# White, Grey, or Silver - A Review!



## Tryg












Welcome to my third screen review. This review will demonstrate three professionally manufactured materials that are *White, Grey,* and *Silver*. I hope to demonstrate the differences of what these different screen colorations can offer and how you may benefit.


The *White* screen will be a white uncoated PVC vinyl that many manufacturers carry and is most similar to the Draper 1300/ Vutec Brite White. The *Grey* screen that will be demonstrated will be the Stewart Firehawk. This is a hybrid screen made on a tensionable grey PVC vinyl backing. And finally, I will present a *Silver* screen known as the SilverStar from Vutec.


I have lived with all three of these screens in my home theater. This is not a trade show review where a glimpse of a product and limited first impressions are stuck in my head. I have run all three of these screens through a battery of tests and am fairly confident of their abilities and limitations. They all represent their coloration characteristics to the highest available performance. As a reminder, this review is for fun and will be full of my observations and opinions. I will not use any special instruments in the review process (only YOUR eyes), and I will try to present all information and pictures as accurately as possible. My camera is also not perfect or calibrated for color accuracy; however, all pictures are untouched and were taken from the same manual setting. Unfortunately, there is no one perfect screen surface so you will likely have some tradeoffs. This review will show you images that are possible with these three different materials but not how they can be integrated into your theater.


Also, I get paid nothing to do this. I do not endorse or work for any manufacturer or even have any ties to the AV industry except as a hobbyist. I also do not claim to know why each manufacturer does what they do except that they are in business and they likely choose products that they can sell. Finally, and most importantly, I am not an expert. I will attempt to pass on my impressions and will try my best to call them as I see them.



*Now, on to the screens!*


1. Draper 1300 or similar Vutec Brite White 1.3


This, like all other vinyl/pvc material, needs tensioning. It is very white. With the slight surface sheen created from the manufacturing process it brings the gain up slightly above 1. It also does not suffer from any hot spotting. This screen has basically and unlimited viewing angle with virtually no noticeable drop-off. This material is actually light transmissive so you can see the image on the backside. This allows the material to illuminate and may help in the light diffusion process.

2. Stewart - Firehawk 1.35


The Stewart Firehawk is a grey pvc/vinyl material that also needs tensioning. The grey material is slightly darker than the Vutec Greydove/Draper HiDef Grey and it has a reflective emulsion carefully and lightly splattered on. The grey material is designed to give you good blacks and the reflective emulsion boosts the whites bringing the gain up to 1.35. This, of course, reduces the viewing angle.

3. Vutec - SilverStar 6.0


Material is some kind of silvery angular reflective paper laminated onto a solid composite foam board. Screen surface is silver in color and pretty smooth. Very bright, but not too bright for HT. Super vibrant colors and over the top whites. The SilverStar somehow has a better viewing cone horizontally than all the other high powers. It's hard to estimate the gain of this screen but it is definitely very bright. It feels like about 3+?. Remarkably, it doesn't seem to suffer from hot spotting. However, I bet if you went with screen sizes larger than what Vutec actually manufactures, you likely would see something.



Both the White and Firehawk screens are made with a PVC vinyl backing so they need to be tensioned to remove the wrinkles. The SilverStar comes as a solid fixed screen so it has no wrinkles at all. All three of the screens are Angular Reflective in nature so are ideal for most projector mounting applications including the ceiling.

*How do they compare?*


White


A standard white screen has been the AV industry standard now for a long time. Why? In offers accurate colors, great looking whites and the most generous viewing angles of any screen. Basically, no nonsense. Plus there are numerous materials to fit the bill for a matte white screen material. All standard or Matte White screens are basically neutral gain or 1. Some manufacturers say their product is 1.1 or 1.3, but this slight bump in these numbers are considered false gain and usually attributed to a slight surface sheen from manufacturing the product. There are white colored screens like the Da-lite Cinema vision or High Power that offer increased gain but from an emulsion that is put onto the screen backing. Don't expect to see noticeable differences in gain within the 1-1.3 gain range.


The white screen that I will be showing is extra white pvc/vinyl tensionable material with no surface texture or emulsion. This material has been in my own HT for years. The cool thing about this material is that light penetrates it allowing the illumination effect. This illumination effect diffuses and blends the light a bit hiding some source material artifacts and provides spot on linear color accuracy and whites. Also, since the light is able to penetrate the material, it may defuse the light in such a way as to lighten up the area between the pixels known as screen door and possibly soften some source material artifacts. Basically this screen is low enough gain and forgiving enough to hide many of the flaws of your system. In reality, it's about the same as all the other matte white screens but is tensionable to eliminate any wrinkles.


Grey


As we start thinking about grey and what it does we enter into negative gain territory. Obviously the darker the grey gets the less reflectivity it has and thus its ability to hide your system flaws increases. Of course what's really happening is you are just reflecting less light/image! Grey has just recently become popular and this can primarily be contributed to the fact that digital projectors are gaining in popularity, they typically have problems providing the deepest of blacks, and there are enough higher lumen projectors available now to make using grey possible.


Keep in mind grey reduces the reflected light and thus causes coloration changes. Some people don't mind this, others just can't get used to it. And of course, if it's the only screen in your theater, you may not even notice, as you have nothing to compare it to. In some applications grey screen may be necessary to tame a projector with lots of lumens or if your projector suffers from lack of contrast range it may also be of some benefit. How does it change colors?










Thank you Movie Bear for this illustration.


I will be showing the Stewart Firehawk for grey. This is not your typical grey screen. It actually is a grey hybrid screen that has reflective emulsion on a grey backing to give it the darks of a grey screen and the whites of a 1.35 gain screen. The Stewart Filmscreen team came up with this screen combination that essentially offers the deepest of blacks, a reflective coating for the punch of 1.35 gain in addition to rejection of ambient light via a viewing cone. Viewing on the Firehawk is a little like having an equalizer on your stereo and pushing up the bass and the treble. If you're a purist this may bother you. The casual observer will likely love it.

The Firehawk sheds ambient light better than any product I've seen, but the best picture is definitely obtained by watching on-axis. You do have some amount of leeway from side to side without noticing the drop-off and this should be fine for most home theater environments. I actually think this product performs it's best with a little ambient light. In total darkness blacks tends to lose shadow detail and whites tend to look crushed to me. If you like some ambient light in your viewing environment the Stewart Firehawk may be for you.


Silver


Silver, it's back and Wow!

The movie industry started out with silver for a reason low light projectors. This is similar to what some HTs experience. You can significantly boost gain through silver as high as ~10 gain! Unlike greys, colors and whites are vibrant and almost leap off the screen and yet it can still offer the perceived blacks of a grey screen. Silver however obviously has the highest probability for hot spotting. The trick is to find a surface or emulsion that offers the properties of silver with the excellent diffusion of a standard white screen. Enter the Vutec SilverStar and as far as I know they are the only company that offers such a screen.


I've been living with a 122" SilverStar for a few weeks now and can't stop getting excited about what it does. It's hard not to like this screen right from the get go. Colors are beautiful and almost leap off the screen! Whites are white white white. The dynamic range is in a totally different league, response is linear throughout the range, and the viewing cone is remarkably much wider than the Firehawk at 1.35 gain. Unfortunately, the biggest screen they manufacture is only 122 diagonal as I would love to have one even bigger! Trick questionhow do get a 122 plasma? Match a 1000 lumen projector with the SilverStar! Seriously though, I love watching stuff on this thing. Perfect screen? Of course not, there are tradeoffs with everything. One thing is the viewing cone/light diffusion efficiency. Hey this thing sets new standards for light diffusion efficiency. It is so good it has a hard time shedding ambient light. Make sure you have NO direct ambient light hitting the screen. You will see it. Even though you can still obtain a great image with low indirect lighting, no lighting will yield the most impressive results for Home Theater. Also because this thing is ~3+ gain (no, it's not too much) you may see flaws of your system more easily(projector, source, component etc.). Compression artifacts may become noticeable if sitting too close etc. Bottom line, this screen surface is very sensitive to light. Feed it the right stuff and you will be rewarded with a stunning image that other screens are just not capable of producing. People say this screen surface also has a characteristic behavior of being kind of sparkly/active in some scenes(sky). This is compression artifacts from the source material. How can you alleviate this? Sit at least 16 feet from the screen. My closest viewing puts me at 18 feet, so I can't see it but if I move closer to the screen it does become evident if I really start to look for it. Kids, this screen is like a high performance sports car. You will feel every pit, bump and piece of gravel on the road. If you're looking for a Ferrari this is probably the screen for you.


From the few weeks of viewing the SilverStar I have been very critical as I am a skeptic with every thing. However, the good definitely outweighs the bad in my system and it would be very hard at this point to go back now to anything with less gain and/or performance.


Now for the testingseeing is believing!

*My Home Theater for testing*


The projector being used in the test is a JVC G1000 (D-ila), producing approximately 600 true lumens right now. It is "ceiling mounted" and aligned with the top of the screen. Center couch seating is 18' from screen, projector is 26' from screen. Screens are approximately 9-10 feet wide and all 16:9 aspect ratio.


*Pixels?*


One interesting test I put these three screens through is the examination of a single pixel. I really wanted to see if I could illustrate my theory that a white uncoated PVC screen actually diffuses screen door effect in digital projectors slightly. What I found was something even more remarkable. I fully expected the SilverStar to exacerbate the screen door as it is much higher gain than the other two screens. What I found was that it actually minimized it? Huh? I'll let you decide, but I think it is actually harder to see the screen door and pixel dimple on the SilverStar Here are some pictures. Pull back from your screen a bit and see if you concur











*Screen Shots*


Hey, I could go on and on about how great each one of these screen materials are or I can let you see for yourself. As they say A picture is worth a thousand words so I offer these full screen shots of these three different materials and same source material. These shots were high-resolution shots taken from the Kodak high resolution digital website. I apologize for those taken a little off center and I've been testing out my new camera. All pictures were taken from a subcompact digital camera (Canon Powershot S400). The lens is very sensitive to geometry issues compared to my other camera. I think you'll get the idea Enjoy!


Also, all shots will be presented in order of *White, Grey, Silver* for reference, and were taken in very low lighting conditions. Not total darkness but very dim. It would be impossible to read a newspaper under these lighting conditions without the reflection of the screen.


























































*Conclusions*


White, Grey or Silver


What's best for you? Of course it is important to match the best product with your own equipment and environment. In my case I went from a white screen which I loved, to a grey screen which took me a long time to get used to, and finally a silver screen which I'm having more fun with than... It's kind of like the first time I started watching High Definition materialI'm still watching in awe.


If you want no-nonsense performance and accurate delivery of colors and whites I highly recommend a white-based screen. If you are trying to overcome some limitations of your equipment or environment, like poor black level, a grey screen may be for you. If you want what is possibly the best of both worlds and an awesome punch to your image, you should really consider what Silver could do for you.


I hope that others manufactures will consider the benefits of silver and start working on their version of the best of both worlds Until then, bravo Vutec! what a screen!


Okay, one final *White, Grey, Silver* split screen shot of all the tested screens in one shot. I thought I'd bring back your favorite










Sorry about the green shading in the background on the right...that's from my D-ILA.


*Again, Thank you AVScience! and*


Vutec Corp for the SilverStar

Stewart Filmscreen for the Firehawk


For further information screen info you can contact:


Vutec Corp (FL): www.vutec.com (954) 545-9000

Stewart Filmscreen Corp. (CA): www.stewartfilm.com (310) 784-5300

Draper, Inc. (IN): www.draperinc.com (800) 580-1560

Da-Lite Screen Company (IN): www.da-lite.com (574) 267-8101


----------



## Tryg

What About Contrast?


Can a Gray or Silver screen offer different contrast? Yes, and No.

A screen is just a passive device so it's really only capable of showing you what your projector is displaying. However, this is only true in perfect conditions (total darkness). Enter ambient light into the equation...


Let's assume that we have a room with perfect light control---all walls painted black, for example. (I say this because I don't want to have to deal with secondary reflections off non-white walls in this analysis.) We're going to be looking at how 5 different screens work in this room:

--- an 0.75 gain gray screen

--- a 1.0 gain white screen

--- a 1.5 gain gray screen

--- a 2.0 gain white screen

--- a 3.0 gain gray screen

Let's assume that all screens are angular reflective, and that all of the gray screens are exactly the same base color of gray.


First, let's turn off ALL ambient light, and look at the brightness vs. gray level response of all the screens. The result is shown in the FIRST graph below. As you can see, all of the lines intersect (0,0) at. If your projector is capable of 2000:1, this perfectly dark room would achieve 2000:1 contrast on any of these screens---each with a different peak brightness, of course.


Now let's turn on some ambient light and see what happens. We're going to turn on enough ambient light so that, with the projector off, the matte white 1.0 gain screen is registering a brightness of 5 lumens. Performing the same experiement, we get the results in the SECOND graph below.


As you can see, the two white screens bottom out at 5 lumens, just like we expect. But the gray screens bottom out at 3.75 lumens, a 25% reduction. This is no surprise: the gray color absorbs some of the ambient light. At the high end, the ambient light is overwhelmed by the projected image, and everything looks normal---also no surprise.


In these very poor conditions, the contrast ratios are horrible:

-- 0.75 gain gray: 3:1

-- 1.0 white: 3:1

-- 1.5 gray: 5:1

-- 2.0 white: 5:1

-- 3.0 gray: 9:1

Obviously nobody would want to watch under these conditions. But, I purposefully chose a lot of ambient light so that the differences would actually be visible on the graph. Also, let's not forget that the ambient light is additive, so it not only reduces contrast but it shifts all colors slightly towards the color of the ambient light.


But the point is clear: if you don't have a "black hole" for a theater, your choice of screen can make a difference in the contrast ratio you experience! Perhaps the reason the SilverStar works well is that it makes the blacks look darker than the ambient light, while giving you enough gain so that the whites are still nice and bright.



















Thanks Michael Grant for that Contrast explanation and Illustrations!

How about this viewing cone thing?


We all know a passive device can't create light. So how can the SilverStar have Higher Gain and Wider Viewing Cone?


First off, I think the substrate which is used is just more efficient than painted on emulsions. When you paint on emulsions, regardless of how good you are, you will have differences is particle alignment and consistency. These reflective particles are what make "gain" screens get their gain. The SilverStar is different in that it uses a manufactured reflective paper of some sort. This manufacturing process apparently yields incredibly consistent results and therefor more efficiency.


Secondly, the SilverStar substrate seems to have a wider viewing in the horizontal axis. The vertical axis is still wide, but it's very noticable the horizontal axis is MUCH wider than any other higher power screen out there. This is very good for home theater as it gives the full effects of the gain from all seats in the house, and there is no noticable dropoff if you tend to move from side to side during viewing. Wide is good!


How exactly it does it? I don't know. But it does it!

What about Shadow Detail?



Okay, you probably think by now that I'm a little biased toward the SilverStar. The truth? You bet I am. The thing delivers.


You also probably think I just tried to pull a fast one on you by Wowing you with colors and other explanations. What else do you need to be wowed by? Hey, if your not saying Wow by now you either just bought a grey screen or you're wearing your sunglasses.


If you look closely, not only are the SilverStar pictures outright stunning, but there are numerous things in every image that just cannot be seen in the white and grey screens. For more shadow detail examples I'll submit these pics.... Enjoy!






































More testing to come...

Let There Be Light!


----------



## Tryg

This Post is a Supplement to the testing done for the WHITE, GREY, and SILVER Review.



First off I would like to thank *darinp* for dismantling both his home theaters and bringing them down to my place about 100 miles away. We had quite an arsenal of equipment, screens, and theater room flexibility to really give us a good idea of what we liked and what we didn't like. On another note, after seeing all this equipment over a 4-hour period, and late at night, your mind starts to get a little foggy on even what's good and what's not. In the end I think we both probably came to some similar conclusions.


Keep in mind when reading and viewing we are looking and examining some high-end stuff. All of these screens are very good and will likely please any average human. Our real quest, I guess, is to be total nerds and over analyze the best of the best.


Our mission? First off, was to have a little fun and get to know each of the screens. Then our job was to:


1. Demonstrate black level.

2. Reexamine viewing angles.

3. Test the SilverStar with DLP


Fortunately my theater room/living room/lab has enough space that throwing around 10 foot wide screens can be accomplished with ease. Also, my front screen frame system allows for easy swap out of any material you want in about 5 minutes. This can be ideal for somebody that wants different screens for different occasions.


Okay, for all the test pictures we will still be using my system which should be evident as my D-ILA has a fairly obvious shading issues on the right side of the pictures and it only comes in at about 700:1 contrast after calibration.



*Demonstration of Blacks*

1. SilverStar vs. Firehawk


Here's a good test. Certainly a screen that's about 3 times the gain should have significantly elevated black levels, especially with this projector. But, what are the shadow detail differences? All these split screen shots will have the SilverStar on the Left, Firehawk on the Right, and are all about 10 feet wide.






































2. SilverStar vs. Da-Lite High Power


Another great test. We compared the SilverStar to the Da-Lite High Power because people asked us to, and we had one available. Which has better blacks? Better detail? These two screens actually turned out to be much closer in gain than we expected. We actually thought the high power might be slightly brighter perfectly on axis. All these split screen shots will have the SilverStar on the Left, High Power on the Right, and are all about 10 feet wide.






































*Comparing the viewing angles*


This will be another demonstration of viewing angles and light sensitivity. The SilverStar will be on the left and the Da-Lite High Power will be on the right. We will go from 0 - 40 degrees in 10 degree increments. We both thought the High Power was slightly brighter on axis but the SilverStar with it's unusually large viewing cone pulled away from it as we went past 15 degrees.










*SilverStar with DLP?*


Yes, as you go to higher gain like the SilverStar, or any screen, you are going to start to see the flaws of your system and source material. One question isCan a DLP look good on the SilverStar with it's limited resolution and other potential artifacts?


We used the NEC HT1000.

The HT1000 is a native 4:3 format DLP-based projector which uses the new standard XGA-resolution (1024x768) 12-degree high contrast DMD chip. It is rated at 1000 ANSI lumens of brightness in normal operation. It can be reduced to 800 ANSI lumens in eco-mode to extend lamp life and reduce fan noise in operation. The specifications indicate a contrast ratio is over 2000 and even higher when the unique IRIS feature activated. This projector is a little powerhouse with an extremely small foot print.


Does it match these specs? No, but it is equally as bright as my JVC G1000 and has a damn good image for only an XGA projector. It definitely beats my D-ila in contrast but not in smoothness as the D-ila has 77% more pixels, 3 chips, and virtually no screen-door.


Now, we kinda cheated in watching this DLP because we used a DVD player that had DVI connections and thus the picture was REAL good. We got so wrapped up in watching only good content on good equipment that we kinda forgot to try to find out where a DLP projector might break down on viewing with the SilverStar. Generally, I'd say it's not going to be an issue. The SilverStar will give you back exactly what you feed it. Feed it junk and you may be disappointed. Feed it quality material from proper equipment and it should sing.


Also, the HT1000 has a 4X color wheel. This minimizes the rainbow artifact to some extent but having a higher gain screen I think probably exacerbates this. I saw a lot of them in our dark scene testing.

*Final Conclusions*


Gain of a screen can be confusing at times. Generally, If you have a very intimate HT and sit close to the screen you'll likely be happier with a lower gain screen. It helps hide the flaws and does a little better job of removing the screen from the image. This shouldn't be that much of an issue because your irises in your eyes will adjust to the lower lighting intensity and still deliver a fine image to your brain. Will all the detail be there? No.


If you sit a little further back like 13 feet or more. You will likely enjoy a screen with more gain. It's really about viewing preferences. One thing that's pretty clear is that the further back you go the more the horsepower of higher gain becomes favorable. Go far enough back and it's no contest.


Back to the sparklies issue. I'm fully convinced now that it is entirely compression artifacts from the source material. The sparklies which I'm going to now call active screen really doesn't sparkle at all. This is just a compression artifact that can be viewed on any higher gain screen and is most visible in blue sky scenes. It looks a little like the screen is crawling with tiny insects or something. The same artifact was equally as visible on both the High Power and the SilverStar.


Which screen did I like better?

The Da-Lite High Power is a great screen material. However, it does have a very noticeable viewing cone. When viewing straight on it can be stunning and provide even better whites and maybe contrast than the SilverStar. One thing that makes the SilverStar different from other high power screens is it's unusually large viewing cone. As you walk from 0 to 60 degrees off-axis the diminishing gain is very smooth, consistent and subtle. It really makes watching something and walking around the room at the same time a pleasure.


Of course, then the High Power sheds ambient light better. This is definitely attributed to it's obvious viewing cone and under the right conditions, like higher ambient light and watching sports, it would be an awesome product. For watching movies, I would definitely take the SilverStar. It felt like it had more depth and the screen tended to just disappear more. I've heard people say this same thing when going from a matte white screen to a grey screen. The SilverStar exhibits this same quality but at a gain of over 3. High gain, detail, and depth. It's pretty awesome, and in many ways a stunning combination.


----------



## EricD

You mentioned that the silver screen has 'sparkles'. How badley? I saw a glass bead screen (pretty sure, looked close at it) with a sharp9k and it has sparkles that bugged me. Do you think it has less or more sparkles than a glass beaded screen?


BTW, another excellent review


----------



## KingofOld

I picked up an old dalite silver screen from goodwill for 5 bucks, I don't use it its not very big but I just wanted to see what it looks like. The image is very sparkly but it is indeed very bright, I'm guessing the sparkles would be similar to teh silver screen in the tests


----------



## Rick Guynn

Was I correct in reading somewhere that the SilverStar was something on the order of $60/sq. ft.? (it does look stunning, BTW)


RG


----------



## dvdvideo

Holy...is that a huge difference! I want one.....off to look up prices! (shudders to think.......$1000!??)


Couldn't find any prices online........

Any dealers in Canada?


Is there any other screen product on the market like it?


----------



## Xander

Wow - what can one say? Thanks again for the excellent review. I wonder what us DIY screen makers can do about making a silver screen?


----------



## ABrasic

Outstanding review, Tryg. Was the purchase of the Vutec Silverstar inspired by your findings from your previous review of DIY screens where you lauded the performance of silver spray paint?


In addition, yes please to posting the cost of the SilverStar.


----------



## Steve Dodds

I guess it depends on your priorities. I'm into black levels, and for that reason would still go for the grey screen, which appears to have notably better blacks than the silver.


Steve


----------



## CPetty

Great post! Kudos for the time and effort. - CP


----------



## Tryg

Steve,


I think we all like good blacks. But good black really is a function of the darkness of your Home Theater and the limitations of your projector. Trying to cheat this with a grey screen is really only cheating yourself out of the real image. Check this out..











Did you even notice the green leaves in the left pictures on the grey screen? Did you even notice that there was a red flower on the grey screen? This is mostly because this is a grey screen reflecting less light/image.


However, If you look at the full images above it becomes obvious these areas that I chose are actually starting to fall outside the viewing cone of the Firehawk. Yes, and this is only a 10 foot wide screen with a very long throw to my projector. If my projector was closer it would look even worse as the angles would be greater. If you're a Firehawk owner you probably never even noticed this.


For everyone else... I can only guess on prices of this product. I suspect you might be able to get the SilverStar for around $50 a square foot. Call Alan or any AVS rep for pricing...I'm sure they will equally wow you with a good price. Maybe a powerbuy?


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Andrikos_
> *I'm thinking dalite high power... LOL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



We will compare them on Saturday, but one thing for people to remember is that the Hi-Power is retro-reflective, so really requires the projector to be somewhere around the viewing level (either low on a table or mounted pretty low for ceiling mount) to get the advantage of the gain. The Silver Star sounds like it is really for ceiling mount, being angular-reflective.


If your projector is right above your head then it would seem like the Hi-Power would be better at reducing hot-spotting, but it will be interesting to see.


I've said this before, but I think the extra gain on this thing might bring out the artifacts from DLPs even more. I predict that this screen gives more of an advantage for LCOS projectors, which tend to show less artifacts in general.


How about a Sony 1920x1080 SXRD with one of these things? Then you'll really wish they made this screen bigger. Looks like the Hi-Power can go to 6' high and whatever width you want before adding a seam. That's 169"x72" for a 2.35:1 screen or 128"x72" for a 16:9 screen.


--Darin


----------



## rogo

Tryg: You are truly the _Marquis de Screens_.


Please, please, please give us some ambient light shots and opinions. I really want to know if this thing makes daytime viewing tolerable, decent, whatnot. And I want to know what happens with a few lamps off the sides not hitting the screen.


Thanks again for the review!


mark


----------



## gesundheit

OK, I'll jump in with a counterpoint. At least within the limitations of the camera and jpeg compression for internet posting, I find the whites on the SilverStar to look a little crushed. For instance, the shot of the outdoor cafe: the central pillar's sunny side is washed out so that some of the horizontal lines disappear, and the boat on the near bank has less visible detail on the SilverStar compared to the FireHawk. But I agree the shadow detail is outstanding. Always tradeoffs.


----------



## stingray999

Tyrg,


Your review was wonderful. This review really gave me better impression how different screens would look like in my setup. The timing is just right as I am about to order one.


Great work! Hope to see more in the future.


----------



## D_B_0673

Tryg, thanks for the great info. I am planning my first HT and hope to buy either the Virtoso that Mr Wigggles is demoing or maybe the Optima H76 after it is reviewed. Both are HD2 dlp projectors. I hope for a 100" (diag)16x9 screen. Seeting would be 12' first row and 16' second row. Would the Silver work for this set up? (I hope you say yes because after seeing your pictures I will not be happy with anything else)

thanks

Dan Brown


----------



## Free

I agree with gesundheit, the whites look a bit blown out in some places. Would this be something that could be compensated for with a touch of calibration specifically for the screen? I am assuming that the exact same settings were used for each screen for comparison purposes.


Also, is the material available in a roll up version or only for fixed screens?


----------



## JHouse

These pictures trace the history of my experience. The white and gray screens show what my prior setups did. Crushed blacks, ordinary colors, typical image (but it was big and artifact free so I was impressed). The Silver Star shows exactly what I now enjoy on my HD20/PLV-70 with 120" diag. 16:9 Hi-Power. This makes perfect sense since my pj is about 3 times as bright as Tryg's but my screen (with a ceiling mount) is probably 1/3 the gain of the Silver Star.



My experience parallels Tryg's current revelation. Fabulous colors, better shadow detail, and generally much more obvious overall visibility of all the content. What he says about watching in awe is absolutely true. I can still feel it.


You DLP Mustang Chip guys ought to be going nuts. Your picture on this screen would be incredible. You have more than double my contrast ratio and better fill ratio. Think of the shadow detail. Tryg is showing you dramatically improved shadow detail on D-ILA for kripes sake.


I understand that this screen can be had for even less than the FireHawk. I smell a production rate/backorder problem in the making. They are going to sell really fast.


I just got a digital camera yesterday, so with any luck, over the weekend, I'm going to get you some screen shots.


This screen means that we can have bright pictures on extremely detailed and QUIET projectors. How cool is that? This could change the landscape. DLPs won't need to be ashamed of any inherent limit in brightness. They won't need it. Heck, they can now concentrate on increasing contrast ratio further. Those luminous colors that I once thought only direct views, crts and some plasmas had can now be had by all.


Tryg has done us a great service. Here's to spreading big stupid grins all around!


----------



## Tryg

rogo - I will try to take some shots with ambient light of all three screens. I'll even leave the Firehawk in the sweetspot (middle) where it performs it's best.


geundheit - yes there is camera JPG compression when you shooting these these brighter areas. take a look at me in the very first pic. I couldn't even get a good one of me cause everthing around me was so bright. upon compressing the picture file it got even worse. so yes the whites suffer a bit from the camera.


D_B_0673 - The sparkly/active characteristic of the screen needs to be commented on more. This to me is the only relevent downside of two. I really noticed it at first but as I started watch the content I started getting more immersed in the film. I now have adapted and have a harder time seeing it or even explaining it. I don't notice it now. Hopefully I can get some comments from some fresh eyes on Saturday and we'll try to define it. Remember this baby is like a sports car. If you've been driving a nice cushy cadillac for the last couple years then you hop in a Ferarri it may feal a little foreign/ugly. You might complain about how much you can feel the road and how twitchy the stearing and throttle is. After a week of driving though you probably can't imagine going back the mushiness of the Caddy. Your senses are elevated, you are now finally in control.


The other downside? These things need to be bigger. 9 feet wide for me is not enough. The thing looks puny on my 32' x 16' wall







Seriously though, they need to start thinking bigger if possible. 10 foot wide is the sweet spot for me. When a 1920 x 1080 projector comes out, I expect to go a little larger. Please Vutec send me your prototype 14' x 6' 2.35 screen to study










Free - I hope to do just that. I'm fairly confident you can calibrate your projector from the screen and eliminate any crushed whites and still get all the rest. My projector is currently calibrated right on the edge for my white screen. I finally stopped when I could almost see a little crushed whites during calibration. Now apply it to the Firehawk and SilverStar and of course your gonna get different results. A projector with the right capabilities and calibrated to the SilverStar should look breathtaking.


I've heard a rumor they are working on a fabric version. But, of course, I don't believe rumors I just spred them.


----------



## JHouse

Only fixed screen.


Yes, you can adjust the gray scale on the white end.


----------



## kelliot

After playing with home made screens I settled on a Firehawk because it was the best compromise for my situation.


Why not white or silver.

White looks horrible in ambient.

Silver is extremely sensitive to any imperfection. The "sparklies" finally got to me. Stewart makes a silver high gain screen for 3D viewing that is quit good because it is very very uniform in texture., but it has got to be perfectly flat.


----------



## Rosano

Tryg..this is great reading. Even though I already have my set up installed I find this absolutely fascinating.. This is the type of stuff that make this forum so amazing.


The HT rags can only dream about publishing stuff like this.


Out of curiosity could you please elaborate on the "other" parts of your system. What pj did you use....DVD player...video processor if any...HD source...interlaced or progressive...yada yada yada!!!


Thanks


----------



## Free

For me, the only way I could make a fixed screen work would be to suspend it from the ceiling.


How heavy is the screen and what type of a board is it mounted to? Could you use 2 or 3 cables and hooks in the ceiling and put it up and take it down pretty easily?


Where do you mount the projector to maximize the gain of this screen? Does it have to be above the top of the screen; at the top of the screen; below the top or in the middle of the screen to get the 6.0 gain?


----------



## Daniel Hutnicki

I might have to get me one of these screens. The pictures look wonderful


----------



## TomJones

Tryg,


Thanks for such useful research.

How and why is the Silver Star better than the old curved foil screens?

Can it be easily cleaned?

How is it shipped so as not to be damaged?


Tom


----------



## D_B_0673

Thanks again Mr Tryg, This is going to be my first HT, first projector, first dvd player and on. I can't wait. I am remodeling a small basement room now. I cannot go any bigger than 100' diag (16x9). The War Department (wife) is going to kill me when I show the cost of the screen, but I think your comparison pictures might keep alive. I could catch a bus to Olympia and move in with you...


----------



## Robin




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by TomJones_
> *How and why is the Silver Star better than the old curved foil screens?
> 
> 
> Tom*



A downside (and it may not be enough to disuade the potential buyer) of this highly reflective type of screen is the falloff of the projected light at the edges of the screen. The curved silver screen attempts to ameliorate this by directing that edge light back to the viewer.


----------



## JHouse

Oh, and that IS my favorite. Thanks.


But talk about poor product placement, AVS has a lot of GAUL!


----------



## Jetlag

What would you estimate you are getting in foot-lamberts with the silver screen?


----------



## thirdkind

Nice review Tryg.


How's the black level when the scene is primarily composed of dark elements? If it's super bright, the black level should be nice during high contrast scenes, but dark scenes would look pretty foggy, no?


I love the increased detail thanks to the higher brightness, but I'm concerned how it will affect dark scenes. I have an SX21, which has a black level at least as good as film from what I can see using a matte white Da-Lite, but bumping the blacks up a couple notches could make it too bright at the low end. And the Vutec isn't exactly cheap or easy to ship, so buying one just to try it out isn't an option.


----------



## Free

I called Vutec to answer my questions and I would be able to suspend the screen from the ceiling by cables quite easily and since it is very light.


Unfortunately they are only able to make it 107" wide without a seam so that is very unfortunate


----------



## JHouse




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Jetlag_
> *What would you estimate you are getting in foot-lamberts with the silver screen?*



Yea, who knows the formula for that?


43 square feet of screen. 600 total lumens. 6.0 gain.


Is it 600 divided by 43 times 6?


----------



## JHouse

MAN, what do you want? Isn't 107" wide a little more than a 10 foot diagonal 16:9 screen?


That's what I have now, and it is pretty darn big!


----------



## thirdkind

It's all relative. My 80" wide screen seems huge to me, but that's because my theater room is 17' x 9' and a 92" diagonal screen is what I could fit. If my room were twice as large, I'd want a screen that's twice the size


----------



## Free




> Quote:
> MAN, what do you want? Isn't 107" wide a little more than a 10 foot diagonal 16:9 screen?



I told my wife that I was thinking of getting a screen that was about 6" narrower than the one we have now and she didn't like that one bit


----------



## JHouse

Yes, I suppose since the resolution remains constant, you can get closer to the screen and have the identical field of view covered by a smaller screen and loose nothing.


----------



## JimmyR

The big break through of the SilverStar is the fact that it's FLAT.


The curved screens (foil) are/were great for CRT because most of them allowed for compensating (adjusting) for the bow at the top or bottom of the image.

Digital projector owners now have the ability to have a very high gain screen and not have that "bowing" artifact.

Another advantage of flat is even focus on the surface compared to the curved gain screen.

Electric remote screen drop down is a wonderful thing in my HT with the HiPower. If I'm getting the SilverStar $$$$ then electric center opening, and s l o w moving maroon drapes in front of this screen are in my future.


----------



## JHouse

Free, she will be so blinded by the color and detail, she'll think it's bigger.


Size isn't as important as what it does. (I've been told).


----------



## callipygian

One more advantage of silver screens: They preserve the polarization of the light souce.


If you every want to do 3D projection with polarized sources, this is crucial.


We do 3D projection on our silver screen from slides and from an LCD projector. (LCD projectors typical have green polarized 90 degrees from red/blue. Take a pair of polarizing glasses and see.) By making 3D images into green/magenta anaglyphs, and projecting them onto a silver screen, viewers with polarized glasses can see 3D images. This effect really impresses visitors to our HT.


For 2D viewing, we use a DLP projector, which outputs non-polarized light.


----------



## callipygian

One more advantage of silver screens: They preserve the polarization of the light souce.


If you every want to do 3D projection with polarized sources, this is crucial.


We do 3D projection on our silver screen from still slides and from an LCD projector. (LCD projectors typical have green polarized 90 degrees from red/blue. Take a pair of polarizing glasses and see.) By making 3D images into green/magenta anaglyphs, and projecting them onto a silver screen, viewers with polarized glasses can see 3D images. This effect really impresses visitors to our HT.


For 2D viewing, we use a DLP projector, which outputs non-polarized light.


----------



## Chris Dallas

Tryg,


can you please give us a detailed review on these 3 screens you're talking about?


----------



## usabrian

Did you read the original post? Brian


----------



## P8nter

Tryg, Nice job. How about some pictures of commonly used movies like the Fifth Element , So I can compare the shadow detail of my 9000-Firehawk combo to yours.


----------



## Chris Dallas

Come on TRYG, SOME PHOTO'S PLEASE!


Great review!


----------



## J. L.

Tryg,


How about some images of the three screens from various angles when off axis similar to how you did in your previous reviews?


It is fairly easy to have gain when on axis, but many of us have wide viewing cones in our theaters.


More pictures please...


Joe L.


----------



## yurd

Tryg, Thankyou.


I'll take that silverstar when you're done with it.


----------



## penticton102

very nice and very interesting, its nice having comparisons done right in front of the old peepers, that siverstar wins hands down as far as i can see , but some side shots would be helpful to judge how wide of a viewing cone there is before the pics looses a little of its punch, so tryg howsa bout some more pics?................


----------



## PerfKnee

I've personally always felt that high gain screens are the way to go, and I have kept on enjoying my 2.5 gain Draper M2500 with my G1000 DILA even while everyone else had been getting darker and darker screens. I would love to try out a truly high power screen like this.


Brighter is better. The more photons hitting our eyes, the greater the feeling that we are right there outside. And the more photons, the more information our eyes get, so we can see subtle gradiations of colors more.


And this review is great to read. The most important part is hearing the actual viewer impressions.


From my photography background, I know that the pictures posted are meaningless. You simply can't evaluate brightness of different full range images with photographs. The reason is that the photo taking process clips the dynamic range of the actual source. Either the blacks are clipped or the whites are clipped or both. If as Tryg did you take pictures of different illumination levels with the same camera settings, the pictures will end up showing you how the camera clips the blacks of the dimmer images, and clips the whites of the brighter images. None of that has any relation to what you see when you actually look at the images. Of course all three images are still full range; the screen can't change the gamma curve or clip blacks or whites because it reflects all levels equally; it would have to be an "active" screen to reflect different levels differently, and none are. One easy way to understand that the pictures are not accurately portraying reality is to notice that in all the pictures black is black; in actual reality none of the screens makes the projector's almost black be completely black.


I appreciate Tryg's work, and he seems to have done the best possible job of taking the pictures, but you really can't make comparisons based on these kinds of pictures. The only thing you can conclude is that none of the screens distorted color significantly (assuming Tryg left the white balance fixed), and that none of the screens exhibited noticeable hotspotting in his setup.


-Tom


----------



## Tryg

Guys thanks for all the great words of praise. It really does make going through the trouble of digging deeper and presenting the findings worth while. I hope that we all can learn from this.


Jhouse - higher gain is definately a plus. It just delivers more of the image to the viewer. This screen just happens to take it one notch higher and with a MUCH wider viewing cone than anything else out there.


I'm sitting here laughing as I'm calculating the ft lamberts for your setup. If this screen doesn't make you happy... well then nothing will. ~150 ft lamberts...Make sure you are smiling when you turn the projector on. It may burn your face permanently into that position










Free - this screen is very light. Mounted to a foam board. I suspend it with just two pieces of 2 mil cord. However, it comes with a slick mounting system built right into the frame


Jetlag - About 40


third kind - Yes, like the white screen the contrast range is linear. So as you go into dark scenes your eyes adjust BUT now you actually get to see the detail. WAY more detail that many people are paying an extra $5k more for the step up from an HD1 to an HD2 projector. An HD1 with this screen should kill an HD2. It is very noticable.


Take a look at these shots again..











