buy all equipments one by one and researching on the screen. My plan is for a 120" screen. BestBuy guy suggested for the Screen Innovation 5 series Pure Gray screen. I have ordered this and it woill take about two weeks to get it.
> 
> I am glad to see that you have a similar screen and need your suggestion. Should I go for hite instead. My home theater would be in an underground basement. I will prefer little bit of ambient light so kids can play around instead of making it a dark place. My only concern is that the fray screen wouldn't be very bright enough. also, someone mentioned that the gray screen a bluiesh tint. Plaese sen dyou suggestion if i should go for a white screen instead. Or your experience of the gray screen.
> 
> Thanks in advance.


No need for the white screen IMO. The PureGray is plenty bright unless you have a really dim projector. Even with a JVC projector (which some say is low on light output), I have the iris manually closed and the light bulb on low mode. Yet the picture easily bright enough for my needs even with a good amount of overhead light on in the room.


----------



## ADMama

deewan said:


> No need for the white screen IMO. The PureGray is plenty bright unless you have a really dim projector. Even with a JVC projector (which some say is low on light output), I have the iris manually closed and the light bulb on low mode. Yet the picture easily bright enough for my needs even with a good amount of overhead light on in the room.


I am planning to get EPSON 5030UB. Since I am starting on the HT and also 4k would be cheaper in few years this seems to be a reasonable projector for now. Otherwise the JVC x500r would have been an option too.

On the screen I was thinking about black diamond too but thats even couple of grands more. Pure gray looks reasonable price wise too. A friend of mine has epson 5030UB with a very cheap gray screen ($500), I looked at the pictures and it doesn't look very bright. I could see the bluish tint others mentioned. Some mentioned about too much 'screen door'. Screen gain is .85 but others suggests gain of 1.0 or above. Just worried that it will be really disappointing after spending so much if picture doesn't look bit perfect.

Here is what I have ordered:

- Screen innovation 5 series Zero edge Pure Gray 120"
- EPSON 5030UB
- Marantz SR7009
- Bowers & wilkins 683 series S2 - tower speakers
- B&W HTM61S2 - Center speaker
- B&W ASW610 sub
- B&W ceiling speakers

Orders can be changed. Please suggest if anything in this.

Thank you.


----------



## Sam Ash

*Very Interesting...*



yuweimichael said:


> We are launching a new projection screen called Microlitescreen. We are welcome any local users can come to our demo room and see our screen yourself. Seeing is believing. If you are happen to be in the Los Angeles area, please come and see us. Anyone mention avsforum, we will give you a promotional price of $999 for a 100"16:9 velvet fixed frame screen. You can choose your gain 2.0 or 3.3. Any gains come with full viewing angle feature.
> 
> Our web site is www.microlitescreen.com
> Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/microlitescreen
> Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LumC9BFg7-I
> 
> Thank you.


Hi Michael, that is very interesting. I have a few questions:-

1. How does this screen compare to Screen Innovation's Black Diamond ?
2. Does it suffer from sparklies and shimmering effect (Shiny dots during projection) ?
3. Does the projector have to be 1.5 to 1.8 times the length of the screen away from the screen ?
4. Is ambient light rejected from all sides of the screen or just the sides ?

The 180 degrees viewing cone specification is impressive.

Regards,

Sam


----------



## deewan

ADMama said:


> I am planning to get EPSON 5030UB. Since I am starting on the HT and also 4k would be cheaper in few years this seems to be a reasonable projector for now. Otherwise the JVC x500r would have been an option too.
> 
> On the screen I was thinking about black diamond too but thats even couple of grands more. Pure gray looks reasonable price wise too. A friend of mine has epson 5030UB with a very cheap gray screen ($500), I looked at the pictures and it doesn't look very bright. I could see the bluish tint others mentioned. Some mentioned about too much 'screen door'. Screen gain is .85 but others suggests gain of 1.0 or above. Just worried that it will be really disappointing after spending so much if picture doesn't look bit perfect.
> 
> Here is what I have ordered:
> 
> - Screen innovation 5 series Zero edge Pure Gray 120"
> - EPSON 5030UB
> - Marantz SR7009
> - Bowers & wilkins 683 series S2 - tower speakers
> - B&W HTM61S2 - Center speaker
> - B&W ASW610 sub
> - B&W ceiling speakers
> 
> Orders can be changed. Please suggest if anything in this.
> 
> Thank you.


The screen door effect isn't caused by the screen, it's caused by the projector. Just wanted to make sure you knew that as it seems like you liked the screen door to the screen. The PureGray could possibly have a blue-ish hue to it, but I haven't noticed it. Also, if it does have a hint of blue, it can't be much and I would think it would be easy to calibrate out using one of the cheap and easy to use calibration BluRay discs. But I also wouldn't be surprised if the people complaining about the blue-ish hue are seeing it because of their projector.

The Epson 5030UB should be plenty bright. If your friends 5030ub seems dim I'd look into his settings because something seems off, unless his bulb is really old and has grown dim.

I'll also send you a PM about something else.


----------



## deewan

yuweimichael said:


> We are launching a new projection screen called Microlitescreen. We are welcome any local users can come to our demo room and see our screen yourself. Seeing is believing. If you are happen to be in the Los Angeles area, please come and see us. Anyone mention avsforum, we will give you a promotional price of $999 for a 100"16:9 velvet fixed frame screen. You can choose your gain 2.0 or 3.3. Any gains come with full viewing angle feature.
> 
> Our web site is www.microlitescreen.com
> Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/microlitescreen
> Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LumC9BFg7-I
> 
> Thank you.


Please don't take this as bashing your product, I simply would like to offer my reaction to what you are promoting on a thread devoted to SI Black Diamond screens. The video you have posted on your site is a poor example of your screens ability to deflect ambient light. SI has similar videos, but they attempt to have the white screen and the Black Diamond screen as near to the same plane as possible by either holding a panel in front of the white screen or having the screens close to one another. In your example, the angle at which the light his the white screen and the Microlite screen is quite different, as is evident from the shadow on the wall mounted Microlite screen.

Pure White screen which appeas to drop down right in front of the lights:









Microlite screen being aided by shadow from being setback further from lights created by the drop-down screen:









The the Microlite screen by itself (setback a bit from the same lights demonstrated by shadow across the top):









I'm not trying to be rude, but if you are going to post to a thread about SI Black Diamond, you should really do a 1:1 comparison with Black Diamond or run the examples the same way SI does. If feel your videos are a little misleading. That being said, if your product works half as well as a SI Black Diamond, your prices are VERY competitive and I wish you the best of luck bringing this sort of performance to a more budget friendly consumer.


----------



## deewan

yuweimichael said:


> I totally agree with you. I understand your concerns about the performance on the Microlitescreen. I can not comment on other screens because every product has pros and cons but i can tell you our product is not working half but more. However, i like to tell you that, seeing is believing. When I took this video, i understand the risk of being questioned. But i still did it b/c I want to show you guys the performance when its under the total of 2000 lux, 4 spot lights hang right above the both screens. I can simply show you the ambient light rejection by using just overhead recess lighting in the office and i can guarantee you wont see any shadows.
> 
> Again, typing here wont do anything, please come and see our screen or visit us at Infocomm and CEDIA this year. Whenever we do the trade show, we put our screen right under the bright environment. Yes, the image wont be great b/c lights coming from anywhere but i hope user appreciates that they can see the true performance on what you are buying in real world environment.


I understand what you are saying. But I am also saying the two screens in your video are not close to being n the same plane, therefore, your screen could not work at all, yet look better than the white screen that is closer to the lights. If you think your screen is better, then in your own thread compare a the Black Diamond screen on the same wall as your screen. Simple way to make (or break) your point.

I would suggest starting your own product thread and then people can discuss and post reviews there. This is the Black Diamond thread.


----------



## ADMama

deewan said:


> The screen door effect isn't caused by the screen, it's caused by the projector. Just wanted to make sure you knew that as it seems like you liked the screen door to the screen. The PureGray could possibly have a blue-ish hue to it, but I haven't noticed it. Also, if it does have a hint of blue, it can't be much and I would think it would be easy to calibrate out using one of the cheap and easy to use calibration BluRay discs. But I also wouldn't be surprised if the people complaining about the blue-ish hue are seeing it because of their projector.
> 
> The Epson 5030UB should be plenty bright. If your friends 5030ub seems dim I'd look into his settings because something seems off, unless his bulb is really old and has grown dim.
> 
> I'll also send you a PM about something else.


Sure. Thank you so much.


----------



## yuweimichael

deewan said:


> I understand what you are saying. But I am also saying the two screens in your video are not close to being n the same plane, therefore, your screen could not work at all, yet look better than the white screen that is closer to the lights. If you think your screen is better, then in your own thread compare a the Black Diamond screen on the same wall as your screen. Simple way to make (or break) your point.
> 
> I would suggest starting your own product thread and then people can discuss and post reviews there. This is the Black Diamond thread.


I removed my post thank you for suggestion.


----------



## Sam Ash

Since the BD1.4 is a angular reflective screen, has it been designed to work with a ceiling mount projector for optimum results ?


----------



## Sam Ash

What is the ideal ceiling mount position, in relation to the top-frame of the screen, to get optimum results ?


----------



## Swolephile

There are six used Black Diamond zero edge screens for sale near me. However all of them have light scratches on them. My question is how easily are these screens damaged. Will brushing up against a zero edge screen damage one? I want really, really bad, but it seems every used one I can find has the same type of imperfections.


----------



## thezaks

Yes, they are easily scratched. That is one of the reasons why I like the DNP screens and the Elite Screens Darkstar (1.4 and .9).

Dave


----------



## Swolephile

I purchased a Black Diamond 120" 1.4 gain screen yesterday. Everything looked good at the store but the screen was damaged during delivery. There is a small dent and light scratch on the bottom left corner of the screen. 

I'm so upset that this screen could be damaged so easily. I have to move again in January and I dare not take a screen so fragile with me. So my question is what do you all think about the Stewart Firehawk. From what I read it is much more durable than the Black Diamond and has favorable picture quality with better blacks but less contrast. 

I will most likely return the screen today. Such a shame.


----------



## thezaks

Swolephile said:


> I purchased a Black Diamond 120" 1.4 gain screen yesterday. Everything looked good at the store but the screen was damaged during delivery. There is a small dent and light scratch on the bottom left corner of the screen.
> 
> I'm so upset that this screen could be damaged so easily. I have to move again in January and I dare not take a screen so fragile with me. So my question is what do you all think about the Stewart Firehawk. From what I read it is much more durable than the Black Diamond and has favorable picture quality with better blacks but less contrast.
> 
> I will most likely return the screen today. Such a shame.