One thing that I really never got use to in the Firehawk is it's non linearity. By capturing the darks with the grey backing and boosting the whites with the reflective emulsion, is it really only looks good during balanced contrast scenes. Once you entered into the midrange it fell flat like what is exibited in this picture. This is where the viewing cone kicks you in the teeth. What especially concerned me is when I viewed it compared to the Da-Lite HCMW (basically same as HCCV but not tensionable). As a movie trasitioned from a bright scene to a dark scene and vice versa this mid range really fell flat compared to the HCMW. It's just not linear and your eyes have a hard time adapting through the range. Your eyes are supposedly only capable of about 100:1 contrast so as you move up and down the scale with a linear screen your perception can also stay linear and not confuse your brain/irises. I hope I'm not just confusing everybody. I will try to explain this better later as I don't mean to beat up on the Firehawk. I have personally just had a hard time adapting to it and I have no other way of making these comparisons.


third kind, I actually wasn't sure if I could take Vutec seriously when they said they could ship me a screen. I sat there thinking...but you're 3000 miles away and it's a big board. Hey, it came to my doorstep without any problems. They deliver.


callipygian - I must learn how to do 3D! I will contact you.


Chris Dallas - I'm working on it.


J.L. - My other reviews really cover light sensativity at different viewing angles better than anything. To compare products you really need to look at them.

High Gain / Exotic Screen Review 

A Screen Showcase and DIY Review 


I'll bump them for ya!


PerfKnee - After I read *"I know that the pictures posted are meaningless. You simply can't evaluate brightness of different full range images with photographs."* I really couldn't take you seriously. And, your explanation is quite the opposite of what is true. The camera from a fixed setting does not change. It is a piece of hardware and only captures exactly what it is presented. Now, human perception does change. Look at the white screen in one room and then take a break and walk into an identical setup with the SilverStar in the other room and the differences will will become a bit less noticable. Will you still see a difference? of course! you do have relative memory to relate to. But, your eyes will adapt a bit to the new bightness levels since your iris does change/adapt.

The camera doesn't change.


Meaningless?


----------



## J. L.

Tryg,


Believe me, I spent plenty of time looking at the images in your previous reviews of screen materials. In fact, they made my task of choosing screen material for my own DIY screen much easier.


I have a very wide seating area, therefore, I cannot use a screen where gain noticeably falls off once you are 20 degrees off axis.


I just finished building a 96x54 inch DIY screen using Vutec Brite-White 1.5 gain material. At the most extreme off axis seat in my theater, the image is about as bright as it was with a blackout cloth screen. All the other seats have a brighter image. It was your screen review and sample images that helped me to decide it was a good screen material for my needs.


You keep talking about the wide viewing cone of the Silver Screen from Vutec, but you have not yet posted any images of it from various angles. It is much harder for me to see the difference from center to the side when viewing head on.


I would like to see images on the silver screen at 10,20, 30, and 40 degrees off axis. Others might be interested as well.


Unfortunately, there is no way to get a solid screen down the stairs and into my basement theater. Until the Silver screen material is made on a vinyl surface that can be rolled, it can't be a choice for me, even if it has a wide viewing angle and tons of gain.


Thanks again for your hard work pulling all this together.


Joe L.


----------



## JHouse

Joe, You can't cut a slot in the floor? The carpet will cover it!


----------



## JHouse

Is this how it works?


Projector Lumens = FL x Screen Area /Screen Gain


2200 = FL x 43/6


Projector Lumens x Screen Gain/Screen Area = FL


2200 x 6/43 = 306 FL


2200 x 2.8/43 = 143 FL


2200 x 2/43 = 102 FL


So it looks like I'm watching a minimum of 100 FL right now. Got to change my tag line now.


----------



## rogo

I don't know if Tryg's pix would be meaingless in a vaccuum. But when combined with his prose, they tell not just 1,000 words, but 10,000. You can see -- even if compressed JPEGs sent through the net -- what he is saying with ease.


In fact, while he is not sitting there with instruments -- an exercise I often find entirely useless in magazines -- he is telling us what is good and not-so good about a product.


I await those ambient light pix and comments because they will actually influence whether or not I buy a screen like this. Whereas the precise number of footlamberts the screen offers is entirely uninteresting to me. Of course, things like viewing cone performance are also issues, but Tryg has already told us all that the viewing cone of this appeared to be better than the High Power (see other review). So unless I heard differently, I can judge whether that cone is enough for me. [Note: I was days away from ordering a High Power 3 weeks ago.]


----------



## Steve Dodds

I'd still love to a see a scene with real black areas such as spce or the sky at night as I'm a bit of sci-fi buff.


Steve


----------



## mic31

can you get this screen in Oz


----------



## KSBailey

Thanks for the great review Tyrg! It's guys like you that make us newbies much more informed about this way of life......I mean "Hobby".


----------



## Robin

Tryg,


Did Vutec indicate how the screen was to be oriented (did they mark "top" on one of the two possible edges)? I notice there is a difference in reflective properties as I rotate my sample.


----------



## David Barteaux

I guess this is where they got the term "The Silver Screen".

Anyway, I am using DIY blackout cloth screen with my DLP projector. Can this cloth be painted with silver spray paint to get similar results?


----------



## Free




> Quote:
> I'd still love to a see a scene with real black areas such as spce or the sky at night as I'm a bit of sci-fi buff.



Ditto on that. I know those pictures would be more difficult to capture and the camera may compensate more, but perhaps along with Tryg's observations, I think some really dark scenes would be very interesting.


Here are some suggestions:


Dark City

Pitch Black

ATOC space scenes

LOTR mine scenes


BTW Thanks Tryg. It is so cool what you are doing for all of us


----------



## JimmyR

JHouse if you get poor JL to cut a "slot" in his floor I'll give you free pizza and beer for a year.


Rogo I have the sample 6.0 here but it won't cut the mustard compared to the 13g curved screen your picking up. We'll put the Sanyo 20HD on it then you can tell JHouse he hasn't a clue what "BRIGHT" is.


----------



## Randy Mathis

The biggest that they offer is 48"X85" in 16:9 and 48"X112" in 2.35. 58"X104 would be nice. The wife now wants a silverstar after seeing this. She won't go for the 85" though.


----------



## Tryg

Jhouse,


If you want, I can send you my 9.5 gain sample and you can just use that for your screen. It's only 1.5 square feet though... lets see


2200/1.5*9.5 hey, almost 14,000 foot lamberts. You should be able to see the image then.











For all you guys deathly concerned about black levels, you can always flip the screen around and use the back side...It's totally black, you'll love it!

Make sure you remove the sticker.










Seriously though, again Black Level is a function of how dark your surface material is when you start out (HT lighting level), and the CR limitations of your projector.


Even a white screen looks black in the dark. Now if your projector doesn't project any light to an area of the screen, it will still be black.


There are no magic pills!



I will try to do some testing tonigh with black material and post the pics...


----------



## JimmyR

The biggest that they offer is 48"X85" in 16:9 and 48"X112" in 2.35. 58"X104 would be nice. The wife now wants a silverstar after seeing this. She won't go for the 85" though.

...............................................

Randy, sure you can make you wife happy.

These sizes should be available.


16:9


30x53

40x71

45x80

48x85

50.5x89.75

54x96

60x106.75


4:3 viewing Area


30x40

40x53

48x64

60x80


Jim


----------



## Free

How is the off axis viewing? Is the 6.0 gain good for only one seat in the house?


----------



## JHouse

Free/Phil, you aren't reading closely. It is full Magilla off axis. That's the coolest part.


Someone tell me if I'm wrong.


----------



## JHouse

Tryg,


Does that mean I got the math right?


So I AM watching 100 Ft.L.!


COOL!


----------



## mquinn25

Tryg....


Truly an awesome post. The silver screen is remarkable, but it seems like it would give me a headache it's so bright! It does appear that it does slightly crush whites in some instances....I noticed it on the clouds. The image looks awesome otherwise. The colors leap off the screen and the detail is exceptional. I thinks it's out of my price range, but THANK YOU for the pics.


MQ25


----------



## Robin




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by JHouse_
> *Free/Phil, you aren't reading closely. It is full Magilla off axis. That's the coolest part.
> 
> 
> Someone tell me if I'm wrong.*



It is not full Magilla off axis. It is best if you can get a sample yourself and move it around to different points on your existing screen while projecting an image. That way you can compare it something you know. I have about a gain of 1 screen and the sample looks great when I place it dead center and I place myself in the prime viewing spot in the room. When I move the sample to edges/corners the gain drops precipitously; sometimes below the unity gain of my existing screen. These are early observations; I'll try to elaborate as I do more experimenting. Remember all these observations are taking place from the prime viewing spot; with ceiling mounted projectors (one LCD, one CRT; both short throw). I still have to check out more carefully what happens when I move off horizontal axis.


----------



## Dan Miller

Tryg, you say that you are living with a 122", but if the largest they make is 48 x 85, am I missing something?


DM


----------



## Free

I was told when I called Vutec that the largest size was 107x60.


----------



## Gordon Groff




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Robin_
> *It is not full Magilla off axis. It is best if you can get a sample yourself and move it around to different points on your existing screen while projecting an image. That way you can compare it something you know. I have about a gain of 1 screen and the sample looks great when I place it dead center and I place myself in the prime viewing spot in the room. When I move the sample to edges/corners the gain drops precipitously; sometimes below the unity gain of my existing screen. These are early observations; I'll try to elaborate as I do more experimenting. Remember all these observations are taking place from the prime viewing spot; with ceiling mounted projectors (one LCD, one CRT; both short throw). I still have to check out more carefully what happens when I move off horizontal axis.*



Robin,

How's the visibility of screendoor compare with the LCD between the silver sample and your 1.0 gain screen? What is screen you are comparing against?


Tryg- GREAT JOB!! Thanks!! This is what makes these forums GREAT!!


Gordon

Also fascintaed by the screenshots.


----------



## philba

Is anyone using a SilverStar with an LCD PJ? (I think there are a couple of PLV70 people on this thread) I like what I see but am wondering if a filtered/tweaked LCD would really shine (no pun...) on the SS.


There seems to be some contradictory info in the thread about black levels. It appears from tryg's pictures that blacks have more detail (sounds good) but then there are other posts implying caution for us LCD owners.


It would be great if I could get more black detail with my HS10. Anyone using the SS with an HS10?


Phil


----------



## Tryg

I have added the *Supplemental Testing to the Review*. It can be found on the third post in this thread. It covers:


1. Demonstrations of black level.

2. Reexamination of viewing angles.

3. Testing the SilverStar with DLP


Many thanks to *darinp* who brought his NEC HT1000 DLP over, three anamorphic lenses, A JVC D-ila M20, a Da-Lite High Power screen, DVD player with DVI, JVC DVHS deck for HD material, HTPC and a ton of other toys. We had a great time testing all the stuff and got to play with some of the finest products in HT available


Hopefully he will share some of his thoughts on the SilverStar.


You can be directed to the supplement by clicking HERE


----------



## Free

Wow Tryg, Fabulous supplement! Thanks.

You answered all of my questions


----------



## shovven

Thanx for a really good review... If you'd compare the High Power to the Firehawk... Do you have any pictures of those three together???


Shovven


----------



## aldheorte

Tryg


In your previous review on high gain and exotic screens, you pointed out differences in optimal reflection angles between the Da-Lite High Power (retro-reflective) and the Vultec Silver (angular reflective). When you were doing this latest round of testing, where were you putting the projectors relative to normal? Is the vertical choice of projector mounting (e.g. table or ceiling) of significance in the performance yielded by these screens?


----------



## DrewB

Great work Tyrg. I guess you're now way beyond comparing the parkland plastic and other diy screens to the commercial ones.


----------



## darinp

First off, thanks to Tryg for being a great host. He's definitely figured out how to take price/performance to a new level.


Although his G1000 would be considered ceiling mounted, it is way back and therefore leaves viewers within the Hi-Power sweet spot vertically. When we first started watching things there was quite a bit of ambient light coming in, as it wasn't completely dark outside yet. At this point I preferred the Firehawk and the Hi-Power to the SilverStar. One reason is that I saw a kind of sheen on the SilverStar that I also see on my Da-Lite High Contrast Matte White. Up close the Firehawk has just a few sparklies, but not nearly the amount of sparkle of the SilverStar and HCMW and none of this sheen. I don't see the screen itself with the Hi-Power, but it does tend to bring out the artifacts when they are there.


Tryg's living room is much like mine, as far as having white walls, etc. I have found that what I prefer in my living room is different than what I prefer in my dark walled theater room. High black levels don't seem to bother me unless they get too high in my living room, but seem to really stand out in my theater room.


Both the Hi-Power and Firehawk do a really good job of rejecting ambient light. However, I saw more depth to the image on the Firehawk. At times I felt that the image was bright enough on the Firehawk and at times I wanted more, though.


I think that Tryg's observation about viewing distance and gain is a really good one. When close to the screen reducing artifacts becomes important and a low gain helps for this. However, when viewing from a ways from the screen the artifacts disappear anyway and the extra brightness becomes a big advantage, IMO. So, if you've decided to go with a bigger screen and therefore have calculated that you need a brighter screen to get the ft-lamberts that you want, consider this effect if your seating isn't moving back. You may still prefer the darker screen.


JHouse posted somewhere else that above 50 ft-lamberts your iris closes, so there is only so much brightness that we can see. So, with a small screen viewed from a distance the extra brightness might not be an advantage beyond a certain point for whites, but could be a disadvantage for black levels.


Later on after it got dark the effects seemed to be a little different (or maybe my eyes where just getting tired). I should note here that for our early testing with the SilverStar we had it turned 90 degrees from the way Vutec recommends. By later on and before Tryg took any pictures we had turned it the way they recommend. I don't know if this really made any difference with his long throw, though. I had felt that the SilverStar had a lot more hot-spotting with an all white screen than the Hi-Power, but this was before we turned it and I don't remember noticing this or looking for this after it was placed the other way. When we tried the SilverStar on the left and the Hi-Power on the right with some space scenes I felt that the blacks were a hair brighter on the SilverStar when viewing inside the cone. Outside the blacks are definitely darker on the Hi-Power, since everything is. The strange thing is that all white squares are definitely brighter on the Hi-Power, so I found the brighter blacks on the SilverStar to be a little bit perplexing.


One thing I had noticed earlier is that the Hi-Power seems to give a sharper picture. When viewed up close it was easier to make the pixels out on the Hi-Power and I think the SilverStar was diffusing things a little bit. At the end of the night I agreed with Tryg that the SilverStar seemed to have a more saturated and 3D look when we played the arena scene (chapter 40) from the last Star Wars movie. At that point I would have picked the SilverStar screen, but I would have to do more viewing. One thing I've noticed at home is that I defocus my D-ILA just a little bit on my Hi-Power and maybe this has the same effect as the SilverStar, but we didn't try this.


At the very end we tried my HT1000 on the SilverStar. At his viewing distance of maybe 2x screen width it looked pretty incredible to me. We tried it in low lamp mode and it still looked plenty bright and it is pretty amazing how quite it gets. I thought I was hearing his fridge over it since I couldn't hear the HT1000 in this mode at all, but it was actually the fan for his hushbox that was a bit behind us. We tried Dark City and LOTR with this one. As Tryg said we were using a DVI DVD player (the Bravo D1) and in some ways this could be considered cheating when looking for artifacts since these DVI DVD players are such a huge leap beyond any other way I've seen for viewing DVDs on this thing, but I can't imagine why anybody would go any other way at this point. Maybe if DVI cable runs are a problem or you really need an analog player for its audio capabilities, but IMO you'll have to live with more image artifacts if you do. My HPTC with TheaterTek doesn't even come close IMO, and that doesn't even include how loud my HTPC is.


Anyway, I didn't notice any dithering or bad artifacts with Dark City or LOTR. The extended version of LOTR is one of the cleanest DVDs I've seen, but Dark City is not and it looked very good. However, we were sitting back far enough that I probably wouldn't have noticed dithering in the blacks anyway and I know that others are more likely to see it than me. I did stand up at one point and move closer to the screen. There is a point where the images started to look very bad (digital) to me and moving back just a few feet makes them smooth out and look incredible. I didn't map out where that point was, but I'm guessing maybe 1.5x screen width. For reference I've moved back to 1.8x screen width in my theater room and feel that my 1.4x viewing distance in my living room is too close for the HT1000, but not for my M20 D-ILA.


We probably should have tried some of my other DVDs I use for testing mosquito noise in clouds, but it was getting late. I don't know if it would have been better or worse on the SilverStar compared to the Hi-Power in the dark. Earlier with ambient light coming in I probably would have said the Hi-Power was better because of that lack of sheen, but I didn't notice the sheen on the SilverStar later on. Tryg said he had noticed something like it at first but didn't notice it anymore.


I guess I should try to give a quick summary. With ambient light I preferred the Hi-Power (when inside the cone) or Firehawk. By the end of the night I was liking the SilverStar with bright stuff as the images seemed more saturated and 3D (more like what the Firehawk does but without going so dark) than the Hi-Power. I will be sticking with my 116" wide pull-down Hi-Power in my living room where I sometimes need to deal with ambient light and where I still marvel at what this screen does for the approximately $10/square foot that I paid. The bright blacks on the SilverStar concern me and for my dark theater room I am looking to buy a Firehawk. I already have a pull-down 92" wide Hi-Power for in there for sports, etc. I will follow pricing for the SilverStar and consider it, but I think I would want to see it again before committing that much money.


BTW: For those who recommend the Hi-Power for ceiling mount I have to say that I disagree unless your projector is fairly low. Other than price, the only advantages I see to it in that setup are the lack of waves and the lack of hot-spotting. But if waves are a problem then I think making/buying a fixed screen is a better choice. The lack of hotspotting is good, but I don't think it outweighs the disadvantages of the Hi-Power if you aren't going to be viewing inside the cone where you get some gain advantages.


Also, Tryg and I did prove one thing. There is no such thing as a fixed cutoff point for what is white. We put a pure white PVC screen next to the Hi-Power and the whites on the PVC looked pretty gray. If the Hi-Power is removed, then the white screen looks white again. So, white is relative.


--Darin


----------



## Steve Dodds

Thanks Darin.


If the Silver screen has about the same black levels as a High Power that puts it out for me. I used to have a High Power and could only use it for casual TV watching because of the elevated black levels.


Cheers


Steve


----------



## noah katz

Most interesting stuff. Darin, were the black levels w/the HT1000 too high because of imperfect ambient light control or because of its high gain coupled with the black level of the pj?


Tryg,


I'm surprised to hear you contest Perfknee's statements about cameras compressing dynamic range. Virtually every screen shot I've seen, including LCD pj's with really high black levels, has blacks rendered as inky.


----------



## JHouse

I just saw Tryg's supplement. Boy am I confused. My Hi-Power is sounding better all the time. You almost had me sold on the Silver Star.


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by noah katz_
> *Most interesting stuff. Darin, were the black levels w/the HT1000 too high because of imperfect ambient light control or because of its high gain coupled with the black level of the pj?*



Noah,


I'll answer that in relation to my experience in my theater room, since I don't remember much about really black stuff at Tryg's place with this projector (most of the black level testing was with the G1000).


In my theater room I orginally had the HT1000 on a table and tried the Hi-Power screen. I'm not a black junkie, but with really dark stuff (some Nova star field scenes) I found that we have a ways to go to get blacks to look black on the Hi-Power. I tried it in low mode and the iris closed and the blacks are still reasonably bright in these scenes. I have pretty good light control, but some LEDs and front panels aren't covered (I'll try that later). However, it looks like almost all the light on the screen is the projector, since turning it off makes the screen go very dark.


Later I put my HT1000 on the ceiling and used my HCMW screen. Here the blacks are much darker. At this point I only have about a 3' square piece of Firehawk material, but the blacks do look better on there. I am looking into buying a used full size Firehawk and it will be interesting to see how that works with a full sized dark image. I think it will look good, but there are some scenes where I think the grey blacks will show. I should point out that this isn't in very many scenes though, as most scenes have at least some bright objects in them and these will make blacks look black.


With ColorFacts I measured something between 1300:1 and 1400:1 CR with the iris closed and something like a couple hundred less than that with it open. I do need to cover up the small light sources on DVD players, etc, and test again, though. I also want to try my method of testing 0 IRE and 10 IRE while pointing at the lens and 10 IRE and 100 IRE while pointing at the screen, but I haven't gotten around to trying that. I think William said that he couldn't measure anything above 1800:1 one time until he found a small LED that he had to turn off.


I tend to use the HT1000 in full power mode with the iris open most of the time, since I would like it to be even brighter. I don't know if that will change if I get a full-size Firehawk, but I'm guessing it won't. In the past I have noticed at times that when I thought I wanted something brighter so that I could see things, it was more that I wanted a larger contrast range.


--Darin


----------



## Tryg

Jhouse,

I really cant get into the psychology too much on what is better. I would spew a bunch of BS for about 10 pages then end up back where I started.

What's better Porsche or Ferrari? Blondes or Brunettes?

The psychology of buying different products has always baffled me. Bottom line? If you want it, you'll pretty much figure out a way to get it. Humans are very emotional thinkers....and buyers. All I can say is they are both great products and they do slightly different things.


I'm definately not a gimmick guy as when darin brought over his 3 different anamorphic lenses I put each one in front of my projector and basically said NEXT. If there isn't drastic noticable differences right off the bat for me it simply adds too much complexity/nonsense and I'll pass. However, I sit very far back so the compression with the lens really doesn't do much for my setup. The brightness can easily be handled in other ways for much less $$$. With that said, the SilverStar in my mind is a real product. It's not a gimmick. It delivers a fine image with higher gain and without some of the limitations that other high gain screens have.


The High Power to me had a great image too. Clean, bright and is a bargain. I think I would love this screen for watching HD sports and such as the image would just snap off the screen. Darin and I kinda joked that if we showed the Superbowl in my place to a bunch of AV nerds like us we would all probably congregate toward the middle for viewing. It's best image is definately on-axis. With the SilverStar this isn't a problem. You can walk all around the room and get a great image. It has the slightly softer look of a grey screen. Well, because it's silver. Don't forget the surface color of the screen does play a roll in image delivery. I found this very satisfiying especially for movies as it tended to add more depth to the image. Just make sure if you have some lighting it must be low and indirect. This is the only way to get the screen itself to totally disappear(as with all high powers).


Noah,


I'm not really discounting what PerfKnee said about compressing the black or whites etc. The post just came out with a strong flavor of not seeing the forest for the trees. To say the comparisons are meaningless is itself a joke.


Yes, you can see slightly larger dynamic range in person. However, not everyone in the world can come to my living room. I think it's mind blowing that I can take a few controlled pictures and share them via this method and explain some of the findings with people 20,000 miles away. With that said, think about the path that is being taken for these images. Someone took the original picture with a piece of hardware. Put it on the net. I downloaded it to my computer which I then display through my projector onto a screen material. I then use another piece of hardware to take a picture of what's happening, then imported it into my computer, croped and resized it, then post to this server. You then bring the image up on your monitor and see with your own two eyes. An amazing overall journey. Yet you can still see basically what I'm seeing right here in my living room. In fact, in some ways I find the pictures that I post are even more representative because they don't confuse the viewer from all these nonsense subtleties that often distract us from just examining the obvious. It's true, some people get so wrapped up in the details of things they can't see what's really happening. Nobody's accused us high end AV geeks of that right?.










I can tell you one thing, there are probably some manufacturers and sales people all shaking their head at these pics and if you showed up in their store they would probably give you some convoluded disertation on why it's totally irrelevent and such. All the while playing directly into their sales pitch.


Look, the images I post on the forum are excellent examples of what I see with my own two eyes here in my living room. If they weren't, I wouldn't post em. I am not a sales agent for anybody. I'm actually a economic researcher for an insurance company. The SilverStar is a solid product. I highly doubt Vutec would send a full screen 3000 miles to some no name joker on the internet to review if the product didn't perform valiantly. Imagine the risk they took. No risk at all really if it's great product.


My agenda? call em as I see em.


----------



## PerfKnee

Tryg,


You have done some great work here. This really is exactly the kind of stuff that you can't find in the magazines and your commentary is exactly the kind of info we need to make good decisions.


I'm sorry if I came across as dismissive when I posted about your photos being meaningless. You are right that they do illustrate what you describe, and it is helpful to have pictures to see what those words are all about.


But lets be clear that the pictures do not show the dynamic range of the images that you observe. The camera can capture a dynmic range much less than what the human eye can see. In the dimmer pictures where you say shadow detail is not as great, the blacks are being clipped by the camera. That does illustrate your point of what you experienced, but a viewer who was actually there would see more shadow detail in the dimmer screens than your pictures show.


There's an easy way to verify this. Put up a greyscale test pattern, with bars at 0 IRE, 5 IRE, 10 IRE.... 95 IRE, 100IRE. Take pictures in the same way that you did before of the different screens (all on one manual setting). You will notice that even though in person you could see a difference between the 0 IRE and 5 IRE patches, that in the pictures you won't be able to see that difference on the dimmer screens. You may also notice that on the brighter screens you can see a difference between 95IRE and 100IRE in person but not in the pictures.


So just to be clear, I'm saying the camera is overemphasizing the effects that you describe, and that in person the effects would be more subtle.


By the way, I think it's a great idea to take pictures of the off-axis response, and those side by side pics are tremendously useful!


-Tom


----------



## trutu

tryg i noticed in almost all of the screenshots there was a blue/blackish tint on the right side of the screen is this dropoff? from the lower lumens or is it something else?


Stoney


----------



## Tryg

Yes, the green shading problem is from the D-ILA projector. To get rid of it you must hand calibrate it out at this time. It really stands out with higher gain and projecting white. You generally cant notice it in a normal image.


There's plenty of DILARD owners out there waiting for the Shading Wizard so we can alleviate the picture of this annoying discoloration around the edges.


Mark...are you still working on it? Hurry up, they are making fun of me!


Shading Wizard

Shading Wizard

Shading Wizard

Shading Wizard

Shading Wizard


please


----------



## JHouse

Great insights Tryg. I really appreciate the bottom line candor.


----------



## D_B_0673

JHouse

It may be more fun than working, but it sure is more confusing than working.

Dan


----------



## MaxC

darinp,


I saw that you were considering the Firehawk/similar screen for your theater room. Is there any reason you would want that over a flat white, or retroreflective off-white like the Cinemavision (1.3)? From the pictures on the first page it appears that the white screen has just as good black levels under controlled lighting and more brightness with these new HD2 DLPs.


I have been debating between the High Power and Cinemavision for a while now and have dropped the High Contrast CinemaVision (Da-Lite's Firehawk) from my consideration after seeing that blacks looked just as black on the CinemaVision.


----------



## darinp

Max,


Pictures crush blacks. There is no way that the blacks on a white screen are going to be as dark as the Firehawk blacks when viewed live. With bright scenes you won't notice this because the eyes can only see so much contrast ratio at a time.


--Darin


----------



## bowbie89

Tryg - Thanks for all your input and hard work in putting this together! Thanks to darinp as well for your input.


There is full light control in our basement but we will be using it for watching sports with the lights on in addition to movies in the dark. I was thinking of a 106" Hi Power before reading this. The projector choice has not been made yet (probably DLP2) but it will be ceiling mounted.


After reading darinp and Tryg's comments, it seems I would be better off with the Hi Power because of our viewing with the lights on even though I am ceiling mounting the projector.


Am I right in my assumption?


----------



## PerfKnee

Anyone have any idea about the science of how the silverstar can get such high gain and wide viewing angles?


A theoretically perfect matt white screen has gain 1.0 and reflects light equally from 0 (on axis) to 90 degrees (the hypothetical viewer who is directly to the side of the screen).


The only way to increase gain is to direct some of the light that was directed off axis in the general on axis direction. For instance if a hypothetical screen directed all the energy between 45 and 90 degrees back to between 0 and 45 degrees, it would have a gain of two.


So the following are hypothetical max gains for a hypothetical screen which has "brick wall" falloff at a particular angle:


90 degrees gain 1

45 degrees gain 2

30 degrees gain 3

22 degrees gain 4

18 degrees gain 5

15 degrees gain 6

13 degrees gain 7

11 degrees gain 8

10 degrees gain 9


The average gain between zero and 90 degrees is always one or less, because you cannot make light.


But Vutec seems to be violating that rule of physics with it's high gain screens somehow. See the gain chart at:

http://vutec.com/vuteccatalog/ultrahighgain.pdf 


and you can see that the average gain of their curved screens from zero to 90 degrees is something like maybe 5 or so. How can this be?


-Tom


----------



## PerfKnee

Actually looking at the chart, I part of the answer to how they get those amazing viewing angle charts: They measure at only 2x the screen width. My numbers had assumed they were measuring much further away so that the size of the screen didn't make a difference.


Still, it seems amazing that they could get such a viewing angle curve, or even the viewing angles that Tryg is reporting... I'm curious how they could be doing that?


-Tom


----------



## Tryg

The scattering and diffusion of light within a substrate causes an effect called optical dot gain, also known as the Yule-Neilsen effect. As shown in the picture below(very much like the SilverStar), a photon entering the surface will scatter and diffuse within the paper and exit the paper from a point that is different from the point at which it entered. The average distance a photon diffuses before exiting the paper is called the scattering length.












As with other screens the light enters the surface and exits from closer to the same point. With the SilverStar, it exits at a further point.

When there is no diffusion, a photon always enters and exits the surface from the same point. This gap is just significantly larger in the SilverStar material. This is why this screen looks ever so slightly softer than the High Power. But, the rewards are an enormous viewing cone. Basically double.

This may also explain why screen door seems to be diffused more. This may also help blend pixel edges thus minimizing stairstepping artifact.













Actually, I think it's probably just Magic.










BTW I smell a powerbuy coming on


----------



## DaViD Boulet

Very interesting thread. I too would love to learn more about this silverstar.


Eventually I need a motorized screen...and in the short term would need a fixed screen that could be quickly rolled-up or folded and put away if we needed access to the door that resides behind it...so a large fixed-board style screen wouldn't be practical.


-dave


----------



## Robin

Tryg,


Are you saying that light is permeating the silver coating on the SilverStar bouncing around in the substrate and then repermeating the silver coating when exiting?


Robin


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by PerfKnee_
> *Anyone have any idea about the science of how the silverstar can get such high gain and wide viewing angles?*



Tom,


I don't know the answer for these other claims, but I think we found one answer for the screen that Tryg has. I think we showed that it is a lower gain screen than the Hi-Power on axis, regardless of Vutec's claims. Whites are brighter on the Hi-Power inside its viewing cone.


--Darin


----------



## Free




> Quote:
> a large fixed-board style screen wouldn't be practical.



David, I also need a roll up because I have cabinets behind the screen that I need to access occaisionally. I am still thinking of getting this screen and hanging it from the ceiling on hooks so that I can easily take it down if I need to. From what I hear it is pretty light and wouldn't require much to hang it and move it out of the way.


----------



## Free




> Quote:
> I think we showed that it is a lower gain screen than the Hi-Power on axis,



So Darin, what would you estimate the actual gain of the Silverstar is? Isn't the highpower about 2.8? If Vutec is claiming 6.0 then maybe their 9.0 is the one to get


----------



## Tryg

Free, as far as I know they only manufacture the 6.0. At least that is what they have told me.


For all I know they may have sent me the 4.5 gain(maybe I shoudl look at the back of the screen instead of the front







. Regardless, I would estimate this screen at just over 3 gain. I think the High power is more like 3.3.


----------



## DaViD Boulet

I'd consider haning my screen on hooks too. My only problem there is that I can't imagine where I'd store the screen if I needed to take it down for a dinner party etc. Something that could "roll up" would work much better. Then again...maybe just stashing it in the guest bedroom for the evening once in a while wouldn't be a problem...


-dave


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Free_
> *So Darin, what would you estimate the actual gain of the Silverstar is? Isn't the highpower about 2.8? If Vutec is claiming 6.0 then maybe their 9.0 is the one to get
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



Tryg might be right about the gain. Someone did post a graph that showed the Hi-Power at something like 3.3 right at the lens and then trailing off to 0.6 at some angle. You could probably guess how these compare as well as me by looking at Tryg's pictures of the white and black squares in this post. Whites are just a little hotter on the Hi-Power near the lens. It's enough that there really isn't any question which one is brighter white, but I wouldn't say it blows the Vutec away in this department.


--Darin


----------



## rogo

I am catching a whiff of that powerbuy too... Of course, the devil is in the details....


Mark


----------



## Michael Grant

Hey guys,

I'm trying to figure out if it's possible to _retract_ a rigid screen into the ceiling (assuming there is enough clearance in the attic). I figured it wouldn't be too hard to attach a rigid screen frame to a "cable climber" much like Stewart shows on this page:
http://www.stewartfilm.com/product_i...creens_13.html 

The one trick would be to make sure it's not going to swing too much when raising it back up, lest it get banged around. Perhaps the solution is to combine this cable system with some rigid guides, kind of like the rails of a pull-out drawer.


----------



## PerfKnee

Michael-


That's a way cool idea. It seems so much more dramatic for the whole thing to go up into the ceiling. If I were doing it, I'd probably go the DIY approach and use an automotive winch or something to get it up.


Actually you might want to look at home pocket doors... that is the same idea only rotated ninety degrees. But then again the gravity issues might make the pocket doors not work.


-Tom


----------



## rogo

I think with the right design you could virtually eliminate any swinging.


----------



## MaxC




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by darinp_
> *Max,
> 
> 
> Pictures crush blacks. There is no way that the blacks on a white screen are going to be as dark as the Firehawk blacks when viewed live. With bright scenes you won't notice this because the eyes can only see so much contrast ratio at a time.
> 
> 
> --Darin*



I have samples of the HighContast CinemaVision (1.1 gray) and the CinemaVison (1.3 slightly off-white) and the black on both screens are virtually identical while colors and whites are a bit more bright as illustrated by tryg's pictures. This is a side by side comparison of the two (plus the High Power) on space and other black scenes.


I own the Sharp Z10000 and attribute some of the solid blacks to the higher contrast of this HD2 projector. This is why I was asking if you, if you noticed the same with your Nec HT1000 and if so, why consider the Firehawk over a white screen.


----------



## MaxC

Some higher gain can be due to the shape/structure of the coated material and how the light reflects off one partical and onto a near by partical for an addative gain effect...?










For instance on glass beads: Some light goes through and is reflected back, while other is scatter to nearby beads and is reflected in different directions...adding to the overall brightness.


----------



## darinp

Max,


The blacks on the Firehawk look blacker than the blacks on the HCMW (pulldown version of HCCV) to me. Are you doing these comparisons in a really dark room where your iris is allowed to open and perceive the black level? One reason I ask is that differences in blacks would be hard to see otherwise or if the background screen is bright (like 2 samples pasted to a Hi-Power). I haven't seen the CinemaVision, so I can't comment on that, but with my HT1000 I can see that the HCMW has brighter blacks than the Firehawk (whites are close) and that the Hi-Power has much higher blacks than either, when viewed on axis. On a small screen while watching a movie the blacks on the Hi-Power look great to me, but on a big screen with a close viewing range in my dark walled theater room they are higher than I would like on both the HCMW and Hi-Power.


--Darin


----------



## DaViD Boulet

Sounds like your saying that the firehawk produces better black level than the HCCV. So there's really no affordable "firehawk clone" that performs almost as well (in regards to blacks and ambient light) for less cost?


----------



## Tryg

Yes David. The black level on the Firehawk is the blackest. Why? It has a darker grey backing than anything else I've seen out there. You could of course take this to an even more extreme level by making a screen backing that is even darker. Then of course you are reflecting even less light.


Michael,


Interesting concept. Maybe if you had a Medieval theme to your HT you could make something like this to present your SilverStar


----------



## MaxC




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by darinp_
> *Max,
> 
> 
> The blacks on the Firehawk look blacker than the blacks on the HCMW (pulldown version of HCCV) to me. Are you doing these comparisons in a really dark room where your iris is allowed to open and perceive the black level? One reason I ask is that differences in blacks would be hard to see otherwise or if the background screen is bright (like 2 samples pasted to a Hi-Power). I haven't seen the CinemaVision, so I can't comment on that, but with my HT1000 I can see that the HCMW has brighter blacks than the Firehawk (whites are close) and that the Hi-Power has much higher blacks than either, when viewed on axis. On a small screen while watching a movie the blacks on the Hi-Power look great to me, but on a big screen with a close viewing range in my dark walled theater room they are higher than I would like on both the HCMW and Hi-Power.
> 
> 
> --Darin*



I am not familiar with the HCMW (is it 0.8 gain?) but the HCCV is a medium gray screen. I am doing comparisons in a completely dark room and my background screen is a High Contrast CinePerf (gray) screen.


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by MaxC_
> *I am not familiar with the HCMW (is it 0.8 gain?) but the HCCV is a medium gray screen.*



Max,


As I said, it is the pull-down version of the HCCV. Same gain. Almost exactly the same color. The HCCV is tensionable and the HCMW is not.


So, I can't explain what you are seeing unless it is just that these things are very close and it is harder to differentiate small differences in blacks than in whites. At least that would be my guess. I think if you got a Firehawk sample you would find that the blacks are darker than either of these screens, though.


Just to be straight, these 1.1 and 1.3 gain screens that you compared both have darker blacks than the Hi-Power, right?


--Darin


----------



## MaxC

Oh yeah...much darker.


----------



## Randy Mathis

I'd love a power buy but I would need it to drag on for a while. I currently own two houses and am paying both mortgages. I need to sell the other house before I pay +-2k for a screen that would be used with a 2.5k projector.


How many of us would we need for a power buy? I'm guessing that it would take time.


----------



## DaViD Boulet

I'm confused...on their website I see HCCV available in a drop-down (electric). Do they use a different material for a manual pull-down screen?



> Quote:
> As I said, it is the pull-down version of the HCCV. Same gain. Almost exactly the same color. The HCCV is tensionable and the HCMW is not.


----------



## Gordon Groff

I am following this thread with great interest.


RE: DaLite HCMW - check out my experience with this and my comments on the last page of this thread: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...3&pagenumber=3 


I am VERY interested in how the SilverStar would compare to the Grayhawk for my PLV-70 in light of what I've been going through lately (per thread above). It appears to me (newbie guessing here) that the HCMW exacerbates screendoor/lines due to 0 diffusion and the sharp-edged, rectangluar, straight rows of the dimples used to texture it. Any comments Tryg??


Thanks again for your GREAT work here!!!


Gordon


----------



## Michael Grant




> Quote:
> Interesting concept. Maybe if you had a Medieval theme to your HT you could make something like this to present your SilverStar



Very funny, and yet of course the mechanics are roughly the same


----------



## D_B_0673

Tryg,

I am leaning heavily toward purchasing a SilverStar. You recommend that you have some indirect lighting. Do you think a totally dark room would be a detriment? My lighting will be a few recessed lights in a suspended ceiling that could be dimmed during the movie. Is that what you mean.