If you do not need a motorized screen, then I would go with an Elite Screens Darkstar or Polarstar screen. These screens, like the DNP screens, are much more scratch resistant than screens like the BD.

Dave


----------



## Swolephile

thezaks said:


> If you do not need a motorized screen, then I would go with an Elite Screens Darkstar or Polarstar screen. These screens, like the DNP screens, are much more scratch resistant than screens like the BD.
> 
> Dave


You did warn me about the fragility of BD screens. I should have listened. Thanks for the advice on the Elite Screens Polarstar. I will read up on it today.


----------



## mylan

Swolephile said:


> You did warn me about the fragility of BD screens. I should have listened. Thanks for the advice on the Elite Screens Polarstar. I will read up on it today.


Elite Aeon to a BD, quite the difference there. I swear, come time I'm going to Best Buy and at least try this one.


----------



## Swolephile

mylan said:


> Elite Aeon to a BD, quite the difference there. I swear, come time I'm going to Best Buy and at least try this one.


I'm also contemplating a Seymour Matinee Black screen.

Edit: Never mind. Reviews say it is also very fragile and prone to scratches.


----------



## thezaks

Swolephile said:


> I'm also contemplating a Seymour Matinee Black screen.
> 
> Edit: Never mind. Reviews say it is also very fragile and prone to scratches.


I just received samples of the Microlite screens - I'll be looking at them this afternoon. Like the DNP and the Elite Screens DS and PS screens, this one is also scratch resistant. 

Dave


----------



## evlo

Is black blackdiamond reflective like current TVs or is it matte even when there is daylight in the room?


----------



## Ftoast

evlo said:


> Is black blackdiamond reflective like current TVs or is it matte even when there is daylight in the room?


It's gain is angular reflective (somewhat similar to a mirror or shiny screen) which will washout severely in the presence of any light that's strong enough and coming from the proper position to glare off a TV screen in the same spot.

Light-rejecting screens only reject light hitting them at glancing angles (like a stone skipping over a lake), they can't fight light hitting them from farther back..especially anything bright hitting them from behind your seats or near the projector. 
Fighting that kind of light would require them to also fight the projector's own light/image.

Light-rejecting screens are for helping against washout from nearby light-colored surfaces reflections and from some direct light at glancing angles, but not really anything else.


----------



## ch1sox

Screen Innovations is introducing something new at Cedia in October, should be interesting. http://www.screeninnovations.com/news/si-news/si-cedia-2015/


----------



## Swolephile

ch1sox said:


> Screen Innovations is introducing something new at Cedia in October, should be interesting. http://www.screeninnovations.com/news/si-news/si-cedia-2015/


No doubt it will be overpriced and extremely fragile.


----------



## thezaks

Swolephile said:


> No doubt it will be overpriced and extremely fragile.


Agreed - probably won't be very scratch resistant. How will it be with angles? What gain will it be? Will it be able to compete with the new Microlite screens?

Dave


----------



## Mike Garrett

thezaks said:


> Agreed - probably won't be very scratch resistant. How will it be with angles? What gain will it be? Will it be able to compete with the new Microlite screens?
> 
> Dave


I don't know, but I will certainly check it out at CEDIA.


----------



## Tooschaye

Hi All,


New here and to this equipment (knew a little bit several years ago and got out of date...) Thanks in advance for the help.


I am building a dedicated room, with no windows, and will optimize (limited only by my knowhow) dark walls and optimal room lighting. I will watch movies in the dark, but sports with friends and some lights on.


I am thinking of getting the Sony VW-350ES (4k Projector).


Trying to figure out best screen and size. Installer recommended SI's Black Diamond 106' (he is open to discussing options, this is the start of the process). Assume for sake of argument that I care about optimal picture over price in the range of, say, $3,500+- or less (e.g. I would be fine paying 3.5k over 1k for an appreciable difference (but would prefer 1k all else being equal and not to get ripped off (read: waste money I can spend on seats....). Does this seem like the right screen for my preferences, projector and light conditions?


Second related question regards the size. My room is 17.5" feet long, ceiling of 8 feet, width TBD (somewhere from 12.5' to 15.5').... What is the right size screen (and does this influence make and model choice- I assume not)? (I have not decided where to put seats yet (thinking couch in front and raised second row seats if there is room).


Thanks in advance.


----------



## Tooschaye

Tooschaye said:


> Hi All,
> 
> ....
> 
> Second related question regards the size. My room is 17.5" feet long, ceiling of 8 feet, width TBD (somewhere from 12.5' to 15.5').... What is the right size screen (and does this influence make and model choice- I assume not)? (I have not decided where to put seats yet (thinking couch in front and raised second row seats if there is room).


I should have added that my preference on screen size is as big as reasonable (I am hoping you all say 106" is too small...).


----------



## thezaks

Tooschaye said:


> Hi All,
> 
> 
> New here and to this equipment (knew a little bit several years ago and got out of date...) Thanks in advance for the help.
> 
> 
> I am building a dedicated room, with no windows, and will optimize (limited only by my knowhow) dark walls and optimal room lighting. I will watch movies in the dark, but sports with friends and some lights on.
> 
> 
> I am thinking of getting the Sony VW-350ES (4k Projector).
> 
> 
> Trying to figure out best screen and size. Installer recommended SI's Black Diamond 106' (he is open to discussing options, this is the start of the process). Assume for sake of argument that I care about optimal picture over price in the range of, say, $3,500+- or less (e.g. I would be fine paying 3.5k over 1k for an appreciable difference (but would prefer 1k all else being equal and not to get ripped off (read: waste money I can spend on seats....). Does this seem like the right screen for my preferences, projector and light conditions?
> 
> 
> Second related question regards the size. My room is 17.5" feet long, ceiling of 8 feet, width TBD (somewhere from 12.5' to 15.5').... What is the right size screen (and does this influence make and model choice- I assume not)? (I have not decided where to put seats yet (thinking couch in front and raised second row seats if there is room).
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance.


I'd recommend the Elite Screens Darkstar 1.4 over the BD 1.4. Elite Screens also has a zero edge now. The new Microlite F2 screen should be considered as well.

Dave


----------



## Hawkmarket

Tooschaye said:


> Hi All,
> 
> 
> New here and to this equipment (knew a little bit several years ago and got out of date...) Thanks in advance for the help.
> 
> 
> I am building a dedicated room, with no windows, and will optimize (limited only by my knowhow) dark walls and optimal room lighting. I will watch movies in the dark, but sports with friends and some lights on.
> 
> 
> I am thinking of getting the Sony VW-350ES (4k Projector).
> 
> 
> Trying to figure out best screen and size. Installer recommended SI's Black Diamond 106' (he is open to discussing options, this is the start of the process). Assume for sake of argument that I care about optimal picture over price in the range of, say, $3,500+- or less (e.g. I would be fine paying 3.5k over 1k for an appreciable difference (but would prefer 1k all else being equal and not to get ripped off (read: waste money I can spend on seats....). Does this seem like the right screen for my preferences, projector and light conditions?
> 
> 
> Second related question regards the size. My room is 17.5" feet long, ceiling of 8 feet, width TBD (somewhere from 12.5' to 15.5').... What is the right size screen (and does this influence make and model choice- I assume not)? (I have not decided where to put seats yet (thinking couch in front and raised second row seats if there is room).
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance.


The purpose for using a BD is to help offset tremendous ambient light issues and it doesn't sound like that's your issue at all. I have more windows and ambient light than you're describing and am most likely going with the SI Slate 1.2. I would still absolutely defer to the experts around here but I'm not certain your room sounds like a great match for this screen.


----------



## Tooschaye

thezaks said:


> I'd recommend the Elite Screens Darkstar 1.4 over the BD 1.4. Elite Screens also has a zero edge now. The new Microlite F2 screen should be considered as well.
> 
> Dave


Just wondering why you think this? 
(searching google for answer now...)
Thanks again


----------



## thezaks

Tooschaye said:


> Just wondering why you think this?
> (searching google for answer now...)
> Thanks again


Hi,

The Elite Screens Darkstar has less artifacts than the BD, it looks to me to have a touch better contast than the BD, and it is better at angles than the BD. 

The new Microlite F2 and F3 screens have outstanding angles, when compared to either one of the above screens. The F3 allows the use of a lower lumens projector, while being ISF certified and having accurate color. 

Dave


----------



## Tooschaye

thezaks said:


> Hi,
> 
> The Elite Screens Darkstar has less artifacts than the BD, it looks to me to have a touch better contast than the BD, and it is better at angles than the BD.
> 
> The new Microlite F2 and F3 screens have outstanding angles, when compared to either one of the above screens. The F3 allows the use of a lower lumens projector, while being ISF certified and having accurate color.
> 
> Dave


Thanks. I emailed the Elite Screens east coast sales rep (apparently in CA)... what an annoying way to shop in this day and age. But I'm looking forward to the reply.... Sorry for the newbie question: what type of "artifacts" do you mean? And anyone know if there is a handy chart of angles around? curious if my room will be wide enough for that to make a difference (for my friends that aren't getting my seat...). Thanks again, super helpful to get feedback that isn't a years old review or from someone that isn't (as far as I know) selling me something...


----------



## Tooschaye

I spoke with the ES rep today. He recommended the polar star over the darkstar. Unclear to me why. Thoughts?


Thanks as always...


----------



## thezaks

Tooschaye said:


> Thanks. I emailed the Elite Screens east coast sales rep (apparently in CA)... what an annoying way to shop in this day and age. But I'm looking forward to the reply.... Sorry for the newbie question: what type of "artifacts" do you mean? And anyone know if there is a handy chart of angles around? curious if my room will be wide enough for that to make a difference (for my friends that aren't getting my seat...). Thanks again, super helpful to get feedback that isn't a years old review or from someone that isn't (as far as I know) selling me something...


OK, just to let you know in advance, even though I like the DarkStar screens, I think that Elite Screens is not very good at Customer Support - Screen Innovations is much better. Microlite is better than Elite Screens as well. 

Artifacts include sparkling and shimmering. Regarding angles, the screen manufacturers provide a "half gain" measurement. As the angle increases, the picture on the screen typically darkens. Here's the specs:

Black Diamond 1.4 = 50 degrees
DarkStar 1.4 = 35 degrees
Microlite F3 = 80 degrees

Here's the deceiving thing - although it looks on paper that the BD is better than the DarkStar, in actual viewing of the screen, it is not. I not only have samples of both, I have seen both in person. I also installed my friend's BD 1.4 screen. Believe me, I wanted to love the BD 1.4 screen, but it was the angles that killed it for me. The DarkStar, on the other hand, was much better when viewing a full screen. The Microlite is a freak of nature - it looks pretty much the same, regardless of the angle.