Dan ( I feel like the village idiot)


----------



## JHouse




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Gordon Groff_
> *It appears to me (newbie guessing here) that the HCMW exacerbates screendoor/lines due to 0 diffusion and the sharp-edged, rectangluar, straight rows of the dimples used to texture it. Any comments Tryg??
> *



This kind of sounds like a similar problem that occurs in perforated screens where the grid lines and the holes kind of coordinate and add to one another in certain circumstances.


----------



## Tryg

I didn't mean to imply you need some lighting. Obviously the lower the lighting with any screen the better the results.


Now at 3 gain some people might find sitting in the dark with this kind of foot lamberts coming back at your eyes too much. In this case, some mild bias lighting would be great. Since the screen is solid, just a small light behind the screen is all you need. This will shut down your irises a bit, add a little indirect ambient light to the room and allow for a very enjoyable image and viewing. Check what bias lighting does for percieved blacks.


You get all the detail and image from higher gain, excellent percieved blacks from the bias lighting, accurate colors and whites and all the viewing angle you need. hmmmm


Gordon, I wouldn't say it exacerbates it. This would imply it makes it worse than normal. What is normal? If a white screen is normal then yes I think you can see the screendoor more on grey screens as shown in the illustration in the initial post. I use a D-ila so there is virtually no screen door anyway. I don't even think about these things like screendoor. Had I taken this picture with a DLP things would look much worse. LCD, you guys would run and hide










Also, what you see at the screen is not what you see at your seating positions.


----------



## rttrek

I think these pix and comparisons would be much more useful if the projector was recalibrated to match each screen. Many projectors have their brightness turned below max on high gain screens. I realize it's not reasonable to do this in a comparison of this sort, however.


I'd also like to see similar pix with a higher power, LCD projector. I agree with the findings herein for D-ILA and perhaps even DLP, but are they correct for high-lumen LCDs like the PLV-70 and the HS-10?


----------



## PerfKnee

Digital projectors generally don't need any calibration adjustments to be used on different screens. The reason is that they all need all the contrast ratio they can get, and any adjustment you would do for a particular screen will lower the contrast ratio. Once the black and white level have been set at the one and only value that gives the best contrast ratio, you would be silly to change that.


If there is too much brightness, you might consider using a neutral density (grey) filter because that would preserver contrast ratio. But you wouldn't adjust the projector brightness because that would lower the contrast ratio.


Your point is well taken however that high lumen projectors might be too much for high gain screens. I have seen a 20HD be way too bright on my Draper M2500 screen which works great with my JVC G1000. Personally I would try increasing the image size or using neutral density filters if that were an issue.


-Tom


----------



## noah katz

Tom,


But Vutec seems to be violating that rule of physics with it's high gain "screens somehow."


They've managed the same thing with their Prismatec rear screen material. The sample I have is way brighter at all viewing angles than any of the various types of other samples I have.


David,


"My only problem there is that I can't imagine where I'd store the screen"


How about swinging it up 90 deg and sticking it to the ceiling with magnets or cabinet latches? You could put some artsy fabric on the backside.


----------



## Michael Grant

It does seem like they're violating the laws of physics, doesn't it? The light has to come from somewhere, so if the viewing cone is large in the horizontal direction, it must be small in the vertical direction. One way to test this: turn the screen 90 degrees on its side


----------



## Tryg

No, this material doesn't violate the laws of physics it just takes it to a new level that we are not familiar with. Yes the viewing cone is twice what the other high gain screens are and it is a very smooth transition. All the other screens seem to go to about 20 degrees max then drop off very noticably and rapidly.


I really got my curiosity up tonight when I was pondering why this screen really only measured about 3 gain. Had they sent me the 4.5 gain material? Well I busted out my samples of 6 gain and 9.5 gain and put them up to the screen. Lo and behold...It's definately the 6 gain material.


The 6 gain material seems to be the sweetspot for this material as the dropoff rate is so slow and smooth it's almost not noticable even when projecting white only. If you notice the 9.5 gain material actually drops off fairly rapidly(yet smooth) and it's about the same as the 6 gain material at 25 degrees. As we get out to 50 degrees the 6 gain stuff still looks great and the 9.5 gain stuff is no longer reflecting much light.


This is probably why they have decided to just manufacture the 6 gain stuff. Definately a winner for home theater.












Michael, I thought for sure it must be the same viewing angle in both directions but just to make sure I tipped the 6 gain sample on its side. Yes the viewing cone is slightly smaller in the vertical direction. How? I have no clue. Just looking at the surface material it looks identical from all directions. However after testing the sample on its sideit's not quite as wide (a little smaller). This definatley makes sense to have the wider cone on the horizontal plane. No worries though, when you get your screen if you have your 16:9 screen installed vertically you should recognize something is wrong right off the bat










This stuff is amazing


OK no more pictures of white screens...It's making my D-ila look bad. I need the Shading Wizard! Mark?


----------



## darinp

Great stuff Tryg. As usual.


That 9.5 gain stuff looks like it would be awesome for rejecting ambient light. Does it sparkle? Or have a bright sheen?


Maybe you can get them to send you a full size version of the 9.5 material after all the screens they're going to sell from your review.


--Darin


----------



## D_B_0673

Tryg, you stated

"Had I taken this picture with a DLP things would look much worse."

What things? Are you saying that the SilverStar would look much worse with a DLP? I just ordered the Virtuoso HD2 and thought you had implied that the SilverStar would look great with that pj.

Dan(I guess I am the village idiot)

Tryg check out my post at the end of this thread. Thanks as always
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...hreadid=263731


----------



## MaxC

He is saying that screen door would be worse on a DLP and even more of a problem on an LCD.


----------



## MaxC




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Michael Grant_
> *It does seem like they're violating the laws of physics, doesn't it? The light has to come from somewhere, so if the viewing cone is large in the horizontal direction, it must be small in the vertical direction. One way to test this: turn the screen 90 degrees on its side
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



There's no violation. The screens plug into the wall like a light brite kit.







...and the sample, hmmm....the samples glow for up to two hours after you turn off the lights, so you are set unless you are demo'ing movies back to back.











(just kidding of course)


----------



## Floydbob

I think the next move will be biogenic screens. If they sense blacks they go darker and if they sense whites they go whiter.


The Chameleon (TM) Screen!


True contrast enhancement for the next generation of organic projectors.


----------



## Tryg




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by darinp_
> *
> 
> Or have a bright sheen?
> 
> 
> Maybe you can get them to send you a full size version of the 9.5 material after all the screens they're going to sell from your review.
> 
> 
> --Darin*



Yes, the 9.5 material probably isn't for home theater. It's too extreme and th 6.0 stuff seems to be a great fit. Might be good for some commercial applications though like in a walkway at an airport. Bright, probably rejects ambient light good and if your walking straight on at it, it would be a great advertizing board for a projector. Just speculation.


D_B_0673, I hope you have viewed a single chip DLP projector before you purchased. You may be in for a big surprise! Dan, don't let me rain on your parade as I'm sure the Virtuoso is a worthy projector. I just don't tolerate one chip projectors. I will say when darinp brought over his calibrated HT1000 he put it in eco mode. The projector went silent. The image got a little dimmer but still very satisfying as the screen is ~3 gain. I must say, a nice little combo...and probably for any higher end DLP. I did however see rainbows all over the place.


Actually, I was thinking if Sony was smart they would send me one of their new SXRD projectors. I'd be happy to review it










For those that are interested in this screen maybe Alan could set up a powerbuy and make owning one a little easier.


----------



## Alan Gouger

What a review.


This definitely deserves a place in one of the magazines but we are privileged to have it here first.


Its amazing the difference between the screen material when placed side by side.

What helps is you have real user size comparison screens from each manufacture. Its impossible to get a good idea how each screen looks with a 1 foot square sample.


I think for Dila and CRT the SilverStar looks like a big hit. I wonder how it does with DLP.

I am also surprised how well the White material looks also.


Well you've out done yourself Tryg. Now what are you going to do. Its all downhill from here


----------



## q3131a

Did anyone confirm the price per square foot of the material?


----------



## Tryg

I think the obvious answer to this is call AVS. My curiosity just got the best of me so I did. I highly doubt anyone else could beat their deal. It was way below what I expected. Nice work AVS!


If you are interested in this screen I suggest you call em.


----------



## D_B_0673

Tryg,

Bias Lighting "behind" the screen??? My screen will be on the back wall. Not sure what type of setup you refer to.

Thanks

Dan


----------



## AVWERKS

Excellent! your time and effort in this research is much appreciated by me and everyone else I,m sure! Thanks a lot! I use the hi-power and love it but not the off axis performance, so this material looks like the best compromise of both. Concerning the surface itself the hipower is cleanable, how about the silverstar? And why can,t this material be made in a roll down? A fixed screen is out of the question for me. Are the beads larger than the hi-power material ? pardon me if I missed a post on this question


----------



## Free

I believe that it is the lack of Flexibility in the surface material that makes it difficult to come out with a roll up version.


----------



## noah katz

You could make awood L-section frame, say3" x 3", around the screen with rope light behind it. The frame will keep the light from hitting the screen and from viewers seeing it directly; it makes a nice halo/corona effect on the wall.


----------



## Gordon Groff

Hey Tryg (or anyone else who knows)


I'm fascinated by the "scattering" and "diffusion" effect you described earlier and it's benefit for a digital image. Is there any "rating" system or way of determining the "amount" of this effect for a given screen material?


I'm speculating that it may have a major impact on the appearance of pixelation/screendoor/other digital FPN. Do you think this is true?


How would one "rank" the following screens in terms of this effect (from least to most diffusive):


DaLite HCMW (Probably least)

DaLite HiPower

Stewart Firehawk

Parkland Plastic

Stewart Grayhawk

Silver Star


Thanks!


Gordon


----------



## Tryg




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by D_B_0673_
> *Tryg,
> 
> Bias Lighting "behind" the screen??? My screen will be on the back wall.*



Dan, won't this hurt you neck always looking behind you to watch your movies? I recommend putting this screen on your front wall. Search for "bias" lighting.


Gordon, I really wouldn't worry too much about about this "scattering" effect. Very very very low on the picture inprovement priorities list. You would have to have an extremely well tuned system to even notice it.


ALAN,


Hey you really threw me with your post so I forgot to thank you for the compliment.


I was thinking... What the hell is he thinking saying this should be in a magazine? Alan, don't you know by now that AVS crushes any magazine?







The fact that you got exclusive rights to my work is a testiment to how worthy I think this communication medium is. Sorry to those who haven't found AVS yet. They'll have to just rely on the opinions of marketers.


Alan, maybe you should raise the AVS bar one notch higher by offering a yearly award to the most informative post. This would reduce the nonsense chatter, save on server bandwidth and probably pull in some of that Grey Matter we have lost over the years. I'd love to see some of the old brainpower return to AVS. BTW, $1000 award would definately raise my level of blather.










Yes, even DLP looks good on the SilverStar.










Thanks again for the compliments and you should definately pick one of these things up for the showroom. I continue to enjoy it's benefits. There is probably a stigma to the SilverStar that it's just too expensive. All I can say is I've seen a lot of products bought over the years that are much more expensive, and purchased on hype alone. What I can say about this product is it will likely be the best upgrade to the final image you'll make. Here's to delivering the image that you never knew was there!


----------



## JimmyR

Lotta hype but when enough people really see it full size their going to be amazed. Tis a winning product and a half.


----------



## Brett

Hi Tryg,


Very nice showdown indeedy.


I realize that the Silver Star is recommended here for digital projectors - but just wondered off chance what you would think if its use in a curved Torus CRT screen?


TIA.



EDIT: Oooops - just read that it is on a rigid foam backing.


----------



## raoofsyed

I watch movies on a Draper 2.5 gain 120" diagonal screen with NEC XG 1352LC CRT Projector, please some one advise me if Silver star will look even better? I will appreciate your advise.

Thank!


----------



## VideoGrabber

Tryg wrote:

> These shots were high-resolution shots taken from the Kodak high resolution digital website.


----------



## Randy Mathis

How durable is the silverstar? I have two dogs and I am wondering if noses etc... and children will cause irrepairable damage to it. I want the silverstar but I am considering using goo until the dogs become room temperature and my friends kids grow up and then buying a screen like the silverstar.


----------



## christer W.

Tryg,


From your ealier DIY review, you thought that Rustoleum Aluminum created an excellent surface that had similar gain and performance to the SilverStar.


The issue with others that have experimented with this paint was the difficulty in getting a uniform coating.


Has anyone come up with a workable solution to using this aluminum paint?


I was thinking that if you can paint a car silver, there must be a way to spray a screen. Continuing with the car theme, match the Rustoleum color with an automotive finish and have a professional have a go at it. Couldn't cost that much. Of course, I would have the surface primed and sanded so the painter would just have to put on the final surface.


----------



## Tryg

VideoGrabber


here is the Kodak Website or you can do a google for kodak pictures, should be first at top


Randy Mathis,


I would not recommend this screen for dogs , noses, children etc. Generally dont touch this surface. I don't know if it would be vary receptive to cleaning as I don't want to do it and find out... unless I have too.

Get something the dogs can total and you'll laugh about it, not cry.


Christer, why would you hire a painter when you can do all that? If you have an air compressor use an HPLV gun and have fun. $50 at Harbor Freight tools


raoofsyed, I don't know about CRTs. I suspect it would be fine but you never know. Last night I watch Vanilla Sky and was just giddy about the performance. After the movie I was tired and wanting to go to bed, flipped off the DVD and Joy Ride was on HBO in HD. The picture was so stunning I stayed up another 2 hours watching in awe. This thing is fun


This thing actually makes my projector look like a super bright CRT. More depth, contrast, and has that slight softness that CRTs exibit. Very immersive! I wish there were some more veterans to come check this out as I think they would be impressed.


----------



## Free

I ordered one from AVS. Tryg, how long did it take for you to get yours? I am hoping I will have it in about 2 weeks and then I will give you my impression with my SX21.


----------



## Andy Lammer

Phil, definitely keep us posted on your thoughts of teh Silverstar with the SX21. I am going to delay my HCCV purchase until I hear your findings.


- Andy


----------



## D_B_0673

Tryg,

You are right again, the screen on the front wall will be better. LOL , But seriously I spent all day yesterday reading about Bias Lighting. Thanks. I am getting a Virtuoso, and would like the silverStar. my planned 100" diag will then be 600 lumen's X 6.0 gain / 28.3 sqft =127 FtLamberts. I worry that is too bright, never seen any of these products together. (never seen anything except in a store for a couple of minutes) Would you recommend this set up and bias lighting? Eliminate eye strain and improve black levels. I would probably just use the rope lights. Also do think 1.75 X width for seating would work. (12.5 ft for a 100" diag screen)

Thanks

Dan


----------



## darinp

Dan,


The SilverStar might be 3.0 gain, but if I were putting money down I would put it on under 3.0 before over 3.0 (the whites are brighter on axis on the Hi-Power advertised at 2.8). So, I don't think you'll have problems with it be blindingly bright. I don't remember if the Virtuoso has a low power mode, but that would also bring the light down a little bit. If it is too bright you could always add some bias lighting, but I wouldn't assume that you will need it.


1.75x sounds great to me for this setup. I would think you could push to almost 1.5x with that projector if you wanted to, but 1.75x will keep the artifacts down.


--Darin


----------



## jkirk

Tryg,


on page 4

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...0&pagenumber=4 


of this thread, the photo you took of the back of the silverstar shows a gain of 9.5. Is this correct? Is this the gain that you are generally recommending for DSL's.


thnx,


It's really great to have experts you can actually communicate with.


----------



## jkirk

Oops. Did I say DSL? Too many acronyms. I meant DLP!


----------



## Big Picture

Has anyone seen this screen with a Sony VPL-10HT LCD front projector?


Thank you.


----------



## D_B_0673




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by darinp_
> *Dan,
> 
> 
> The SilverStar might be 3.0 gain, but if I were putting money down I would put it on under 3.0 before over 3.0 (the whites are brighter on axis on the Hi-Power advertised at 2.8). So, I don't think you'll have problems with it be blindingly bright. I don't remember if the Virtuoso has a low power mode, but that would also bring the light down a little bit. If it is too bright you could always add some bias lighting, but I wouldn't assume that you will need it.
> 
> 
> 1.75x sounds great to me for this setup. I would think you could push to almost 1.5x with that projector if you wanted to, but 1.75x will keep the artifacts down.
> 
> 
> --Darin*



Thanks Darin. I going for it and can't wait. Room remodel is moving along. Hope to have opening for the Two Towers in August

Dan


----------



## jkirk

How much light is thrown back into the room during lighter scenes? Don't most theaters aim for dark settings to help immerse into the movie?


----------



## Tryg

Jkirk


They only manufacture the 6.0 gain screen(which is actually more like around 3 gain).


I don't recommend this screen with a lot of ambient light. The viewing cone is so big it tends to reflect any extra lighting in the room. So if you have light, keep it very low and indirect... behind the screen could be good too.


I know they are showing the product at INFOCOMM and likely in very poor conditions. I think this product is currently marketed mostly to the business marketplace but frankly I think it's value is in HT. I'd take the High Power for the boardroom and SilverStar for my HT.


----------



## jbaracelona

Do you think that this screen would be a problem for the LCD Projectors? I believe you mentioned that LCD owners would run and hide.


----------



## JimmyR

LCD owners are always running and hiding around here Joe. But the screen has nothing to do with it.


----------



## rogo

I think the running and hiding was related to some fear that screendoor would be worse with this baby. And I think that proved to be untrue.


Ugly artifacts are apparently a bit worse, but that's not an LCD-specific issue.


I will likely be trying the Silverstar with a Z1.


----------



## Theater Dreamer

Tryg--


I can't believe how much detail opens up in the dark areas of the photos.


Does it look that good in person or is the camera able to capture more than we see? From your excitement I suspect you can see a dramatic difference.


Have you spoke with the manufacturer to see when they might make a 133" screen?


----------



## mandarax

Tryg..


Just spent a considerable amount of time reading many of your threads...

I had some interesting results at my Canuck Shootout with many of the screen samples commercial and the DIY variety. In the end I posted the results of what people .... the people that were looking at the screens picked as their favorite screens. This from filling out independent feedback forms. Funny thing is... many people preferred a variety of different screens watching the same damn screen shots and video clips.... I find this almost every day when demoing equipment with a variety of different screen choices. There seems to be a conclusion in this thread that something akin to a high power is the way to go... Unless I am misreading the thread entirely. I have found that peoples preferences are not all the same and my observations post and prior to the event on percentages of people that like a certain screen type to be almost or following along the lines of the shootout results. I have a firehawk, HCCV, CV, HC-da-matte, Goo digital grey lite, Hi Power, Goo CRT White. Not samples.. full screens. Judging from the theme of this thread it seems that screens akin to a high power's punch.. must be king... would be preferred by most... is the way to go... Hasnt worked out that way for me.


Screen Shots from a digital cameras lens and processed in the camera of a screen projected via a projector transferred to your video card downloaded to this site viewed through peoples own computer and monitor as a determination of what the image really looks like ... interesting.


I originally did the shootout because of the hype of some products I saw people being drawn to in the forum and with the limited knowledge I have on the subject knew there was alot of people being led to believe there was a secret cheap formula... something akin to the Behr combination ... not sure how many people went down that road but there seemed to be alot. Also some of the fabrics, non coated, and other DIY solutions that were horrid.


I guess its your choice to state get this screen or that screen and with the volume of info and work you put into it sometimes ones own bias towards a product or image can get difficult to understand why someone doesnt see product A or B as I do.... but some people for instance loved the high power... some really didnt like it at all. Some liked the greyhawk as their favorite... some put it near the bottom ...


Point is I guess... If you can get into a situation where you can see a variety of screens with your projector... do it... dont let others make your decision for you.


----------



## Pocatello

Mandarax,


what kind of PJs did you use?


----------



## mandarax

There was a JVC SX21, Goo .5, Infocus X1, Epson TW100, SE20HD/PLV70, Nec LT260, Sony HS10... were suppose to have two Z1's and a NEC HT1000 but the Z1'ers didnt show up... and the HT1000 guy sent an email the night before at 11:45 PM saying oops I cant make it. But still there was enough variety with all the screens ...


----------



## JHouse

When individuals with a "problem" are evaluating different screens, the will naturally pick the screen that solves their problem. If you are worried about the deepness of your blacks, or the obviousness of the pixel grid, or the visibility of processing artifacts, and that particular problem irks you, you will probably pick the screen that seems to best solve that particular problem. I don't think this type of decision making necessarily works out best in the long run. Over the long run we first get familiar with our set-up and usually learn to love it....for a while. Then, after time, the obviousness of any particular shortcoming starts to stand out. Then we have a new problem to fret about. And you might very will pick a different screen at that point.


However, this applies mostly to the initiated. The uninitiated are generally looking for a bigger version of what they are familiar with (a TV). They really haven't bought all the rationalization here about the desirability of the low light output of cinema (which are necessary to hide the problems of 24 frames per second). They typically want a TV/movie picture that is as bright and vivid as what they are used to. And unless you are trying to get rid of a particular problem that is eating you, most people immediately notice that a brighter picture (assuming it is properly adjusted/calibrated) shows more detail and color, and is easier to watch. That's what I wanted, and what I still want. I think this explains why the high gain screens are so popular. Though to some, they just aggravate their current pet peeve. Because it becomes more visible.


----------



## Tryg

First off, I was joking about LCDs. the product will look good on all technologies.


Theater Dreamer,


This is most due to the fact that it is higher gain. Reflect more light, get more image. It's that simple. If you are satisfied with your grey screeen then great. BUT, you are not seeing the full image...not even close.


What if you took your direct view TV and turned down the brightness 66%. Yuck! I guess you could get used to it especially if you haven't seen anything else to compare it to but...why?


Yes, it looks even more dynamic in person. Diagonal 122" is the largest they make unfortunately. I would take larger in a heartbeat. And the viewing cone can easily support it.


mandarax,


I know I cant please everyone so I choose to please myself. However, I have given enough disclaimers thoughout my review to wake up those that are on the edge of a one track mind. Those that are already there are going to do what they want anyway.


Yes, people prefer a variety of things and for a variety of reasons. The variables are overwelming. So I just have to do all the opinions and preferences using my own brain. This screen may not be for everybody, after all it's mounted to a big board. But none of it's downsides bothered me and I'm still loving it. I actually think it makes my D-ILA look more like a very bright CRT.


Still in awe... are you in awe about any of your screens?


----------



## Dan Miller

What is cool here is that many are finally realizing how important the screen is to the package. For a LONG time, people figured that, "hey, it is just a screen, use whatever works". When Stewart screens started to become more popular many thought them crazy for their pricing... until they owned one. Now we all can see how it is almost as important as loudspeaker selection is to your audio system.


Dan


----------



## Theater Dreamer

Well, I do appreciate the reply. I will have a dazian in next week to replace my temporary screen. But, if they start making a big silver screen the dazian may become the temorary screen.....


I just never considered a gray screen. With the output of the HS10 and the size of screen I have to have I figured it would be too dark. Looking at you several reviews (thanks by the way) the gray screens just never appealed to me.


Here's to hoping for a 133" silver beauty!!!!


----------



## rogo

Tryg: The great service you've done here is that you've advocated that people try almost-free DIY solutions... and also expressed a preference for a screen material that has a $60/sq ft. list price.


I really appreciate that kind of perspective and information.


----------



## ThePanda

If I want to watch a bright projector on a silver screen with no ambient light, will the image blind me with its intensity because of the gain? Right now I'm just using white paint and it already seems really bright. Just the projector lights up much of the room, and black levels are too bright. I have a Sharp M20X.


----------



## mandarax

Tryg...


One of the major reasons for the shootout was due to the fact that some people were using as you are aware some very feckless screen solutions. Given that I demo the units all the time I have understood that people will like one screen vs another and there is no real scientific method that I could conclude from doing demo's that would enable me to be able to have one choose ... yeah this one is the best. Its kinda like some guys visually like portly obese women... some like red heads with heart shaped butt steaks. Some like bulbulous breasts... some like em small and as firm as vinyl car seats... Its kind of the same way with anything visual. Too difficult to predict what someone will like. All of our eyes are different colours and we do not see everything exactly the same. I think it is great that you are bringing an awareness of the importance of a proper screen. All that time and effort is greatly appreciated by alot of people.


I have not been in Awe of a screen yet. I prefer different screens for different movies... sports etc. I like some screens with some projectors and not with others. The purpose of the shootout was to give people an understanding and get some stats on what people preferred... So for instance if a customer that cant get a demo of a screen... I can get the stats on the projector and advise not my opinion but what the population of participants at the event chose when they liked the projector and rated it high.


How thick is the Vutec? I am making an aluminum extrusion for a frame and this might work out well for the next shootout event.


Rob


----------



## shodoug

Great thread.


Making me feel better about my DLP and HiPower all teh time. It has been in storage so long, I don't remember what it looks like.


Thanks,

Doug


----------



## volley

That 122" silverstar is seemless right? Their webpage is a bit confusing about that.


----------



## Tryg

I'm really glad you guys have enjoyed the review.


Yes, the product is seamless.


----------



## Big Picture

I'm considering the Silverstar. I have a 120" diagonal 16:9 Stewart Grayhawk now in a Stewart fixed Luxus Deluxe frame. Has anyone here tried to fit the Silverstar in to the Stewart Luxus Deluxe frame? The Stewart frame is a real piece of work (expensive) and I don't want to give it up.


Thank you.


----------



## Free

I have been told that my new Silverstar screen will weigh about 120lbs so I think it is no piece of junk either.


----------



## Tryg

the SilverStar comes in it's own frame. ITS A SOLID BOARD!


It might be 120 lbs in the shipping crate.


weight = quality ???? then all other screens must be junk. this is a joke right?


Either Vutec needs to provide more information on their website or you guys need to start using your head


----------



## Free

Well...I admit I have been a little stressed lately







But how much does the screen weigh then?


The shipping weight is 140lbs in its packaging.


----------



## Tryg

less than the packaging.


Vutec. If you're listening, you really need to provide more information on your website about your products!


----------



## Free

What is the board made out of? I have never purchased a fixed screen before so I am curious. Is it a lightweight solid foam or more of a plywood with a foam surface attached?


----------



## jsharpe




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Big Picture_
> *I'm considering the Silverstar. I have a 120" diagonal 16:9 Stewart Grayhawk now in a Stewart fixed Luxus Deluxe frame. .. The Stewart frame is a real piece of work (expensive) and I don't want to give it up.
> *



I'm in a similar situation with a fairly new 123" Firehawk. While I really like the screen, the extra brightness of the Silverstar is enticing. My first choice would be for Stewart to come out with something similar that would work in my current frame. Second choice would be to buy just the Silverstar material and place it in my current frame. I've heard that they are not selling the Silverstar material separately at this time. If it came down to replacing the entire frame I think I'll stick with the Firehawk.


As far a mounting the Silverstar material in a Stewart frame, I think it would be pretty easy. The Silverstar is basically just a big piece of foamcore with a special surface.


----------



## Rob Tomlin

I wish a few more people would take the chance and order one of these puppies and post their reviews (and preferably use a HD2 DLP unit).


Despite the excellent review and pictures, it is still difficult to purchase something like this sight unseen, despite the fact I find myself somewhat caught up in the excitement/hype.


My main concern is the "sparklies" issue, and black levels. I will be using a 123 inch screen and the first row of seats will be about 13.5 feet away, with a DWIN TV3 projector (mounted 17 feet back).


Would the distance the pj is mounted from the screen have any effect on the amount of "sparklies"?


And thanks for the excellent review Tryg (and to think you did it while drinking a Corona)!


----------



## bosng

sorry for the question if answered already but this screen is if this screen is fixed on a board...how is it delivered? don't many of the shippers have size restrictions? oh and can it be cleaned easily? what is the return policy if not satified? went to the vutec site and info is hard to find. the pages freeze on me too often. thanks


oh and thanks tryg for all your hard work. your posts are always well thought out and i definitely appreciate the hard work you've put into all your reviews.


one more question if it's ok. if i see sparklies in the firehawk (which i do--well i guess it's kind of a sheen effect) will i see the same or more on this screen?


----------



## Tryg

Bosng,


Yes, the screen is laminated to a solid composite foam core board. It comes with its own frame. (I've told this to a dozen people in the last week







) It's slick as hell, and ready to mounting. A 10 year old girl could install it on the wall in 30 minutes. I've emailed Vutec to provide more product information on their website.


Yes, they have taken care of all shipping requirements.


Rob,


I know some people ordered them. I myself am sitting back loving it! Watched Death to Smoochy last night...Fun. I'm trying not to overly hype this product but I've seen a lot of screens in the last 6 months and this one is really fun to watch stuff on.


Your second row of seating should give you a great image. Projector distance has no relation.


It does not have sparklies like the firehawk. Th firehawk sometimes has a wierd prism effect from an aberant piece of the reflective coating. The SilverStar has no visable reflective coating. The "sparkly" effect is not the screen but compression artifacts from your source material. The screen is just so efficient it makes seeing your source material flaws easier. I doubt you will even notice it after the first day or so of viewing. Your eyes adjust to what you start seeing and you start seeing a lot more of the image being projected. You will see the same artifacts on any higher power screen.


Jsharpe,


It sounds like you really have a strong attachment to your Stewart frame. Maybe this product isn't for you because it comes with it's own frame. I don't know?...but I wouldn't hold your breath on Stewart coming out with a similar product. Vutec makes the product now...and likely for cheaper than anyone else could possibly deliver it for. If your interested call AVS for pricing and the facts.


----------



## Rob Tomlin

Thanks for the response.


I have spent quite a bit of time with the Firehawk, and I really haven't noticed any problems with sparklies. So, when you say "It does not have sparklies like the firehawk", that really alleviates a lot of my concerns with that issue.


If the sparklies on the SilverStar are the result of compression artifacts in the source material, I wonder if this would be alleviated some with a DVI DVD player?


Still wishing I could see one in person....


----------



## Big Picture

I have been in touch with Vutec and they tell me they can cut a Silverstar to fit into my 16:9 120" diagonal Stewart Luxus Deluxe frame. From this I assume (I know bad word) that I can purchase just the screen material.


----------



## Tryg

you guys are killing me










Throw your damn Stewart frame in your neighbors yard, crush it under heavy machinery...I dont care, but when your done mount the damn SS with the supplied frame.


Or you can spend endless hours, frustration, time money and lose your wife, kids and become an acoholic and drug addict trying to fit the damn SilverStar to your Stewart frame.


One thing I know for sure is that Stewart is a genius. Somehow he has managed to brainwash people into only one thought. Buy stewart screen, mount to stewart frame.


I'm losing it here







Did I mention it's a SOLID board?


----------



## paulgas

HAHAHA Tryg youare a blast. Thanks for the hard work. A friend is bringing a sample over soon so I can see the star in action and compare it to my firehawk. I may need a new screen...

Paul


----------



## supahjohn

Tryg,

Is the SilverStar mounted to a solid board? If so, can I mount the SilverStar to my Stewart frame? If not, can I peel the fabric away from the board so I can use my Stewart frame with it? If I had a file and was able to open channel to fit my SilverStar, can I use my Stewart frame with it? Would Liquid Nails work to adhere my SilverStar to my Stewart frame? If so, is the SilverStar mounted on a solid board? If I can not accomplish any of these, can I just mount my SilverStar and use my Stewart frame for my Pollock canvases?


----------



## JHouse

Being a Hi-Power owner (and therefore booster), I have heard several things on this thread that perked my ears up .


1. Whites are whiter on the Hi-Power.


2. The Hi-Power actually appears a little brighter in the sweet spot.


3. The Hi-Power is better at ambient light rejection.


4. There really isn't that big of a difference between the two.


Elsewhere I have read that the Hi-Power is actually about 3.3 gain in the sweet spot, and the Silver Star is closer to 3.


Understand these are all statements made based on mere viewing comparisons, and apparently not measurements. Still, the combination sounds pretty compelling. (Please don't ask me to track down who said what, but I thing Tryg and Darinp mentioned much of it)


So, what other fact factors would offset the apparent superiority of the Hi-Power?


----------



## Michael Grant

Well, Joe, I just got back from paulgas' house where we played around with the SilverStar sample that AVS was kind enough to mail me. He has a 110" Firehawk and a ceiling-mounted Infocus 7200. I was also able to test it briefly with my setup, but I couldn't do too much, because we're dismantling the system to remodel right now.


Of course, this is just a sample, so we didn't bother trying to do a critical analysis of the differences in image quality---because of course our eyes were acclimated to the darker Firehawk. But the SilverStar was most definitely brighter, although I certainly had no way of knowing if it was 2-2.5 times brighter than the Firehawk. It seemed to also have higher contrast, because it seemed that bright parts of an image became _much_ brighter, and darker parts seemed to become just a _little_ brighter. But again that could have been just an illusion caused by the fact we were using a small sample.


Paul & I would take turns holding the sample in various places on the screen. It definitely seemed brighter at all points on the screen---top, bottom, side, center. But here is what seemed most compelling to me: it seemed brighter even for the person standing there holding the sample, looking at it from the side.


What does that mean? Well, it means that somehow the SilverStar must have a base gain level that is higher than that of a standard screen, somehow it makes more efficient use of the light. It didn't seem to be borrowing gain from one angle to supply at another angle, at least not to the extent that a typical high-gain screen might. Yes, it has a viewing cone, but it just didn't seem to be as bad as you would expect it to be.


If what I'm saying is true for a full-size screen, the biggest advantage of a SilverStar over a Hi Power is its wider viewing cone, which allows a larger "sweet spot" and more flexible projector placement. Having said that, if you're happy with your Hi-Power and you don't need a wider viewing cone, I don't think I would bother to change.


----------



## Tryg

Michael,


I've been tempted to call it a "high gain firehawk" but frankly it does so many things better than the Firehawk well I just sit back and enjoy it.


1. It's linear throughout the range. Meaning it does have a higher contrast than even the firehawk AND it gets everything correct in the middle too. Where 95% of the image is.


2. Viewing cone is MUCH MUCH wider than the firehawk which is amazing for a screen of this gain.


3. It doesn't oversaturate colors like a grey screen.


But, what I'm really worried about...and maybe supahjohn can help me, is that I've been watching this thing now in front of my Firehawk. Yes I have black felt in between but what I would really like to do is somehow mount it to the Stewart Firehawk. Maybe something like liquid nails or something. No, not the frame itself but directly to the Firehawk. Will it snap into place somehow or .... look, if anyone has any ideas I would really appreciate it.


Maybe the answer it to rip the material off the board and frame somehow, then I could bond it to the Firehawk?


----------



## Theater Dreamer

Well, I don't know much about screens and pjs but I'm into the construction end of things. I believe that a professional mounting job would be most important as you don't want your silverstar to slip off the firehawk, these are expensive screens.


So:


1. Use a piece of 5/8" MDF BEHIND the firehawk. You should adhere the firehawk to this material with a paste made from flour and water.


2. Carefully place the silverstar over the firehawk and adhere the two together with a high quality 2 part epoxy.


3. Use an air powered finish nailer and nail the silverstar to the firehawk with the MDF behind it. Nails should be about 10" apart across the entire screen.


4. Use painters putty to fill the small holes left in the silverstar and sand carefully.


5. Next use a matching silver spray paint to cover the puttied holes.


6. Presto you now have two beautiful screens which will provide hours of enjoyment.


7. If you live in CA or other earthquake prone areas you should use 2 - 1/2" MDF boards bonded together and attach the silverstar to the firehawk with sheetrock screws for maximum holding power. You can never be too safe......


----------



## Rob Tomlin




> Quote:
> Maybe something like liquid nails or something. No, not the frame itself but directly to the Firehawk. Will it snap into place somehow



Oh yeah, that will definitely work! Shouldn't be a problem at all. Just make sure the liquid nails match the screen color somewhat close and all should be fine!












> Quote:
> It's linear throughout the range. Meaning it does have a higher contrast than even the firehawk AND it gets everything correct in the middle too. Where 99% of the image is.



That's a very important observation. I was curious as to how the middle of the scale would look on this. Having greater contrast (and gain) is great, as long as it doesn't come at the expensive of having the ability to accurately depict the full gray scale.


Tryg-


Have you watched any black and white movies on this screen? I would be interested in knowing what they look like. It may make it easier to see if the full gray scale is being shown, or whether the SilverStar has too much contrast.


----------



## JHouse

I'm not really trying to start a whizzing match at all. Really. Just trying to focus on the critical parameters of difference. (And since Tryg and Daren haven't yet addressed the question) I gather from what you are saying, the wider viewing cone and perhaps some "spreading" of the contrast due to hotter whites but not as much proportional gain for the blacks. How can it do that? All I've ever heard around here is that the contrast ratios remain constant on all screens because it treats all light alike. So, still not sure what's going on.


----------



## Theater Dreamer

Oh, I wouldn't use liquid nails. You need mechanical holding power. The liquid nails could possibly dry out and crack in 30 or 40 years....


----------



## JHouse

BTW, Supajohn gets the award for the best first post ever.


----------



## Michael Grant




> Quote:
> I gather from what you are saying, the wider viewing cone and perhaps some "spreading" of the contrast due to hotter whites but not as much proportional gain for the blacks. How can it do that? All I've ever heard around here is that the contrast ratios remain constant on all screens because it treats all light alike.



I just reported what I saw, that's all. I agree with you in theory, which is why I said it was likely an illusion caused by viewing just a sample.


----------



## Tryg

You tell me if all screens have the same contrast ratio?


----------



## JHouse

You know it's really hard to tell about the ratio. The differences in overall brightness is clear, but when I copy the image and blow it up to compare the patches close up, the brighter samples all seem to have brighter blacks too. Seems kind of proportional.


----------



## JHouse

And I've lost track, the image here isn't an ANSI checkerboard is it? Because the blacks are all a babypoop golden brown (chili for dinner, I suppose).


----------



## rogo

First of all, Tryg, you are abso-friggin-lutely hysterical these days!


Second of all, the sample is interesting. I would be inclined to say this based on initial tests:


* Ambient light rejection is not incredible vs. the shiny poster material I have. It's better, but not incredible. If anyone in the Bay Area reading this has some Da-Lite samples they can loan me, please, let me know ASAP! I am really curious about this.


* The screen is a marvel. There is always a pissing contest about blacks, but half the time I don't know whether the poster cares about blacks being inky or cares about shadow detail -- i.e. seeing the stuff in the dark areas. I can't tell you yet whether the Silverstar messes up the inky blackness of my Sanyo Z1, but it's an instant revelation on shadow detail. As has been noted here at least once or twice, you suddenly see stuff that you didn't even know was there!!!


I may try tonight's CBS reruns because both CSI and Without a Trace have a lot of dark areas where I would simply not see stuff with either my former plasma or the current Z1 (admittedly without a proper screen right now). But I bet the Silverstar really shines when the daylight goes away and it gets this test.


* I am essentially ready to order based on the sample. My only question remains: Is there a better choice for a daytime-friendly screen? That's why I want to see the High Power sample. I am trying to setup a projector-only living room right now If it can't work, fine, it can't work. The idea would be zoom in, shrink the image down, and still see it well during the day and blow it up, and watch it rock in the evenings and nights. I might be better served by a High Power or Vutec Pearlbrite for this. I might need a second screen of one of those that could go in front of the Silverstar during the day. I might need a plasma or LCD for the daytime that can somehow get out of the way.


Or maybe I can order the Silverstar as a rollup screen? Is that possible Tryg? Or does it come on a fixed board? And if so, how do they ship it?
























Mark


----------



## Assayer

This picture is actually very puzzling. With some ambient light, the 'black' on the high power look about equal to the cinema vision, while the 'black' of the silver star actually looks darker than the cinema vision.


For those who have seen it, is this representative of what your eyes perceive in real life?


----------



## Tryg

super riddles solved!


Yes, JHouse this is an ANSI checkerboard projecting black and white checkerboard. Now projected black is mearly the absense of light...so the black boxes are what the screen material looks like in that ambient lighting conditions. So the black boxes (or brownish) is mearly the reflections of the ambient light in the room and reflections off my tan walls. Turn off the ambient lighting and the black squares would be much "blacker"


As far as the blacks of the cinema vision and the SilverStar? Same thing. the Silver material is darker than the white Cinema vision. So don't project any light onto it to create black and all you're left with is what the material looks like in the given ambient lighting.


How do you get the deapest blacks?


1. Turn your lights off

2. get projector with high CR rating

3. make your screen material darker


rogo, I've learned to not care about blacks any more. The lengths people go to have become ubsurd. To the point now you could probably sell these people a black screen just on the merits that it produces frickin awesome blacks.... Who cares that you can't see the damn image!


----------



## Michael Grant

I agree with JHouse, Tryg... I don't think that picture demonstrates any significant difference in contrast ratio.


Besides, I don't have a good physical reason to believe that a screen could have a "contrast ratio". In order for the screen to affect the contrast ratio, it would need to have a different absorption ratio at different absolute intensities of light.


Now if you're referring to the effect of ambient light rejection, that I can understand. But in perfect light control, I'd have to say that all screens should have the same contrast ratio.


> Quote:
> I can't tell you yet whether the Silverstar messes up the inky blackness of my Sanyo Z1, but it's an instant revelation on shadow detail. As has been noted here at least once or twice, you suddenly see stuff that you didn't even know was there!!!



Rogo, this is where we need to be careful. When you put your SilverStar sample up against your darker screen, it is certainly going to reveal shadow detail, because it will all be made brighter. But if you replace your entire screen, will that have an effect? After all, the whites will be whiter as well, so your eyes may acclimatize to the new average brightness and make everything cancel out. But to hear JHouse say it, the tradeoff isn't 100%---so brighter is better up to about 50 ftL or so.


----------



## Tryg

my god Michael! If you cant look at the above image and see that the blacks are darker on the SilverStar than the Stewart Ultramatte AND the whites are much whiter on the SilverStar than the Ultramatte then I can't help you


I have to go chase some skirt now...you guys are cutting into my drinking time.


----------



## JimmyR

I can't tell from the pictures either but the blacks are darker on the SilverStar than on the HiPower. It's not a bunch but we can see it. Probably because the HP seems whiter than the SS.


----------



## Rob Tomlin

I agree with Tryg.


The apparent increase in contrast with the SilverStar seems obvious in the pictures.


And how exactly do the whites on the HP seem whiter than the SS? I don't see it that way at all Jimmy. Just the opposite. The SS has the brightest whites by far (except for the 9.5 SS!).


----------



## JimmyR

It say's it but not clearly enough I guess.


"Probably because the HP (surface) seems whiter than the SS."


Get it ?


----------



## Rob Tomlin

Duh!



hiding in shame.....


----------



## JimmyR

No shame Rob. That was a lousy way for me to say it.


I also think Tyrg is cutting the pant's too short about the SilverStar's gain. I see much more on the SS than the HiPower and I've got the same sample that Tyrg used.


----------



## Rob Tomlin

Based solely on the screen shots, I agree Jimmy. It really does look like an amazing product.


I actually feel lucky that this product has come out just before I purchase my first front projector and screen, giving me more choices.


----------



## Michael Grant




> Quote:
> my god Michael! If you cant look at the above image and see that the blacks are darker on the SilverStar than the Stewart Ultramatte AND the whites are much whiter on the SilverStar than the Ultramatte then I can't help you



Look, I think we totally agree that a screen with a fair amount of gain and that is good at shedding ambient light is going to result in better contrast in a _non-ideal_ environment. But paint your walls black and eliminate all ambient light, and the story will be different: all of those screens will have the same contrast ratio.


----------



## darinp

Tryg,


Are you sure the 6.0 sample in your picture above is the same material as the fullscreen that you got? In that picture the SS 6.0 looks brighter than the Hi-Power. However, when we viewed both at your house the whites were brighter on the Hi-Power. In this post it is obvious that the whites were brighter in the picture on the Hi-Power at 0 offset. This is also what I saw and I will trust my eyes live over a picture, anyway.


Also, my opinion may be different than some. I saw sheen on the SilverStar and I see sheen on the Da-Lite High Contrast Matte White. That is my biggest concern with both of those (along with waves on the HCMW). I do not see this sheen on the Hi-Power or on the Firehawk. While I don't see sheen on the Firehawk I do see some of the little embedded mirrors. At least that is what they look like to me when I sit in a spot that gives me one little sparkly. This is different than the sheen which is basically diffused and not just one point. I believe that this sheen brings out artifacts more. Now that I've switched from the HCMW to the Firehawk the artifacts don't bother me as much and I don't see as much pixel structure.


I agree with Micheal. Maybe it will cost me $20, but I'll offer a prize of $20 (PayPal) to the first person who can explain the physics of how one of these nonactive screens can have a higher contrast ratio than a matte white in the absence of ambient light and no reflections to a theoretically perfect sensor that can measure every photon. Anybody game?


Let me put it another way. Tell me a screen that will reflect a different percentage of the photons with different intensities of light. If it reflects 1% to an area at 1000 lumens it will need to reflect


----------



## Tryg

The $20 is mine!


the Firehawk is a perfect example.

During no/low light there's not enough light to activate the reflective powers of the emulsion. Thus you just get the grey backing.


But when you hit it with white, the reflective coating is activated and takes over thus boosting the reflective gain PAST the gain of the grey backing.


REMOVE the reflective splatter and you are absolutely correct. With the reflective splatter and you've just boosted the high end.


The SilverStar happens to be performing a similar feat. Because as you hit it with higher intensities of light it throws back more somehow.


**************************************************


The upper picture, by the way, is kinda bad for the high power. First the sample size is too small. Secondly it's in the upper half so it's viewing cone is actually above the camera.


darinp the High Power looked brighter at my place because we were standing up directly in the high powers viewing cone. Whereas the SilverStar was reflecting down at the couch. Sitting down the results would have been different.


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Tryg_
> *During no/low light there's not enough light to activate the reflective powers of the emulsion.*



Tryg,


I'm not giving up the money until you can explain this activation and what it takes to trigger it







Learning all this is worth $20 to me.


So, a photon hits the screen. How it is reflected depends in a large part on how many other photons hit? Is time part of the equation? That is, for a DLP the colors are on the screen half as long for half as much light or 1/10th as long for 1/10th as much light, but the instantaneous intensity is the same. Does this emulsion reflect different ratios in each case?


Also, I'll have to ask Don Stewart to answer the following question (or get someone to really explain it) before I give up. Is the true gain on the Firehawk different for 20 lumens than for 1000 lumens?


> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Tryg_
> *darinp the High Power looked brighter at my place because we were standing up directly in the high powers viewing cone. Whereas the SilverStar was reflecting down at the couch. Sitting down the results would have been different.*



Are you sure about this with your angles? Were the portions of the pictures from the bottom of the screen? From what I remember the top of the screen wasn't much lower than the projector, so the squares at the top of the screen should have been pretty close to a perfect angle back to the camera.


--Darin


----------



## Michael Grant




> Quote:
> During no/low light there's not enough light to activate the reflective powers of the emulsion.



Where did you pull that from? A screen is a passive device, so the very idea that you have to "activative" it is silly. But perhaps that's just your attempt to express some cogent physical principle in terms we laymen can understand, so I'll forgive that.


So we still need two things. First, we need some sort of credible physical reference that describes this phenomenon. And second, we need some calculations which show that the light levels under which this phenomena occurs are visible to the human eye using _any_ other screen. Otherwise, he keeps his $20.


----------



## Assayer

I think we may be confusing two properties here. The firehawk has been praised for its ambient light rejection properties because of the grey base and viewing cone. If you project a mixed scene (or ansi test pattern) the image will tend to light up the room, and assuming the room is not a completely controlled environment, reflecting back on the screen more or less evenly. The dark areas will see just as many extra lumens of soft reflected light as the light areas. But if you add say an arbitrary 0.25 ft-lambert to black and 0.25 ft-lambert to white when white is say 15 ft-lambert, you reduce the contrast and absolute black level. But in the case of the firehawk, it rejects off axis light better than many materials, making the reflected black look darker. In a cream colored room such as Tryg's test environment, this would likely result in a non-linear perception curve for many screens as the black end of the range would tend to be swamped out by this reflected light effect.


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Assayer_
> *I think we may be confusing two properties here.*



Some are claiming that even with disregarding directionality and ambient light effects on CR, that some screens actually have inherent CRs. As Don Stewart told me last year at CEDIA when I told him that Vutec was claiming 70:1 CR for their screen (paraphrasing), "How can a screen have a CR? They can't go against physics. I would like to see them back up some of their claims."


--Darin


----------



## rogo

Michael said:



You make a good point. Right now, my "screen" is so small that the Silverstar sample is about half the screen. So either side is confusing the other as much the other is confusing it. All I know is that there is stuff in the Silverstar that _simply is not there_ on my "screen." Whatever is happening to the absolute black level is truly and completely irrelevant to me. The minimum black of the Z1 is not significantly adversely affected by the SS, in fact it may be helped by it.


Mark


----------



## Michael Grant

Assayer, you have given a very clear and more complete description of what I claim is going on. So therefore I agree with you and Darin---and, apparently, Don Stewart. I predict Tryg may be slow to agree though; some of his other opinions about gray screens depend on this idea of "intensity-dependent reflectivity" as well.


----------



## Dan Miller

This goes to my measurements of our projector, and people's claim that on/off CR is either valid/invalid.


IF you are talking about the characteristics of a device, then you have to eliminate all other variables.


I love and admire all of the work that Tryg has put in to this, but for example, if you really wanted to use a screenshot to evaluate anything:


1. Set the camera for EVERYTHING manual, including white balance, exposure, aperture, ISO, etc.... everything.


2. Do one screen sample at a time. Each sample needs to be positioned in the middle of the target area (where the SS 6.0 is in the original). This makes sure the same amount of light is hitting it, barring any PJ problems.


3. Position the camera for peak gain angle for each sample. To do any angular reflective screen and a retroreflective screen in the same shot doesn't make sense.


4. (and this is the one that is impossible for most) Remove the room. In loudspeaker measurements, MLSSA was developed to yield anechoic measurements with an anechoic chamber. Unfortunately, no such measurement system exists yet for screens. In my basement lab/HT, my ceiling and walls are covered in black velvet (the wife hates it, but man, what a picture) to absorb any stray light.


At this point you could take a bunch of meaningful shots, and piece them all together in photoshop for comparison. But the fact that the black squares look brown is a tribute to how much the room interacts, and also to how forgiving our eyes are, because when watching a movie, I'll bet they look black, not brown.


But forgiving eyes notwithstanding, we are talking about a screen review here. People criticize manufacturers for using full on/off for measuring CR, instead of ANSI. This is for the same reason. It eliminates the room.


Just as any PJ will look different in every room, the same holds true for screens. Therefore to maximize the effectiveness of a review, you have to take pains not to let the room interfere.


Tryg, again, the effort that you have put into your review(s) has been staggering. Trust me, I know EXACTLY. I'm just suggesting ideas for the future, because overall, this is a tremendous help for everyone here.


Wouldn't it be nice to have an active screen (kind of like DBX was in the 70s for audio--- if you have no clue what I'm referring to, don't worry, it didn't work in reality). Or better yet, a screen that connected to your source with a cable that could instantly deliver a signal describing the overall luminance of a scene and the screen could adjust the gain accordingly?


Or better yet, a screen divided into tiny little areas, maybe corresponding to the native resolution of the source device. Each of these little areas (let's call them picture elements) could independently change according to the signal. Maybe not just gain, but they could actually generate light in bright areas, and maybe even change color too? What a concept!











Dan


----------



## bowbie89




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Tryg_
> *The $20 is mine!*



I thought you were out chasing skirt?!


----------



## bowbie89




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Rob Tomlin_
> *I actually feel lucky that this product has come out just before I purchase my first front projector and screen, giving me more choices.*



I agree. I would not feel as if I'm limited to choosing a projector with a vertical lens shift to go with a High Power since a table mount is probably out for me.


----------



## Rob Tomlin




> Quote:
> Look, I think we totally agree that a screen with a fair amount of gain and that is good at shedding ambient light is going to result in better contrast in a non-ideal environment. But paint your walls black and eliminate all ambient light, and the story will be different: all of those screens will have the same contrast ratio.



Michael-


If you admit that different screens can have different contrast ratios with (the same) ambient light, why couldn't the same be true when there is no ambient light?


----------



## Tryg




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Dan Miller_
> *
> 
> I love and admire all of the work that Tryg has put in to this,*



Wow, Dan we should hook up. Maybe, chasing skirts is a waste of my time? Seriously though, I WAS chasing skirts when I wrote that last post and you guys all owe me $20. Do you know how stealthy you have to be to write posts to this forum while your having cocktails with a couple hot blonds. They were 22 and clueless. I told em I was shopping for a Ferrari and I had to email the seller back ASAP. That sealed the deal.









Dan, thanks for the kudos... makes investigating and sharing th results more satisfying if you know others are benefitting.


Now, back to the serious stuff. I tried to remove the room but it seemed like a lot of work and I couldn't figure out where I would put it.







Really though, I did make some mistakes in that first review that are very evident now that I know more. I won't make the same mistakes agian (I hope) but I likely will not show/test in perfect conditions also. It's too confusing to the average person sometimes what exactly they are supposed to be looking for. I try my best to duplicate Real World conditions so people can relate. I think there is some value to that.


As far as active screens...the sooner we can get rid of these damn projectors the better. OLED baby! Roll out your 10' wide screen on your wall, thumbtack down the edges and hook it up to your HD-DVD player. End of story. The first company to produce this is gonna lay waist to this industry.


Rob, exactly. The ambient light doesn't change the equation...only the perception.


----------



## Michael Grant




> Quote:
> If you admit that different screens can have different contrast ratios with (the same) ambient light, why couldn't the same be true when there is no ambient light?



Simple---because ambient light, and the cross-reflections due to non-black walls, is what is changing the contrast ratios. The ambient light basically raises the perceived black. Even if the projector produces a _perfect_ black, the ambient light makes it imperfect.


So with any projector with a sufficiently high native contrast, it is the _ambient light and/or cross-reflections_ that determine the black level, and the _projector brigthness and screen gain_ that determine the white level. So in this case, higher screen gain and better ambient light rejection can raise the perceived contrast ratio.


Eliminate the ambient light, and paint the walls black so that all cross-reflections are suppressed, and now it is the _projector brightness and screen gain_ that determines the black level, the same as for the white level. The screen gain does not depend on brightness. Thus the contrast ratio is determined _solely_ by the projector.


I am _not_ saying that all screens are the same of course. None of us has the perfect room. So we _want_ a reasonably bright setup, determined by projector brightness, screen size, and screen gain; and a screen with good ambient light rejection. All we're disputing here are the mechanisms by which percieved contrast ratio is determined.


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Tryg_
> *Rob, exactly. The ambient light doesn't change the equation...only the perception.*



As I see it the ambient light definitely changes the equation. Here is an example taking directionality and gain into account.


1000 lumen projector with 1000:1 CR. 1 lumen of ambient light coming from the side. Now what is that actual (not just perceived) CR.


Screen #1: 1.0 gain non-directional screen: Whites are 1001 lumens. Blacks are 2 lumens. CR = 500:1.


Screen #2: 3.0 gain directional screen where this ambient light gets 1.0 gain at the viewing position. Whites are 3001 lumens. Blacks are 4 lumens. CR = 750:1.


Example #2 not including directionality.


We'll use 4 lumens of ambient light. Viewer decides that they like a certain brightness and their projector is bright enough to do it even on a 0.8 gain screen (they have a PLV-70 that we will call 2000 lumens and 500:1 CR).


Screen #1: 0.8 gain. Whites are 1603 lumens. Blacks are 3.2 lumens plus 3.2 lumens for 6.4 lumens. CR = 250:1.


Screen #2: 3.0 gain. User puts a neutral density filter on to reduce brightness to 530 lumens. Whites are 1602 lumens. Blacks are 3.2 lumens plus 12 lumens for 15.2 lumens. CR = 55:1.


If the dark screen doesn't make the image bright enough then a higher gain screen of course has the advantage of getting into an area that you like.


Rob,


The directionality of the screen can help increase the CR with ambient light from off axis, but the projector is shining from a single place. We know that gains can be different for light hitting the screen from different angles, but it doesn't follow that we have screens that can reflect different percentages of the light depending on the intensity. Think of shining a flashlight on a mirror. Changing the angle will change how much light your eye receives. But if the flashlight is left in one spot and turned down to half brightness, can the mirror reflect something different than half of what it did at full intensity? That is what some are claiming here.


--Darin


----------



## Tryg




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Tryg_
> *The ambient light doesn't change the equation...only the perception.*



cancel that thought...I concur with darin that light directionality also plays a role.


----------



## Dan Miller

Here is a real world example... I might have the numbers off a little, but you get the idea.


Don Stewart has a glass 35mm slide with a 2500:1 ansi contrast pattern. 2500:1. Guaranteed. Projected in a real room, on a white screen, it measured less than 700 and on a firehawk closer to 1000. Ambient light supression.


In my room (a black hole)...


Absolute black from my VP12S2 measured .012 ftL. Truning on my SR9200 receiver changed the level to .019. CR with no other lights=2083. CR with my receiver on=1315.


DM


----------



## Assayer

Dan,


Can you perceive the difference?


----------



## PerfKnee

The firehawk is not an active screen and does not have any facility for changing its gain depending on the amount of light hitting it.


It is fun to dream about such a thing though. Imagine a screen made of a huge LCD panel, with little teensy solar cells much smaller than pixels. Whenever the solar cell gets hit by light, it produces a voltage which rotates the liquid crystals and therefore changes the transmissivity of the screen. Of course cost would probably rule such a thing out, not to mention timing issues; the LCD and solar cells would have to respond very fast and have a linear response in order to avoid affecting gamma.


It is clear that the firehawk is not such a screen; it always reflects back the same percentage of photons that hit it; if it is reflecting 10% of photons directly back at full intensity it is reflecting 10% directly back at the lowest intensities too.


But having said that, the eye is not necessarily linear in its response. Even though the contrast ratio of all screens in a perfectly nonreflective and lighttight room is the same, the perceived contrast ratio can be different. I personally believe that the higher the light output, the higher the perceived contrast ratio.


An easy way to understand this is to compare a moonlit night versus a sunny day. Lets assume that the moon is in the same location in the sky as the sun is for the purposes of this example. Viewing the same landscape under the moonlight is going to look muted and low contrast, while under bright sunlight the landscape will look punchy; the shadows will look deep and the highlights will look bright. The landscape's reflectance hasn't changed, and the illumination quality hasn't changed; the moonlight scene in fact has the same contrast ratio as the bright sunny scene. But the bright scene is perceived as higher contrast.


This is why I like my 2.5 gain Draper M2500, and why I'm investigating higher gain screens- brighter is perceived as higher contrast even though it isn't.


-Tom


----------



## Tryg

first off I would like to submit this illustration.











Do different screen colorations and ability to reflect light have different reflectance slopes?


The ratios therefore are different? No?


----------



## Rob Tomlin




> Quote:
> The landscape's reflectance hasn't changed, and the illumination quality hasn't changed; the moonlight scene in fact has the same contrast ratio as the bright sunny scene.



I see what you are trying to say, but I don't think this is accurate. If you took a light meter to both of these scenes and read the darkest shadows and the brightest whites, it is clear that the moonlit scene would have a much lower contrast ratio than the sunlit scene.


I agree about the reflectance of the landscape not changing though.


----------



## PerfKnee

Tryg,


Reflectance is the same thing as gain, the ratio of incoming light that gets reflected. The gain is constant across intensity. So your graph should simply be a bunch of horizontal lines. The silverstar has highest reflectance (gain) so it will be the highest line. White will be a horizontal line below, and so forth.


-Tom


----------



## PerfKnee

Rob-


Why do you think the moonlit scene would have a lower measured contrast ratio? The landscape's reflectance is the same, and the lighting is from the same position, just a different intensity. Actually there is a slight difference in that the moon subtends a wider arc in the sky and so it provides a slightly more diffuse lighting but lets ignore that effect for the purpose of this example because that effect is miniscule compared to the human eye's perception differences. The moon is far enough away that it is basically a point source.


-Tom


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by PerfKnee_
> *I personally believe that the higher the light output, the higher the perceived contrast ratio.*



Tom,


One thing to consider is something that somebody else posted (I don't guarantee it). They said that above about 50 ft-lamberts the iris will close down and people won't perceive extra brightness. So if you get a brighter screen that pushes you from 50 ft-l to 100 ft-l your brights won't look brighter to your eyes, but the blacks will look brighter in very dark scenes.


Also, something that complicates all this is that we are talking about on/off contrast here with these projectors, where the importance of on/off is really in being able to get good contrast ratio during really low light level scenes. During bright scenes the blacks are going to look black with just about any current combo.


Tryg,


I assume you drew that graph yourself. To be right I think your "Reflectance" must mean the amount of light reflected, not some reflectance ratio as I would normally think of that term. Some of us are claiming that every line must be straight and go through the 0,0 point. You are claiming that they don't.


--Darin


----------



## Rob Tomlin

The brightest scenes under moonlight wont be anywhere near as bright as under a sunlit scene.


Dark shadows, however, would probably be about the same. So, the difference between the darkest and brightest scenes under these two lighting situations will be greater in the sunlit scene than the moonlit scene, which means the sunlit scene has the greater contrast.


----------



## Pocatello




> Quote:
> Dark shadows, however, would probably be about the same.



Rob, are you saying that dark shadows would be the same in daylight?


Am I confused?


Dark shadows in the daytime are not nearly as black as they are at night time.


----------



## PerfKnee

Rob, what physical principle or mechanism would you cite for the shadows reflecting a greater percentage of the moon's light and a lesser percentage of the sun's light?


-Tom


----------



## Abit-id

Dear All


Anyone see about Image depth for Silverstar ? is it better than firehawk or same ? And how about screen gain ? I'm little bit confuse about choosing it..


Thanks for your suggestion.


----------



## Rob Tomlin




> Quote:
> Rob, are you saying that dark shadows would be the same in daylight?



I said they would be "about the same". The point being that deep shadows will be much closer between the moonlit scene and sunlit scene than the highlights would be. So I still maintain that your overall contrast will be higher in the daylight scene.


----------



## jbaracelona

Will there be another review of the different screens in the near future?


----------



## Michael Grant




> Quote:
> first off I would like to submit this illustration.



I agree with Tom and Darin, your graph is incorrect. Even a perfect matte white screen would have a horizontal line on this graph. Now if you changed the y-axis to "brightness at the seating position", then those diagonal lines would be closer to correct---except that they should all pass through (0,0). After all, if the projector is not sending out _any_ light, the screen should be reflecting no light back, correct?


Now if you assume a fixed amount of ambient light in the environment, then those lines would shift upward so that they no longer intersect (0,0). They might move up different amounts, depending on how well each screen sheds ambient light. As a result, the perceived contrast ratios would be different. But that's exactly what we're talking about: it's ambient light (or cross-reflections from non-black walls) that reduces contrast.


Dan, thank you for your very specific example, that was very interesting!


----------



## Rob Tomlin

Dan's post was indeed interesting, and almost downright unbelievable!


I would like the follow up question to be answered...could the measured difference in the contrast ratio actually be perceived?


----------



## Dan Miller

Not during a movie.


Keep in mind that it is an extreme example. My receiver lights up bright and is facing the screen and right below the PJ. I just wanted to exemplify how ambient light can affect absolute black level readings. But i did try this:


Turn off everything in the room. Night time. We are talking absolute blackness. Your eyes never adjust. After a few minutes, if I'm looking at the screen and turn on the receiver, the screen literally lights up... I can make hand puppets and see my way around the room now.


Also, my Minolta LS-100, is fairly accurate at low light levels, but I wouldn't be surprised if there are some inaccuracies that might throw things off.


Dan


----------



## Michael Grant

One more thing we have to keep in mind: judging from Dan's picture, his eyes are much younger and probably more sensitive than ours


----------



## Tryg

Ok guys I don't have much time to talk but I made a new illustration that may make some of you happier with axis labeling. Also, I am convinced that AMBIENT LIGHT and SCREEN COLORATION play a roll in what the screen is capable of.











It's pretty clear you have to throw a lot more light at a gray/black screen to get the same illumination level at a given point on a white or silver (higher gain screen)


Now, I contend looking back at the picture of the SilverStar and the Stewart Ultramatte that the lines MUST cross. Thus capable of higher contrast.











So I give you 3 pictures I took back in my first screen review of different lighting levels. All three show the SS and UM in relatively the same optimal positions (center of the screen)





























Now Id say that the SilverStar has deaper blacks in all the pictures AND that the SilverStar clearly has higher whites (illuminance). If this is true, the lines must cross! and... it's capable of higher contrast!


However, the only reason why I think the SilverStars blacks appear deaper is the coloration of the screen itself. The same trick that the firehawk pulls.


----------



## Michael Grant




> Quote:
> Now, I contend looking back at the picture of the SilverStar and the Stewart Ultramatte that the lines MUST cross.



In the presence of ambient light, including the conditions under which your pictures were taken, yes. With perfect light control, no.


> Quote:
> Thus capable of higher contrast.



Again, in the presence of ambient light, I accept that (as do we all). With perfect light control, I disagree.


> Quote:
> However, the only reason why I think the SilverStars blacks appear deaper is the coloration of the screen itself.



Or perhaps it is because the SilverStar sends less ambient light back to the viewing position.


Ambient light and cross-reflections from non-black walls are the _only_ reason that the lines on your graphs should not intersect at the (0,0) origin. In such a non-ideal environment, I agree that screen coloration and directionality would affect where those lines would intersect, and therefore which screen would be best for that environment.


But to be clear: in a room with perfect light control, screen coloration has _absolutely no impact on contrast ratio_. Zero.


Now look, I know that most of us aren't going to have a perfect black hole viewing environment like Dan Miller used to test his 2500:1 CR slide. So yes, it is absolutely important for someone to understand which screen and projector combo is going to give me the best contrast ratio _in their non-ideal environment_. But we should all have a clear understanding of _why_, and that's where we disagree.


A screen is a completely linear, multiplicative device. But it is receives light from _multiple sources_: the projector, ambient light, and secondary diffuse reflections from non-black walls. The image we see, then, is a linear combination of the light from those three sources. The better the screen is at directing the projector's light to our eyes, and rejecting the light from the other two sources, the better the resulting contrast ratio.


----------



## Tryg

how could this be?


Are you saying in total darkness this holds true but with 1 photon of ambient light present the whole laws of physics change? No.


The ambient light mearly brings everything up at an equal and consistent level. Except in the case of reflective directionality (viewing cone). However, since the SilverStar has a WIDER viewing cone than the Ultramatte it is clearly defying your theory again! Because it should look worse than the Ultramatte, but it clearly doesn't.


all I can say is it's *MAGIC*. and I love it!


It's kinda like pulling a rabbit out of a hat




















BTW I think I smell a powerbuy again...that last wiff was just a false alarm.


----------



## Michael Grant




> Quote:
> how could this be?



How could what be?


> Quote:
> Are you saying in total darkness this holds true but with 1 photon of ambient light present the whole laws of physics change?



Of course not. Nothing that I have said suggests that. The _amount_ of ambient light and the coloration of the screens will determine exactly _where_ the lines on the graph intersect. But as you bring ambient light (and cross-reflections) down to zero, all of those lines will move in a nice orderly fashion to the origin (0,0).


> Quote:
> However, since the SilverStar has a WIDER viewing cone than the Ultramatte it is clearly defying your theory again!



No, my theory is intact. After all, I did concede (I hope its clear) that coloration _does matter_ when in the presence of ambient light. So the gray screen reduces the brightness of the ambient light that it reflects. Yes, it's the same trick the Firehawk and Greyhawk play, I agree.


> Quote:
> all I can say is it's magic. and I love it!



Yes! We agree more than we disagree, really. I was impressed with the sample of SS I recently saw.


----------



## JimmyR

That's exactly what I've been seeing with the SilverStar but I'm comparing the HiPower with it instead of the UM.

The surface color (shade) of the SS is just plain darker so of course the black's/grays will be darker with a projected image.

The "mystery" is how does the SilverStar pump up the bright whites and bright colors so much (gain) without being curved ?


What the hell is this surface ? It doesn't look unusual even when magnified. Is it very thin aluminum sheet that's been acid washed, brushed then washed again ?

That sounds simple enough right ? But the reflected image has a wider angle in the horizontal than the vertical. ????

There's plenty of samples around now so someone may some idea what it is and how this surface reflects light in a more than unusual way.


----------



## Tryg

Michael I'm sitting here laughing...


I've had 4 dozen people PM me in the last few weeks asking if this screen is any good. Better yet, they continue to ask me if it's worth it?


Gee, I don't know, you just spent $5000 to upgrade your projector to get the miniscule difference from the HD1 chip to the HD2. Maybe the MASSIVE difference your gonna see from this $1500 screen won't impress you.


ESPECIALLY SINCE I'VE SPELLED IT OUT EIGHT WAYS TILL SUNDAY IN THIS REVIEW!


I guess the only thing left is to tell people to go away it sucks










did I mention its on a foam board?


----------



## Michael Grant

OK, as long as you're taking all this in the right spirit, I don't mind







I hope it's clear to you (and to everyone) that I am NOT arguing with you about whether or not this screen is the real deal. *IT IS.* I've seen it (although not full-screen yet), and I believe it. Our disagreement is simply _why_.


Hey I like these big letters.


----------



## JimmyR

I saw a funny one the other day... "Does it come perferated ?"


You can't win Tryg.


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by JimmyR_
> *That's exactly what I've been seeing with the SilverStar but I'm comparing the HiPower with it instead of the UM.
> 
> The surface color (shade) of the SS is just plain darker so of course the black's/grays will be darker with a projected image.
> 
> The "mystery" is how does the SilverStar pump up the bright whites and bright colors so much (gain) without being curved ?*



When we had the Hi-Power and the SS next to each other at Tryg's house the blacks looked brighter on the SS to me in one dark space scene. I was surprised by that, but it means that I'm not convinced that blacks are blacker on the SS. The strange thing was that the whites looked whiter on the Hi-Power to me. I would probably have to play with it some more to figure it out.


I thought the SS was magic until I saw it next to the Hi-Power. Now I think they exaggerated their specs. I still think it is a nice screen for certain setups, though.


--Darin


----------



## Rob Tomlin

Jimmy-


I saw that post too...couldn't tell if it was a joke.


Regarding the issue of whether screens can have different "contrast ratios" with ambient light controlled, wouldn't it be possible to prove this one way or the other by taking light measurements from the black and white ANSI checkerboard?


If Tryg has a spot light meter, this could be done. You could simply take several measurement from the black squares and white squares from each screen and compare them. If one screen had a wider range of values between the black and white measurements, that screen would have the higher contrast, right?


If Tryg lived closer I would drive over and let him use my Minolta reflective spot meter for this test.


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Tryg_
> *how could this be?
> 
> 
> Are you saying in total darkness this holds true but with 1 photon of ambient light present the whole laws of physics change? No.*



I don't get this. The laws of physics apply to the light from the projector, reflections, and ambient light, as well as all of them combined. As Dan said when he turned the projector off and his other device on there was a constant light on the screen. This light would move things away from the 0,0 point, just as Michael said. I guess it is hard to argue against your point when I don't understand where you think this is going against some law of physics.


--Darin


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Tryg_
> *However, since the SilverStar has a WIDER viewing cone than the Ultramatte it is clearly defying your theory again!*



The SilverStar may have a wider viewing cone in the horizontal, but is it wider in the vertical? Don't they mark it with "Top"? I wonder what would happen if you turned it upside down and kept the projector above it. If the gain wasn't as high then it would imply they have done some stuff for directionality that would help with reflections off your carpet.


--Darin


----------



## Michael Grant

OK, you want graphs, I'll give ya graphs










[EDIT: I made some corrections on the second graph, because I wasn't adding the intensities properly.]


Let's assume that we have a room with perfect light control---all walls painted black, for example. (I say this because I don't want to have to deal with secondary reflections off non-white walls in this analysis.) We're going to be looking at how 5 different screens work in this room:

--- an 0.75 gain gray screen

--- a 1.0 gain white screen

--- a 1.5 gain gray screen

--- a 2.0 gain white screen

--- a 3.0 gain gray screen

Let's assume that all screens are angular reflective, and that all of the gray screens are exactly the same base color of gray.


First, let's turn off ALL ambient light, and look at the brightness vs. gray level response of all the screens. The result is shown in the FIRST graph below. As you can see, all of the lines intersect (0,0) at. If your projector is capable of 2000:1, this perfectly dark room would achieve 2000:1 contrast on _any_ of these screens---each with a different peak brightness, of course.


Now let's turn on some ambient light and see what happens. We're going to turn on enough ambient light so that, with the projector off, the matte white 1.0 gain screen is registering a brightness of 5 lumens. Performing the same experiement, we get the results in the SECOND graph below.


As you can see, the two white screens bottom out at 5 lumens, just like we expect. But the gray screens bottom out at 3.75 lumens, a 25% reduction. This is no surprise: the gray color absorbs some of the ambient light. At the high end, the ambient light is overwhelmed by the projected image, and everything looks normal---also no surprise.


In these very poor conditions, the contrast ratios are horrible:

-- 0.75 gain gray: 3:1

-- 1.0 white: 3:1

-- 1.5 gray: 5:1

-- 2.0 white: 5:1

-- 3.0 gray: 9:1

Obviously nobody would want to watch under these conditions. But, I purposefully chose a lot of ambient light so that the differences would actually be visible on the graph. Also, let's not forget that the ambient light is _additive_, so it not only reduces contrast but it shifts all colors slightly towards the color of the ambient light.


But the point is clear: if you don't have a "black hole" for a theater, your choice of screen _can_ make a difference in the contrast ratio you experience! Perhaps the reason the SilverStar works well is that it makes the blacks look darker than the ambient light, while giving you enough gain so that the whites are still nice and bright.


----------



## Tryg

I've unleashed a monster!


Nice graphs! I concur


Like I said in my conclusions "the best of both worlds"


Michael, If I could, I'd like to use these graphs in the initial review. This kind of greymatter shouldn't be lost on page 14. Of course I will give you credit.


----------



## JHouse

I have Tryg and Jimmy on one hand and Darinp on the other all have compared with the Hi-Power, saying opposite things. Freaky.


Dan is echoing something that the Infocus guy who got fired for talking with us said. He tested pj's for contrast ratio all the time. You can't wear a light shirt in the room because the reflections off of it will screw the numbers way up.


But the numbers, they are screwy. CR isn't everything. A 3 fL image with a a CR of infinity has got to suck compared with a 30 fL picture with a 500:1 CR.


A less extreme example. Same exact contrast ratio in 2 pj's. One has 550 lumens and the other has 2200. Sure the blacks are going to be 4 times lighter on the brighter projector (say 4 lux vs 1 lux for the dimmer pj), but the RATIO is going to be the same. BUT doesn't the RANGE between the two pj's count for something? It just seems to me that SPREADING what you eye can look at across a greater number of lumens must make it significantly easier to see distinctions between adjacent patches of pixels. The shadow detail will be 4 times more different than each other on the brighter projector.


----------



## Tryg

I agree we need to retest this. Da-Lite if you are listening please send me a High Power screen(actually just the material). PM me and I'll send you dimensions


----------



## rogo

Ok, guys, you are crackin' me up again.


Now, a question:


I want to get the Silverstar, but I have an unusual mounting problem.... I bought a black hole and put it in my theater. You guys say stray light can really screw things up, so I figured something that actually sucks in light -- not just some candy-ass black velvet -- would be good.


What I can't decide is whether to put the screen across the black hole -- using some guy wires suspended across the face that I've anchored to the Rockies, Andes and Himalayas for support. Or should I just put the screen on the opposite side of the room. The guy wires would seem to work, but I'm concerned that the gravitational pull may cause Mount Everest to be sucked in through my living room.


Thanks in advance,

Mark


----------



## Michael Grant

JHouse,


I think there are two different issues here. The first is this: certainly, it is possible for a projector/screen combo to be so weak that, even with your pupils fully dialated, it's going to look _too_ dark---even in a perfectly light-controlled room. So even if you have a black hole theater, you're going to still want at least 10-15ft-L coming off your screen (or in your case, 40-50ft-L







)


Secondly, in the presence of ambient light, a brighter projector/screen combo is going to give you better _effective_ CR because the ambient light will wash out less of the low end. So for example, with your 2200 lumen projector you'll be able to make out shadow detail that is 4 times "darker" (in the source) than if you had a 550 lumen projector.


I think this is all consistent, right? The bottom line---control your ambient light as best you can, and get a nice bright projector/screen combo.


----------



## Rob Tomlin

My head hurts!


Seriously though, this is a great discussion.



> Quote:
> Secondly, in the presence of ambient light, a brighter projector/screen combo is going to give you better effective CR because the ambient light will wash out less of the low end. So for example, with your 2200 lumen projector you'll be able to make out shadow detail that is 4 times "darker" (in the source) than if you had a 550 lumen projector.



So when you say "brighter projector/screen combo", this would mean that the same projector (even the 550 lumen one) on a brighter screen (a SilverStar for example







) would also yield more shadow detail, right?


That certainly seems to be what the screenshots show.


----------



## darinp

Michael,


Just want to make sure I'm clear on something with your graphs. I'm assuming that you are saying that the ambient light isn't coming from the same direction as the projector. Otherwise the 3.75 number for ambient light for the 3.0 gain gray screen wouldn't make sense to me, as it should be 15. If it is on axis it should get the same gain as the projected light and start higher than the 1.0 gain white screen.