Dave


----------



## thezaks

Tooschaye said:


> I spoke with the ES rep today. He recommended the polar star over the darkstar. Unclear to me why. Thoughts?
> 
> 
> Thanks as always...


I'd be curious to understand why they recommend the PolarStar over the DarkStar?? If you had more ambient light, especially from the side, then I could see recommending the PolarStar. However, given your environment, I would think the DarkStar would be best.

Perhaps your choice of projector could be the reason? Have you mentioned the projector you are going to use? If the lumens are lower on the projector you want to use, then the PolarStar might make more sense, due to the extra gain. At that point, I would go to the Microlite F2 or F3 screen. 

Dave


----------



## Tooschaye

thezaks said:


> I'd be curious to understand why they recommend the PolarStar over the DarkStar?? If you had more ambient light, especially from the side, then I could see recommending the PolarStar. However, given your environment, I would think the DarkStar would be best.
> 
> Perhaps your choice of projector could be the reason? Have you mentioned the projector you are going to use? If the lumens are lower on the projector you want to use, then the PolarStar might make more sense, due to the extra gain. At that point, I would go to the Microlite F2 or F3 screen.
> 
> Dave


I did mention the projector, although unclear if they processed that information before responding.
I also spoke with the Microlite rep today (liked him, very helpful and happy to discuss options, he also personally owned the projector which was a lucky plus). He recommended the f2 over f3 (despite saying how awesome f3 looks) based on my input that the lights will be on for at least a good portion of my (family's) use. I find myself leaning this way, but not sure if I could put my finger on why. Read a review from projector people (oddly from a link on SI's website) that made me think this was the best option (it was a "shootout" comparison of the F2 and Slate).


----------



## thezaks

Tooschaye said:


> I did mention the projector, although unclear if they processed that information before responding.
> I also spoke with the Microlite rep today (liked him, very helpful and happy to discuss options, he also personally owned the projector which was a lucky plus). He recommended the f2 over f3 (despite saying how awesome f3 looks) based on my input that the lights will be on for at least a good portion of my (family's) use. I find myself leaning this way, but not sure if I could put my finger on why. Read a review from projector people (oddly from a link on SI's website) that made me think this was the best option (it was a "shootout" comparison of the F2 and Slate).


Sounds great! There's a Microlite thread in this forum too, so it will probably be good to check that out:

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/23-screens/1267206-microlite-optical-screen.html

Dave


----------



## Tooschaye

Perhaps this is too far off topic- but are there good pull-down screens for a totally dark room that are not dramatically expensive? Rather than having the trade-offs that seem to be inherent to the ALR screen when I watch a movie in the dark, but having the benefit of the ALR screen when watching sports with friends and the lights on, have a pull down in front of the ALR screen? Is this just a giant waste of money because I am over worried about the relatively small drawbacks of these ALR screens when I do turn off the lights (I have no windows)? Do I still need an expensive pull down screen for it to look good (read: better than the ALR screens in a dark room) or are there lower priced options that are great for a perfectly light controlled environment? 


Thanks as always...


----------



## thezaks

Tooschaye said:


> Perhaps this is too far off topic- but are there good pull-down screens for a totally dark room that are not dramatically expensive? Rather than having the trade-offs that seem to be inherent to the ALR screen when I watch a movie in the dark, but having the benefit of the ALR screen when watching sports with friends and the lights on, have a pull down in front of the ALR screen? Is this just a giant waste of money because I am over worried about the relatively small drawbacks of these ALR screens when I do turn off the lights (I have no windows)? Do I still need an expensive pull down screen for it to look good (read: better than the ALR screens in a dark room) or are there lower priced options that are great for a perfectly light controlled environment?
> 
> 
> Thanks as always...


If you have a blacked out dedicated room, then a quality unity gain pull down screen might be a great option. I don't have a dedicated room, so if going with a screen/projector, I will need to have an ALR screen. One thing I do like about ALR screens is the increased contrast and deeper blacks over a white screen.

Dave


----------



## Tooschaye

thezaks said:


> If you have a blacked out dedicated room, then a quality unity gain pull down screen might be a great option. I don't have a dedicated room, so if going with a screen/projector, I will need to have an ALR screen. One thing I do like about ALR screens is the increased contrast and deeper blacks over a white screen.
> 
> Dave


Would I need to calibrate the projector differently if I had two screens? 
(if so is it possible to have multiple presets?)


Thanks


----------



## thezaks

Tooschaye said:


> Would I need to calibrate the projector differently if I had two screens?
> (if so is it possible to have multiple presets?)
> 
> 
> Thanks


I would think that would be best. In fact, even if having just one screen, I would probably want multiple presets for different lighting scenarios.

Dave


----------



## thezaks

By the way, Screen Innovations is talking up some big announcement they will make at CEDIA, so in another week or two, we'll know more about that too.

Dave


----------



## jwithing

Hey guys, I've read through a ton of this thread and am now more confused than before. I am buying a new house and leaving my old setup. I could use some expertise in picking the best setup for my needs.

I am looking at picking up an Epson 5030UB to replace my Optoma HD25e. The dilemma I am facing is deciding which screen to get. I though I was settled on a Black Diamond .8 gain, but not sure if I should go for the 1.4 or the SLATE instead. My room is the basement, 155 inches wide and approximately 30 feet deep with a pool table on the far side. There are no windows and the double french door is on the far side by the pool table, so sunlight shouldn't be a big concern. I really want ALR so that I can entertain with the lights on. Lighting is 8 recessed lights and a pool table light.

Any recommendations for slate vs black diamond and the gain? I wanted the Black Diamond for the optimum ALR quality and I thought the .8 gain made the screen more black and looked really cool, more like a tv. I'm planning on viewing distance being 12 feet and a 4 person theater seating system. I thought .8 gain would reduce the risk of hot spotting and thought the epson would provide plenty of light.

The price isn't really a concern, but if the quality differences aren't very apparent, I could use a thousand dollar saving for an outdoor tv. 

Thanks in advance!


----------



## mylan

thezaks said:


> By the way, Screen Innovations is talking up some big announcement they will make at CEDIA, so in another week or two, we'll know more about that too.
> 
> Dave


The one thing we do know is that it will be insanely expensive. ....


----------



## Swolephile

mylan said:


> The one thing we do know is that it will be insanely expensive. ....


And insanely fragile.


----------



## thezaks

Swolephile said:


> And insanely fragile.


Possibly true, if they are anything like the BD screens. The Microlites, the DNP's, and the Elite Screens Darkstars are all more rugged.

Dave


----------



## Ftoast

jwithing said:


> Hey guys, I've read through a ton of this thread and am now more confused than before. I am buying a new house and leaving my old setup. I could use some expertise in picking the best setup for my needs.
> 
> I am looking at picking up an Epson 5030UB to replace my Optoma HD25e. The dilemma I am facing is deciding which screen to get. I though I was settled on a Black Diamond .8 gain, but not sure if I should go for the 1.4 or the SLATE instead. My room is the basement, 155 inches wide and approximately 30 feet deep with a pool table on the far side. There are no windows and the double french door is on the far side by the pool table, so sunlight shouldn't be a big concern. I really want ALR so that I can entertain with the lights on. Lighting is 8 recessed lights and a pool table light.
> 
> Any recommendations for slate vs black diamond and the gain? I wanted the Black Diamond for the optimum ALR quality and I thought the .8 gain made the screen more black and looked really cool, more like a tv. I'm planning on viewing distance being 12 feet and a 4 person theater seating system. I thought .8 gain would reduce the risk of hot spotting and thought the epson would provide plenty of light.
> 
> The price isn't really a concern, but if the quality differences aren't very apparent, I could use a thousand dollar saving for an outdoor tv.
> 
> Thanks in advance!


The long/narrow room with the screen at the far end will not see much benefit from an ALR screen when most/all of the ambient light will be coming from the same exact angle as the projector.

You'll have better luck going with a more modestly priced and less aggressive screen while working to keep those lights directed downward and off the screen. Narrow spot-bulbs, dimmer switches, dark-colored walls (and ceiling if possible..at least near the screen)..this is where your effort should focus the strongest.


----------



## jwithing

That's definetely not at all what I was expecting. Thank you for your honest input. Are you saying it would be overkill or just completely worthless to go with an ALR screen all together? I plan on upgrading the recessed lights, so I can go more directional, and using remote controlled dimmers, but not too keen on dark walls or ceiling. Is there a different screen that you would recommend? Im not worried about the price/going overkill, but if its pointless, I definitely would like to persue better options. Thanks!


----------



## Ftoast

jwithing said:


> That's definetely not at all what I was expecting. Thank you for your honest input. Are you saying it would be overkill or just completely worthless to go with an ALR screen all together? I plan on upgrading the recessed lights, so I can go more directional, and using remote controlled dimmers, but not too keen on dark walls or ceiling. Is there a different screen that you would recommend? Im not worried about the price/going overkill, but if its pointless, I definitely would like to persue better options. Thanks!


The more aggressive the ALR screen is, the narrower its viewing cone and more visible its artifacts (sparkling and dark corners) BUT the farther out from itself it'll be able to fight light. A weaker ALR screen will only fight light that's hitting it at the sharpest of angles..like a light nearly behind the screen it's so close and to the side or overhead. 

EVERY ALR screen, even the strongest (and the BD 0.8 is very aggressive) will still washout about as badly as a plain white screen from light hitting them from windows or lights positioned beside the seats or farther back. They only work when the light-source is forward enough and/or far above (tall ceiling) or way off toward the side enough so the light bounces off at a wide angle.

I think an ALR screen will help you with your light-colored walls by lessening the reflection washout. I don't think any screen will be of much help for the lights you'll want to leave on, because those lights are likely over the top of your seats and behind you..the screen couldn't fight those lights without also fighting the projected image's light.

Definitely do the spot-bulb thing..and it sounds like you already have dimmers setup or on the way. I think you'll have your lights under good control with what you're doing and almost any ALR screen will help against the light-colored walls/ceiling, so I'd personally urge you toward something a bit less dark and aggressive..but getting samples and deciding for yourself is cheap (or often free) and will help take care of any "what ifs" and curiosity. 
It'll also help you see if you notice sparkling on any particular screens or other things you may not like.

Gentler ALR options include screens like SI's very own Slate, all the way down to the ~$300 SilverTicket Grey. 
If it were me, I'd get all the samples I could, then narrow it down to the cheapest option that didn't show bothersome artifacts, then make sure to buy from a source which allows returns just in case..if worse comes to worse and it doesn't look as good at full-size, simply return it and move on to the next option up in price and availability. 
If you have a BestBuy and/or Frys, or any other local place with PJs set up..stop by and look at their screens too. The BlackDiamond and Stewart greyhawk (I think) are popular displays at some BestBuy locations.