Also, I believe that your scale is off in the 2nd graph. The 1.0 gain screen should have 15 ft-l at 100 IRE and should have a 3:1 CR. Some others have some similar offsets. It also seems that the lines in the 2nd graph should be straight and not curved. This of course assumes a 1.0 gamma.


Thanks,

Darin


----------



## Michael Grant

Rob,


Yeah my head kinda hurts too but it really is interesting thinking about these issues.


You're right: For the most part, it doesn't matter where you get your brightness from, a brighter projector or more screen gain.


However, there are two sources of ambient light that can eat into the effective CR. The first is from other light sources: lamps, sunlight/moonlight coming in through windows, LEDs on your electronic equipment, and so forth. You can counter those _independent_ sources effectively by getting a brighter projector or a higher-gain screen.


The second source of ambient light comes from secondary reflections from the screen itself---light that bounces from the projector to the screen, then off all the walls, and then back to your eyes. This stray light is the reason it's good to put up dark drapes or paint your theater room a dark color. _This_ source of ambient light is a bit different, because it gets brighter as your projector gets brighter.


This is speculation here, but I think that because of these secondary reflections, it may be better to go with a higher-gain screen than a brighter projector, if at all possible. That's because a higher-gain screen usually has a tighter viewing cone (with a possible exception of the SilverStar!). So, more of the light is going to the viewing position, and less of it is being scattered all over the room, raising the ambient light level.


Like I said, that's just speculation. But maybe that means that it's slightly better to go with a higher-gain screen than a brighter projector, if you had to choose between the two.


----------



## Tryg

ahhh Michael, good deduction. Cheaper too!


But I'm still a little curious. Aren't these graphs clearly showing that screens are capable of different contrast ratio's?


2 additional assumptions.

1. Definately different contrast ratios if the base color of the screen is different.

2. You cant really ever get to 0 IRE or absolute black hole darkness


----------



## Michael Grant




> Quote:
> Just want to make sure I'm clear on something with your graphs. I'm assuming that you are saying that the ambient light isn't coming from the same direction as the projector.



That is correct. I am assuming that all of the gray screens have a gain of 0.75 for ambient light, even if those that have a higher gain for on-axis projected light. It's important to distinguish between the "gain" for ambient light, which is coming from multiple directions, from that gain for the projected image. After all, if ambient light were subject to a gain of 3.0, the screen would shine rather brightly when you had the lights on in the room! But this doesn't happen, and I think that's exactly why gray screens do their magic: for light coming in at random directions, they have a gain of less than 1.


> Quote:
> Also, I believe that your scale is off in the 2nd graph. The 1.0 gain screen should have 15 ft-l at 100 IRE and should have a 3:1 CR.



The reason that it is slightly higher than 15 because of the ambient light. I assumed that the powers would add, which means that the intensities add according to a Pythagorean formula: sqrt( x^2 + y^2 ). So the curves all seem shift up a bit on the second graph is because of the ambient light.


Don't forget, I chose exaggerated gains (0.75 gray screen?) and ambient light levels (5 ft-L!) so we could see the effects clearly on the graphs. In real life the curves wouldn't shift so much.


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Michael Grant_
> *I assumed that the powers would add, which means that the intensities add according to a Pythagorean formula: sqrt( x^2 + y^2 ). So the curves all seem shift up a bit on the second graph is because of the ambient light.*



I'll have to think about it a little more, but I would bet a lot right now that 5 ft-l of ambient light and 10 ft-l of light from the projector gives you 15 fl-l. Not any more complicated than adding the sources.


--Darin


----------



## Michael Grant

Well if I'm wrong about the Pythagorean addition, then that second curve will look different: basically, all the lines will be straight, like in the first graph, but will come out from 5 and 3.75 instead of 0. I'll see if I can find anything. Fortunately, I believe the conclusions will end up being the same: higher gain/brightness is better...


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Michael Grant_
> *You can counter those independent sources effectively by getting a brighter projector or a higher-gain screen.*



It really depends on where the ambient light is coming from. With my Hi-Power if I turn lights on that are the same direction as the projector it totally washes the picture out, but if I turn lights on to the side it has a much smaller effect.


Also, for those using a Hi-Power with high ceiling mounting, they may actually be decreasing their CR by increasing the effects of ambient and reflected light.


If we discount directionality then I don't think a higher gain screen has any advantages for CR (this would be a 1.0 vs a 0.5), since it will increase all light (ambient, reflected, and projected). A lower gain screen can help with CR though if it means that you can turn your projector up (or buy a brighter projector) and still not have it too bright for your liking.


I want a 0.2 gain screen with a 5000 lumen projector











> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Tryg_
> *2. You cant really ever get to 0 IRE or absolute black hole darkness
> *



Even if your projector can't put out 0 light (digitals sure can't when displaying images) that doesn't mean that the line can't go through 0,0 when extended. In the absence of all other light this is what it will do.


--Darin


----------



## Michael Grant




> Quote:
> 1. Definately different contrast ratios if the base color of the screen is different.



I don't know how many times I have to repeat this, but NO. With perfect light control, color doesn't matter---for contrast of course. Now if you paint your screen red, you'll get a color shift---but the contrast will stay the same.


> Quote:
> 2. You cant really ever get to 0 IRE or absolute black hole darkness



Darin is right. Just put a CRT projector up there if you want to see what happens at 0 IRE.


> Quote:
> A lower gain screen can help with CR though if it means that you can turn your projector up (or buy a brighter projector) and still not have it too bright for your liking. I want a 0.2 gain screen with a 5000 lumen projector.



Darin, I think I see your point... this would do well to shed ambient light. But I think that it wouldn't do well to shed secondary reflections---because that is determined by the brightness of the _image_, which is a function of both the projector and screen. So with regard to secondary reflections, your 5000 lumen/0.2 gain setup would be no better than a 1000 lumen/1.0 setup.


Perhaps the best bet is to get a screen with an 0.2 gain gray base, but with enough directionality to get a gain of, say, 0.5 on axis







Couple that with a 2000 lumen projector... the best of all worlds?


----------



## Tryg

There is no such thing as perfect light control. Your room will ALWAYS have some light. Unless of course you are in a black hole.


----------



## Michael Grant

Fair enough. But you can get close. Remember William Phelps' contrast measurements on a G90? He had to have a pretty dark room to get those.


Still, I know _my_ room isn't even close. It's a dual use room so black walls ain't gonna happen


----------



## Tryg

Now I'm finally at a point where I can explain what I think happens with the Firehawk.


First it has the Grey backing of the .75 screen.

But is also has the Reflective splatter of a 3 gain (estimate) screen.


So it has the .75 gain slope on the low end until the reflective splatter has enough lumens to kick in? and accelerate upward along the 3 gain slope.


Unfortunately your eyes can't adjust to this as your going up and down the curve. You also seem to get crushed blacks(in the yellow oval) and blown out whites (in the light blue oval).


What I really notice when watching the Firehawk is if it's a bright scene, then it transitions to darker, it goes down the slope but then goes unusually dark when it hits the grey slope (in the grey oval). My eyes simply can't adjust to this. I don't know why. It was even more evident when I saw the sample against Darins HCMW screen. The high contrast matte white screen was clearly linear throughout the range but the Firehawk would have this dumping effect where it went really dark all of a sudden and the image detail was completely lost. It was dark like this till my eyes could adjust a second or two later. Unfortunatley this can be very trying if it's happening repeatedly during a movie.


----------



## Michael Grant

The Firehawk curve, as you've drawn it is simply impossible. Again, it implies that the Firehawk has some sort of intensity-dependent, active element to it, which it just cannot. No screen can do that! It's a simple conservation of energy principle. If you shine twice as much light on a screen, it _must_ reflect twice as much back.


Besides, what if I replaced your projector with one that is twice as bright? The "break" in the curve would suddenly occur at 37.5 IRE or so instead of the 75 IRE where you've drawn it.


Tryg, I'm not denying that there's something weird about the Firehawk. But you're going to have to look for causes that don't defy the laws of physics.


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Michael Grant_
> *Perhaps the best bet is to get a screen with an 0.2 gain gray base, but with enough directionality to get a gain of, say, 0.5 on axis
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Couple that with a 2000 lumen projector... the best of all worlds?*



Micheal,


You're right that there are some advantages to a screen like the Firehawk that could be applied here. Maybe a 0.65 gain Firehawk like screen at some point. Right now I actually want a gray version of the Hi-Power (maybe 1.4 gain) that is also retroreflective. I really like my new Firehawk, but one great thing about the Hi-Power is that I just don't see any sparkles or sheen on that one. The Firehawk doesn't have the sheen at least, but sometimes I get a sparkle fixed on my position.


There are advances happening all over with these projector and screen combinations. I think the variable iris thing is big and I expect (or at least hope for) just about every new >$5k projector at CEDIA this year to have one. Even without the directionality I would probably prefer a 0.4 gain screen with a projector that could go anywhere from 2500 lumens to 5000 lumens. Then I could get just right for football and just right for Dark City.


Part of this variation by source can already be done with a high gain screen and a neutral density filter. Also, since high gain screens can bring out the artifacts, the better the sources get the more advantages to brighter images. With lots of artifacts the dimmer images have helped hide things. I've read that is one reason that theaters are run fairly dim.


--Darin


----------



## Tryg

Maybe the curve is not that abrupt and it's actually smoothed out more. But I can't figure out any other way of expressing what I'm seeing with my eyes.


If it was linear It would be evident. Especially when comparing it to similar products. But it's not. This dumping effect is real. Although I do seem to have missing hours and bright flashing lights in the back yard during the times I was testing...and my butt kinda hurt afterwards.


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Michael Grant_
> *Tryg, I'm not denying that there's something weird about the Firehawk. But you're going to have to look for causes that don't defy the laws of physics.*



Michael,


I agree about the measurements. Like you, when I hear that something is defying the laws of physics I don't just assume that it is able to do that, I want to figure out how and why. If someone on here posted information that they had created a perpetual motion machine I wouldn't just believe it, even if I didn't have the total answer to their results. I feel the same way about some of the pictures posted. I don't think either one of us is going to just accept that they are able to defy physics. There are explanations and it would be nice to find them. I think we have gone partway down that road here.


I don't claim to know what the Firehawk is doing exactly and I would love to see actual measurements with good sensors at different points and intensities. It seems like what they are doing is a little bit of an optical illusion, but has anybody seen Don Stewart actually explain the effect? Maybe he wouldn't want to give too much away to the competition, though.


--Darin


----------



## rogo

Incidentally, even from the sample, you can see the viewing cone of the Silverstar. I can pull far enough off axis to see the white poster junk I'm using get brighter than the Silverstar. The SS would still be viewable, of course, but it eventually drops below the gain of my poster material.


Mark


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by rogo_
> *Incidentally, even from the sample, you can see the viewing cone of the Silverstar. I can pull far enough off axis to see the white poster junk I'm using get brighter than the Silverstar. The SS would still be viewable, of course, but it eventually drops below the gain of my poster material.
> *



Mark,


Is your sample posted with "Top" or anything like that? If so, it would be interesting make sure it is below the projector and try it right side up and upside down. I think Tryg and I noticed that it had a narrower cone in the vertical than in the horizontal, which could explain some of its gain and pretty good viewing cone for a room.


--Darin


----------



## Michael Grant

I guarantee that the Firehawk line is straight as an arrow. But I'm sure there's a logical explanation for what you're seeing. Perhaps the difference is due to additive effects of the ambient light; perhaps the partial retro-reflectivity of the Firehawk does something weird.


And while screens _must_ be linear, our _eyes_ most certainly are not... lightness perception is roughly logarithmic...


----------



## Tryg

Good, because between the people that want to mount their SilverStar to a Stewart frame and those that keep asking if they can roll it up, I thought I might have experienced an alien abduction or something.


----------



## Rob Tomlin




> Quote:
> This is speculation here, but I think that because of these secondary reflections, it may be better to go with a higher-gain screen than a brighter projector, if at all possible. That's because a higher-gain screen usually has a tighter viewing cone (with a possible exception of the SilverStar!). So, more of the light is going to the viewing position, and less of it is being scattered all over the room, raising the ambient light level.



Now that is an excellent point Michael. One that I never thought of. No wonder I keep reading this thread!


That really does make sense. Based on this theory, however, the SilverStar would actually seem to have a _disadvantage_ due to its apparently very large viewing cone. How wide does the cone go on the SS before there is noticeable roll off Tryg?


One more thing that I have been wondering....is there a microperf version of the SilverStar?


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Rob Tomlin_
> *That really does make sense. Based on this theory, however, the SilverStar would actually seem to have a disadvantage due to its apparently very large viewing cone. How wide does the cone go on the SS before there is noticeable roll off Tryg?*



I think I'm repeating something that is earlier in the thread, but with ambient light around at Tryg's place before the sun completely went away I thought the SS was a distant third to the Firehawk and Hi-Power. I know this is different than the reflections issue, but just thought I would make sure it was out there.


When the HT1000 was first introduced I asked Don Stewart whether these very high contrast projectors would mean that we wouldn't want/need these gray screens anymore. He said that no, as long as we have these imperfect rooms with reflections there will be a place for these screens. He said that when white reflections hit a white screen they show up as white, but when they hit a gray screen they show up as gray. At the time I didn't understand this, but that was before I had realized that there really isn't such a think as a white point. Gray and white are just different intensities of the same mixture of colors and we whether we perceive something as white depends very much on what is around it. As Tryg and I saw when I was at his place and as he shows in some pictures a 1.0 white screen will look gray next to a 2.8 gain screen and a 2.8 gain screen will look gray next to a 9.0 gain screen.


This brings me to something else I've discussed with people. We have somewhat arbitrarily defined a gray screen as one with a layer that reflects less than 1.0 gain and a white screen as one that reflects 1.0 or more. I asked before if a white screen like the Hi-Power is considered gray off axis and if you look at a Hi-Power from the side next to a 1.0 gain white screen (light not coming from your position though) you will see that the Hi-Power does indeed look gray from there. So, this is part of what is important with the directionality issue. When you have a Hi-Power, the projector next to you, and a lamp going off to the side, the screen is really a whiter than white screen for the light directly from the projector, but a gray screen for the light from the lamp. At least that is one way to look at it.


The Firehawk really tries to use both advantages. The advantage of directionality to improve final CR and lower gain for the same thing and I think it seems to be the champion of screens for dealing with ambient light.


--Darin


----------



## Dan Miller

Again, this all goes back to two things:


1. Our eyes aren't linear; not even close. And our eye-brain decoding system is incredibly adaptive and forgiving.


2. Your room isn't set up for this kind of discussion. Michael is right. EVERY screen is a straight line. But the only way to check this is:


No eyes... measurements. And...


A black hole of a room (or one that is at least close enough for government work).


DM


----------



## Michael Grant

I can just see it now:

--- the Vutec "BlackStar": 122" diagonal, average/ambient gain of 0.1, on-axis gain of 0.6, reasonable (but not too large) viewing cone.

--- the Marantz "Prodigy": 3000 lumens (2000 in eco-mode), 2500:1 contrast, 28dB noise level.

40 ft-L of viewing paradise!


----------



## JHouse

I did a do it yourself microperf on my screen that I think will work on the SS. You can do it two ways. The second way is faster. 1/4 inch drill bit or square dancing with golf shoes. You can almost hear your speaker kind of ok right through the screen then. Be sure to make the holes completely random so you don't develop an interference pattern with your pixel grid.


I can't tell if this thread is making me dimmer or brighter.


----------



## lapworth




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by darinp_
> *Tryg,
> 
> 
> 
> Let me put it another way. Tell me a screen that will reflect a different percentage of the photons with different intensities of light. If it reflects 1% to an area at 1000 lumens it will need to reflect*


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by lapworth_
> *Some Substances can appear to reflect more light than falls on them by emmiting light at a different wavelength. ie. Flourescence, if the white light actually contains some Ultraviolet component which excites the electrons to the next valence band, when the electrons drop back to the lower valence band they emit photons at a visible wavelength or several visible wavelengths (white). So if your projector is emitting UV along with white then it is entirely possible for the whites to look even brighter thereby increasing the contrast ratio.
> 
> 
> Just a theory.
> 
> 
> p.s. I have been known to be wrong in the past so this thought could be totally irrelevant.
> 
> 
> p.p.s. can I have the $20???
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



Interesting theory. However, would the projector put out a different amount of UV light in bright scenes than dark scenes, or a higher ratio in bright scenes? Otherwise it seems like an effect like this would have a negative effect on contrast ratio or at the very least no effect at all. Seems like the only way it could have a positive effect would be if the projector had a higher inherent CR in the UV range than in the visible range and also that the designers took this into account.


In other words, the whites might be a little brighter, but the blacks would also be brighter by the same amount and the CR would go down in the same way that turning a light on increases the brightest scenes but hurts CR.


--Darin


----------



## Michael Grant

Two additional problems with the flourescence idea.


First, the color of "extra" light that a flourescent material emits is determined by the energy states of the electrons in the material. UV light causes electrons to jump two or more states; and then visible light is emitted as the electrons hop back down, one state at a time. Because those energy states are very specific, the flourescence phenomenon produces light at specific wavelengths---that is, colors. That's not going to work well with a screen that is intended to accurately reproduce what is projected on it! So I am sure flourescence is something a screen manufacturer wishes to avoid







However, that could be used to explain color shifts, to be sure!


Secondly, I'm pretty sure that even flourescent materials will have a precisely linear response to different intensities of light. So you still have these perfect straight lines on the graph, even if the colors are all funky. So even flourescence wouldn't change contrast.


But I see one intriguing possibility: what if the projector emitted different proportions of UV light at different points on the grey scale? Then the projector/screen combo would indeed appear to have a nonlinear response to intensity---but it's actually the projector's fault, not the screen's. This really won't be possible for bulb projectors, but it might be true for CRTs.


----------



## rogo

Darin queried amidst the obscura:



It's labeled Up Up... So it apppears to have an axis, but not a top and bottom, per se. I was using it wrong! Now that I have switched it, the viewing cone has widened noticeably. So, in my minds this confirms unequivocally that the screen has a wider horizontal cone than vertical cone.


Of course, that's the way I'd design it to. You might need a wide cone for a lot of people to enjoy the screen, perhaps 90-120 degrees even. But up and down, a much smaller cones works for the sitting/standing phenomenon... Perhaps 25-50 degrees...


Now that I've set it up right, I can move much closer to the fringe and still "out gain" the poster stuff. Eventually, it does drop below that, but the drop off is adequately slow that I think it would rarely be disturbing.


Mark


----------



## JHouse

WOW! That starts making some sense now. Ok boys, what should be the practical effect of that fact on the gain or sweet spot in determining the proper projector positioning (table and ceiling mount options)?


This thing sounds angular reflective horizontally but retro-reflective vertically! How veird!


----------



## Tryg




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by JHouse_
> *
> 
> This thing sounds angular reflective horizontally but retro-reflective vertically! How veird!*



That doesn't make sense. It's all angular reflective but somehow they have managed to allign the particals in this surface material so that the reflection pattern is oval. Wider horizontally and a little narrower vertically. However, even if you sum the axises it appears to be more efficient than other surfaces. Remember, you cannot create light. Only reflect it. So with that said, others surfaces must absorb some photons. This happens to reflect even a higher percentage of photons than others. Better yet it reflects it wider generally where you need it most...the horizontal axis.


I'm firm now in my mind why this showed to be less gain than the high power. We were standing directly in the High Powers peak viewing cone, and not the other. Somehow we need to retest this.


Now, how do you reflect it differently? Some how there must be particles that are alligned in the surface material to do so. Since I cant see them, I will have to borrow my neighbors electron microscope to investigate. It's hard to imagine that the reflected light can (scatter) on a different axis so consistently. BUT, I have noticed that it does look ever so slightly softer than other materials like the high power. This must account for that.


The first few times comparing it to other materials I kept saying "wow this thing is making my projector look like a CRT... but a very bright crt" This in my opinion is very nice for watching movies. Since I watch mostly high definition stuff, but still many DVDs, the range of quality and compression artifacts etc is very large. This surface with it's slight difference in light scatter tends to blend things slightly minimizing the artifacts of bad stuff, softening the good stuff so your left with a much more consistent image throughout the viewing material range.


I think for sports and stuff I would prefer the High Power, I looks crisper. Partly because everthing is taped on a fix pixel device (camera) then replayed on a fixed pixel device (digital projector) but then you add the round viewing cone of the High Power and you get sharpness beyond what you're are used to. That same "holy crap" stuff you saw the first time you viewed HD.


Guys this is just my theory but the oval viewing cone of the SilverStar does scatter the light slightly differently than the round viewing cones of other materials. This can be most pleasurable for moviesas it may soften the image a bit and since the surface coloration also seems to give you some contrast benefits.


----------



## M&M

There are still more factors other than those discussed above which makes this still more complicated.


Already discussed are

- screen gain caused by the reflective properties, call it focus gain

Focus gain above raises on-axis light and lowers off-axis light. Off-axis is lowered less than on axis is raised since there is more solid angle off-axis

- screen gain modified by based color, call it color gain. Color gain only lowers light


Here's an example.


Case 1 is std matte white screen, focus gain = 1, color gain = 1, on-axis = 1, off = 1


Case 2 is like Firehawk screen, focus gain = 2, color gain = .75

On-axis is 2*.75 = 1.5 while off-axis will be something around 0.75*0.75=0.56. The first 0.75 comes from assuming the extra light making up the 2 on axis came from 4x the area off axis (1-(2-1)/4)


Case 3 is like High Power screen, focus gain = 3, color gain = 1, on-axis = 3, off = 0.5


Notice that Case 2 and Case 3 have roughly equal brightness off-axis in absolute terms while case 3 is brighter on axis. Dependent on how much your eye adapts, you'll perceive different things.


- ambient light, on and off axis. Ambient light can only raise the black floor


But there is also ambient light which comes from projector to screen to room and back to screen. This is proportional to the average intensity on the screen and is modified by color and geometry of the room. For a home theater without black walls this is probably the dominate ambient. Even in ones with black walls, there's reflections off the audience unless they are wearing Ninja outfits. Try standing next to your screen while a well lit scene is playing and see where the ambient light is coming from.


Let's assume projector is putting out 10 units of light for dark scene, 3 units off-axis ambient, 1 unit on-axis, and a room gain of 0.25 (grey box). This would be a poor theater!


Then the screen light is made up of


Case 1 Case 2 Case 3

Projector 10 15 30


Ambient off-axis 3 1.7 1.5

Room reflection 2.5 1.4 1.2

Ambient on-axis 1 1.5 3

--- --- ---

6.5 4.6 4.0


Ratio 65% 31% 19%


Case 3 performs best mostly because the projector portion is brighter but case 2 has nearly the same absolute black level and holds absolute black better as the ambient rises. White side walls close to the screen would be an example where case 2 gains since your eye probably adjusts to both screen and walls. If the on-axis ambient rises, say a white back wall lit by a window, the benefit of case 2 and 3 diminishes. I can see some evidence of these effects in the review discussion as the evening wore on.


The other factor is the auto-gain, auto-white balance, and logarithmic sensitivity of the human eye. All of these screens are linear because there are only fixed offsets and proportionality factors. If you plot the logarithm though of the light versus ideal under these conditions, you get a curve which looks kinked for the black end of the scale. The eye will see less contrast in those areas because the ambient light raises the black threshold. Plugging in some different values for the three cases above, I've concluded the screens with gain will look more linear in the dark regions because of rejection of off-axis light. Raise light on-axis and the benefit goes away.


All this is driven by ambient light effects. Those with black box theaters and and Ninja outfits can use any screen and see apparent linearity. This still won't stop them from fretting though that they can still perceive the screen when playing the 0 IRE test patterns.


I'm going to take a break and leave the horizontal vs vertical discussion to others but clearly the ceiling vs walls would matter in that case.

Mike


----------



## rogo

Tryg: I e-mailed both Superman and Lt. Geordi LaForge so they could tell us more about the material and the exact photon scattering.


Their schedules are tricky, but I figured we could all meet at your place in August, perhaps.


Mark


----------



## Michael Grant

Very intersting stuff, Mike. Actually, we have talked about these secondary reflections from before in some of the posts #272-291:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...44#post2324544 

But we really didn't go very far with it. Thank you for putting some numbers and other technical elaboration to these speculations! I think we ended up agreeing with you that focus gain would help reduce the effects of these reflections.


----------



## M&M

Here's a graph of the 3 cases. Scales are log to correspond to perception.

I extended this up to 1000 units of projector. You can see the kink would move if the projector is much much brighter than ambient


----------



## M&M

Sorry about missing the earlier discussion of room reflections. 14 pages of posts you know. I do remember the liquid nails.










Room reflections drive two things. Ones that are in the field of view adjust your perception of the screen, color and/or brightness, while those out of field of view just degrade contrast on a given picture. Luckily those scenes most affected are also most forgiving given the adaptability of the eye. Those bright sunshine scenes with black shadows look good on most any system.


So what screen do I need? I have a 16x30 room with 7 foot wide screen mounted near ceiling. Side walls are chocolate (better than white but some potential for color shift) and celing is white. Back wall is same color but probably far enough back vs seating position to be non-issue vs walls. So some gain would be good. No off-axis gain toward ceiling would be best. During summer, there's room light quite late and in that case grey might help but in winter would just make whites dimmer. So high power is probably best bet but not available in pull-down.


So for now I'll stick with matte white and tweak the gamma slightly to smooth out the response.


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by M&M_
> *So high power is probably best bet but not available in pull-down.
> *



Mike,


I'm not sure if this is a typo, but the Hi-Power is probably most popular in the pull-down versions. I have a 92" wide pull-down and a 116" wide pull-down. And the prices are incredible compared to the SilverStar and Firehawk.


--Darin


----------



## M&M

Actually I meant SilverStar but I'll have to look back at threads for Dalite High Power


----------



## Rob Tomlin

Earlier in this thread, it was stated that the SilverStar slightly softened the image compared to the High Power screen.


Just how "slight" was the softening? Would this be noticeable on its own, or only by direct side by side comparison with the High Power?


How did the sharpness of the SS compare to other screens, such as the Firehawk and 1.3 gain white screen?


----------



## Tryg

Darin,


I'd like to see Da-Lite add some grey to their high power emulsion. This might be a killer combo.


Rob,


The SilverStar just looks slightly softer than the High Power as far as I can tell. The lower gain screens are harder to evaluate this because the image is more depressed than a 3 gain screen. Don't read too much into the softness statement. I doubt most people would/could notice it even side by side with other products. I only mentioned it because we have taken the examination of this screen to extreme and probably absurd levels. I recommend sitting back and enjoying.


Oh and did someone mention a

POWERBUY!


Nice work AVS! I bet it wasn't easy setting such a deal up.


Sweet! Now many that thought this product was outside of their means can likely partake.


----------



## Dan Miller

Here is a test you might want to try for sharpness/softness.


Useing a PJ with good optics:


Get a 1 pixel checkerboard. There are several sources. Or you could use the Nokia Monitor Test (a free download, but I lost the link) which has both H and V 1 pixel tests...


Make sure your PJ can do a perfect pixel match, and go to it...


DM


----------



## tsteves

here is the link


----------



## mfranke

Folks,

first, this is the most useful thread I've read in 1 year. I must say thanks for all the info/research that was done. Outstanding effort. Next, my final choice for screens is down the The Firehawk and Silver Screen. My concern is will either be to bright or have hot spots with a 12-14' throw on a up to 110" screen with an Infocus 7200.

Thanks in advance

Mark Franke

Greatful for the forum . Save me lots o mistakes


----------



## Randyman

Has anyone seen this Silverstar with a Panasonic 300U? I'm somewhat wavering between the Firehawk, or the Silverstar. Of course I am unable to view even a sample of the Silverstar, so I am hoping that someone has seen the combo to hopefully give me a little better idea of what I could expect. Screen size would be 100" diagonal 16x9 in a non fully controlled ambient light situation. There are blinds, but that would be about it.


----------



## Michael Grant

I updated the graphs and contrast numbers in my post
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...77#post2323777 

based on some comments Darin made a few posts later. He was correct that I wasn't adding the intensities correctly. Fortunately, the conclusions do not change...


----------



## rogo

Mfranke: I have a silly temporary screen that hotspots badly and the SS sample, no matter where I put it, does not hotspot at all.


----------



## lapworth




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Michael Grant_
> *Two additional problems with the flourescence idea.
> 
> 
> First, the color of "extra" light that a flourescent material emits is determined by the energy states of the electrons in the material. UV light causes electrons to jump two or more states; and then visible light is emitted as the electrons hop back down, one state at a time. Because those energy states are very specific, the flourescence phenomenon produces light at specific wavelengths---that is, colors. That's not going to work well with a screen that is intended to accurately reproduce what is projected on it! So I am sure flourescence is something a screen manufacturer wishes to avoid
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> However, that could be used to explain color shifts, to be sure!
> 
> 
> Secondly, I'm pretty sure that even flourescent materials will have a precisely linear response to different intensities of light. So you still have these perfect straight lines on the graph, even if the colors are all funky. So even flourescence wouldn't change contrast.
> 
> 
> But I see one intriguing possibility: what if the projector emitted different proportions of UV light at different points on the grey scale? Then the projector/screen combo would indeed appear to have a nonlinear response to intensity---but it's actually the projector's fault, not the screen's. This really won't be possible for bulb projectors, but it might be true for CRTs.*



Tongue firmly in cheek.

If the flourescent materials were selected to respond with appropriate levels of Red Green and Blue like the phosphor on the inside of your average Flourescent light bulb then the resulting light would be white, and although it may have a linear response in itself it would add to the other reflected light steepening the response curve and giving an apparent increase in contrast ratio.


It's actually more likely to happen with a bulb type projector than a CRT projector as the light from a CRT projector is emitted at specific wavelengths only red green and blue from the phosphors on the CRT faces as they are bombarded by electrons sucked from the cathodes by the EHT applied to the anode on the back of the phosphors. Bulb projectors on the other hand emit broad spectrum white light which may well contain UV, how much UV gets through would depend entirely on how the optics are set up within the projector, ie what sort of glass is used, what sort of beam splitters, mirrors and filters etc.


I don't actually believe this is happening but was merely proposing a theory whereby you could SEE more light coming off a screen than appeared to be hitting it in the first place.


----------



## kencoon

Anyone respond to Randyman's question? I'm in the same boat and have a Panasonic 300U coming on Thursday. It's my first projector and I've gone though the obsessive/compussive research first on the projector, then on cables, now on the screen. I'm within an inch of having my head explode. All the while selling the ideas I come up with to my finace.


I've gotten as far as a 103-106 fixed screen and I'm now deciding between the HCCV, HP, and the SilverStar. I will be ceiling mounting the projector on a 9 foot ceiling. I have a sliding glass door next to the screen and two windows in the room. I have heavy curtains on them so I have some light control, but not perfect. Nor do I want it as I'd like some light during the day lest I start looking like Gollem. Once I get this set up I'll probably sound like him anyways, "My preccccioussss!"










My plan was I could close the curtains on the sliding glass doors during the day with the window curtains partially open. This would prevent direct ambient light from stricking the screen, but I'd still have reflected ambient light. This would be for TV viewing only. Movies would adject for perfectly dark.


Oh yeah, and I'd be sitting between 15 and 20 feet from the screen and I plan to use the projector as a TV replacement so it will mostly be used for movies, but also TV viewing.


Now that I've given the details I guess I'm looking for some advise. Would a Silverstar be right for me? I've heard mixed things about HP and ceiling mount. Will the HCCV give enough gain for a bright image?


At this point I'm leaning towards the Silverstar with the powerbuy due to the statements in some of the threads like "moving the sample around was like looking through a clean window,'" and the analogy to plasma. If black levels are as good or almost as good as a grey screen I'm practically sold.


BTW, I'd like to thank the AVS Science guys for responding to my e-mails and phone calls. I'm sure they answer a million questions a day and their patience is greatly appriciated. They responded to me as if I was the first guy asking these questions and never made me feel like "OK, I told you what I thought, you gonna buy?" Great guys! You have my screen purchase whatever it is.


----------



## Jeraden

Well if it matters, I'm planning on ordering a Silverstar today and I'll be using a 300u. I don't have anything currently as my theater is still under construction, but based on the screenshots and opinions in this thread, I think the silverstar should be a good fit. If anything I'm concerned about the screen being too bright with an 800 lumen projector - I'll have complete light control. Fortunately the 300u has the economy mode. If you do the lamberts calculations and assume this acts as a 3 gain screen, it should be plenty bright for a bit of ambient light (although its been stated that the silverstar doesn't shed ambient light well, but I'm not 100% sure what that means in practical use though).


----------



## bowbie89

Here's a positive opinion of watching the SilverStar with the lights on.


So hopefully Jeraden, you will be pleasantly suprised.


----------



## Projector

I don't agree that SS is a MAGIC or something. I think It's just a high gain screen afterall. FireHawk was designed for HD1 projectors which usually have a contrast of around 1000. As all HD1 projector owner knows, it really helps improving black level while providing a beautiful picture. But now, Sim2 is introducing Ht300Link with a contrast of 2500 and the projectors that are going to be announced in September (Hd 2.5 ? or HD3) will have even higher contrast ratios. So definitely FireHawk won't be a choice for owner of those projectors. I am sure Stewart is working on a better product for the new Hd3 projectors.


I dont know if Stewart is making a 3.0 gain or 6.0 gain screen and if they are, then I think it would be great if Tryg could compare the high gain Stewart screens to SS, so that we can see the difference. As I said FireHawk and SS comparison is not fair at all, two different products for two different purposes. And I personally think there wont be any difference between the high gain Stewart screens and SS. If it turns out to be true that, there is no difference, then, we could all buy the high gain Stewart and thus could keep our frames. It would be much more easier for installation too. But if you say , stewart dont have a screen similar to SS, then I agree, SS is the way to go.


----------



## Projector

I want to add one more thing. I personally find the FireHawk screenshots to be too dark...I think this is because Tryg has used the same projector settings for both screens. Ex... Brightness 38 Contrast 52 might be perfect for SS, but that would show FH too dark, so for FH it should have been Brightness 48 and Contrast 62 ...(The numbers are not real values here, just example) . I do agree that FH shows the image a tad darker than white as it is a gray screen afterall, but thats mostly in low light scenes... The pics Tryg has posted, the flowers, house , boat, could have been brighter I guess. Therefore, I wonder if it is possible for Tryg to repeat the test with better projector settings for FH. Not the same settings for both screens. I think we should see much better images than shown here.


Hope I don't sound rude...


Best Regards,


----------



## Michael Grant




> Quote:
> But now, Sim2 is introducing Ht300Link with a contrast of 2500 and the projectors that are going to be announced in September (Hd 2.5 ? or HD3) will have even higher contrast ratios. Definitely FireHawk won't be a choice for owner of those projectors.



Why not? This statement reflects the common and persistent misunderstanding about grey screens.

_No_ grey screen improves the stated contrast of a projector---which can only be achieved anyway in a room with perfect light control; that is, with no additive ambient light and painted black walls.


Grey screens improve the _effective_ contrast of a projector in _in the presence of imperfect light control_. In the presence of ambient light or secondary reflections, deep blacks will be washed out by this light. So the bottom end is determined not by the projector but by the room: and the difference between 1000:1 and 2500:1 contrast becomes irrelevant.


If your home theater room is a true black hole, there's no reason whatsoever to go with a grey screen. But if by necessity or desire you would like your theater to tolerate some ambient light, a grey screen can help---no matter what the CR of your projector is. Even a CRT would benefit. That is, of course, assuming that the loss of screen gain doesn't make the image undesirably dim.


----------



## rogo

The SS is magic because it's high gain with a huge horizontal viewing cone. It's magic because it brings out detail in the shadow areas that is lost elsewhere.


It's magic.


Mark


----------



## Free

Mine is on the truck and should be here the end of the week or the beginning of next week. I will let you know when I get it


----------



## C Clark

And since we only have to end of month for special deal, you must QUICKLY!!! post comments. Be sure to comment on ambient light conditions/sources when you comment.


----------



## Free

I promise that I will post as soon as it arrives. I am hoping that I can get it tomorrow because I have a Sim2 HT300 DLP that I am selling this weekend and after that it will just be my DILA. I am curious how this screen does with DLP.


----------



## Projector

Free,


What price are you selling your projector?


----------



## Free

I have it listed in the Individual Sales Forum for $4950


----------



## Rob4x20

The thing I like the most about the SS on the first pile of Tryg's screenshots is the additional shadow detail. Much more visible. Is this a characteristic of the SS b/c of the gain or is something else going on? I mean, would the High Power show similar enhanced shadow detail if compared to the 1.3 draper or the FH as the SS was in the first post?


I want the SS but holy crap that's alot of moola to me. If the HP is 90% as good, particularly in shadow detail enhancement, then I might not have a choice.


thx tryg, again, for the additional grist for the mill.


----------



## mbaxter

It seems to me the only advantage of the Silverstar over the High Power is that the Silverstar is optomized for ceiling mount, whereas with the High Power you have to have the projector shelf or table mounted to get the same results.


Both screens appear to give identical results when viewed from the "sweet spot", but being in the High Power's sweet spot means your projector has to be in a less-than-ideal position.


----------



## bowbie89




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by mbaxter_
> *It seems to me the only advantage of the Silverstar over the High Power is that the Silverstar is optomized for ceiling mount, whereas with the High Power you have to have the projector shelf or table mounted to get the same results.*



That right and that could be a big advantage to people who can't table mount or don't have a projector with an adjustible vertical lens shift.


Also a major advantage in my opinion would be the greater viewing cone. If you are going to a few people viewing off axis the SilverStar would have the advantage.


----------



## Michael Grant

Last night I went to JimmyR's house to see his setup, which consists of a ceiling-mounted Sanyo PLV-70 (or more precisely, the Studio Experience rebrand) and a Da-Lite Hi-Power. He also had a sample of the SilverStar for us to compare with.


There is an incredible back-and-forth about how much you lose on the Hi-Power by going with a ceiling mount. Well, in JimmyR's _particular_ setup, you don't lose much. Yes, when I stand up from his normal seating position, the image gets a bit brighter. But it is _not_ a huge difference. Of course, it may help that his projector is plenty bright to begin with (2200 lumens rated, probably 1500 calibrated). But in terms of the _difference_ in brightness between standing and sitting, it wasn't significant.


So why do some people say the gain lost is much worse? Well, I do think it's dependent on your _exact_ configuration. Here are JimmyR's numbers:

--- screen: 92" wide, 16:9, 32" above the floor

--- projector: 17.8 ft throw, center of lens 82" above the floor

--- viewer: about 17.5 ft back.

When I came home, I plugged these numbers into my handy-dandy spreadsheet. In the _seated_ position, the viewing angle is only about 12.5 degrees! Standing on my tiptoes just under the projector gets you down to about 5 degrees. Just so you know, 5 degrees is about the best you can do with a Hi-Power, even with a table-mounted projector. So the fact is, with JimmyR's setup, the seating position really isn't that far from optimal.