----------



## jwithing

Thanks for the long writeup, I really appreciate it. I'll start gathering samples now, if I can get similar results for $3k less, I may as well spend that money on an outdoor tv for my hot tub viewing pleasure


----------



## thezaks

I have a feeling that Screen Innovations big announcement tomorrow (at CEDIA 2015) will have to do with a motorized screen. I just received an email with a picture of a remote control. We'll soon find out!

Dave


----------



## Sam Ash

thezaks said:


> I have a feeling that Screen Innovations big announcement tomorrow (at CEDIA 2015) will have to do with a motorized screen. I just received an email with a picture of a remote control. We'll soon find out!
> 
> Dave


I'm hoping it will be the next level in ALR / optical screen technology, that would be nice.


----------



## ConradC

thezaks said:


> I have a feeling that Screen Innovations big announcement tomorrow (at CEDIA 2015) will have to do with a motorized screen. I just received an email with a picture of a remote control. We'll soon find out!
> 
> Dave


I'm thinking some sort of masking system.


----------



## Hawkmarket

ConradC said:


> I'm thinking some sort of masking system.


That's my bet as well. An expensive one.


----------



## DAlba

There is an ad in Cedia Daily. SI 5 Series Motorized Revolve


----------



## jaychatbonneau

deewan said:


> I have the SI Pure Gray in a light controlled room. I can't recommend it enough. It is insanely good! IMO with a light controlled room you don't need to worry about the slate or black diamond features.


I am thinking about buying this screen. How are the whites; do they look gray? Is there any visible texture? I am especially concerned about texture in very bright scenes. Thanks.


----------



## deewan

jaychatbonneau said:


> I am thinking about buying this screen. How are the whites; do they look gray? Is there any visible texture? I am especially concerned about texture in very bright scenes. Thanks.


The "Pure" screens are designed to have little or no texture on the screen. Check the SI website for details. Also, the PureGray is not like a Black Diamond or 'gray' screen. There may be a slight shade of gray, but once the projector is on, you would never be able to tell with just your eyes.


----------



## liloatavs

deewan said:


> I have the SI Pure Gray in a light controlled room. I can't recommend it enough. It is insanely good! IMO with a light controlled room you don't need to worry about the slate or black diamond features.


I also have a light controlled room but the walls and the ceiling are light. Does your room have dark interior?


----------



## deewan

liloatavs said:


> I also have a light controlled room but the walls and the ceiling are light. Does your room have dark interior?


You can click on the click in my signature to see pictures of my room and determine the lightness or darkness of the walls, carpet and ceiling.


----------



## kevinnho

*113" Black Diamond on Ebay*

Looking for inputs on this Black Diamond screen on Ebay. I currently have Silver Ticket 120" white matte screen, but they're not great when lights are on (non dedicated theater room). How would this perform if I want to watch football with lights on? 


http://www.ebay.com/itm/Screen-Inno...273395?hash=item3ab46ef3b3:g:UVoAAOSwYHxWGmfU


----------



## deewan

kevinnho said:


> Looking for inputs on this Black Diamond screen on Ebay. I currently have Silver Ticket 120" white matte screen, but they're not great when lights are on (non dedicated theater room). How would this perform if I want to watch football with lights on?
> 
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Screen-Inno...273395?hash=item3ab46ef3b3:g:UVoAAOSwYHxWGmfU


Should work pretty well, but I think the price is a little steep for a used screen. I think a buddy of mine bought a 110" Black Diamond new for about $1200, and he didn't have to pay for shipping.


----------



## Sam Ash

Anyone with any experience with the BD UST screen, is it a modified BD1.4 screen ? Also, has anyone tried it with alternative and reasonably priced UST projectors other than the Sony which is quite expensive.


----------



## Swolephile

I'm wondering if anyone is purchasing the older fixed frame BD screens which must be assembled? I just cant see anyone prefering this older style with the velvet border over the newer and sleeker zero edge style.

Plus the material is so easily damaged with creases and bumps on the older fixed frame vs. the one piece assembled zero edge which is more like a extremely hard piece of wood. I've seen some of the zero edges with light scratches, but never the bumps which plague the older fixed frame version.


----------



## deewan

Swolephile said:


> I'm wondering if anyone is purchasing the older fixed frame BD Screens which must be assembled? I just cant see anyone prefering this older style with the velvet border over the newer and sleeker zero edge style.
> 
> Plus the material is so easily damaged with creases and bumps on the older fixed frame vs. the one piece assembled zero edge which is more like a extremely hard piece of wood. I've seen some of the zero edges with light scratches, but never the bumps which plague the older fixed frame version.


There is still a big demand for the fixed frame BD screens. One of the main reasons is the cost difference. There is a danger of botching the install and having a wrinkle or bubble in the screen, but I think it is a risk a lot of people are willing to take. I have a zero edge screen and love the look, but it is something I was willing to pay extra for.

One last thing, the zero edge screens are very difficult getting into some homes. Like you said, it is like a piece of wood. If you have troubles getting a 4x8 sheet of drywall into your theater, a zero edge screen si even worse. You either keep it in the box to protect the screen but adds weight and size, or you take it out of the box and risk scratching it while moving.


----------



## Swolephile

Anyone know if the led kits that come with some SI zero edge screens are the same as the cheapy led kits sold on ebay? Or are they of better quality?


----------



## deewan

Swolephile said:


> Anyone know if the led kits that come with some SI zero edge screens are the same as the cheapy led kits sold on ebay? Or are they of better quality?


I was curious about this as well when I bought my screen with LED kit. Basically the exact same kit. It would be easy to buy an LED kit off amazon and install it in the same channel SI does. Just depends on your value of your time. 

Search for pictures of how SI mounts the power supply and IR controller to the back of the screen. If you want I can take pictures of the LED sitting in the channel of the frame. Only reason I got my LED kit from SI was they were having a promo that made it essentially free. It's not worth the several hundred dollars they charge unless you don't want to mess with it.


----------



## wouldtoo

I am wanting to get Slate Zero Edge. I am seeing information about the 1.2 material and the .8 material. Could someone tell me about the difference between the two? I am learning. Is one better than the other?

Thanks


----------



## deewan

wouldtoo said:


> I am wanting to get Slate Zero Edge. I am seeing information about the 1.2 material and the .8 material. Could someone tell me about the difference between the two? I am learning. Is one better than the other?
> 
> Thanks


1.2 and 0.8 refers to the gain level of the screen. Easy way to think of it is a 1.2 gain screen will reflect 120% of the light a 1.0 screen would reject. A 0.8 screen will return 80% of the light a 1.0 screen would reflect. They both have their purpose. 0.8 can help with darker blacks, e.i. black light from the projector is reflected at 80% brightness instead of 120%. but a 1.2 screen could help out if you have a dim projector with amazing black levels. 

If you already have your projector, list it and people may be able to give you suggestions on which screen to buy. Also, this is *my personal opinion*, but the money saved on a Slate isn't worth the performance decrease from a Black Diamond. If you have a somewhat light controlled room and don't want to purchase a black diamond, check out the PureGray zero edge.


----------



## wouldtoo

Thanks for your info. I will be putting in the Sony VPLHW55ES. Our house is being built and we are scheduled to move in around December 19th. This is a Merry Christmas gift to myself, haha. The screen will be a 110"


----------



## deewan

@wouldtoo, I have a friend that has that same projector and a ~110" Black Diamond screen. That projector has plenty of light output for a 0.8 Black Diamond screen. His room is a open room in a basement with windows all along the left side. The Black Diamond works out wonderfully.


----------



## wouldtoo

Thanks for your info. Wanted to go Black Diamond, but was a little out of my price range. Went with the Slate. The room will be a dedicated media room without Windows. The only light that will come in is from the entry doors on side if I keep the doors open a little. I can't wait to get it in, naturally.


----------



## deewan

wouldtoo said:


> Thanks for your info. Wanted to go Black Diamond, but was a little out of my price range. Went with the Slate. The room will be a dedicated media room without Windows. The only light that will come in is from the entry doors on side if I keep the doors open a little. I can't wait to get it in, naturally.


Sounds like with that room a Black Diamond or slate screen would not be needed. I have a PureGray and even with overhead lights at 85% I have no need for a Black Diamond. 

You may want to do a little more research and save some more money and go with a zero edge pure screen.


----------



## Swolephile

Makes me wonder what is the purpose of a Slate .8 if it will not preserve contrast as well as a Black Diamond 1.4.


----------



## deewan

Swolephile said:


> Makes me wonder what is the purpose of a Slate .8 if it will not preserve contrast as well as a Black Diamond 1.4.


A Slate screen doesn't have the same ambient light reduction as the Black Diamond. I don't know the math required to compare the Slate 0.8 to a Black Diamond 1.4 for contrast ratio since that is comparing apples to oranges (screen gain and ambient light reduction). A 0.8 Slate and 1.4 Black Diamond may be similar for 'black' light, but for ambient light reduction it's my opinion that the money you save by going with a Slate isn't worth the performance reduction from a Black Diamond. All this is IF you need ambient light reduction. In a light controlled room and with lights that won't be full on and mounted over the screen, neither a Slate or Black Diamond screen is normally needed.


----------



## WilliamG

Hey all! I'm really struggling to decide what screen to get for my new house. It has a dedicated movie room space (well, I'm dedicating that space!). Walls and ceiling will be painted, and zero light from anywhere else. 

I demoed some Black Diamond 0.8 Zero Edge tonight, and was massively distracted by the shimmering/sparkle effect. 

I get the impression from this thread that BD is overkill for my space anyway. Is the Pure Zero Edge 0.8 or 1.3 any better in terms of sparkle?

Thanks!


----------



## Swolephile

WilliamG said:


> Hey all! I'm really struggling to decide what screen to get for my new house. It has a dedicated movie room space (well, I'm dedicating that space!). Walls and ceiling will be painted, and zero light from anywhere else.
> 
> I demoed some Black Diamond 0.8 Zero Edge tonight, and was massively distracted by the shimmering/sparkle effect.
> 
> I get the impression from this thread that BD is overkill for my space anyway. Is the Pure Zero Edge 0.8 or 1.3 any better in terms of sparkle?
> 
> Thanks!


You can go with a Pure white or pure gray zero edge for a light controlled room. Dont waste time with Black Diamond which is for viewing under moderate to heavy ambient levels of ambient light.


----------



## Swolephile

I have now read through every page of this thread. It's funny how this thread started with "new groundbreaking tech" which reportedly did not hot spot, was astonishly bright, etc. Then as more consumers began getting their hands on these screens, talk of their numerous flaws came out.

Reminds me so much of a certain other thread with lots of hype and groundbreaking optical technology coming soon.


----------



## WilliamG

Swolephile said:


> You can go with a Pure white or pure gray zero edge for a light controlled room. Dont waste time with Black Diamond which is for viewing under moderate to heavy ambient levels of ambient light.


Thank you. But I still have a shimmer/sparkle concern. Any opinions on whether the Pure white or Pure grey is free of this issue?


----------



## Swolephile

WilliamG said:


> Thank you. But I still have a shimmer/sparkle concern. Any opinions on whether the Pure white or Pure grey is free of this issue?


I saw zero shimmer, zero sparkle, and zero texture on the Pure White zero edge screen I owned.


----------



## WilliamG

Swolephile said:


> I saw zero shimmer, zero sparkle, and zero texture on the Pure White zero edge screen I owned.


Thank you. Hopefully others can chime in on this, too. For a light controlled room, is the white better than the grey for the Pure type screen?


----------



## Swolephile

WilliamG said:


> Thank you. Hopefully others can chime in on this, too. For a light controlled room, is the white better than the grey for the Pure type screen?


I believe so. I would never go with any other material besides white in a completely light controlled room for dark viewing.


----------



## WilliamG

Swolephile said:


> I believe so. I would never go with any other material besides white in a completely light controlled room for dark viewing.


Thank you. Why did you switch from the Pure white SI screen?


----------



## Swolephile

WilliamG said:


> Thank you. Why did you switch from the Pure white SI screen?


I don't have a light controlled room. It had the best picture quality of any screen I've owned from S.I. Screens. However my front projection setup is for ambient light viewing first so I needed a alr screen instead.


----------



## WilliamG

Swolephile said:


> I don't have a light controlled room. It had the best picture quality of any screen I've owned from S.I. Screens. However my front projection setup is for ambient light viewing first so I needed a alr screen instead.


Right. I understand. Would you pick the 1.3 Pure White screen over the Pure Grey screen?


----------



## Swolephile

WilliamG said:


> Right. I understand. Would you pick the 1.3 Pure White screen over the Pure Grey screen?


Yes. The pure grey screen was nice, but it did not bring anything substantial to dark viewing over the pure white in my opinion. And the image was a bit dimmer with the pure grey.


----------



## WilliamG

Swolephile said:


> Yes. The pure grey screen was nice, but it did not bring anything substantial to dark viewing over the pure white in my opinion. And the image was a bit dimmer with the pure grey.


Great info. Thank you. Hopefully some others can chime in about the Pure White 1.3 in terms of shimmer, because it was unbelievably distracting on the Black Diamond 0.8. I don't know why any discerning A/V enthusiast would live with it, personally, unless they HAD to because of ambient lighting issues.

I'm just hoping the 1.3 Pure White isn't too bright, even with a dark room..


----------



## Swolephile

WilliamG said:


> Great info. Thank you. Hopefully some others can chime in about the Pure White 1.3 in terms of shimmer, because it was unbelievably distracting on the Black Diamond 0.8. I don't know why any discerning A/V enthusiast would live with it, personally, unless they HAD to because of ambient lighting issues.
> 
> I'm just hoping the 1.3 Pure White isn't too bright, even with a dark room..


Here is a video of the Pure White Zero Edge. Most of the issues you saw are mainly with the Black Diamond series which has a host of screen artifacts due to it's aggressive alr properties. The pure materials are much different.


----------



## WilliamG

Swolephile said:


> Here is a video of the Pure White Zero Edge. Most of the issues you saw are mainly with the Black Diamond series which has a host of screen artifacts due to it's aggressive alr properties. The pure materials are much different.
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wt_4GcOA3dw


To be fair, that video is just pure marketing. Black Diamond is marketed similarly, - "the best thing ever" etc. It's actually really off-putting how much puffery goes on in SI's video marketing. Feels very peddler-on-the-street -ish.


----------



## Swolephile

WilliamG said:


> To be fair, that video is just pure marketing. Black Diamond is marketed similarly, - "the best thing ever" etc. It's actually really off-putting how much puffery goes on in SI's video marketing. Feels very peddler-on-the-street -ish.


Haha I agree. I only mentioned the video because in between the phony airbrushed looking pics they showed real images of an actual S.I. Pure White zero edge screen which I really liked. And I typically find white screens boring and overpriced. If you are going for a screen in a typical dark room for lights out viewing, I would not bother with any type of grey screen or alr screen. 


A simple white screen from Silver Ticket or Elite Screens would look very nice in a dark room for a mere fraction of the money S.I. is commanding. What other attributes you are looking for? I assume you are a mainly dark room viewing. A white screen is always going to be your best option hands down. I am kind of confused as to why you were looking at alr screens or even a grey screen for a light controlled room?


----------



## WilliamG

Swolephile said:


> Haha I agree. I only mentioned the video because in between the phony airbrushed looking pics they showed real images of an actual S.I. Pure White zero edge screen which I really liked. And I typically find white screens boring and overpriced. If you are going for a screen in a typical dark room for lights out viewing, I would not bother with any type of grey screen or alr screen.
> 
> 
> A simple white screen from Silver Ticket or Elite Screens would look very nice in a dark room for a mere fraction of the money S.I. is commanding. What other attributes you are looking for? I assume you are a mainly dark room viewing. A white screen is always going to be your best option hands down. I am kind of confused as to why you were looking at alr screens or even a grey screen for a light controlled room?


But my wife is SO sold on Zero Edge and the LED lighting. Rather limits my choices.


----------



## Swolephile

WilliamG said:


> But my wife is SO sold on Zero Edge and the LED lighting. Rather limits my choices.


You can get a Elite Screen Aeon Screen with cinewhite material and led lighting for well under $1,000. It has the borderless, zero edge look. 


http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_2?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=elite+screens+aeon


----------



## WilliamG

Swolephile said:


> You can get a Elite Screen Aeon Screen with cinewhite material and led lighting for well under $1,000. It has the borderless, zero edge look.
> 
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_2?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=elite+screens+aeon


Yes, but that border is (comparatively) huge. Wife said no.


----------



## Swolephile

WilliamG said:


> Yes, but that border is (comparatively) huge. Wife said no.


 The border is nothing but velvet tape that has to be added. All you have to do is not place it on the screen. When you assemble the screen it has no border unless you choose to add one.


----------



## Swolephile

Here is the Elite Screen Aeon without the border.


----------



## WilliamG

Swolephile said:


> The border is nothing but velvet tape that has to be added. All you have to do is not place it on the screen. When you assemble the screen it has no border unless you choose to add one.


I see. Still, velvet tape... There's clearly a quality difference between the two. Whether it's worth the additional cost is of course up for debate. The LED system on the Aeon is also a little bit... ghetto... But I see the value proposition there. SI is not cheap.


----------



## Swolephile

Lol. One has overblown pricing while the other is too cheap/ghetto. Plus alr screen with no alr related artifacts in a light controlled room. I give up.


----------



## WilliamG

Swolephile said:


> Lol. One has overblown pricing while the other is too cheap/ghetto. Plus alr screen with no alr related artifacts in a light controlled room. I give up.


Haha! It's a hard decision. But heck, the velvet strip you stick on IS ghetto!


----------



## Swolephile

WilliamG said:


> Haha! It's a hard decision. But heck, the velvet strip you stick on IS ghetto!


Ha,ha. How about we meet in the middle. What about a S.I. Slate Zero Edge with led kit. It is a very mild alr screen with minimal screen artifacts which looks great in a dark room. And is much cheaper than a Black Diamond.


----------



## WilliamG

Swolephile said:


> Ha,ha. How about we meet in the middle. What about a S.I. Slate Zero Edge with led kit. It is a very mild alr screen with minimal screen artifacts which looks great in a dark room. And is much cheaper than a Black Diamond.


But I thought you said the Pure White was better for a dark room? Make up your mind!


----------



## Swolephile

WilliamG said:


> But I thought you said the Pure White was better for a dark room? Make up your mind!


I'm trying to help you make up your mind!  The Pure White is the hands down winner for dark room viewing. The Pure White Zero edge has a very sleek design which will allow it to blend with any room in a home. 


I've given you the answer already but you are still waiting on others to chime in for you to seemingly come to a decision. You won't find too many people here who have seen more screens than me.


----------



## WilliamG

Swolephile said:


> I'm trying to help you make up your mind!  The Pure White is the hands down winner for dark room viewing. The Pure White Zero edge has a very sleek design which will allow it to blend with any room in a home.
> 
> 
> I've given you the answer already but you are still waiting on others to chime in for you to seemingly come to a decision. You won't find too many people here who have seen more screens than me.


I hear you. Mostly just wanted to know from others sensitive to sparkle/shimmer if they found the same as you. But yeah, very much leaning toward the Pure White Zero Edge.  Thank you. 

Be nice if somewhere in/near Seattle had a demo up!


----------



## Swolephile

WilliamG said:


> I hear you. Mostly just wanted to know from others sensitive to sparkle/shimmer if they found the same as you. But yeah, very much leaning toward the Pure White Zero Edge.  Thank you.
> 
> Be nice if somewhere in/near Seattle had a demo up!


If you are flat out looking for the most artifact free, accurate picture you can find for dark room viewing, the Stewart Studiotek 100 is hands down the best material I know of. It is the closest material to an almost perfect neutral screen available. 


http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/standard-products/luninesse-(lum)


You can get this material placed on their new borderless frame which is the Luminesse. You are are going to pay for it. But this would satisfy your discerning eye for the most accurate picture available along with your wife's discriminating taste for an aesthetically pleasing zero edge screen


It will be in the same price range as S.I. Screens. I have given you the perfect answer for your scenario. Let's see what you do with the info.


----------



## WilliamG

Swolephile said:


> If you are flat out looking for the most artifact free, accurate picture you can find for dark room viewing, the Stewart Studiotek 100 is hands down the best material I know of. It is the closest material to an almost perfect neutral screen available. It will be in the same price range as S.I. Screens. There you go. I gave you the perfect answer for your scenario. Let's see what you do with the info.
> 
> 
> http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/standard-products/luninesse-(lum)
> 
> 
> You can get this material placed on their new borderless frame which is the Luminesse. You are are going to pay for it. But this would satisfy your discerning eye for the most accurate picture available along with your wife's discriminating taste for an aesthetically pleasing zero edge screen.


So by mentioning the Stewart.... you're saying the Pure White SI screen _isn't_ artifact free? Either it is or it isn't. I really want to have zero shimmer/sparkle. This is of paramount importance. Make up your mind!


----------



## Swolephile

WilliamG said:


> So by mentioning the Stewart.... you're saying the Pure White SI screen _isn't_ artifact free? Either it is or it isn't. I really want to have zero shimmer/sparkle. This is of paramount importance. Make up your mind!