So it is indeed possible to have a ceiling-mounted projector and get most of the gain from a Hi-Power. The lower the projector can be mounted, the better. If your projector has an adjustable vertical shift, mount it just high enough to keep people from bumping their head on it, and adjust the lens accordingly. I wouldn't recommend pairing it with a projector with a fixed offset of more than 100% though---that is, a projector that must be placed well above the top of the screen.


The retro-reflectivity of the Hi-Power has other benefits besides gain. First of all, the brightness of the image is _very_ uniform---_no_ hotspotting whatsoever. As you step outside the optimal viewing cone, the brightness goes down, but very evenly. Also, it does a great job of hiding wrinkles and waves, so you don't need to pay for a tensioned screen. JimmyR stuck his finger behind the screen at one point and pushed it out a few inches, so you could easily tell from the border of the screen that it was distorted. But the image itself still looked flat!


Now, how did it compare to the SilverStar? Well, first of all, we found that the SilverStar _definitely_ has more gain than the Hi-Power, particularly in the seated position but even standing on my tiptoes to maximize the Hi-Power's benefits. The increased gain made the colors more vivid and the detail more crisp. Of course, it also raised the black level, which became clear when we put the sample in front of an all-black letterbox bar. In very dark scenes this might disturb some people; but hey, that's why we all want 5000:1 CR projectors, right? And the truth is, with the extra brightness came extra shadow detai, which was quite nice.


Interestingly, I _cannot_ say that the SilverStar's viewing cone was necessarily larger than the Hi-Power's. I'm at a loss to understand this, because I know all the other data says otherwise. Still, the viewing cone was impressively large so don't let that scare you anyway.


I think the SilverStar is great, and truth be told if I could use the SilverStar I would definitely buy it instead of the Hi-Power. Despite what I said above, the Hi-Power isn't ideal for ceiling-mounted applications, so if you really want a lot of gain you're more likely to have success with a SilverStar. For me, it's a non-starter because it's a rigid screen! It isn't retractable. Believe me, I've thought of all sorts of creative ways that I might be able to retract this screen into the attic, and ultimately found that I just didn't have the room.


So seeing the Hi-Power in action at JimmyR's house reassured me that the Hi-Power is _not_ a bad second choice at all. If you're constrained by cost or other constraints and can't use the SilverStar, I don't think you'll be disappointed in the Hi-Power unless your projector placement is really rather bad in comparison.


Thanks again to JimmyR for having us over to check out his setup. Incidentally, let me put a plug in and say that I felt that his light cannon + Hi Power combo is _not_ too bright. It looked great. Yeah the black levels weren't great but I can totally understand why he's chosen to take brightness over black level for now, until an ultra-high contrast, high brightness digital projector comes along.


----------



## Tryg

Michael, I'm at a loss which one is brighter. In all my experiments the SS was definately brighter. But when Darin came down to my place with his portable high power screen, It looked brighter. This could definately been that we were viewing from a standing position or Darin has a super secret 5 gain High Power. I think it was the viewing positions as we just threw the screens in place and started watching. We never really adjusted the screens etc. The high power was pretty awesome and really worked good for straight on viewing at my place, but my projector is also at the top of my screen.


The SilverStar may in fact be brighter It's hard to tell. If your expectations are around 3 gain nobody should be dissapointed with either.


Rob4x20,


Get the High Power...They are both great screens. You can't say one is 90% as good as the other. I'm sure you will be happy with either one. Just pick one and don't look back.


The biggest benefit of either of these screens is that they are higher gain. This of course will be what you notice the most.


----------



## kencoon

Based on Michael's review I think I'm getting the Silverstar for my Panny 300U. This is based on a number of things including the fact that I'm ceiling mounting and using a fixed screen. Ironically, if I get the Silverstar before the powerbuy is over the price difference between the two is within a couple hundred dollars. Not insignifigant, but not a deal breaker.


I was thinking about the differences in perceived gain that has been reported here and one possibility that I might suggest is that a very high light output projector would make a small gain difference more dramatic, no? What I mean is:


For a 1500 Lumens Projector on a 100" screen

SS: 3*1500=4500 Lumens, 147 foot-lamberts

HP: 2.8*1500=4200, 137 foot-lamberts


For a 400 Lumens Projector on a 100" screen

SS: 3*400=1200 Lumens, 39.3 foot-lamberts

HP: 2.8*400=1120 Lumens, 36.7 foot-lamberts


Keep in mind I'm learning this stuff, so if my calculations are wrong forgive me. The 400 number cam from Projector Central's review of the Panasonic 300U's actual light output. I know the numbers are exagerated, but they make the point.


Anyways, thanks again for all the information. The amount of info shared in this thread has been increadibly in depth. I went from knowing nothing about screens to THINKING I know something about them


----------



## C Clark




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Michael Grant_
> *---
> 
> The increased gain made the colors more vivid and the detail more crisp. Of course, it also raised the black level, which became clear when we put the sample in front of an all-black letterbox bar. In very dark scenes this might disturb some people; but hey, that's why we all want 5000:1 CR projectors, right? And the truth is, with the extra brightness came extra shadow detai, which was quite nice.
> *



So, my dilemma is how to decide if the black levels or the shadow detail is the more important feature for me. Firehawk? or SS? with a ht300+. Currently using plain blackout cloth.


----------



## Rob Tomlin

Thanks for the review Michael.


Getting closer to making the leap for the SS!


----------



## Assayer

I hope that I am not throwing a hand-grenade here, but all of this discussion about the shadow detail improvements of the silverstar product has got me thinking. . . and so I will play devil's advocate for a moment.


I have been running an HTPC with zoom player and ffdshow for the last month or so. like many software DVD player solutions, ffdshow contains a gamma correction filter. Use of this filter in moderation results in significantly improved shadow detail, as well as a general increase in image brightness.


Although a software filter obviously does not introduce real gain into the system and will consequently not deliver the color saturation and 'punch' of optical gain, doesn't this approach basically give you the same improved shadow detail that many of the Silver Star admirers have cited as a primary purchase consideration?


Obviously, there are other advantages and trade-offs associated with a screen like this, not the least of which is that HTPCs can be a nuisance to use and maintain and are clearly not for everyone. Still it seems like many users who were previously happy with their old white or gray screens might want to consider tinkering with software gamma correction filters before spending four figures on a new screen to improve their shadow detail.


And so in the spirit of healthy discussion I ask: is there something fundamental that I am missing here?


----------



## Michael Grant

In my review I said that the SilverStar improved shadow detail. Well, let me clarify. The reason that it did this is simple: it made everything brighter. So compared to the lower gain Hi-Power, which consumed 95% of my viewing area, of _course_ the shadow detail would be more apparent.


So what if we removed the Hi-Power completely and replaced it with a full-size SilverStar? It's not certain that the shadow detail would remain "better" once our eyes acclimated themselves to the new brightness level. Certainly, it will help in the presence of ambient light, because the brighter image wouldn't be washed out as much. But in a very dark room, it probably would not---unless the result is so bright that the 0IRE black level is raised to undesirable levels.


Depending on the exact setup, some sort of "gamma enhancement" as you propose may very well accomplish something that even the SilverStar cannot, although it would come at an expense of accuracy. And if you overdo it, you may end up crushing the whites.


----------



## Daniel Hutnicki

Rob


Jump jump, I will catch you


----------



## mbaxter




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Michael Grant_
> *Here are JimmyR's numbers:
> 
> --- screen: 92" wide, 16:9, 32" above the floor
> 
> --- projector: 17.8 ft throw, center of lens 82" above the floor
> 
> --- viewer: about 17.5 ft back.
> 
> When I came home, I plugged these numbers into my handy-dandy spreadsheet. In the seated position, the viewing angle is only about 12.5 degrees!*



Michael, I plugged in these #'s and got 11.3 degrees for the "Middle Center" angle (which I assume is the angle you're quoting). Did you use a different seating height than the default 40"? Just wanted to make sure I was using your spreadsheet correctly.


By the way, on your spreadsheet, what are the desired viewing angles that you want to see for an angular reflective screen?


----------



## paulgas

Does Stewart make a higain screen that corresponds to the hi power? Has anyone been looking at DLP's on Stewart hi gain screens? The reason I boughtthe Firehawk was to take advantage of improved black/contrast of the grey screen. With the great SS hipower debate I have heard no mentionof comparable Stewart product. I ask this only because since I own the Firehawk a fabric change is the cheapest ves buying the SS sight unseen. Darn.

Paul


----------



## Michael Grant




> Quote:
> Michael, I plugged in these #'s and got 11.3 degrees for the "Middle Center" angle (which I assume is the angle you're quoting). Did you use a different seating height than the default 40"? Just wanted to make sure I was using your spreadsheet correctly.



I did use a different seating height, 36" I think. 40" is me sitting straight up on my couch







His chairs were shorter so I just took a few inches off. It was a rough guess. And I think I rounded my answer to the nearest half-degree when I posted, too.


> Quote:
> By the way, on your spreadsheet, what are the desired viewing angles that you want to see for an angular reflective screen?



Honestly, I'm not sure what angles I'm looking for given an angular reflective screen. I mean, I figure that roughly, the larger they are the lower the gain you should use so that hotspotting isn't irritating. It's actually quite shocking to me how large those angles end up being---almost 40 degrees or so for my application. I mean, that's larger than the half-gain angle for most screens! Imagine the edges of your screen appearing less than half as bright as the center.


Having said that, with the Firehawk they recommend using a throw distance of 1.65 screen widths or more to avoid hotspotting. I think that roughly translates to a maximum angle of 40 degrees or so. The Firehawk is a bit more directional than its gain suggests, because its focus gain has been reduced by the use of grey material. So you can get higher gains with the same viewing cone as the Firehawk. (And it would seem that the SilverStar may be one of them.)


----------



## rogo

mbaxter mused:


----------



## Rob Tomlin




> Quote:
> Rob
> 
> 
> Jump jump, I will catch you



You a funny guy, Daniel!


Just don't push me in!


----------



## mbaxter

Michael Grant: would I be correct in assuming that for the angular reflective calculations, the main thing you're looking for is for the "middle center" angle to be as close to zero as possible, and the "spread" value to be as small as possible? That seems to make geometric sense to me, but you're the math whiz so please correct me if I'm wrong.


And when doing the calculation for a retroreflective screen, which resulting value is most important? The "middle center" angle, or the average of the max and min angles? Please clarify.


thanks,

Mike B


----------



## M&M

Assayer

Yes you can partially correct with gamma correction to gain back shadow detail. If you look at my log graph I posted, you can imagine bending the graph up with gamma correction to help compenstate for ambient light. I actually do this today by using the video equalizer function in the Holo3D software.


There is no free lunch though. If you make the graph steeper at the bottom of the light range, then you have to make it flatter at the top since you can't make the overall top of the range brighter. So you essentially lose punch for the brighter scenes to gain detail at the bottom. I had to play around a while until I was happy with the tradeoff.


I think I'm going to get a Da-lite high power when I get back from vacation and then tweak some more.


----------



## Michael Grant




> Quote:
> Michael Grant: would I be correct in assuming that for the angular reflective calculations, the main thing you're looking for is for the "middle center" angle to be as close to zero as possible, and the "spread" value to be as small as possible? That seems to make geometric sense to me, but you're the math whiz so please correct me if I'm wrong.



Actually, it really doesn't matter if the "middle center" exactly zero. With an angular reflective screen, it's almost certain that the "hotspot" will be _somewhere_ around the center of the screen---but it doesn't need to be exact. What really matters is what the largest angle is (positive or negative, it doesn't matter)---which is probably going to be at a corner of the screen. That number will tell you how severe the hotspot is.


Having said that, if the middle center is _far_ from zero, that's an indication that you might be able to reduce the peak angle a bit by adjusting some of the various dimensions to move the hotspot closer to the center.


> Quote:
> And when doing the calculation for a retroreflective screen, which resulting value is most important? The "middle center" angle, or the average of the max and min angles? Please clarify.



Actually, all of the above







I look at both the min and the max, really. Their average gives me a good idea of the overall brightness of the screen. And their _difference_ tells me how uniform the brightness is across the screen. Ideally that difference should be pretty small---say, less than 5 degrees. But even more than 5 might be OK, I'm not sure. In JimmyR's setup the difference is less than 1 degree! Now _that's_ uniformity!


----------



## bowbie89




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Michael Grant_
> *Interestingly, I cannot say that the SilverStar's viewing cone was necessarily larger than the Hi-Power's.*



That is suprising. But it makes me feel more comfortable if I decide to go with the High Power.


----------



## mbaxter

Quote:

_Originally posted by Michael Grant_
*I look at both the min and the max, really. Their average gives me a good idea of the overall brightness of the screen. And their difference tells me how uniform the brightness is across the screen. Ideally that difference should be pretty small---say, less than 5 degrees. But even more than 5 might be OK, I'm not sure. In JimmyR's setup the difference is less than 1 degree! Now that's uniformity!*
Thanks for the clarifications. You know, a cell that shows the average of min and max angles would be very handy, so I modified your spreadsheet accordingly. For retroreflective screens, the "average" angle is always very close to the "Middle Center" angle, so I'm not sure it's very meaningful but anyway here's the file if you want it:

 

screen angles.zip 8.5869140625k . file

 

screen angles.zip 8.5869140625k . file


----------



## Michael Grant

Thanks Mike. I've made some other improvements to my spreadsheet so I'll include this when I update the spreadsheet thread.


----------



## kencoon

Just took the plunge and ordered the 103" diagonal SilverStar deluxe from AVS to match my Panasonic 300U projector. I'm very excited about it and will post my impressions when I finaly get it. I feel very confident based on all the information I had from others in this forum.


The angles speadsheet was a great tool also in looking at whether a retro-reflective screen was good for me (which is wasn't if I wanted high gain).


----------



## astrojeff

After reading all the hype about the Silverstar screen, I ordered a sample and received it yesterday for review. I currently have a 10HT and am using a 110" diag. Grayhawk screen in a light-controlled room. The projector is fitted with a CC filter and calibrated with SMARTIII. I can get about a CR 300 with the filter and calibration.


I placed the SS sample on the screen and compared it to the Grayhawk watching Die Another Day. I also tested it with AVIA. I found that the SS produced a much brighter picture overall with whiter whites and unfortunately lighter blacks. The colors were much brighter and better saturated, probably due to the overall brighter picture. I measured the light relected off the screen with my light meter and found that the black level was raised about as much as the white level (about double as compared to the Grayhawk). I thought that I might be able to improve this by adjusting the brightness control of the projector, which was also suggested by other posts. Using AVIA I found that the brightness should be set the same for both screens (about 52). Although the picture was brighter, both the white bars and the black background were brighter which yielded the same setting to "just be able to see" the left bar. Of course the contrast ratio could be changed, but this is not dependent on the screen, but , rather, set by direct measurements of the projector output.


Although I enjoyed the whiter whites and more saturated colors, the elevated black levels were unacceptable. Black areas in the movie and on the test screens were now a lighter gray. I suppose if someone has a projector with a high CR -- and contrast to spare -- then the elevated black level wouldn't be an issue. The screen may be appropriate when I upgrade to a SXRD or next gen. DLP coming this fall or next year. Of course if the new projectors put out 2000 lumens, then the SS may not be necessary either. I did find that the horizontal viewing angle was narrower on the SS than on the Grayhawk. Also, with the room lights on the SS was much darker to begin with than the GH.


----------



## ddog

Very nice review and nicely put!


Ddog!!


----------



## ddog

Oh!! I forgot to say that whiter Whites and good saturated color are great!


But dark detailed inky blacks are a must have in my book!!


Ddog!!


----------



## Rob Tomlin




> Quote:
> But dark detailed inky blacks are a must have in my book!!



How can "dark inky blacks" be "detailed"??


----------



## jspielberg

Ink can't be detailled ?









j/k... I get what you mean. . .


----------



## Daniel Hutnicki

I think Vutec is working overtime these days but I am sure they are up to it.


Just one more thing


tick tock


tick tock


----------



## Free

Got my SS.


Will post tomorrow.


Must sleep now........


----------



## Rob Tomlin

Screw sleep.


Give us your review _now_!!!


----------



## Big Picture

astrojeff,


I also have the Sony 10HT and a 120" diagonal 16:9 Grayhawk and was very interested in the SilverStar until I read your report.


The Grayhawk is not bright enough to suit me and it turns whites to gray. I have done an Avia calbration. I have not done a SMART calibration because I'm concerned about losing even more brightness.


----------



## Michael Grant

Big Picture,

I hate to say it but there is just no way to increase the brightness of your setup without also raising the black level as well. If you're that concerned about the black level, maybe you need to get a screen that has _barely_ enough gain to boost your whites to a suitable level. Perhaps the Firehawk will be sufficient...


----------



## astrojeff

Big Picture,



A 120" screen is too large for that projector. With my 110" Grayhawk I could get only 12.3 ft/L with a new bulb after the SMART calibration using the CC filter. The literature stated that there would be approx. 10% loss in brightness with the filter. With my old bulb which had ~500 hours I was only getting 6.8ft L ! which of course was dismal. However I did increase my CR from 139 to 308. Although I would like a screen with at least 20fL, I'm not going to get it with this projector. I could get it with the SS, but at a big sacrifice in black level. Fortunately I have a dedicated theater with no ambient light, so the the PQ is not too bad now. When I get a new projector which is much brighter I would also like to increase the screen size. I then may be able to go with a screen with some gain if the CR is satisfactory.


If you have an old bulb in your projector you should definitely consider changing it -- at least test the light output. It would be nice if the manufacturers were honest about their specifications. My projector outputs only 465 lumens with my set up at 6500K (with a new bulb).


Jeff


----------



## Free

OK. After spending a day with a 107x60 Silverstar here are my thoughts:


First the good:

The screen is bright

It looks very nice, the frame is beautiful (I got the deluxe version).

Colors are vibrant and pop off the screen, it makes my SX21 look like a giant plasma screen.

Black level is not really too bad with this screen even though it is bright.

The grey substrate helps and is virtually identical to the Firehawk. I measured an identical color shift towards red that I measure with my Firehawk.


Now the Bad:

This screen is VERY revealing. You will see every defect of your projector and every defect of your source. Compression artifacts become quite obvious on DVD's. I had to reduce Gamma on my SX21 significantly to mask the noise I was seeing. I am crushing black a bit in the process.


The screen gives things a gritty look. I would say that the picture with my Firehawk is creamy and the SS is more grainy. In very bright scenes you can see some sparkling of the surface material that can be distracting.


I fired up my HT300 and was surprised how good it looked on the SS. I was expecting it to make DLP look bad but it really didn't. In fact, I think I liked it better than my SX21 on this screen. It may just be that the HT300 is the right balance of brightness for this gain to my eye. The SX21 is a little over the top in brightness with this much gain. In fact after viewing my HT300 on the SS, I was sorry to see it go, since I sold it today.


Overall, I would say that this is a very nice screen for the right projector. I never thought that it could be to bright but it may be for certain source material. There is a lot hidden in the shadows of a DVD that you might not want to see


----------



## darinp

Phil,


I know this is unrelated to screens, but I've been following a few of your posts and it sounds like you are approaching the point of trading in the D-ILA for a DLP. Am I warm? I know you just sold the DLP, but it seems like you are heading the projector change direction.


Maybe a newer DLP (like Sharp 10000) with this screen would be a better fit for you than the SX21.


I just got a 10000 last night (might go to a friend, though). I'll be showing it on my Hi-Power along with my M20 D-ILA to some people tomorrow night. One of the first things I noticed is that my M20 has gotten really dim after about 260 hours. I'm not complaining much, because on the Hi-Power I think it looks good, but I think it has probably lost more than half its original brightness (could even be 3/4ths). The 10000 actually looked brighter. I could always get a new bulb for the D-ILA and turn the power to it down 10% to get it at a reasonable point and save the bulb.


I think the M20 was actually too bright for even my 116" wide Hi-Power with a new bulb. It was giving me a headache at times. It wouldn't surprise me if the SX21 with the SilverStar had the same effect.


So, what are your plans? You could use a neutral density filter to get your brightness down to a reasonable level when the lights are out and then go with the bright images for lights on viewing.


With good HD I imagine you don't see artifacts too much, but the sheen on bright images concerned me.


--Darin


----------



## Free

Yeah Darin, I am torn. I like the small pixels of the SX21 but it is not user friendly and could use a real boost in the contrast department.


I am trying to hold out until this fall to see what comes out at CEDIA, but I don't know if I can wait that long.


I tried a CC10R today and adjusted for the color shift. I am not sure I liked it. The more things I put in front of the lens, first a panamorph, then a filter, just has to adversely affect the picture. Each layer in front of the lens gets dust on it and the end result is not as clean and clear as a simple set up.


----------



## Rob Tomlin




> Quote:
> This screen is VERY revealing. You will see every defect of your projector and every defect of your source. Compression artifacts become quite obvious on DVD's. I had to reduce Gamma on my SX21 significantly to mask the noise I was seeing. I am crushing black a bit in the process.
> 
> 
> The screen gives things a gritty look. I would say that the picture with my Firehawk is creamy and the SS is more grainy. In very bright scenes you can see some sparkling of the surface material that can be distracting.



So, Phil, would you say that the negatives of the SilverStar outweigh the positives?


I guess it would be more appropriate to ask it a different way:


1) Would the negatives outweigh the positives when using the JVC SX21?


2) Would the negatives outweigh the positives when using the HT300?


Are you keeping the Firehawk or SilverStar? Or both?


----------



## Free

I am not committed yet, I need more time. I believe I have the SX21 dialed in and the picture looks very good. Actually, the SS has forced me to improve my picture because there were some things that I didn't see with the firehawk.


I like the brightness when it is a clean picture. If it is a bad DVD or other inferior source, the brightness is not such a good thing.


I would say that, at this point the positives outweigh the negatives for both projectors. I will keep both screens for now and see what projectors come out this fall. If I end up getting something really bright, I won't need the SilverStar. If on the other hand it is still necessary to have a lower Lumen projector to get the highest contrast ratio, the Silverstar will still be needed.


----------



## Free

Let me just add that I think 500-600 calibrated lumens, which I estimate I am getting from my SX21, is right at the point of being almost too bright for this screen. Any more than that and you better be watching only High Def and only if you don't mind seeing the sparkly coating they apply to the face of the screen.


----------



## Free

Well..I spent the day watching HDTV on this screen and I can say that I have a new appreciation for a high definition source. I watched ATOC on HBO and, although it was zoomed, it was very clean and looked stunning on this screen. In comparison to the DVD the absence of artifacts was very apparent on the SS. I never noticed the artifacts on the ATOC DVD until I viewed it on this screen.


I watched the Soprano's and it looked the best it ever has. I also popped in a few D-Theater tapes and they looked very good as well. I had hoped that the SS would compensate for the darkest scenes on D-Theater but they still looked too dim to me. I don't know what the deal is with D-theater but it always looks dim compared to the same movie on DVD.


With Silverstar, Source is EVERYTHING!


----------



## Rob Tomlin




> Quote:
> I never noticed the artifacts on the ATOC DVD until I viewed it on this screen.



If you are seeing artifacts on this reference DVD with this screen, this is _not_ a good thing!


I'm not so sure that having brighter colors and improved shadow detail is worth it if it comes at the cost of showing the slightest artifacts on DVD (as well as brighter blacks).


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Free_
> *I watched the Soprano's and it looked the best it ever has. I also popped in a few D-Theater tapes and they looked very good as well. I had hoped that the SS would compensate for the darkest scenes on D-Theater but they still looked too dim to me. I don't know what the deal is with D-theater but it always looks dim compared to the same movie on DVD.
> *



Phil,


If you are running D-Theater tapes into the component input, then that could be a big difference. Are you using a transcoder or scaler for D-Theater stuff? I've found that HD on my M20 D-ILA often looks better than D-Theater stuff, just because I was running into the component inputs. I just got a transcoder and I think that helped, but the computer still does the best job of scaling and stuff.


--Darin


----------



## Free

Darin, the component input on the SX21 is fine and looks bright with DVD. D-Theater IMO is just dim. Bright scenes look great but dark scenes are really dark. I have heard others on this forum mention the same thing.


I have been thinking about a way to compensate for the artifacts I am seeing with this screen. I am assuming that it is because of the brightness that I am seeing them. I think that I should have a different brightness for each source material. SD-Satelite-Dim, DVD-Med-Bright, HD-Full-Bright. I am trying to figure out the best way to do this.


If I use an ND-Filter, it would be cumbersome to switch. I have a lot of control over picture settings with my H3D card and I am wondering what would be the best way to electronically simulate an ND-Filter. Would just turning down the Contrast be the same? I don't think so but I would like some advice on this. I can adjust Gamma, Chip Contrast, LUT settings, Even a Video Graphic Equalizer in the H3D Menu. I wonder what combination of settings would best represent an ND filter while preserving picture quality. I may post this question in the projector forum.


----------



## Dan Miller

The problem might be a black level setup problem.


I have seen a number of devices that output 7.5IRE for black when it should be 0 or vice versa.


The only method (if you are lucky) is to compensate the other products in your stack that might correspond to the same input.


For example, in my setup, my progressive output from my replay TV box has the black too dark. But since I share the output with the one from my DVD player, I can fix it by resetting the Black Setup in the DVD to the wrong setting, making it too dark, and then recalibrating the display.


Not perfect, but at least I don't have to keep recalibrating on the fly.


DM


----------



## Tryg

Ok I watched AOTC last night and turned off my "enjoy the show" brain and started nitpicking the screen and my setup. I came to a couple of conclusions.


1. This screen will definetaly perform its best with the higher CR and dimmer DLP projectors. The HD2's should be a great match.


2. I finally noticed the sheen that darinp talks about and I think its just a very subtle form of hotspotting as I can only see it directly between me and the projector and only in bright scenes. Mid or dark scenes I cant ever see it. Also I think it may be a function of the CR of your projector. Lower CR will exacerbate it, higher CR will eleviate it.


These are just theories but for the first time last night I was wanting a higher contrast projector. The screen is very revealing on the limitations of your setup. Maybe it was the source material


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Free_
> *If I use an ND-Filter, it would be cumbersome to switch. I have a lot of control over picture settings with my H3D card and I am wondering what would be the best way to electronically simulate an ND-Filter. Would just turning down the Contrast be the same? I don't think so but I would like some advice on this. I can adjust Gamma, Chip Contrast, LUT settings, Even a Video Graphic Equalizer in the H3D Menu. I wonder what combination of settings would best represent an ND filter while preserving picture quality. I may post this question in the projector forum.*



Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure there isn't any way to electronically simulate a ND filter. The reason is that your projector can only go so low for black level and reducing the contrast will leave you black levels the same, but reduce your whites. So, that will kill your CR. With a real filter you will reduce both blacks and whites without killing the CR.


One thing I think I've noticed is that at times I think the blacks aren't right, but in actuallity it is just that they are getting crushed. Once they aren't crushed and I'm seeing good shadow detail the black levels don't bother me nearly as much.


--Darin


----------



## scottyb

Hey Darin, now that you've had it for a bit, which do you like better, the Firehawk or the Hipower?? Thanks.


Scott


----------



## Rob Tomlin




> Quote:
> 1. This screen will definetaly perform its best with the higher CR and dimmer DLP projectors. The HD2's should be a great match.





> Quote:
> The screen is very revealing on the limitations of your setup. Maybe it was the source material
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )



Tryg-


You say that the HD2 DLP's would be a "great match". However, you have also stated the screen is very revealing of limitations in setup and source material, including artifacts.


If you are using a D-ILA with this screen, which is one of the smoothest, cleanest pj's out there, and you are seeing artifacts with it, wouldn't the artifacts be even worse with a DLP (even the HD2's)?


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by scottyb_
> *Hey Darin, now that you've had it for a bit, which do you like better, the Firehawk or the Hipower?? Thanks.
> 
> 
> Scott*



Hi Scott,


I do like the Firehawk for my theater room. I still think the Hi-Power is the best fit for my living room with the big screen and white walls. For my theater room I like the Firehawk a lot more than the HCMW, since I don't see the sheen and see less rainbows. I just picked up a Sharp 10000 a few days ago and so I should be able to us the Hi-Power with it, since it has lens shift. I haven't really tried it out much on the Firehawk, though. A couple of people last night tried and it said that the HT1000 was brighter. Since I like bright images I might end up using the Hi-Power more at 92" wide if I keep the 10000, but I'll just have to see. I did try the 10000 in my bedroom with my portable 67" wide Hi-Power and it worked great. It was nice to just kick back in bed and watch a movie. If I end up keeping the 10000 I might get a small Firehawk for my room, since I don't need a lot of brightness and the angle isn't the best for the Hi-Power.


Still not sure what I am going to do on the projector front. My friend and his wife are going to decide if they are going to take the 10000, since I offered it to him when I found the deal. If not, I'm currently leaning toward selling both my HT1000 and M20 D-ILA and keeping the 10000 for a few months. I think the D-ILA looks a little better on my big screen, but the 10000 throw works a little better, it is more versatile and I could use it in all my setups. I would be looking at getting an LCOS based projector later, since I'm a fan of the smoother images on those. I hope Alan's little tease is about a 16:9 LCOS.


--Darin


----------



## kbmyers

I hate to ask this question because it is sounds just like 8,000 others, but would the SS be a good matchup for a Virtuoso? Here are the particulars:


Light controlled room (but walls and ceiling are still white)

Ceiling mounted PJ

96" wide screen, 13' viewing distance (1.625 viewing ratio)

CR ~2000:1

Lumens ~600

Primary source material will be DVDs from an HTPC via optical DVI cable

Viewing cone is not critical as only two people use the room 90% of the time.


I'm concerned because I might be a little too close to the screen and it might be a little too bright with the white walls considering the light output of the Virtuoso. Any suggestions?


Thanks,

Kent


----------



## nypd253

what's the best screen for HT1000?


----------



## jkirk

I apologize if this has been referenced before. What are typical lumen output values for direct view tv? plasma? as compared to SS or highpower. I realize we would need to compare the same scene shown on each, perhaps a light, medium and dark scene. This would help provide a qualitative comparison of the various screens we're talking about.


Thanks,


John


----------



## rogo

I think the sheen is in the material, Tryg, not a form of hotspotting. It's pretty minor sheen, imho. (Observations based only on sample)


----------



## mrmucko

I'm very interested in the SilverStar.

I'm getting an Epson TW100 (and a Bravo D1!) very soon.


The PJ will be 10' from the screen and tabletop mounted in a modified audio cabinet. My head is actually below the lens of the PJ when viewing. I sit about 12' back just to the side of the cabinet which is screen center.

I'm considering the 48 x 85 SilverStar.


I seem to be out of the view cone when I use my little piece of Da-Lite Hi Power sample. I think the problem is that I sit too far below the PJ lens.

I would guess maybe 5-10" below the lens. My room really only allows this kind of setup.


So my question is...will the SilverStar work for me?


EDIT: My impression now (changes daily) is that my setup will be too bright for the SilverStar. The PJ will just be too close to the screen. The angular reflective nature of the screen will bounce light off my white ceiling like crazy!


----------



## kraigk

Free / Phil and Tryg.



> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Free_
> *Let me just add that I think 500-600 calibrated lumens, which I estimate I am getting from my SX21, is right at the point of being almost too bright for this screen. Any more than that and you better be watching only High Def and only if you don't mind seeing the sparkly coating they apply to the face of the screen.*



I'm trying to make some sense of all this.


Phil - you estimate 500-600 lumens to be appropriate for the SS. The Dwin TV3 is rated at 1200. Shave off 30% of stated lumens and you've still got 800. Too bright? Will it cause sunburn?


Tryg - you think the HD2 projectors would be a great match, which the TV3 is, but is it too bright? It does have a stated CR of 2000.


You see my dilemma?


thanks,


----------



## Free

A calibrated TV3 is probably a lot closer to 600 lumens.


----------



## Tryg




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by kraigk_
> *
> 
> Tryg - you think the HD2 projectors would be a great match, which the TV3 is, but is it too bright? It does have a stated CR of 2000.
> 
> 
> You see my dilemma?
> *



No, I don't see the dilemna. It would probably look great.


mrmucko,

brightness isn't a function of how close yor projector is. It has to do with how much you spread those photons out (screen size). If your projector is close you may need the wider viewing angle of the SS if you have a larger screen.


Jkirk,

direct view CRTs are about 50 foot lamberts


Rogo,

yes, but hotspotting is created by visable reflection off the surface material.


I can't really comment on projectors with REAL lumen output above 700. So any projector that is rated 1000 lumens or less you should be safe. get the biggest screen you can










The real question is....will we see any competition from other manufacturers in the silver department?


----------



## Free

If I had a TV3 and liked a really bright picture, I would probably go for it. The CR will certainly help and you could always dim it down a bit with an ND filter.


I would be more concerned about your source material. If you are not feeding it a very clean source, you will see everything at that level of brightness.


----------



## David600

hi guys

has anyone experimented a 1.4gain screen, like the one used by Greg on Widescreenreview ? He used it for the Z10000 for instance.

this gain combined with the ISCO gives about 60-65% gain in image brigthness (40%+27%).

For instance, I could get t17FTL which is higher the SMPTE rec on a 3.5m scope screen, and it would need 680 ansi from the Z10000.


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by mrmucko_
> *I seem to be out of the view cone when I use my little piece of Da-Lite Hi Power sample. I think the problem is that I sit too far below the PJ lens.
> 
> I would guess maybe 5-10" below the lens. My room really only allows this kind of setup.*



That distance should put you right in the sweet spot vertically. Maybe you are out of the viewing cone horizontally, though. I think the real gain is somewhere within about 12.5 degrees of the lens. It does sound like the Hi-Power might be a good fit for you, especially at the prices for those.


--Darin


----------



## rogo

Tryg, I hear you on the hotspot. I just happen to have a huge one with my temporary screen and it disappears when I put the SS sample in the way of it. FWIW,


----------



## VideoGrabber

kbmyers wrote:

> 96" wide screen, 13' viewing distance (1.625 viewing ratio)... I'm concerned because I might be a little too close to the screen...


----------



## David600

anyone tried a slightly curved screen (non torus) here with the high gains ?


----------



## Rob Tomlin




> Quote:
> 1. This screen will definetaly perform its best with the higher CR and dimmer DLP projectors. The HD2's should be a great match.





> Quote:
> The screen is very revealing on the limitations of your setup. Maybe it was the source material
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )



Tryg-


You say that the HD2 DLP's would be a "great match". However, you have also stated the screen is very revealing of limitations in setup and source material, including artifacts.


If you are using a D-ILA with this screen, which is one of the smoothest, cleanest pj's out there, and you are seeing artifacts with it, wouldn't the artifacts be even worse with a DLP (even the HD2's)?


I haven't had a direct response to the above, which I originally posted on the previous page, but I have been trying to answer this question myself (with a little help from my friends)!


Assuming that what is being seen on the SS is, in fact, compression artifacts, this is something that is in the source itself. The SS may show these artifacts more than other (lower gain) screens. However, if the artifacts are still there in the source, wouldn't it be correct to state that these other screens are actually "hiding" these artifacts? Or, better stated, they aren't _showing_ the artifacts?


If so, I don't think it is possible for a screen to _only_ hide artifacts. So, if the screen is in fact hiding artifacts, we can only wonder what else it is hiding, (or failing to show us) right?


In this case, it appears these other screens may be hiding (failing to show) shadow detail, whiter whites, and brighter colors that really pop.


Regarding black levels...I have little doubt that this screen will raise black levels to an extent. That being said, I will be using a Dwin TV3, which rivals the best black levels that I have seen from a digital projector, which correlates with very good contrast. From this standpoint, this pj should be an even better fit with the SS than Tryg's current D-ILA.


I am now of the opinion that I would rather see everything that there is to see in the original source material, even if that includes more noticeable artifacts, than to have the screen fail to show me things such as shadow detail, brighter colors etc.


Completely open to comments regarding the above!


----------



## Free

There is no Free Lunch










I hung my SS behind my retractible Firehawk and brought the Firehawk down half way. I watched ATOC and looked for artifacts, black level etc. The black level is definately raised in the dark scenes it is obvious. Where this screen excels is when there is light in the scene it pops to life. Watching the chase scene in ATOC where there are lots of city lights they are vivid on the SS while the Firehawk they are muted.


Also, if you watch the scene in the second chapter when they are all meeting in the chancellors office. The red wall behind them has significant crawlies on the SS that are barely noticeable on the Firehawk. Of course in the HD version of ATOC those crawlies are completely absent.


I didn't get to watch my HT300 fully fill the screen on the SS before I sold it so I can't be sure that the DLP artifacts were not visible. I do think it looked good anyway and I think that a HD2 would be an even better match with the SS due to the contrast ratio. If you are noticeing too many noisy elements you could just use an ND filter and dim it down a bit and that should take care of it.


No one can guarantee that you will like the SS with the Dwin. This is still too new to be sure.


----------



## Michael Grant




> Quote:
> If you are noticeing too many noisy elements you could just use an ND filter and dim it down a bit and that should take care of it.



Back at CES I spoke with a sales rep from VuTec, and he said that he felt that the SS is a _great_ choice for projectors with a "low power" mode that reduces the bulb brightness. The gain of a SilverStar gives you that brightness back, and your bulb life goes way up.


So anyway, an ND filter sounds like another good idea---use it when you have good light control, take it off when you want to watch the Superbowl in some mild ambient light so you can find your beer. Of course, this won't help your increase your bulb life, but at least you'll be able to bring those black levels down to reasonable levels.


(IMPORTANT: do _not_ simply crank down the brightness setting of the projector---this will end up reducing your contrast level.)


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Rob Tomlin_
> *In this case, it appears these other screens may be hiding (failing to show) shadow detail, whiter whites, and brighter colors that really pop.
> *



Maybe we should think of the Grayhawk as makeup for digital projectors and the Firehawk as makeup for both the projectors and less than perfect rooms. The SS would be sans-makeup and a bright light shining.


> Quote:
> *I am now of the opinion that I would rather see everything that there is to see in the original source material, even if that includes more noticeable artifacts, than to have the screen fail to show me things such as shadow detail, brighter colors etc.
> *



I've gone back and forth. I'm currently more in the reducing artifacts and making the images look less digital camp, unless I'm running really clean sources. Although I like to see the details I've also gotten to the point where some of the artifacts distract me.


Now, I would rather date somebody who didn't need makeup, but if they need it, then I guess the question is whether it is better if they use it or not. A lot of projectors/sources can be improved with makeup where others can just go free.