I've had both in my home. The Stewart Studiotek 100 is the most accurate screen available and is an industry benchmark. No screen is perfectly neutral. Anyone who tells you that for any brand is lying. Especially a screen with any sort of gain attached. I'm trying to help you here. 


If you want the the most accurate screen available in the market then go with the Stewart Studiotek 100 on a Luminesse frame with led kit.


----------



## WilliamG

Swolephile said:


> I've had both in my home. The Stewart Studiotek 100 is the most accurate screen available and is an industry benchmark. No screen is perfectly neutral. Anyone who tells you that for any brand is lying. Especially a screen with any sort of gain attached. I'm trying to help you here.
> 
> 
> If you want the the most accurate screen available in the market then go with the Stewart Studiotek 100 on a Luminesse frame with led kit.


That does sound great. This concerns me a little, though... :

http://www.projectorcentral.com/stewart_studiotek_100.htm

_"You'll need to make sure you have non-reflective surfaces throughout your room. Reflected light is just as bad as ambient light as far as contrast ratios are concerned. Most consumers don't want to go through the hassle of turning their room into a black hole. If you're one of these people, Stewart's screen materials that are intended for home theater use are better alternatives for you."_

My concern is my room isn't very wide, deep or tall. It's 14' (168") deep and 10'6" (126") wide, and 8' (96") tall. The screen is going to be 110" diagonal, which is about 96" wide. Speakers will be on either side. Then the walls. The walls and ceiling will be painted, and the window and door will be covered 110% with light blocking curtains. So aside from possible wall/ceiling reflections - even after painting appropriately, it will be a man cave.

Should I still be concerned about screen/light reflectance off walls/ceiling, though?


----------



## Swolephile

WilliamG said:


> That does sound great. This concerns me a little, though... :
> 
> http://www.projectorcentral.com/stewart_studiotek_100.htm
> 
> _"You'll need to make sure you have non-reflective surfaces throughout your room. Reflected light is just as bad as ambient light as far as contrast ratios are concerned. Most consumers don't want to go through the hassle of turning their room into a black hole. If you're one of these people, Stewart's screen materials that are intended for home theater use are better alternatives for you."_
> 
> My concern is my room isn't very wide, deep or tall. It's 14' (168") deep and 10'6" (126") wide, and 8' (96") tall. The screen is going to be 110" diagonal, which is about 96" wide. Speakers will be on either side. Then the walls. The walls and ceiling will be painted, and the window and door will be covered 110% with light blocking curtains. So aside from possible wall/ceiling reflections - even after painting appropriately, it will be a man cave.
> 
> Should I still be concerned about screen/light reflectance off walls/ceiling, though?


Depends on the color of your walls and ceilings. Anything besides black will absorb less light and have a higher degree of reflection.


----------



## WilliamG

Swolephile said:


> Depends on the color of your walls and ceilings. Anything besides black will absorb less light and have a higher degree of reflection.


The ceiling is likely going to be a dark color (almost black - dark grey). The walls we're undecided on. All of it will be dark, deep colors, though. I feel like I could never make a truly informed decision... 

Need to figure out "movie room" paint, too...


----------



## Swolephile

WilliamG said:


> The ceiling is likely going to be a dark color (almost black - dark grey). The walls we're undecided on. All of it will be dark, deep colors, though. I feel like I could never make a truly informed decision...
> 
> Need to figure out "movie room" paint, too...


Black would be best. Dark grey would be close. All in all, the Stewart 100 would be your most accurate option in a dark room with dark walls, ceilings etc. Bringing in any alr screen will introduce some degree of artifacts.


The S.I. Pure White is a very good screen. However the Stewart ST 100 is the industry standard which other screens are measured by in testing, comparisons, etc. And the two screens are in the same price category. So of course I am going to recommend going with the industry benchmark screen which is widely recognized to be the most accurate screen available.


----------



## WilliamG

Swolephile said:


> Black would be best. Dark grey would be close. All in all, the Stewart 100 would be your most accurate option in a dark room with dark walls, ceilings etc. Bringing in any alr screen will introduce some degree of artifacts.
> 
> 
> The S.I. Pure White is a very good screen. However the Stewart ST 100 is the industry standard which other screens are measured by in testing, comparisons, etc. And the two screens are in the same price category. So of course I am going to recommend going with the industry benchmark screen which is widely recognized to be the most accurate screen available.


Perfect. Thank you. Now I need to figure out how much a 110" diagonal ST 100 screen with LEDs will cost me.


----------



## Swolephile

I've looked at seven used Black Diamond Zero Edge screens over the last two weeks. All have dents that start behind the screen and look like bubbles on the screen. I am just not understanding how this is also happening to their rigid one piece zero edge screens?


----------



## ch1sox

Swolephile said:


> I've looked at seven used Black Diamond Zero Edge screens over the last two weeks. All have dents that start behind the screen and look like bubbles on the screen. I am just not understanding how this is also happening to their rigid one piece zero edge screens?


Bubbles on the rigid screen? I don't see how that would even be possible.


----------



## Swolephile

ch1sox said:


> Bubbles on the rigid screen? I don't see how that would even be possible.


Just posted pics of a few of the screens I saw with this blemish. I am also baffled by how this is happening to their rigid zero edge screens.


----------



## ch1sox

Swolephile said:


> Just posted pics of a few of the screens I saw with this blemish. I am also baffled by how this is happening to their rigid zero edge screens.


I wouldn't let that sway my buying decision. You'd have to somehow hit the back of the screen with something to cause that I'd think.


----------



## Swolephile

ch1sox said:


> I wouldn't let that sway my buying decision. You'd have to somehow hit the back of the screen with something to cause that I'd think.


Well I was going to buy a demo or used one. However each preowned one I've looked at has this bubble blemish somewhere on the screen.


----------



## ch1sox

Swolephile said:


> Well I was going to buy a demo or used one. However each preowned one I've looked at has this bubble blemish somewhere on the screen.


 oh


----------



## Swolephile

ch1sox said:


> oh


Yeah Im going to have to buy a new screen. My fixed frame Black Diamond got the same dent/bubble blemish during delivery. I thought the rigid zero edge would be immune to this kind of blemish. Looks like I was wrong.


----------



## thezaks

Yikes! I already had reasons for preferring other ALR screens over the BD, but I'll add this one to the list.

Dave


----------



## Dan Ellis

*Continuing SI Pure White discussion*

I hate to continue to drag this old thread on, but the recent posts are right in my query zone. I just installed a new JVC RS600 projector. I've had a very good 8" CRT shooting a 90" diagonal 16:9 Draper M1300 motorized screen for many years. I moved during those years and had room in my new AV cabinetry for a larger screen, but burn in lines on CRT tubes prevented switching. With that constriction lifted, I want to fit all the screen I can. With Stewart, the max I can fit is 100" diagonal. The length of the weight rod is my limiting factor. If I went with Draper again I could fit 102". But, my older Draper screen has picked up visible horizontal lines from the roller mechanism and is also not opaque. I have a daytime 80" LCD right behind it, which I am sure is backlighting the screen and degrading contrast to some degree. I hear the new Draper material is basically the same. With SI I can fit a 106" screen. That is a lot more surface, making me lean toward them even though I am a bit leery of their excess marketing hype and a lack of any real data on their screens, nor ISF certifications and so on. So is their any reason I should avoid the SI Pure White relative to Stewart or other alternatives?

BTW, I have poor light control in the room, which is why I have the daytime LCD. I even have reflection and glare problems with it from the large north facing windows on the wall behind the projector (opposite end from screen). So we have gotten used to using the projector only when it is dark outside. Room itself fairly dark otherwise. Darker wall and ceiling paint and ceiling is tall cathedral. Floor fairly dark too. Viewing area is around 14' wide and ranges from 8-16' back from screen depending on where you sit. Projector throw is short side, around 1.4ish.

On another note, I took home some samples of ALR SI materials. It is hard to say if I got a good feel using these smaller samples, but neither BD or neither Slate or even Pure Grey did it for me. Slate 1.2 looked like it was the best of the bunch, but for the gains made in ambient contrast it knocked off quite a bit of brightness and visual punch. And it still didn't solve the daytime problem, it only improved it. And it looked like it would degrade night time movie viewing in lost bright levels and viewing angle drop off. Am I selling the ALR materials short?


----------



## ConradC

Dan Ellis said:


> I hate to continue to drag this old thread on, but the recent posts are right in my query zone. I just installed a new JVC RS600 projector. I've had a very good 8" CRT shooting a 90" diagonal 16:9 Draper M1300 motorized screen for many years. I moved during those years and had room in my new AV cabinetry for a larger screen, but burn in lines on CRT tubes prevented switching. With that constriction lifted, I want to fit all the screen I can. With Stewart, the max I can fit is 100" diagonal. The length of the weight rod is my limiting factor. If I went with Draper again I could fit 102". But, my older Draper screen has picked up visible horizontal lines from the roller mechanism and is also not opaque. I have a daytime 80" LCD right behind it, which I am sure is backlighting the screen and degrading contrast to some degree. I hear the new Draper material is basically the same. With SI I can fit a 106" screen. That is a lot more surface, making me lean toward them even though I am a bit leery of their excess marketing hype and a lack of any real data on their screens, nor ISF certifications and so on. So is their any reason I should avoid the SI Pure White relative to Stewart or other alternatives?
> 
> BTW, I have poor light control in the room, which is why I have the daytime LCD. I even have reflection and glare problems with it from the large north facing windows on the wall behind the projector (opposite end from screen). So we have gotten used to using the projector only when it is dark outside. Room itself fairly dark otherwise. Darker wall and ceiling paint and ceiling is tall cathedral. Floor fairly dark too. Viewing area is around 14' wide and ranges from 8-16' back from screen depending on where you sit. Projector throw is short side, around 1.4ish.
> 
> On another note, I took home some samples of ALR SI materials. It is hard to say if I got a good feel using these smaller samples, but neither BD or neither Slate or even Pure Grey did it for me. Slate 1.2 looked like it was the best of the bunch, but for the gains made in ambient contrast it knocked off quite a bit of brightness and visual punch. And it still didn't solve the daytime problem, it only improved it. And it looked like it would degrade night time movie viewing in lost bright levels and viewing angle drop off. Am I selling the ALR materials short?


I don't think any ALR screens are going to work in your scenario. ALR screens are designed to reject as much light as it can from the sides and top (any angled light hitting the screen). It won't be able to block light that is coming from behind the projector or straight on.


----------



## Dan Ellis

After viewing the ALR samples with the RS600, I came to that same conclusion. We will have to live with our present LCD situation during daylight hours or finally add some movable shading to rear windows. 2 are larger quarter circles and high off floor so not an easy solution. The RS600 is so much brighter than our prior CRT that on high lamp we can now view brighter source material during the day on our white 1.1 matt screen reasonably well. Not darker movies of course. It can also handle some low level evening ambient lighting pretty well for non-critical viewing or group entertaining. So it comes down to which white motorized screen option given the options discussed. And alternatively, would like any comments as to whether I have properly characterized the ALR samples as not really being worth it for reasons discussed.


----------



## WilliamG

Swolephile said:


> Black would be best. Dark grey would be close. All in all, the Stewart 100 would be your most accurate option in a dark room with dark walls, ceilings etc. Bringing in any alr screen will introduce some degree of artifacts.
> 
> 
> The S.I. Pure White is a very good screen. However the Stewart ST 100 is the industry standard which other screens are measured by in testing, comparisons, etc. And the two screens are in the same price category. So of course I am going to recommend going with the industry benchmark screen which is widely recognized to be the most accurate screen available.


Forgot to update. I ordered the Luminesse + ST100 screen with LED kit. Should have it in a few weeks! Thanks for the help.


----------



## Mike Garrett

Dan Ellis said:


> After viewing the ALR samples with the RS600, I came to that same conclusion. We will have to live with our present LCD situation during daylight hours or finally add some movable shading to rear windows. 2 are larger quarter circles and high off floor so not an easy solution. The RS600 is so much brighter than our prior CRT that on high lamp we can now view brighter source material during the day on our white 1.1 matt screen reasonably well. Not darker movies of course. It can also handle some low level evening ambient lighting pretty well for non-critical viewing or group entertaining. So it comes down to which white motorized screen option given the options discussed. And alternatively, would like any comments as to whether I have properly characterized the ALR samples as not really being worth it for reasons discussed.


Good to have some feedback on the sample sent you. Would be happy to continue our conversation, where we left off. Light coming from the back of the room is tough. About the only thing you can do is go with a gray based screen, but if you did not like the image from the Pure Gray and are going to keep using the TV during the day, then white will work for you.


----------



## WilliamG

Swolephile said:


> Black would be best. Dark grey would be close. All in all, the Stewart 100 would be your most accurate option in a dark room with dark walls, ceilings etc. Bringing in any alr screen will introduce some degree of artifacts.
> 
> 
> The S.I. Pure White is a very good screen. However the Stewart ST 100 is the industry standard which other screens are measured by in testing, comparisons, etc. And the two screens are in the same price category. So of course I am going to recommend going with the industry benchmark screen which is widely recognized to be the most accurate screen available.


Thought you'd like to know I got my Studiotek 100 115" Diagonal, 16:9, Luminesse with LED kit this weekend. It's absolutely incredible. Absolutely no shimmer, which I'm SO sensitive to. It's just amazing, and without doubt the best screen I've ever seen, cinema or otherwise. 

I'm not completely done with the movie room setup, but I set things up just to test - in my bat cave (black screen wall, grey ceilings and side walls - blackout curtains to the side. It's just... yeah.... I couldn't stop gawking.


----------



## bytebuster

Folks,
I just installed my 100 inch Slate 1.2
I do notice some small amount of "shimmering" or "sparkles" on bright white scenes. Interesting thing is that the effect is a lot less pronounced if I stand and look at the screen (by keeping eye level with center of screen).
But if I change the viewing angle by viewing the screen sitting on my couch (so the center is now a few inches from eye level), I do see shimmering on bright white scenes


----------



## WilliamG

bytebuster said:


> Folks,
> I just installed my 100 inch Slate 1.2
> I do notice some small amount of "shimmering" or "sparkles" on bright white scenes. Interesting thing is that the effect is a lot less pronounced if I stand and look at the screen (by keeping eye level with center of screen).
> But if I change the viewing angle by viewing the screen sitting on my couch (so the center is now a few inches from eye level), I do see shimmering on bright white scenes


bytebuster - I'll say that this is not to bash the SI screens, but I struggled with this big time with the BD screens. I was dead set on a Black Diamond screen, and I'm SO glad I got to demo it, because I found the sparkles to be very, very objectionable. The viewing angle absolutely can affect this, and the area of the screen that's showing a brighter image can vary. e.g. if you have a bright area in the lower left of the screen, you might not see the sparkles there, but if it's in the top right, your viewing angle to the top right might be such that you DO see the sparkles there. Hopefully that makes sense.

If you can live with the sparkles (as many are clearly able to do), I'd say live with it. If you can't, well.. there are alternatives. I'm glad I was able to demo the Black Diamond material. While I loved its general properties, the sparkles were something my wife and I absolutely couldn't live with.


----------



## bytebuster

Thanks William. Yeah. The sparkles, thought distracting, are something I am getting used to (I think) 

I had a smaller Stewart firehawk G3 earlier and that too had sparkles. Based on comments online ... I was expecting lesser artifacts with a newer material like SI's Slate.
Otherwise its a good screen. Love that the flexibility in mounting offered by the SI series 5 versus the Stewart Luxus

Will post a more detailed take on the screen later


----------



## Runnjacket

Ok I need advise as well - have read the entire thread and would like some advise

I have an Epson 5030 if dedicated theater room. Room is about 17 ft long and 12 feet wide painted gray (walls and ceiling)

The room is my sports room and has lots of sports memorabilia so there are several reflective surfaces

I was leaning towards a SI pure white or gray but after reading about the Stewart I was thinking that might be a good option

I really want something with good contrast and detailed colors - I can control the light but at times will watch with lights up and I'm worried about the reflections in room from sports memorabilia 

Would love some advise


----------



## Mike Garrett

Runnjacket said:


> Ok I need advise as well - have read the entire thread and would like some advise
> 
> I have an Epson 5030 if dedicated theater room. Room is about 17 ft long and 12 feet wide painted gray (walls and ceiling)
> 
> The room is my sports room and has lots of sports memorabilia so there are several reflective surfaces
> 
> I was leaning towards a SI pure white or gray but after reading about the Stewart I was thinking that might be a good option
> 
> I really want something with good contrast and detailed colors - I can control the light but at times will watch with lights up and I'm worried about the reflections in room from sports memorabilia
> 
> Would love some advise


Need to know:

Screen size?
Viewing distance?
Throw range available?


----------



## ShoutingMan

I hope this isn't against forum rules or the thread topic: 

I'm cross-checking info from a custom installer, and want a typical price for a SI screen (120", fixed frame, acoustically transparent, gain ~1.0). Their website is inscrutable to me; I can't figure out which screen model is for AT. 

Or more generally: are SI screens $2000 or $4000 screens?


----------



## muzz

SI screens I've seen are very cheap cost wise. Never saw one even close to that expensive. They have a website, go check it out. The 106" fixed frame AT screen I bought was $329 shipped on Amazon.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk


----------



## muzz

WAB is the AT screen

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk


----------



## Ellebob

SI Black Diamond screens are usually in that price range. They are more expensive than Stewart.


----------



## ShoutingMan

muzz said:


> SI screens I've seen are very cheap cost wise. Never saw one even close to that expensive. They have a website, go check it out. The 106" fixed frame AT screen I bought was $329 shipped on Amazon.


SI doesn't give prices online. I asked at a local store: SI's Series 5 120" AT (Maestro) screen retails for about $3500.

I'm determining whether to buy a SI screen for $3500 through a custom installer, who will design and construct my room, or buy myself say a Seymour AV screen for about half the price and have the installer install it. It sounds like an easy decision, but it gets trickier negotiating prices and work with an installer as you start eliminating their profit.


----------



## mhconley

muzz said:


> SI screens I've seen are very cheap cost wise. Never saw one even close to that expensive. They have a website, go check it out. The 106" fixed frame AT screen I bought was $329 shipped on Amazon.
> 
> Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk





muzz said:


> WAB is the AT screen
> 
> Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk


Muzz seems to be confusing Screen Innovations with Silver Ticket. Big difference. Silver Ticket screens run from $200 to $500; SI screens run from $3000 to $6000. 

Martin


----------



## muzz

You would be correct.
Apologies.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk


----------



## Mike Garrett

ShoutingMan said:


> I hope this isn't against forum rules or the thread topic:
> 
> I'm cross-checking info from a custom installer, and want a typical price for a SI screen (120", fixed frame, acoustically transparent, gain ~1.0). Their website is inscrutable to me; I can't figure out which screen model is for AT.
> 
> Or more generally: are SI screens $2000 or $4000 screens?





muzz said:


> SI screens I've seen are very cheap cost wise. Never saw one even close to that expensive. They have a website, go check it out. The 106" fixed frame AT screen I bought was $329 shipped on Amazon.
> 
> Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk


Screen Innovations sells their entry level screen on Amazon. I don't think they sell their better screens on Amazon. MSRP for a 120" diagonal 16:9 AT screen is $3,465 plus shipping.

Sent you a PM.


----------



## ShoutingMan

Anyone know of any comparisons between SI and Seymour AT screens? For whatever reasons, these have become my top two options. (Well, and DragonFly as a distant third as proposed by an installer to fit in my budget.)

I'm most interested in whether they are basically peers or if one is substantially better than the other. A dB or two of loss in sound or minor differences in calibration impacts to the projector probably aren't much concern.


----------



## ultracitrus

Just mounted a Black Diamond, 106" diag screen, on the wall. Proj is 13 feet away, ceiling mounted, 2500 lumen.

Ambient light rejection just seems kinda "meh". Looks great in a pitch black room.

Am i just hoping for to much that isnt realistic with ambient light (table lamps on, floor-to-ceiling windows blind open partially & light entering) or are there any tips/tricls to increase/maximize performance (turning all lights OFF is a great suggestion but not necessarily relevant!)


----------



## WereWolf84

ultracitrus said:


> Just mounted a Black Diamond, 106" diag screen, on the wall. Proj is 13 feet away, ceiling mounted, 2500 lumen.
> 
> Ambient light rejection just seems kinda "meh". Looks great in a pitch black room.
> 
> Am i just hoping for to much that isnt realistic with ambient light (table lamps on, floor-to-ceiling windows blind open partially & light entering) or are there any tips/tricls to increase/maximize performance (turning all lights OFF is a great suggestion but not necessary relevant!)


Pictures or it didn't happen


----------



## ultracitrus

Ha! Fair enough!!


Pic with the lights off











Pic with lights on (table lamps on, 1 in both corners, pic is from sitting on the couch, lights are directly to the left & right of couch)


----------



## ConradC

If you wall is white or off white, see how the picture looks like when projected directly to the wall. That should give you a rough estimate of how much light rejection you are achieving. The more off centered the light is, the more it will reject. It won't reject the light coming from the same direction as your projector.