--Darin


----------



## Rob Hufstetler

Tryg,


From your review I am now second guessing myself. I was hooked, line, and sinker on the silver plan and am about to start the project. As I read this I am concerned as I have a "junk" projector. I got this hand-me-down nView Luminator projector from my brother who upgraded recently. This is my first attempt at front projection. This projector is only rated at 640X480. So the question here is, would I be better off with white, gray, or silver, given the "feed it junk, get junk, feed it with a decent picture it will sing" using the nView projector?


I'd like to break into this with the best results possible as I have a doubting Thomas wife. I am coming from a 52" rear project. She is dragging her feet going into the unknown.


Thanks for all your reviews... It really is helping me get a feel for where I am headed. Or Not... ;-)


Rob


----------



## Rob Tomlin




> Quote:
> Maybe we should think of the Grayhawk as makeup for digital projectors and the Firehawk as makeup for both the projectors and less than perfect rooms. The SS would be sans-makeup and a bright light shining.



Good analogy Darin.


Where would a 1.3 gain white screen fit in? Perhaps a little makeup, but not much?


----------



## geocab









These last few posts are making me second guess my purchase! And the wait is even more difficult!


Is this a good screen or not?!


Ok, rant over. It's gotta look way better than my white bedsheet, right?

George


----------



## ddog

Right!, it's gonna look way better than your white bedsheet!


Ddog!!


----------



## Free




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by geocab_
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> These last few posts are making me second guess my purchase! And the wait is even more difficult!
> 
> 
> Is this a good screen or not?!
> 
> 
> Ok, rant over. It's gotta look way better than my white bedsheet, right?
> 
> George*



Remember, you are hearing from VERY picky people here










I watched a movie last night with my wife and I asked her, "So what do you think of the new screen? doesn't it look different than our firehawk" and she said "I can't tell any difference"!!


----------



## rogo

And it could last for years and years and years.


----------



## Daniel Hutnicki

Ok, I have had it with Rob Tomlin, if he hasnt decided what screen to buy between now and June 30, I will literally order a SS from Vutec and pay for it myself












On second thought, forget it


----------



## Gordon Groff




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by darinp_
> *Maybe we should think of the Grayhawk as makeup for digital projectors and the Firehawk as makeup for both the projectors and less than perfect rooms. The SS would be sans-makeup and a bright light shining.
> 
> 
> I've gone back and forth. I'm currently more in the reducing artifacts and making the images look less digital camp, unless I'm running really clean sources. Although I like to see the details I've also gotten to the point where some of the artifacts distract me.
> 
> 
> Now, I would rather date somebody who didn't need makeup, but if they need it, then I guess the question is whether it is better if they use it or not. A lot of projectors/sources can be improved with makeup where others can just go free.
> 
> 
> --Darin*



Fun analogy, Darin!

But, I'm not sure it's quite so. My big concern was FPN I was seeing as verticle lines on light and flesh-toned scenes with my PLV-70 onto a DaLite HCMW screen. I'm making my way up the "upgrade/tweak" path on my system to address that and have finally got it where I want it! First upgrade was to the Bravo D1 DVI output to my PJ. Huge improvement over my Pann RP-82. After big adjustments to contrast/brighness per Avia, the image got so deep, detailed and vibrant that I stopped noticing them. They were still there, but not as obvious with the rest of the image "popping" out the way it was.

Second upgrade just happened when I replaced my DaLite HCMW screen w/ their HiPower. Wow! Talk about a BRIGHT image!! After another Avia tweak, getting the blacks, contrast, and gamma where they belong, double-WOW! I honestly cannot see ANY of those lines or screendoor any more.







Oh-yeah, video HEAVEN!! Once again, I find myself drug reluctantly further into JHouse's camp. There is no such thing as "too bright". Your eyes adjust to ANY overall brightness level. It's the dynamic range (using an audio analogy) that's important. For instance, in Monster's Inc. when the factory's ceiling shutters fly open to admit the CDA, the sunlight is so bright, it almost makes me squint, which is as it should be if full daylight was suddenly spilled into a factory. Likewise, I am geting a LOT of detail on dark scenes that we never noticed before. Blacks look good to me. On Avia, I can get them wherever I want, but bear in mind I'm a relative newbie and never worked with a really hi-contrast (over 1000:1) PJ.


So, I guess the moral of the story is that a hi-gain screen does not have to be more revealing of artifacts after calibration. Another thing I believe is important is to reset contrast/brightness/gamma to match the screen to see what it is truly capable of. This will be tough with samples.


Speaking of samples, I got one of the Silver Star! I hope to be able to spend some time looking at it in the next couple days. Jeff, are you on this thread? Maybe it's time to get together and throw up your grayhawk and firehawk samples again w/ my HiPower and SS sample?


Gordon


----------



## KBMAN

I have a greyhawk in my demo room, and although it's a nice screen, it does show the "sparkles" that really bug me. Does the SS exibit more or less sparkles than the greyhawk? This is the only thing holding me back from buying.


----------



## metallicafreak

Question I need answered in the next 1 hour.

Ambient light and SS. What is the verdict? If my room has blackout shades on all 4 windows only allowing a small amount of light around some edges and light colored walls, will daytime viewing be ok?

FREAK!


----------



## brothermaynard

Metallicafreak, how many lumens is the projector and what size screen?


----------



## metallicafreak

It will be the Dwin TV3:

1200 lumens

2000 contrast

FREAK!


----------



## scottyb

KBMAN,


I have a Grayhawk and don't see sparklies, but I saw them on my Silverstar sample. Call Jason and get a Dalite hi-power to pull down in front of the Grayhawk, if it works in your room.


S


----------



## darinp




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Gordon Groff_
> *So, I guess the moral of the story is that a hi-gain screen does not have to be more revealing of artifacts after calibration.*



Hi Gordon,


Glad to see that you have found a combination you are happy with. Even though the Hi-Power is high gain, my feeling is that is doesn't bring out extra artifacts like some other screens. The HCMW is one of my least favorite screens right now and I think the one I have shows sheen and brings these artifacts out. The Hi-Power is the one screen that seems to be invisible to me. That is, the screen surface never shows up. I also feel that the Firehawk does a much better job in this department than the HCMW and in my short experience with these screens at Tryg's place I felt that the Firehawk was also much better in this department than the SilverStar.


As far as having too much brightness, I know there are some people around here who feel that way and some others that don't. When I first got my M20 D-ILA and set it up on my 116" wide Hi-Power the brightness seemed to give me headaches and I've been a fan of bright images. Since calibration etc. it has probably lost 75% of its brightness and for most stuff I prefer it now. I may end up buying a new bulb that I can swap out for some things, though. Monsters, Inc is one where I would probably use the new bulb.


One concern I have is that someone posted that above 50 ft-lamberts your eye adjusts and you don't see the extra brightness. If this is true the going from 50 ft-l to 100 ft-l with a screen will not make your whites look any brighter to you, but will make the blacks look brighter in very dark scenes. In brighter scenes blacks look black on most of these projectors anyway. It is movies like "Dark City" where many are bothered by the high black levels. Even if the 50 ft-l cutoff is true, then raising to 100 ft-l will make your images look brighter when the brightest object is at 50%, though.


I know you liked your projector on the GrayHawk one time. I bet if you had an easy change system with a GrayHawk and a Hi-Power that you would end up using each screen some of the time. I think Stewart needs to make a wall mount screen with a gray one on one side and a higher gain one on the other. Or maybe just one where there is one fixed screen and then a different screen material inside that which could be pulled down in front.


When I switched from my Hi-Power to my Firehawk the other night with my Sharp 10000 I almost instantly noticed more depth to the images.


--Darin


----------



## Gordon Groff




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by darinp_
> *
> 
> I know you liked your projector on the GrayHawk one time. I bet if you had an easy change system with a GrayHawk and a Hi-Power that you would end up using each screen some of the time. I think Stewart needs to make a wall mount screen with a gray one on one side and a higher gain one on the other. Or maybe just one where there is one fixed screen and then a different screen material inside that which could be pulled down in front.
> 
> 
> When I switched from my Hi-Power to my Firehawk the other night with my Sharp 10000 I almost instantly noticed more depth to the images.
> 
> 
> --Darin*



Hi Darin!

I've been following your posts with great interest for a while now. You have a depth of hands-on experience that I can only dream about. Two GREAT PJ's and multiple screens to view them on! Wow!


Wouldn't it be great to have an in-ceiling screen dispenser that you could choose from 2-3 different ones? I tell you, that is probably the only way to do a real comparison! I've been able to discern nothing concrete from samples so far.


I WAS blown away by the Grayhawk screen at a dealer who let me set up MY PJ at his place. It was the first time I saw how good our PLV-70 could look. Talk about a deep, rich image! NO FPN! I would LOVE to have a full one here to complement the High Power. My visual memory is not great, but if I had to characterize it did seem to have more "depth" than what we have now.


I don't think it will happen, simply because we are SO pleased with the High Power, I could not begin to justify the upcharge to switch. I still can't get over the improvement from HCMW. We (well, actually my wife) like to watch with a fairly high level of ambient light and it seems to work well.


I would LOVE to see your setup with a DILA AND a H2 DLP !!


Very cool!


----------



## rogo

Vutec makes a "twin screen" where two different materials can be pulled down in the same plane (so the focus doesn't change. I'm not sure which of their materials can be used, and I'm sure it's not cheap.


----------



## Rob Tomlin

What the heck, it's only money!


----------



## Mfusick




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by rogo_
> *I don't know if Tryg's pix would be meaingless in a vaccuum. But when combined with his prose, they tell not just 1,000 words, but 10,000. You can see -- even if compressed JPEGs sent through the net -- what he is saying with ease.
> 
> 
> In fact, while he is not sitting there with instruments -- an exercise I often find entirely useless in magazines -- he is telling us what is good and not-so good about a product.
> 
> *



Your thoughts echo mine.


His explanation is very good, and based on real world observations and personal results. His conclusions are easily readible and understood. By no means does he pretend to be the end all of it either.... rather a single experience and conclusion based on his own findings.


His screen shots were amazing, and I very much enjoyed reading this entire thread.


Thanks Tryg!


----------



## Mfusick




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by rogo_
> *
> 
> 
> [Note: I was days away from ordering a High Power 3 weeks ago.]*



What screen did you buy?

What projector do you have?

Do you like it?


----------



## rogo

Mfusick: I have a Sanyo Z1 -- a very nice "first projector" for me.


I bought a Silverstar for eventual use.


I will likely also make a samll screen that might go in the bedroom someday out of Vutec Pearlbrite or something like that. I need a temporary screen because -- as noted elsewhere -- the SS might not be set up for awhile.


Mark


----------



## Joe Przybylski

Hi all,


I have a 10X20 foot room with a 83"x4ft" screen that is currently painted with a DIY mixture (pretty good stuff, see http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...readid=267756. 


I'm a real perfectionist, though. I really want more black levels out of this screen but HATE HOTSPOTTING. I HATE IT.


Here are my specs -- can anyone recommend a screen to me that will suit my needs?


ROOM: 10X20

SCREEN: 83" X 4ft.

PROJECTOR: Panasonic L300U Ceiling mounted

SEATING FROM SCREEN: 11 feet front row, 16 feet back row

AMBIENT LIGHT: NONE (Dedicated Home Theater)


Also, I don't know if it's the position of the projector and the screen, but HotSpotting is a major problem for me, so please recommend something that will not hotspot... I also HATE sparklies. They irritate me... Am I longing for a screen that doesn't exist??


HELP!!!


----------



## storminorm

anyone have a SIM 300+ and a siver star set up. I'd be interested in how the 300+ does with this screen since one of the complaints is that this projector is dim. I think some use the High Gain for the 300+, i'm not sure.


----------



## Free

I looked at my HT300 (briefly before I sold it) on my Silverstar and thought it looked very good. I had the 300HD not the plus. The brightness issue I had with it was compensated for nicely by the Silverstar.


----------



## Mfusick




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by rogo_
> *Mfusick: I have a Sanyo Z1 -- a very nice "first projector" for me.
> 
> 
> I bought a Silverstar for eventual use.
> 
> 
> as noted elsewhere -- the SS might not be set up for awhile.
> *



Why have you not used this?


Have you tried it? And, what where your thoughts and impressions?


----------



## rogo

I don't have it yet.


----------



## Jay Mitchosky

Not having the time read over all 22 pages of posts (wow!) I am interested in knowing if anyone has actually recalibrated their projectors when comparing different screens.


----------



## buns

Again i dont have time to read through all this, but if silver is so good, then the ultimate screen is merely a mirror.


Ad


----------



## Rob Tomlin




----------



## Gordon Groff




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Jay Mitchosky_
> *Not having the time read over all 22 pages of posts (wow!) I am interested in knowing if anyone has actually recalibrated their projectors when comparing different screens.*



This is an excellent point, Jay. I know that when I changed from HCMW to High Power, it required recalibration. After that, I thought the blacks were as good or better than the "gray" screen gave me (although I know it's really all just relative). Before calibration, not nearly as impressive. This alone makes screen sample comparisons really, really tough!


Gordon


----------



## brothermaynard




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by buns_
> *Again i dont have time to read through all this, but if silver is so good, then the ultimate screen is merely a mirror.
> 
> 
> Ad*




Don't just talk about it, give it a shot! Please report back your opinions of the mirror.


----------



## rogo

Yeah, it turns out a $20 mirror from _Tar-Zhay_ blows away every screen on the market....


Not.


----------



## WanMan




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Gordon Groff_
> *This is an excellent point, Jay. I know that when I changed from HCMW to High Power, it required recalibration. After that, I thought the blacks were as good or better than the "gray" screen gave me (although I know it's really all just relative). Before calibration, not nearly as impressive. This alone makes screen sample comparisons really, really tough!
> 
> Gordon*



Are we talking absolute black levels or perceived blacks when you switched to the high-power?


----------



## Gordon Groff




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by WanMan_
> *Are we talking absolute black levels or perceived blacks when you switched to the high-power?*



That's a tough question to answer because I do not have a light meter. If I had to make an honest guess, I'd say percieved, NOT absolute.


After replacing my HCMW with High Power and calibrating my PJ to it, the blacks and contrast seemed significantly better, but I think it is due to the greater brightness of the screen giving a larger range of brightness, if that makes sense. I'm NOT one of the experts here about this stuff, so I'm just trying to put into words what I think I see. I was able to significantly change the brightness/contrast settings of my PJ with this screen. My PLV-70 onto this screen is SO bright that the blacks look positively inky when imbedded in an image. Check out the Moulon Rouge screenshots in my sig file link. They show the black levels pretty well - even though the photos are not very good. If I do a full screen of black, however, it is obviously not black, but gray. Consider this- if you turn your PJ off, what color is your screen? That's the "black" you are seeing - best case, like with a CRT PJ. With a LCD or even DLP, the absolute blacks are even less black than the "PJ off" black. After these experiences, I'm moving strongly into the "brighter is better" camp because it's all relative. The brighter your brights and the better your contrast, the blacker your blacks look, even if they are not.


Sorry for this ramble, but this is a concept I've been mulling over for a while!


Gordon


----------



## Rob Hufstetler

I have just begun the front project arena. I was counseled by TRYG to start with with a white screen. (Good Advise I think, here's why) Just so you all can relate I have and OLD 640X480 nView Luminator projector. So when I received the bulb and verified the projector worked I hung a sheet up and noticed immediately that if the picture was too big I could see the pix-elation. I had to move the projector closer till the picture size was about 6'feet by 4' and it smoothed out. (Still bigger that my 52" rear project) I thought this was VERY dim and faded looking. Since the screen size was going to end up 48" X 64" I chose to use a 1/4" fiber board with a melamine finish. This was better than the sheet but still seemed washed out. Sprayed the board with white paint and this was MUCH better! Brighter and there was a little more contrast. I painted the 2' spare piece of wood with the Rust-o-lium Aluminum paint from Home Depot and it was considerably brighter still and had even more contrast. The colors look more accurate to me. The next day I painted the whole screen Aluminum. I am so glad I started with the white so that I would have a comparison as I was sold on the Silver plan to begin with after reading this message thread. With this ancient projector, and my lack of experience with front project, I doubt this info will make any difference to most of you. It's enough to wet the appetite and motivate me to start saving for a new projector. I also have a little understanding why you need to spend the money on a commercial screen and a real projector, better source equipment. Until you play with it yourself, you don't realize what it could be. For DIY, I liked the silver vs white. Perhaps the new more powerful projectors show the "sparkles" but I don't detect any with this old one.


Rob

FWIW


----------



## kin_ng5

Gordon,


"I'm moving strongly into the "brighter is better" camp because it's all relative."


I just realized that a couple of weeks ago. Now I no longer crave the blackness anymore.


Kin


----------



## Assayer

Thanks Gordon,

This is exactly the information I have been needing to push me off of the fence that I have been sitting on for the last two months. I had picked up a high power sample and loved the colors on-axis, but felt the hit on blacks was scary compared to the white background, yet had always wondered whether moving up to a full size screen would properly bias the eye to make the gray 'blacks' look black again. I can live with a few gray low-light scenes if it gives me the amazing color saturation of the HP during the other 90% of the material I view.


----------



## Gordon Groff




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Assayer_
> *Thanks Gordon,
> 
> This is exactly the information I have been needing to push me off of the fence that I have been sitting on for the last two months. I had picked up a high power sample and loved the colors on-axis, but felt the hit on blacks was scary compared to the white background, yet had always wondered whether moving up to a full size screen would properly bias the eye to make the gray 'blacks' look black again. I can live with a few gray low-light scenes if it gives me the amazing color saturation of the HP during the other 90% of the material I view.*



That's exactly what I meant! I was worried that my posts were confusing, but you got it, Assayer. Cool!


I would love to see a full-screen, calibrated image of my PLV-70 on a Grayhawk or a Silver Star screen, but since I am more than happy with my High Power now, I don't think that will happen.


Gordon


----------



## faithfoo

Does Sanyo Z1 or Pana AE 200 works best with Grey or silver screen ?


Watching a lot of scenery scenes ( turquosie lakes, snow cap mountains , deserts )


1) can anybody point me the most value for money model & brand



2) can some body point me to a simple silver screen ( pull down ) that can somehow mask to 16 : 9 or 4: 3 when we need them


3) I think that for 16: 9 projectors ; DVD would best use 16: 9 screen

& for VHS & Tv sources , 4: 3 screen ?


----------



## MrHelpful

Great work! Too bad I'm so poor I can't even get into the projector market...


----------



## NaTeDoGG

I just spent the last 3 or so hours and read every single post on every single page in this entire thread. Wow! Some interesting discussions! I'm pretty sold on the HP as my room is very narrow so all the seating positions should be in the sweet spot. Plus it is easier on my budget.







I do have some questions though, I'd like to run it by you experts for verification. But tomorrow, because I am passing out!


----------



## iamnotmad

Does anyone else think the light areas on the Silverstar appear washed out? Namely the cat pics, or the one with the blue umbrella (the flat bright edge of that square column) There seems to be some loss of detail compared to both the gray screen and the white screen.


What's looks impressive with the silverstar to me are the nice black levels. But with the firehawk you seem to get the black levels but without being washed out in the bright areas.


Any one else see this?


----------



## mark_1080p

Really nice work, you should be paid for this. Looks like the Hipower holds its own against the Silverstar.


----------



## TeKP

I have had my silverstar screen for about 2 weeks now. Its an 80" diag 4:3 and its paired with my infocus x1.


I love the increased brightness and shadow detail. But now the picture looks "gritty". Not on all scenes, mostly on light colored scenes. The "grit" is not really patterned in anyway so I don't think it is the silverstar enchancing the screen door or anything to do with the pixels.


Its most noticable and annoying when you know what you are watching is supposed to be one solid smooth color but it seems to be flecked with tiny blue-ish purple-ish static-like bits making it look gritty. It kills the 3D effect of the picture.


Anyone else notice this or have this problem?


----------



## storminorm

Well, it took me long enough to read this thread but I am well informed PLUS I actually took my Sim2 300+ to a local HT store with 5 showrooms. They had 2 110" screens, one a Silverstar the other a Firehawk. I spent several hours watching LOTR, Panic Room, Gladiator and Star Wars and without a doubt the Silverstar looked better. There were several projectors

the one mated with the Silverstar was a Marantz S2 but I really liked the SS with my 300+. Now I can make a decision on what I know and what I've seen.


----------



## Rob Tomlin

Storminorm-


Thanks for the review. This is _exactly_ the type of direct comparison that I have been waiting for regarding the Silverstar and the Firehawk....especially with a HD DLP projector!


Could you maybe tell us in a little more detail exactly what it was about the Silverstar that made you think that it "definitely looked better"?


Thanks!


----------



## storminorm

The colors had more punch and the blacks were really black. We watched the Firehawk for over an hour and it was the first screen we viewed with my 300+. I thought it was an improvement over my Dalite HCCV but it didn't wow me, it was just ok. Then we moved to the Silverstar and I noticed right away the colors were brighter, images in all the movies were amazing to me, I hated to leave. Star Wars AOTC was stunning but its a bright movie anyway. It is my opinion that between the 2 screens I liked the Silverstar better than the Firehawk for my 300+. If I were to go out and buy a screen today, it would be the Silverstar.


----------



## Tryg

I like viewing on the Silverstar better than the Firehawk for my type of viewing (sports, movies, TV etc). It simply has more PUNCH!. My setup is for watching all types of stuff. If I had a dedicated dark home theater this question might be harder.


However, going back to a screen with less gain would certainly look dull for awhile till my brain could adjust.


Still having great fun with the SS


----------



## Robert Holloway

Tryg


This is the most awesome thread. You shame us with how thorough you are in your assessment of this stuff 


I have my new SX21 and ISCOII projecting onto a Stewart Studiotek 130 100" 16x9 screen.


My viewing is 95% DVD (Bravo DVI) and 5% Direct TV sports stuff. HBO HD is on the horizon. But DVd will remain the major source.


My room is light in color and not very well light controlled (ie it's not a black tomb!). After 7:30 it's dark


My viewing distance is just over 12 feet.


I'm already thinking of moving up to a 120 or 133' screen


To be honest I'm now completely confused as to where a DILA owner should move to re screen material. Yous SS comments seem to highlight significant pros and cons.


Any thoughts?


Thx

Rob


----------



## Free

Hi Rob, I will jump in here if you don't mind










Since I am currently using my SX21 on a 122" SilverStar, I will give you my honest assessment. I also have a Firehawk that is 129" and I can drop it down right in front of the SilverStar for a quick comparison.


I could be using either screen, but I am using the SilverStar because I prefer a very bright punchy picture.


The SX21 projects such a clean artifact free image that it really looks great on the SS but it will reveal the limitations of your source material. Even though you are using the Bravo, which is a fantastic source, you could be watching DVD's that have poor transfers. You will see the limitations of the source with this screen.


The other downside is that on really bright outdoor scenes you will see a bit of a sheen on the screen. It is not annoying to me although it does make you aware that you are viewing on a screen at those moments.


Other than those two downsides, I absolutely love the SS. Even in dark scenes where there are lights, like the lights of a city, or a space ship. The lights are very realistic and vibrant. On the Firehawk those lights are more muted.


I don't notice a significant difference in black level between the two screens. It is there but is a minor advantage of the Firehawk.


The 122" SilverStar is currently the largest size they make and I would definately go that large with the brightness of the SX21. The Firehawk would also be a fine choice if you want a smoother, more forgiving screen, with slightly more muted colors and better ambient light rejection.


----------



## Free

Rob, here is something else that might help you decide.


Right now you are used to the SX21 on your 100" diagonal Studiotek which has a gain of 1.3. My best estimation is that once the SX21 is calibrated and you are using the lens to gain the extra brightness, you are getting around 600 lumens out of it.


So... you are getting about 26fl of brightness on your current screen. How does it look?


If you go to a large screen..say 122" and went with the Firehawk material, your FL would drop to about 18. If you decided to go with the SilverStar, you would be getting at least 33fl, a significant increase. (I am basing this on a gain of at least 2.5).


So that gives you an idea of how your image might change with the larger screen and different materials.


Firehawk 18FL = more filmlike

SilverStar 33FL = more Plasmalike


----------



## darinp

Another one to consider is the High Power. It is quite a bit less money than the SS, but would need the projector fairly low to get all the gain out. With the throw and offset of the SX21 without an ISCO II I think it would be a good fit, though.


I ordered an SX21 when the special started 10 days ago, but haven't heard anything about when it will ship, so I don't know when I will get it. When I do, I will try it on my 116" wide High Power. By then I will probably have "The Two Towers" recorded on my PC in HD from Dish Network (starts Friday morning). I might make that my first film.


--Darin


----------



## Tryg

Robert,


I have one of each so I would say that Free's comments match mine. I have a white screen also that's comparable to the Studiotek130.


I guess it comes down to preferences. Ive always wanted a large bright tv. The Silverstar gives this feeling. Sure other surfaces may hide your system or source flaws more, but who cares I want to see it all. Yes, you can see a slight sheen at times on the screen surface if you look closely, but hell if you cant see the glass on a TV or a PLASMA well you're blind. Any noticable sheen from the SS is very subtle.


Hey, I'm sure there's probably some HT perfectionists that can knock the Silverstar for perfect movie viewing. I DONT CARE. I've tried to go back to my other screens and every time I get the Silverstar up front for viewing. All I can say is I'm have a ball with it. Yeeee Haww










Bring on MNF!


----------



## Rob Tomlin




> Quote:
> Still having great fun with the SS



Glad to hear it, since I will be mounting my 122.5" version late this week/weekend!


----------



## Robert Holloway

Hmmm


Thanks for the reply

Tryg - thnaks for the mention in the post on the PJ forum 


This is a very hard one as screen PJ combos are very hard to audition


it's even harder as I'm an SX21 neophyte

At the moment the image seems luminous

very bright and lacking in contrast


I'd trade some lumens for a better greyscale or contrast


I clearly need to see an SS


All that said I need to do the following:


1) get 100 hours under my belt so that i know what i'm talking about

2) get my blinds installed

3) get phelperized

4) buy mt HD direct TV setup


then i hit the screen trail


I'm also upgrading my digital camera at the moment - another project 


Rob


----------



## Tryg

Robert, taking the smart way to Home Theater building eh?


I know a lot of people that have a big wad of money in their pocket and go blow it ASAP. Those that take their time and integrate one component at a time usually are much happier with the results. Plus, It's like Chistmas all year round! The decision to buy a new component, or piece of the puzzle, is half the fun!


Nice work!


----------



## actonweber

I am about to be a newbie to HT and have spent many valuable hours perusing these forums. My dealer now says I know more than he does (probably not unusual, eh?)


The only hardware I now actually have is the Bravo D1 DVD and a kick-ass sound system leftover from my halcyon SONY 36" Trinitron days. I plan to obtain either the HS10 or HS20, depending upon how long I can wait (mainly for the WXGA and DVI.) I must have a bit of ambient light in my cellar theater which is about 15'x30' with an overhead FP mount. I will be watching about 2/3 DVD's and 1/3 HDTV.


My problem with this thread is this - I have seen almost no information relating to the Silverstar vs. Hi-Power vs. Firehawk vs HCCV as it relates to LCD FP's and the HS10 in particular. There is an overwhelming amount of info for DLP and CRT owners. One gentleman asked a similar question a few months ago and there was no response. Based upon your testing and observations, what would you do if you were me?


The best advice I have seen so far is to do one component at a time. For now, I will paint my drywall and play around with screens after I get the HS10/HS20 and Bravo D1 going!


John in Northern NY


----------



## George_Stenbeck

hey bob i have seen the sx21 in a complete light controlled environment on a greyhawk, looked like the contrast boast helped.



I also think that this silverstar screen is very impresive but i have not seen the sx21 displayed on it.


----------



## Rob Tomlin

Can anyone tell me how much the 122.5" SilverStar weighs?


I have searched this thread for the answer without success (as well as the Vutec website).


----------



## GJP831

The actual screen in itself weighs about 30-40 lbs . Crated its about 130 lbs


----------



## Mgora1

Hey Rob, Can't you get that screen put up any faster







As I have just purchased this combo as well , I can't wait to hear your reviews.

















Matthew


----------



## Mgora1

Hey Tryg,


After spending more time with the SS, can you make anymore comments regarding ambient light? I will be using the SS with a T3 in a multi-purpose room ( a bar and billiards room behind the theater seating) and want to know if any ambient light is acceptable.


Thanks,

Matthew


----------



## Rob Tomlin




> Quote:
> The actual screen in itself weighs about 30-40 lbs .



Good to know! I just wanted to be sure that if I am not able to get this into a stud that drywall anchors could work. If its that light, I'm sure they will. I will still try to use a stud if possible.



> Quote:
> Hey Rob, Can't you get that screen put up any faster



Your telling me?! The anticipation is killing me! My first impressions of the Dwin TV3 and SilverStar combo will hopefully be posted by the middle to late next week. The PJ is mounted, and the screen will be mounted Sunday.


----------



## PAP

I read this thread up to about page 12 and then gave up and skipped to this page







I'm also looking for LCD users comments on the SS if possible - I'm planning right now to update my UP1100 DLP to a Sony HS20 in the next 4-6 months with new HT built.


Big issue for me is I would really like a perforated screen for center channel, but ....


----------



## storminorm

my 110 inch silverstar came in a huge crate but once you unpack it, it weighed about 30lbs, very easy to handle and my son and i mounted it in about an hour, it would have been less time but my left wrist had been broken for about 6 days and it was extremely sore but i was so excited when the delivery truck called that i was running around like a kid in a candy store. it has made my sim2 300 plus really shine. when you do mount it the measurements have to be very precise. my screen is hung over a fabric wall with speakers behind out of site....really impressive.

regarding ambient light...i have wall sconces and overhead can lights. i can have the sconces turned on low and still get a beautiful picture and the same with the overhead cans, so you can have very low ambient light and still have a great picture.








keep your cards and letters coming........


----------



## Jscopus

Like many of the recent comments I have been following all the screen threads from the great "Misty Evening" contoversy to this very fact filled thread. I have an Epson TW100 and had been told the HCCV was a great match. Looking over the DIY info, it seems for a lot less (even if I just buy raw material) I can do alot better than the 900-1100 that setup runs. I do not mind spending the money, but I do mind wasting the money. Now this SS thing has really created a whole new quandry. Is the 4.5 gain a good match for my 800:1 projector? The color seems extraordinary compared to all the grey screens I thought I was obligated to use. Is there any point in buying the "raw material" for the SS? I have a very controlled to no light situation- does it need some ambient light to really shine? Is this truly the Holy Grail of screens?


Jeff


----------



## actonweber

Maybe this post belongs on the MISTY EVENING thread but here goes.....


I am in the same quandary as the last post. I just got a new HS10. I have been running standard DVD input with S-Video connectors for several days (a Bravo D1 is on order) and playing around with paint on a very smooth drywall. Throw is about 13' and I am getting a 94" wide image. Ambient light is controlled pretty well. The FP is now on a table but will be ceiling mounted eventually.


I have been reading all about the HCCV, SS, Paint issues and now am evaluating a 1/2 flat white paint and 1/2 Misty Evening wall (actually, a retro ME - white ceiling paint with the same colored pigments added.) So far, my family likes the white better. Blacks are great, screendoor is improved and saturation is better with the grey paint but there is no punch to the image like we get with the white. But the color accuracy and saturation with the white is lacking. I guess we have concluded we prefer the "bright TV"-type picture like some others have alluded to. Bottom-line, I don't think the paint-on-drywall makes us happy and I will probably be buying a screen in the future.


My point is this - we LCD-users need more comments and observations here! Tons of DILA, DLP and CRT info about SS vs. HCCV vs. Firehawk, etc. But I would like to have more input from LCD users about these commercial screens before I spend a chunk-of-change on SS or Hi-Power or HCCV or Carada or ANY screen.


This is a great thread on a great forum! Thanks for all of the help!


John in Northern NY


----------



## Robert Holloway

So what is the MSRP of a 120" 16x9 Fixed Silver screen from Vutec?

I just gotta know and scratch this itch 

Rob


----------



## MarkZ

Rob you have a PM.


----------



## Robert Holloway

Thanks Mark

You have a reply 

Rob


----------



## scottyb

Can you send it to my PM also, as I'm very interested in this screen!!


scott


----------



## rogo

The Silverstar lists for $60/sq. ft. A deluxe friends adds about $200-300.


----------



## Rob Tomlin




> Quote:
> A deluxe friends adds about $200-300



$200-300 is a small price to pay for deluxe friends!


----------



## actonweber

And I always thought deluxe friends were "priceless"!


----------



## Robert Holloway

No

That's just in the Mastercard ads 

Rob


----------



## storminorm

by all means spend the extra money for the delux friends, ah delux frame. when you first open the box you'll be glad you did. the silverstar is expensive but i've never regreted once having bought it and also i didn't inform "the one who must be obeyed" of the cost which if she had known i would probably have 2 broken arms instead of only one. it is a very impressive screen.


----------



## Jscopus

Stormin'-


Is there any point in just getting the raw material, and making your own "deluxe" frame? Or will you make it look like crap, and not save that much money? I am concerned if my wife knew what this cost, I would only have half my scrotal contents. You have to be able to do better than 60 SF or I will be meat. BTW, would this be a good match for my Epson LCD? I hear unlike the site, there is only one screen with reported 6.0 gain (not a 4.5 and a 9 as well). Hard to swallow this number when everyone is wetting themselves over their pet $50-100 DIY projects.



Jeff


----------



## Alex Bischoff




> Quote:
> You have to be able to do better than 60 SF or I will be meat.



Well, keep in mind that $60 / sq ft is just the list price -- hopefully, the street price is lower than that.


----------



## Tryg

Mgora,


I'm just getting back into using my home theater now that summer activities are coming to an end. So I've started to experiment with ambient light and the Silverstar. Last night I watched MNF and wow ABC finally has their act together on the HD thing. But I was trying differen't lighting scenarios for having people over. My situation is also a Multi purpose room. I was much more sensative to ambient light issue but now I can tolerate it more. Compared to the other screens the SS does a pretty good job. Obviously nothing is perfect so your milage may vary.


Pap,


Page 14 is when this thread starts to get good










Jscopus,


Holy Grail? I don't know about that. Can there be a holy grail of screens? So far it's the one I like the most. If only it was Bigger! You could get the standard frame and then add some painted trim around that for a wider border. The aluminum framing they use is pretty nice.


To bad you missed the Powerbuy a few months back. Some amazing prices on this screen! One testiment to whether people like this screen is that there were tons of these screen sold, but not one of them has shown up in Classifieds here yet.


----------



## actonweber

TRYG:


OK - I missed that Powerbuy on the SS a few months ago. How much was that significant savings? And how many does it take to get another Powerbuy going?


John in Northern NY


p.s. still playing around with grey paints and HS10 tweaking.


----------



## eameres

I missed the powebuy too, which is why I'm investigating DIY land. It's encouraging, but I'm not wetting myself over it yet!


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Tryg_
> *Page 14 is when this thread starts to get good
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



I think this post on page 14 is one of the most informative all time here. Explains a lot about how grey screens can increase CR from the screen in real world situations.


--Darin


----------



## Mgora1

Thanks Tryg. I look forward to more reviews regarding ambient light as you get back into your viewing season.


----------



## Rob Tomlin

I now have my 122.5 inch diagonal SilverStar up and running with my Dwin TV3 projector.


I have only spent about 4 or 5 hours with it so far, so I will not give a detailed review just yet.


Initial reaction: Wow! Colors definitely pop off the screen, without looking unnatural in any way. There definitely seems to be a great amount of shadow detail. Oh, did I mention the colors?


The brightness is also excellent. There was some concern that the SS might be a bit too bright for the Dwin DLP. It's not. At no time have I felt that the screen is too bright. In fact, I tend to agree with other comments that indicate that it almost looks like a big plasma set, though not quite that bright.


Black levels: this has been a big concern with this screen. To me, it really isn't much of an issue. However, I am sure that the black levels are raised to a degree with this screen...but it's all relative. Black areas look black! The only time I noticed dark scenes looking a bit "grey" is when the screen is more than 50% black, such as some space scenes in movies like The Fifth Element. It would be interesting to do a direct comparison with other screens on the issue of black level. It certainly isn't an issue with me with this screen.


There is a negative to this screen that others have mentioned before. The sheen. It usually shows up in brighter areas of a scene, and more so where there is a big block of the same color, such as sky etc. It gives the image a "gritty" or "grainy" look, and can be somewhat distracting, especially if you start looking for it.


Tryg mentioned this previously, and indicated that you should sit 2x screen width to minimize this effect. He is right. If I sit in the back row of my HT, the same bright scenes don't show the "sheen" nearly as much as if I am sitting in the front row (which is 1.5x screen width vs. 2.0x for the back row).


The other thing that I noticed is that the sheen doesn't appear to be perfectly uniform across the screen. It is more pronounced in the middle than the sides.


The picture really looks gorgeous from the back row! But, the sound is compromised, and you lose some of the "immersive" effect of being 1.5 screen widths back.


It is difficult to determine how much others will be bothered by this sheen. It is almost like there is a film over the screen which you need to "look through" in order to see the image on the screen (again, in brighter areas only).


At this point, I am still not use to the screen, having only spent a short time with it. Once I get over my hyper critical anal retentive analysis of my new system, I may not even notice this anymore, who knows.


I would definitely be completely head over heels in love with this screen if it wasn't for the "sheen" issue. As is, the positives of the screen probably still outweigh this one negative....again, more time with the screen and projector is needed.


Did I really say that this wasn't going to be a "detailed" review?


----------



## Chriš2




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Rob Tomlin_
> *The other thing that I noticed is that the sheen doesn't appear to be perfectly uniform across the screen. It is more pronounced in the middle than the sides.
> *



Rob- Does the sheen change position or brightness if you move around the room?


Also, is your PJ ceiling mounted? If you move up or down is there any change in brightness? I've heard you have to have angles just right to get the best punch, just wondering if you notice that with your setup. Thanks.


----------



## audiofreq




> Tryg mentioned this previously, and indicated that you should sit 2x screen width to minimize this effect. He is right. If I sit in the back row of my HT, the same bright scenes don't show the "sheen" nearly as much as if I am sitting in the front row (which is 1.5x screen width vs. 2.0x for the back row).
> 
> 
> 
> Sheesh Rob.... That would mean you are nearly 20 ft. back in your last row.
> 
> The viewing distance to my seating (single row set-up) is ~12.5' w/110' screen. Sounds like that puts me into the heavy "sheen zone".
> 
> I look forward to your upcoming commentary. Sounds like it could be a workable trade-off though considering the exceptional clarity of colors and vivid brightness.
> 
> 
> Tryg....
> 
> Thanks for this amazing thread and sharing your R & D results.
Click to expand...


----------



## Rob Tomlin




> Quote:
> Rob- Does the sheen change position or brightness if you move around the room?
> 
> 
> Also, is your PJ ceiling mounted? If you move up or down is there any change in brightness? I've heard you have to have angles just right to get the best punch, just wondering if you notice that with your setup. Thanks.