----------



## RoySan_mx

Hi everyone, I am planning to get a SI creen and I was able to record a personal test using slate .8 vs slate 1.2 vs black diamond 1.4 over a vutec white screen. I want to share the video if it is useful for anyone.

You can watch the first 2 videos here:
*youtube.com/watch?v=J2rjsSIOEqE
*youtube.com/watch?v=dNP7dTBxKUI

or 

Leave a comment for helping me get the best option.
*avsforum.com/forum/23-screens/2505138-screen-innovations-real-life-comparison-test-white-screen-vs-slate-vs-black-diamond.html#post45147026[/url]

Thank you for your attention.


----------



## monstosity12

does anybody have any experience viewing the black diamond 2.7 gain screen?

And what is the min. throw distance the projector should be from the screen? im assuming a min. of 1.5x.


----------



## Mike Garrett

monstosity12 said:


> does anybody have any experience viewing the black diamond 2.7 gain screen?
> 
> And what is the min. throw distance the projector should be from the screen? im assuming a min. of 1.5x.


Correct. The minimum throw is 1.5 times image width.


----------



## thezaks

That's a tough setup for even an ALR screen. ALR screens attempt to filter light from overhead and from the sides, but when the light comes from the same direction as the projector light (your sliding glass door), then it becomes fairly ineffective. You will need a light canon of a projector to help with this situation as well. The Epson has a noisy fan, unless in the lowest lamp mode. 

If it were me, I'd just get a large TV and call it a day.

Dave


----------



## techjoy

thezaks said:


> That's a tough setup for even an ALR screen. ALR screens attempt to filter light from overhead and from the sides, but when the light comes from the same direction as the projector light (your sliding glass door), then it becomes fairly ineffective. You will need a light canon of a projector to help with this situation as well. The Epson has a noisy fan, unless in the lowest lamp mode.
> 
> If it were me, I'd just get a large TV and call it a day.
> 
> Dave


Dave,

Yes, I am also considering a large 85" Sony in place of a 95-100" projection screen. That said, my goal is to squeeze as many inches out of that room as possible, thus why I'm looking at projection. So, from your perspective, the configuration of my room would make projection a challenge unless I control the ambient lighting with curtains, etc.? My concern regarding a more powerful projector is the fact the screen would be situated at the lower throw threshold distance from projector, thus increasing the lumen output may have unintended consequences with those pesky sparkles and hot spots.

It appears I'm caught between the proverbial rock and a hard place. Do you think more ambient light control would remedy things a bit or is it the fact the screen is flooded on both sides with light at angles it can't effectively reject?

Andres


----------



## thezaks

Hi Andres,

More light control will help - especially with the light coming in from the sliding glass door. It's a personal preference. Some folks like to have light coming in during the day, and some folks don't mind having it like a cave. The more light control, the better the picture quality. 

Dave


----------



## techjoy

deewan said:


> I have the SI Pure Gray in a light controlled room. I can't recommend it enough. It is insanely good! IMO with a light controlled room you don't need to worry about the slate or black diamond features.


I have about 7 FC of light at worse in my Family Room during the day (measured at noon toward the center of room, much less at the screen location). There is currently a pendant light that will be removed to make projection possible and one lamp light that will remain. I may add new pin lights to wash the screen and walls for affect when the screen is not in use and to have actual lighting in the room. 

Here is a layout of what I intend to do. Some modest light bleeds into room from Kitchen and slider (which opens to a covered patio on the east side of house), but both ambient light sources will eventually be controlled with drapery or in the case of Kitchen light; be turned off during a movie. At about 6 PM, the room becomes even more dim (about 4FC). Eventually, the walls and ceilings will be painted a medium flat gray, the floors will be a textured dark gray carpet tile, the rear wall behind the screen will be some black fabric or velored acoustic panels. The screen will actually float over an existing window which will be covered with blinds.

Like others, I have read enough on this thread to be extremely concerned with the "cons" of ALR screens and while I like the "flat panel" look the dark gray materials provide, I am concerned once in my room, a BD or Slate will not yield enough ambient light rejecting benefits to sacrifice the image quality of say a Pure White 1.0 Zero Edge or a Stewart LuminEsse with the StudioTek 1.0 material. So.. my question is, in the room I just described where I watch TV mostly in the mid afternoon and upward, where movies are watched with little to no artificial lighting, sometimes with small traces of ambient light, but certainly not a bat cave, should I just go with a quality white screen like the ones mentioned and scrap the ALR dream?


----------



## deewan

techjoy said:


> I have about 7 FC of light at worse in my Family Room during the day (measured at noon toward the center of room, much less at the screen location). There is currently a pendant light that will be removed to make projection possible and one lamp light that will remain. I may add new pin lights to wash the screen and walls for affect when the screen is not in use and to have actual lighting in the room.
> 
> Here is a layout of what I intend to do. Some modest light bleeds into room from Kitchen and slider (which opens to a covered patio on the east side of house), but both ambient light sources will eventually be controlled with drapery or in the case of Kitchen light; be turned off during a movie. At about 6 PM, the room becomes even more dim (about 4FC). Eventually, the walls and ceilings will be painted a medium flat gray, the floors will be a textured dark gray carpet tile, the rear wall behind the screen will be some black fabric or velored acoustic panels. The screen will actually float over an existing window which will be covered with blinds.
> 
> Like others, I have read enough on this thread to be extremely concerned with the "cons" of ALR screens and while I like the "flat panel" look the dark gray materials provide, I am concerned once in my room, a BD or Slate will not yield enough ambient light rejecting benefits to sacrifice the image quality of say a Pure White 1.0 Zero Edge or a Stewart LuminEsse with the StudioTek 1.0 material. So.. my question is, in the room I just described where I watch TV mostly in the mid afternoon and upward, where movies are watched with little to no artificial lighting, sometimes with small traces of ambient light, but certainly not a bat cave, should I just go with a quality white screen like the ones mentioned and scrap the ALR dream?


My opinion, unless you want the look of the BD screen when it's not in use, you have very little need for a BD screen in your room. Unless the projector you plan to use is really dim, I think a Pure Gray or Pure White is a great option. Personally I always recommend Pure Gray simply because it's not white, which for some reason seems more like a white board when not in use than the Pure Gray. Once the lights are down or a projector is used, very little perceived difference.


----------



## techjoy

deewan said:


> My opinion, unless you want the look of the BD screen when it's not in use, you have very little need for a BD screen in your room. Unless the projector you plan to use is really dim, I think a Pure Gray or Pure White is a great option. Personally I always recommend Pure Gray simply because it's not white, which for some reason seems more like a white board when not in use than the Pure Gray. Once the lights are down or a projector is used, very little perceived difference.


I think the look of a chalk board, as you put it, is exactly what bothers me the most as the room also is a functioning Family Room; so it seems the choice is more an aesthetic one than one driven by realworld need. As I mentioned earlier, the room is generally dim, so I think your assessment is accurate; an ALR is likely overkill. I am willing to give up some daylight performance to ensure that 80% of the time I watch movies (mostly at night) for a flawless picture free of those pesky artifacts, sparkles, dim borders, poor off axis viewing angle, etc..

Currently, I am torn between the relatively inexpensive Epson 6040, the formidable JVC RS600 and the Epson LS10500. Uncalibrated lumem output goes to the 6040 as well as the price, but I'm concerned once calibrated, those 2500 lumens will drop below that of the more expensive units. Further, the JVC blacks are amazing, but some say the image processing is softer at 1080p; not as sharp as the other two. The LS10500 has a lot going for it too, is less than the JVC, but only has 1500 lumems. The next question is then how many lumems do I really need in that room to make a 120" 16:9 white or gray screen pop enough in modest ambient light conditions and look gorgeous at night?


----------



## techjoy

thezaks said:


> Hi Andres,
> 
> More light control will help - especially with the light coming in from the sliding glass door. It's a personal preference. Some folks like to have light coming in during the day, and some folks don't mind having it like a cave. The more light control, the better the picture quality.
> 
> Dave


I am one of those who dislikes extreme darkness while entertaining, but love it to watch movies. Unfortunately, both often happen at the same time, thus why I was even considering an ALR screen. I do plan for drapery blackouts around the rear of room and an additional sheer behind the slider for some ambient light control when we have visitors, but don't want to entertain in a pit! Lol Decisions decisions


----------



## tomiy1

If anyone is looking for a zero edge, I'm selling one here:
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/218-...mond-zero-edge-106a-1-4-projector-screen.html

thanks


----------



## hungarianhc

I'm about 48 to 72 hours away from pulling the trigger on a Screen Innovations Black Diamond 115" Zero Edge Pro screen, as part of a larger "living room theater" setup. Viewing will be mostly at night, but the kids watch cartoons in the morning, my wife and I sometimes watch shows during the day, and we do watch football / sports on weekends.

I would love to demo this screen in an environment with ambient light, but given the current pandemic, this is proving difficult... It will be paired with an Epson 5050UB. It has been years since this thread has seen much activity.

Can any current Black Diamond owners post a pic and/or video of their setup during daylight hours and how it looks?

Is there anyone here who lives in the SF Bay Area and would be willing to demo theirs for me during daylight hours? I will come over with my mask on, respect social distancing, and drop off a decent amount of your favorite beer / wine!

I just would love to see this in action in real life, not a youtube video, before I plunk down the $!


----------



## surroundsound99

I'm trying to decide on a retractable screen, scope, AT, anywhere from 100 to 120 wide, JVC NX7 is 16.5 from screen. I'm sitting about 10' away but my couch is small and light and i can easily slide it back and forth between 8' to 12' no problem. Finished basement with one small window and 99% light control.

Question 1) For those with a retractable screen, I assume the borders of SI screens are not velvet, can you (or can you not) see the overspray on your screens? I know my NX7 has the masking/cropping feature, and I know it also has the Aspect:Zoom feature, which should eliminate overspray. However my problem is my PJ is off-center and no matter how hard I try the image is not perfectly rectangular. Therefore I have some overspray and I will be relying on the border to hide the overspray. I'm also considering Stewart, and Seymour which claims to be the only manufacturer on the market with a velvet border on a retractable screen, therefore no need to worry about overspray.

Question 2) What do you recommend for AT screen material?

Question 3) I couldn't find an "official" SI general screen thread. Is this the de facto thread?

Any other comments or suggestions are welcome, thank you!


----------



## hungarianhc

Well, day 1 of installation is done. I have the Black Diamond mounted on the wall, but nothing is hooked up so no picture quality tests yet. To be honest, I'm a bit annoyed... I think the screen is about 6" too high. Hopefully the installer can lower it tomorrow without showing mounting holes. The speakers will no longer be exactly vertically centered anymore either. I have a 5050UB projector. I'll post results soon!


----------