I haven't tried moving around the room to see if the sheen would change. I'll have to do that.


Yes, the pj is ceiling mounted. There is virtually no change in brightness from sitting in the middle seat vs. the side seats....or even further (I _did_ try this). In other words, the viewing angle is surprisingly wide for a screen of this gain. Again, this is consistent with what Tryg and others have said.


So, no, you don't "have to have angles just right to get the best punch", it looks great from any seat in my room.


I watched another movie last night....Die Another Day. I was extremely impressed with how good the pq was coming from a DVD via DVI. Although I'm sure an HD version would look better, I don't think there would be a "huge" difference!


Anyway, the sheen didn't seem to bother me as much last night. Once you get more involved in actually watching the movie (rather than critique the pq constantly) it isn't so obvious, except for very large, bright scenes.


I am still very impressed with the colors and brightness!


----------



## Free

The sheen bothered me at first too, but you do get used to it. It is a minor trade off for all of the benefits of the screen. The viewing angle is a big one. I have two rows of seating with the rear row up 12" from the front, and with my Firehawk, sitting in the front row, the vertical viewing angle made the image less bright than the back row. I don't have this problem with the SS and you can sit way out to the side as well.


----------



## Tryg

Ok, I just added Michael Grants brilliant explanations and illustrations on contrast ratio to the review. I had to add them to the second post as the first post wouldn't let me add any more pictures. Apparently there is a 10 picture limit







Anyway Thanks again Michael!


Oh yeah...I think I smell a new SS deal comin on.


----------



## Rob Tomlin

Yes, Phil, I recall your earlier reviews on the SS, particularly your comments regarding the sheen and the "gritty" look that it gives to bright scenes.


I am glad to hear that you have gotten used to the sheen. I watched another movie last night, and it bothered me less than it has.


Like you said, this negative is a trade off for all the benefits of the screen.


----------



## rdwalt

Can you smell what the Tryg is cookin?


----------



## Daniel Hutnicki

In regards to the Silverstar,



please stand by.....


----------



## Davandron

Great review and detail! Too bad its beyond my budget :^(


-Andrew


----------



## Daniel Hutnicki

We have new pricing on Silverstar. Call me if you have any questions


----------



## Stornn

Anyone know where to pick up a Silverstar in australia? I want one, NOW!!!


----------



## Tryg

yes...AVScience







call Jason


----------



## nagyg

Hi Tryg,


I just bought an Infocus SP5700 and now I am agonizing over the screen decision. My dealer is of no help, so I have been surfing the Web for answers: your review is absolutely stunning!!!


The SP5700 also has 1000 lumens output, my screen size will be 82" diagonally, the room is 13'X10', the walls are painted off-white (= ambient light - my wife would not let me paint the room black). Do you think I will get the same results with the silver screen as you did?


Thanks,

Gerhard


----------



## Maggie Guy

Tryg,

Great posts regarding the screens and comparisons. As a High Power owner I am curious to know the camera position when taking the comparison shots between the High Power and the Silverstar.

Was the camera at the seated viewing position or were you just below the projector were the gain would be maximized?


----------



## Tryg

Gerhard,


If you want a high gain screen you might want to consider the Da-Lite high power too. In your situation(skinny room) you probably won't be affected by the narrower viewing cone. The high power should be half the cost. You will get similar results from the SilverStar but the biggest benefit I see is higher gain AND wider viewing angle. This aspect of the SilverStar is what my theater requires as my seating area is over 16 feet wide!











Maggie Guy,


The pictures were taken on a tripod about 5-6 feet off the ground. This definately favored the High Power. Sitting down on the couches the SilverStars gain is more noticable where the angular reflective nature of the ceiling mounted projector is better.


----------



## nagyg

Hi Tryg,


Thanks for your reply. I have since invested the 3-4 hours necessary to read all the posts to your review on this amazing thread. You have reassured me in concluding that the Da-Lite HP might be good enough for me. Viewing angle is of no concern, but the SP5700 is ceiling mounted and the picture is 33% below the lense. I remember reading that this could be a problem with the Da-Lite HP. What do you think?


Tomorrow I have the opportunity to test my SP5700 in the HT of an AVS member who has the FireHawk installed. When I originally called Stewart for a screen recommendation I was told to go with the GreyHawk - not the FireHawk - for an 82" screen. Then I read the review of a disappointed GreyHawk user (* 10goldstars.com/stewart-greyhawk-review-12975.html ), which sent me on this search that got me to your great review...


Thanks,

Gerhard


*the review is at www - as a new member I am not yet allowed to use links in my posts ...


----------



## DLove23

Has anyone tested one of these screens with one of the new LCD projectors out there(HS20, Z2, AE500)? The HS20 is currently in the lead for my pick to get but if the black levels are acceptable enough the high gain of this screen might allow me to get the Z2 or AE500 as they are cheaper. Is the resolution on these LCD players high enough that a high gain screen like that won't bring out all the imperfections from a normal viewing distance(SD, artifacts). Thanx for the replies!!! Tryg, simply awesome stuff man. This is more than any mag review could ever hope to give us.


----------



## Gordon Groff

I can't explain it, but the DaLite High Power screen seemed to reduce, or mask the FPN of my Sanyo PLV-70 LCD PJ as compared to DaLite High Contrast Matte White Screen (gray, no gain). From my experience, I believe the HP to be a good choice for an LCD. I have not had the pleasure of seeing my PJ on a Silver Star.


Gordon


----------



## Tryg

I've recently seen the AE500 on the High Power. Fantastic combination for ~$2500. I wouldn't be dissapointed with this combo in my own theater!


----------



## Nikolaus

Tryg,


Thank you


My 103" Silverstar and AE500 combo is GREAT!


Mark Nikolaus


----------



## Jellyman

Just look at what has been done here. I am amazed that just by sitting down at my computer I have access to and can be a part of such a large R&D team. The Internet has truly changed the world forever. I feel so sorry for those poor souls who profess "I just don't understand computers"


This is evolution baby!!


Thanks Tyrg


----------



## lovingdvd

Tryg - have you been able to use instrumentation to measure the ANSI contrast of each screen in these comparisons? Here is why this is very important to me and I'm sure others:


The strongest argument I've heard favoring the Firehawk over white/silver is that the FH effectively provides higher *ANSI*, real-world (not ON/OFF) contrast.


This is mainly because 1) the way it concentrates the light back to the audience and away from walls/ceiling/floor thereby helping to minimize cross light reflections, and 2) the way it helps to reject ambient light. These are strong obvious advantages in my book.


However... I recently obtained a sample (thanks Jason!) of the SilverStar and am VERY impressed with the extra clarity, details, and vividness of the picture on this screen! But with such a small sample, it is not possible to get any feel for how the extra light resulting from this screen's gain, coupled with its far less ambient and cross light reflection controls compared to the FH, will affect real-world, ANSI contrast.


So - this brings me back to my main question about measured ANSI CR. If it turned out that with the Firehawk ANSI CR was quite a bit higher, my preference would be to stay with the Firehawk as I am happy to trade "grey" whites (and the other disadvantages that come with a grey screen) for the FH's advantages. But if ANSI CR is about the same, we'll a screen upgrade just may be the call!










It would be best if you had measured ANSI CR, but if not I'd appreciate still knowing that your perceptions about overall CR are from mid (average) level screens compared among the three screen types.


Thanks!


----------



## Free

I have a Firehawk and Silverstar. I have not used my Firehawk since I put up the Silverstar and see little difference in CR.


IMO, unless you need the ambient light rejection properties of the Firehawk, I would go with the Silverstar.


This has definately been the greatest addition to my theater this year next to my DILA


----------



## Rob Tomlin

The Firehawk was originally my screen of choice. Then I read this thread about the SilverStar, and i took a chance and ordered the 123" version.


After living with the SS for several weeks, I saw a Firehawk (using the same pj I have, the Dwin TV3) and I personally would easily choose the SilverStar. The Firehawk appeared "dingy" and a bit dark compared to the Silverstar.


The Silverstar does have a sheen that shows up in brighter scenes, and gives the image a gritty/grainy look. But I am willing to put up with this one disadvantage in exchange for all the advantages, which including a brighter image with brighter colors and much more shadow detail.


----------



## Tryg

lovingdvd,


here's a shot from my exotic high gain review. You tell me which has more contrast












I've examined probably a hundred screen materials now and I prefer the Silverstar for a variety of reasons. If they only made it bigger!


I too have a Firehawk among others and I wouldn't even consider not using the Silverstar. I think the Firehawk is a great idea and product but for my application I hands down prefer the Silverstar.


Now, this could change depending on your home theater setup. If you have white walls/ceiling withing a few feet of the screen, the Firehawk would do a much better job of eliminating cross reflections. But seriously, if you don't paint those walls dark or something your not very serious about the best home theater image anyway. The Firehawk isn't gonna save you from this. No screen can perform miracles. Also by far the easiest, cheapest, and most effective thing you can do to improve your image is turn the lights down and get a few gallons of flat black on those walls.


You may also prefer the Firehawk if you sit very close to the screen. Why? it is much lower gain and hides many flaws. God help those that use a DLP, buy a Silverstar, and sit 1 screen width away. For that matter, god help anyone with a DLP and any screen that sits within 1.5 screen widths. Unless of course you like seeing pixels.


It comes down to this. What the Silverstar does right greatly outweighs any other screen I've seen for my HT. The only other contenders are the Dalite High Power (Id have to sacrifice viewing cone) and the Stewart Ultramatte (good, but not in the same league).


BTW they only manufacture the 6.0 gain material. Also, I found it to give results closer to 3 gain.


----------



## lovingdvd

In my situation I do have very light walls, ceiling, and carpeting. Due to WAF there is no way around that. So the question for me is just how much is my FH's cross reflection reducing nature (say that 3 times fast







) benefiting me?


The answer could be that it is benefiting me some but other benefits from the SilverStar would outweight that benefit. Or the answer could be that it is benefiting me more than I realize and with all the extra light output (almost 3x what I have with the FH) coming off the screen, I could have a imagine that has far less real-world contrast than the FH.


Unfortunately there is no way to know without changing the screen, and at that point it would be too late. For example, I can't possibly tell with even a large size sample of the SilverStar because in order to get a feel for the resulting reflections you need the full size screen in place, etc.


Darinp2 mentioned that he has an inexpensive light meter. I don't know if you have access to one, but it would be very interesting to take ANSI CR readings from each of your screens and see how they compare.


----------



## Tryg

an active approach to ambient light reduction in my opinion gives better results than passive(overcome it rather than attempt to block it)


In other words Da Lite High Power is favored over Firehawk for me. Again for a variety of reasons. These same reasons may not apply to you. I prefer the snap of an image with a lot of foot lamberts. I'm bored by an image that barely delivers 12 foot lamberts and hides everything.


It's about personal viewing preferances.


----------



## Free

I am with you Tryg, but I am wondering at what point does it become too much? Right now, my SX21 with the Silverstar seems to be the sweet spot for me, but I am intrigued by the possibilities of a 3 Chip DLP or SXRD with higher brightness.


I guess I am just thinking out loud, and wondering at what point does it make sense to go back to a lower gain screen.


----------



## RonF

Sorry if I missed it somewhere.....How durable or fragile doe this surface appear to be to minor touches and contact? Obviously there's an installation process & careful handling involved. And if it picks up a not serious smudge from incidental contact or holding it how do you clean.....just damp soft something? How about a dreaded more serious smudge without abrasion?


Tryg, having the same projector as you and probably less ansi lumens after calibration as I am still running stock lamps, back when we were all calibrating with Dilard, I never could understand how people with that level brightness left on a new lamp (500-700 lumens let's say) at large sizes, like yourself, could run the lower output of an older lamp on a BIG gray screen. I opted as reported back then to go for a rolled wall application of a mix of Ken's old HIGH gain CRT White Screen Goo and regular gain batch of the same together. Probably wound up around a 2.0 gain for 6 x 8 1/2 ft wide surface (did the whole wall actually), and I have never been sorry for that choice. I'm exceedingly happy with it. SCARY DAMN PROCESS though with that high a gain and a roller application on that big a surface! Still patting myself on back that I pulled it off satisfactorily. That stuff happily is bulletproof for minor smudges and cleaning.


This Silverstar, though, from what users / buyers are reporting, I can just picture what that additional non color- shifted brightness & impact would mean! Phrases like "looks like GIANT high quality plasma display" really, really get to me. I have a second application in a different dedicated location on my premises down the road that would be spectacular with this it sounds like.


----------



## LarrySwede

Sigh!

Just bought my first projector, NEC LT240k, and thought I`d

take a quick look at some forum about screens,

seemes like a new area of expertise.


I was recomended the Da-lite gray High Contrast Cinema Vision , partly

to increase the black bars when widescreen on a 4:3 screen wich I want.


Now...I like brightness... and after reading some of the enthuastic articles

on silver screens I`m in doubt.


Now I wonder if not the higher ansi (2100) on my projecter will give me

brighter white as opposed to the one used in the first review here (600 I think) ?


My plan is: an 80" screen wide vied at a fairly close distance with

moderate ambient light.


Any advice on the Da-lite gray or any other screen to my situation

is highly appreciated.


Thanks

Larry


----------



## chengka

Ok, I'm convinced and I can't wait to make a screen. I'll be using a 44x86 mirror a friend took out of his bathroom. The screen won't be that large, but the price is right. How are people hanging the mirror? I'd like to have a black border, but since my mirror is vertically challenged, I want to lose as little "screen" as possible. I would imagine I don't want a void behind, for safety reasons, right?


Thanks guys, you've made my dream theater much more possible.


Ken


----------



## Game Master 128

A mirror?!?


----------



## scoob5555

Ken,

You should be able to use standard mirror mounts (like in your bathroom). Just make sure the screws are long enough to tap the studs in your wall.


----------



## dokworm

Um wont you just see yourself and your pj in the mirror???


----------



## dokworm

Hey tryg, howzabout adding one of the ghettostar screens to your review?

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...0&pagenumber=4


----------



## chengka

Thanks Scoob.. Somehow I posted this in the wrong thread..


----------



## Chad Varnadore

Fantastic thread! My sincere thanks to Tryg, Darin, Michael, and all who have contributed to this incredible resource. Though, I must be a slow reader as it took me well over 3 hours. Unfortunatly, I'm probably more confused on which screen to get now than when I started reading.


Here's my setup to be:


-Studio Exp. 50HD HD2 mustang chip DLP 1000 lumens 1700:1 CR

-approx. a 92" or 100" diagonal 16:9 screen

-throw = 11.5 feet

-seating distance = about 10 to 11 feet, but would be nice to move even closer.

-ceiling and walls will be completely blackened w' cloth coverings of some type - probably black burlap on the walls to also allow sound to pass through to hidden diy acoustic treatments.

-DVI player


What I've gathered so far:


-Studio Exp. adamantly recommends the Firehawk w/ thier projector

-Joe Kane and Guy Kuo recommend a 1.3 gain white screen

-and ultimately this thread seems to enthusiatically, but conditionally recommend the silverstar or hi-power


The only one of these four that I've seen in person is the white screen, which was less than "wowing". Though, the bulb in the Yamaha DLP HD2 projector at Tweeter was well past it's prime (over 1 yr. at 8-10 hours use per day). And the projector was improperly setup for dvd, but looked good w/ HD. I'll be ceiling mounting this projector so the Hi-power seems out even though it seems to offer much of the benefit of the silverstar w/o as much artifacting. And, while the silverstar seems to be a great choice for longer distances, my room dimensions are only 11x12.5'. One post states that the firehawk will show less artifacts at this close distance for a smoother theater-like feel, while another states it has even more of a sparkly effect than the silverstar, which according to *** 10 to 11 feet away is the boarderline of where "sparklies" become intrusive on a silverstar.


Supposedly these "sparklies" are source related. So, considering that the vast majority of dvds have some degree of visible compression and/or edge enhancement artifacting, this adds greater concern, as dvd amounts to 95% of my viewing. Vutec has yet to respond to any of my emails asking their advice about seating distance for their screen.


I'm using a calibrated 65" Mits CRT RPTV now and it looks fantastic at only 7 to 8 feet away with well done dvds (maybe even 6'). But, at this distance, source limitations do reveal themselves pretty plainly. What I can't figure out is if the FP silverstar combo at 10 to 11 feet will be more revealing or just similar to what I'm already used to.


Michael also seems to suggest that getting a silverstar and if too bright applying an ND filter is the best way to go. Though, I have yet to figure out just what an ND filter is, where to get it, or how it'll impact resolution or sparklies exactly.


----------



## jkirby

Chad, check out
http://www.singh-ray.com/shawarticle.html and

http://www.singh-ray.com/grndgrads.html 


however, that doesn't help me understand

1) the forumla for figuring out which (if any) ND filter is right for me/my machine

2) where I get ND filter lenses for other projectors than those listed at the above site.


Can anyone shed any insight into this?


thanks!


----------



## ddog

quote

2) where I get ND filter lenses for other projectors than those listed at the above site.


Try Sammy's camera. They'll be happy to help you out.


Ddog!!


----------



## jkirby

Ddog - care to provide a URL for Sam's? Can't find it on the web..


thanks.


----------



## Paul Hayward

Hello Chad,


I do not entirely share Tryg's veiw that the Firehawk becomes somewhat flatter than a high gain screen during intermediate bright scenes or that it is a poor choice compared to high gain. If you use high gain with the current crop of DLP's, this will result in a highly vibrant picture but you WILL bring up the black level. Then people will look for further solutions to remedy this via ND filters etc which introduce there own problems.


If you have a well light controlled room with little or no cross reflection problems, then I would recommend the 1.3 gain variety screen, which is the standard the current DLP's are tuned to. If, like myself, you have a white family lounge also used as a Home Theater den, then the cross reflections back onto the screen will wash out the blacks. Under these conditions you can choose either a high gain screen for greater punch and live with highrer blacks or go for a grey screen like the Firehawk. To my mind, with Firehawk you sacrefice a little of the sizzle and sparkle a white screen, especialy high gain in terms of 'pop' and bright scenes. However, blacks are much deeper and blacks are very important to me as I know how much of an impact properly deep blacks have on the fidelity of the image across the light spectrum. To my mind the Firehawk definitely helps to create a nice blended picture that, as Darin says, makes artifacts less obvious. Because the eye is so adaptive, I dont think you really notice the lower whites. Its only when you do see a white screen that you notice the extra vibrancy along with more artifacts in my experience. It is perfectly true that the Firehawk suffers with uniformity issues being brighter at the centre and dimmer at the edges. But I have never noticed this while watching Sky and films on DVD. It all seems perfectly uniform. Finally, as a matter of taste. I actually prefer the slightly darker texture of the Firehawk and miss this when watching other types of screens. For me with my taste and my environment, the Fireahwk definitely provides THE best compromise. Hope this helps a little.


Best Wishes,


Paul H


----------



## Thoburn




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Tryg_
> 
> 
> Welcome to my third screen review. This review will demonstrate three professionally manufactured materials that are *White, Grey,* and *Silver*. I hope to demonstrate the differences of what these different screen colorations can offer and how you may benefit.
> 
> 
> [/b]



Tryg,


Wow!










I just can't seem to process all I've been reading. I would really appreciate a little advice.


I have a Sanyo PLV-Z2 on order. I have a total light controlled. I could paint the walls black, but would prefer a dark charcoal. The room is 13'x19' with an 8' ceiling. The projector will be ceiling mounted about 10 feet back. The seating is about 14'. The screen will be 45"x80" up to 49"x88".


It sounds like I should go for the silver options, but I worry about artifacts.


What is your opinion and why?


Thanks ever so much...


----------



## Chad Varnadore

jkirby, thanks for the links. They were very interesting.


----------



## Tryg




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Thoburn_
> *
> 
> It sounds like I should go for the silver options, but I worry about artifacts.
> 
> 
> What is your opinion and why?
> *



my opinion? you mean you didn't get my opinion by reading the first post?


Silver options? I'm pretty sure there is no other silver options. This is it. VERY IT.


Thoburn, you are welcome anytime to come down to Olympia to see the Silverstar. And a D-ILA if you haven't seen one. PM me for details.


----------



## Chad Varnadore

Thanks Paul. Let me make sure I read your post right. If I have a completely light controlled room, with no light reflection problems (which I will as all the walls and cieling will be draped in black), then a firehawk wouldn't be needed to bring down blacks washed out from ambient light. And, a high gain screen would only overcompensate for the ambient light. So, a 1.3 gain white screen would be preferrable.


Please correct me, if I interpreted wrongly.


----------



## Paul Hayward

Hi Chad,


You understood my views perfectly







with your environment a 1.3 gain screen would be at the top of my list, you lucky thing!!!


Best Wishes,


Paul H


----------



## jkirby

Chad, Paul.


Please correct me if I am wrong, but don't PJ bulbs dim over time? in other words a 1.3 gain would be great today,, but what about 500 bulb hours later? 1,000 hours later?


With a high gain, it might be too bright now, but you can put a ND filter... when it starts to dim.. you can remove it.. when that gets dim, you can increase the Brightness setting on the PJ, etc.. so you can get the most out of the bulb.


With a 1.3. gain, what happens onces the bulb goes dim?


just a thought...


----------



## Gordon Groff

I'm still lost on the "too bright" issue. As long as the PJ is properly calibrated, what makes it too bright? The only issue I see is if you have light colored walls and your screen does not reject ambient well, retroreflections could be a problem. Am I missing something?

Gordon


----------



## ftlee

Rob Tomlin,


Jason Turk from AVS told me that the SilverStar was available in a 123" size and a 16:9 format (60" x 107"). However, I do not see that size available on their website. Can someone please confirm that the 123" version is actually available?


Thanks,


Frank T. Lee


----------



## maxmonty

Someone already asked this way back, but no reply. Can the SilverStar be found anywhere in canada?


----------



## soundmonster

Would'nt a dvd player with a super top notch video dac or with a dvi connection to the projector greatly reduce the visible artifacts such as the "sparklys" that the SilverStar magnifies? Tryg if your out there please help!


----------



## keyser

I haven´t read trough this entire thread, but how is the detail in BRIGHT scenes on the silverstar?


The silverstar raises black levels and shadow detail seems to be good, but from the pics in the first post the bright detail seems a little lost(the block thing under the ball shaped bulb where the people are outside dining seems too loose a little detail), but are there any better pics of detail in those kinda scenes?


----------



## keyser

I haven´t read trough this entire thread, but how is the detail in BRIGHT scenes on the silverstar?


The silverstar raises black levels and shadow detail seems to be good, but from the pics in the first post the bright detail seems a little lost(the block thing under the ball shaped bulb where the people are outside dining seems too loose a little detail), but are there any better pics of detail in those kinda scenes?

Some people that don´t like the silverstar think it raises black level too much and crushes whites(isn´t that the term?).


----------



## Savedsol

I loved the first five pages but don't have the time or brain power for all 27. Two questions...

1) You mention the viewing cone on the Firehawk being restrictive even though you have a long throw. Would that mean that a ceiling mounted short throw would mean you'd have to lay on the floor at the same distance as the projector to enjoy the image?

2) Who are the girls?!







That's an awfully nice image.


----------



## Tryg

1. yes, Ideally. but you should be ok sitting in a chair or couch


2. my harem


----------



## Savedsol

Based on the high gain exotic test it appears that the Firehawk cone is not as bad as the Vutecs (although that was a higher gain). I would be curious to see the same angle test on these screens.


As far as your harem... what movie is it really?


----------



## Tryg

It's hard to compare because SS and FH are so different in gain. SS is 3 times brighter! Yet, the SS in practice seems to beat the FH in viewing cone.


How can you measure this? With comparable products like the SS vs High Power it's easy. They're about the same gain. Viewing cone on SS is almost double. But comparing SS to a roughly 1 gain screen is a little bit trickier. Although the mathematical half gain numbers on the FH may be at a wider degree point(I dont know for sure). In practice on real full screens, I would definately give the upper hand to the SilverStar. Virtualy no viewing cone/hotpotting is visable from straight on, and as you move to the side the image stays vibrant and enjoyable out to a much larger angle than the FH. Truly amazing for a high gain screen. Almost defying the physics!


Please dont forget this caveat. They are two different screens that do different things and for different reasons. They can each hold their own for the proper application. The SS for my application wins. If I had a 2000-3000 lumen projector and walls that were closer to my screen I might prefer the FH.



The pic isn't a movie. Private audition


----------



## Jacob B

Hi Paul,

I see you are located in the UK.

I have trouble finding a dealer on the net in Europe for the Firehawk...

I'm looking for my first screen for my first projector (Z2), and it sounds like from your review that the FH suits my living room with white ceiling and walls and light northern european summer nights (bad ambient light control).

Any help and comments will be appriciated.

Jacob


----------



## Tryg

$50 worth of dark or black paint will do more for your theater than any projector upgrade or screen.


----------



## Jacob B

It's the WAF...


It's a combined living room, dining room and home theater - and dark colors are not fashionable in Scandinavian living rooms







(apparently something to do with the long dark winters).


Jacob


----------



## Thue

OT

Jacob-> It is only around Kolding the long dark winters are present, in CPH everything is always fine...


----------



## RadDoc




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Tryg_
> *
> 
> If they only made it bigger!
> 
> *



DITTO!


122.5" diagonal (~8ft.10in wide) would appear puny in my dedicated HT. What I *need* is a 12 foot wide SilverStar, without seam.


Due to logistical considerations (shipping), Vutec reportedly does not intend to manufacture any larger rigid screen. Perhaps, it's been hinted, the pending flexible SilverStar can/will be made available in jumbo sizes. Unfortunately, contrary to earlier prognostications, Vutec determined that their flexible SS was not yet ready to debut at CES 2004.


Any update on the status of the non-rigid SilverStar........and available sizes?


----------



## Tryg

I think Vutec should consider using a rollable stiff backing for the material. Ship the product rolled up an let the customer do some assembly.


Assemble the frame, unroll the material, and snap to fixed frame. Connect any masking.


This would be MUCH easier to ship, reduce potential damage and POSIBBLEY allow for larger sizes. I don't know what dimensions the surface material comes in.


----------



## WXdude

Tryg,

First of all just wanted to Thank You for doing such a great review. You sure did/do put a lot of work into your reviews and it is much appreciated. Now on to my questions(of which I'm sure you are sick and tired of seeing from 5000 AVS members):

We are getting close to finishing up or dedicated HT room. It is 21L x 17W, it does have 100% light control.

The ceiling is flat black and the walls will be a very dark flat color.

The projector we plan on buying is the Benq 8700+ and it will be ceiling mounted.

We will be sitting between 15-17ft from the screen.

We plan to buy a screen about 110" diag. With a 110" screen we will be sitting right around the 2x screen width.


We watch a wide variety of movies but seems about 60-75% of them are "darkish" type movies. Hope that makes sense, think The Others, Road to Perdition, LOTR, etc.


So, with the above information do you feel that the SS is our best bet? Do you see any problems? Any and all advice is much appreciated. Thank you.

Sincerely,

John


----------



## Rob Tomlin

John-


I am using a 123" SS with a Dwin TV3 DLP projector. My front seats are about 15.5 feet from the screen, and it works fine. The back row is better at 2x distance as far as the "gritty" appearance you can get from the SS in brighter scenes.


Dark movies are where the SS really shines!


I think it would be a good match for your setup.


----------



## Tryg

Weatherdude,


I have sampled over 50 different manufactured materials and dozens of DIY. I use the Silverstar and would be suprised to find a surface that outperforms it for my setup and environment. With that said...I'm sure you'll love it.


----------



## WXdude




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Rob Tomlin_
> *John-
> 
> I am using a 123" SS with a Dwin TV3 DLP projector. My front seats are about 15.5 feet from the screen, and it works fine. The back row is better at 2x distance as far as the "gritty" appearance you can get from the SS in brighter scenes. Dark movies are where the SS really shines!
> 
> I think it would be a good match for your setup.*



Rob,

Thanks for your reply. Wow, a 123" screen and your only 15.5' away! Do you feel that your screen is too large or just perfect? I'm wondering if maybe I should go with a little bit larger screen, considering my room size and seating distance do you think a 110" diag. is a tad too small? This "gritty" appearance you speak of, is it slightly noticable or very noticeable? Thanks for your help Rob.

John


Tryg,

Thanks again Tryg. I'm sure it's a great screen but it's getting close to time to pull the trigger and I'm freaking out over screen choice!!























John


----------



## Rob Tomlin

John-


The saying "Bigger is better" holds true here!


I definitely do NOT think the screen is too big at that distance!


If fact, THX would recommend that you sit about 13.7 feet away from a screen of this size for a angle of view of 36 degrees.


Click here for a screen distance calculator:

http://www.myhometheater.homestead.c...alculator.html 


I measure my front row viewing distance again, and it is actually slightly LESS than 15 feet!


That being said, poor DVD transfers won't look great that close, as you will see all the flaws that much better. High Def material looks absolutely incredible, including D-Theater tapes. I recommend feeding your pj the best quality connection possible....meaning DVI.


Really, I seriously doubt that you would regret going with the bigger size!


----------



## Rob Tomlin

Oh, re: the "gritty" appearance. This only occurs in bright scenes. It is more noticeable when you are sitting straight in the middle. It bothered me a bit at first, but every person I have had over to demo my screen (including 3 people from AVS forum) were not bothered by it at all....in fact they didn't even notice it until I brought it to their attention.


The bottom line is that after getting use to my SS, and seeing a Firehawk (my original screen of choice before deciding on the SS) there is no way I would ever swith from the SS to the Firehawk. The advantages of the SS far outweigh any disadvantages.


I note that your room is rather wide. Another advantage of the SS is the very wide viewing angle, with very little fall off when viewing from the sides.


----------



## keyser

If I see all the bars in the AVIA contrast and brightness tests, doesn´t that mean I´m getting all the dark detail I can from my projector. Now how can I be getting more detail from dark scenes if I have a higher gain screen?


"Dark movies are where the SS really shines!"


I know the silverstar is suppose to increase the detail in dark scenes, but it also raises black levels doesn´t it?


----------



## Rob Tomlin

Some people think so.


But it is also brighter, so the perception is that the blacks are just as good as other screens.


Believe me, there is no lack of "depth" to the SS. I have had two AVS members who own Firehawks over to see my SS, and they both loved it, and agreed that black levels were not an issue with this screen.


One of these individuals is considering switching to the SS when they release their bigger screen size.


My best advice is to see the SS in action for yourself if at all possible.


----------



## dokworm

Curtains people - curtains!

If your wife wont let you paint the room black, get velvet curtains installed that you can pull closed over the walls when viewing movies.

It is even easy enough to make them totally removable. You won't believe the difference a non reflective room makes...


----------



## Ximori

Tryg, how does SS perform on the mostly dark scenes of LoTR? I want all dark scenes in movies to look almost, if not, somewhat similar to what i see on the theatres w/ the sony hs20. thanks.


----------



## gceusa




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by rogo_
> *Tryg: You are truly the Marquis de Screens.
> 
> 
> Please, please, please give us some ambient light shots and opinions. I really want to know if this thing makes daytime viewing tolerable, decent, whatnot. And I want to know what happens with a few lamps off the sides not hitting the screen.
> 
> 
> Thanks again for the review!
> 
> 
> mark*



YES, YES, I agree some comparisons of these screens with some low level ambient light would be the clincher in an already excellent review. It would be very helpful for those of us that use our dedicated home theaters not only for movies, but for the occassional t.v. viewing of special events.


thanks


----------



## craig john

Tryg,


Projector Central has put up a screen review that, in many ways is contrary to your observations, especially in relation to the SilverStar. They found a severely restricted viewing cone with significant brightness and color shifts even within the axis of the screen. To quote:


"In general, if you are sitting off center from the zero degree viewing axis, the portion of the screen nearest you will appear brighter than the opposing side. Moving around the SilverStar will cause significant changes in relative light intensity in various parts of the image. The magnitude of this effect will vary based upon (a) the angles from which you are viewing it (both horizontally and vertically relative to the line of projection) and (b) the ratio of the throw distance to screen width, the effect becoming more exaggerated as you reduce the throw distance. The unevenness of light being reflected from various portions of the screen is part of the downside to the use of any high gain screen for home theater, not just the SilverStar."


Further, they found a reduced image sharpness, Again I quote:


"Another problem related to the high gain of the SilverStar is reduced image sharpness. The light amplification creates a blooming effect that is most particularly visible in highlights and white text. This can be seen if the SilverStar and Firehawk are placed side by side and a 100 IRE Crosshatch pattern is projected onto them. While the white lines are much brighter on the SilverStar, they are also thicker and fuzzier than they are on the Firehawk."


In the final analysis, they felt the SilverStar was not even appropriate for home theater. The final quote:


"The SilverStar is a powerfully brilliant screen. But we would not select a home theater screen based solely upon its brightness any more than we would select a set of speakers based on how many decibels they could produce. The SilverStar is an exciting screen technology that is particularly well suited to commercial installations and university classrooms where image brightness may be vitally important for communicating with a large audience. It is not in our view an appropriate choice for the typical home theater."


I would be interested in your thoughts.


Craig


----------



## jkirby

If you would permit a few words from a non-technical person..


I read and re-read those reviews and could not find


1) what was the lumens output of the projectors they tested?

2) What was the seating distance measured?

3) What was the screen size measured?


Was anybody able to find these statistics in the review? if not, then what was it based on?


If they compared an 80" screen with a 'light cannon" infocus-type projector, then I can understand what they are saying. If they were discussing the results of a Sharp Z12 on a 110" screen in HC mode then I can't understand.


Also, I saw no comment about the trend in dimmer, higher contrast projectors, nor no consideration for aging of the bulb.


In regards to their off axis comment- all I can say is that my room will barely accomodate 4 chairs in a row. Are they really saying that there is substantial viewing degradation on a Silverstar from seat #1 to seat #4?


I have seen the SilverStar and Firehawk in action. All I can say is that Firehawk was dim in my opinion - and this was a new bulb.


----------



## craig john

I had these same questions after I read the reviews. I actually e-mailed Evan and asked him, but I have not heard back from him. They are valid points, tho. Certainly projector and screen size will have a _significant_ impact on the results. The fact that they didn't mention either of these leaves one wondering.


In terms of seating distance, it seems they moved around a lot, but their comments about viewing angles/cones were all totally subjective. In fact, other than the brightness measurements, all their comments about color rendition/saturation, color uniformity and black levels were totally subjective. At the end of the SilverStar review they make this comment:


"But we would not select a home theater screen based solely upon its brightness any more than we would select a set of speakers based on how many decibels they could produce."


In spite of this comment, they didn't publish any measurements other than brightness. I asked Evan if they had actually measured any half-gain viewing angles since they mention this, as it seems this would have been easy to do while taking the brightness measurements. As I said, I am awaiting his reply.


Craig


----------



## Rob Tomlin

I have the SilverStar and really like it. I am surprised by their comments regarding the off axis viewing. I simply don't see this problem.


Regarding the "loss of sharpness" because of "blooming", I think there may be some truth to this, but it is definitely to a minor degree, and not something that would be in any way obvious without doing a direct comparision with another screen.


Having compared the SS to the Firehawk, there is no way I would use the Firehawk over the SS. As mentioned by Jkirby, the Firehawk looks quite dim in comparison.


----------



## Tryg

craig john,


I just read the review. I must say Even Powell lost some significant credibility with me on this one. He needs to learn about some of the fundamentals of screens besides just comparing it to the Firehawk. This was a biased review.


Twice as bright as the Firehawk? Is that how professionals compare all screens now?


Misleading to view side be side? How? Why? Cut the BS, innuendo and speculation and tell the reader why?


Firehawk wide viewing angle? Good grief. He doesn't know what he's talking about.


This is biased review, that lacks facts, by a person infatuated with Stewart Filmscreen. In fact it contained all the "key words" of critisism I've heard from other S salesmen.



BTW I have both screens, as do others, and we're all watching the Silverstar.


----------



## Don Rombach

As posted in the review thread.

The review is simply wrong on all counts, save one. As everyone agrees the gain is more like three than six.


The review states that the viewing cone is 20 degrees. Nonsense. While the screen does not have complete brightness uniformity as does a unity gain white screen, it displays a bright image from ANY viewing angle.

While one can indeed see slight hot-spotting when a white test pattern is displayed, I defy anyone to find the "viewing cone" in normal viewing. I can walk from dead center to almost 90 degrees and there is no point that one can see an appreciable drop off in brightness.


The review states that this screen blurs fine detail though blooming whites. Absolutely ridiculous. Consider this. As have been stated many times before, one of the DRAWBACKS of the Silverstar is if ones video chain has any flaws, the flaws (motion artifacts, dithering etc.) are more bothersome because the Silverstar produces a SHARPER IMAGE.


I have viewed this screen with both a high end Marantz DLP, and in my theater with a Sony G70 crt pj.


Now giving the benefit of the doubt to the reviewers, looking at test patterns may indicate the undesirable effects found in the review. But in actual use, the silverstar produces a finely detailed, bright image with excellent color rendition, and enhances black levels for digital users without muting the reds as other gray screens do.



__________________

Big D


----------



## WXdude

We installed our SS this past weekend and I have to say, WOW, what a screen! We have all ready watched several movies and I just love this screen. I would have to disagree with the review of the SS vs the Firehawk. Our HT is only one row of chairs four wide but that one row is about 12 feet wide and sitting in either outside chair the off axis viewing is wonderful, actually just as good as sitting in the center. I am very happy with the screen and see none of the "problems" the reviewer mentioned.


On the other hand, I have a question about the finish on you guys screens:

Ours had a few of what looked like some grease spots or something similar on the left side of the screen, any of you notice anything like this on yours? They almost look like a "smudge" from the people either assembling the screen or maybe the guys packing the screen up into the shipping container.

Next, about 4-6 inches down from the velvet masking there are a few small dots, about the size of a "BB" across the top of the screen. Kind of look like a bubble formed in the silver finish and left a little bare white spot on the screen.


Do any of you have these markings on your screen?

John


----------



## Don Rombach

My Silverstar arrived flawless.


If the spots you have effect the image, I would consider requesting a replacement. If not, perhaps a good photo may persuade your dealer to provide some compensation since returning a screen is a hassle both for you and the dealer.


----------



## craig john




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by craig john_
> *I had these same questions after I read the reviews. I actually e-mailed Evan and asked him, but I have not heard back from him. They are valid points, tho. Certainly projector and screen size will have a _significant_ impact on the results. The fact that they didn't mention either of these leaves one wondering.
> 
> 
> In terms of seating distance, it seems they moved around a lot, but their comments about viewing angles/cones were all totally subjective. In fact, other than the brightness measurements, all their comments about color rendition/saturation, color uniformity and black levels were totally subjective. At the end of the SilverStar review they make this comment:
> 
> 
> "But we would not select a home theater screen based solely upon its brightness any more than we would select a set of speakers based on how many decibels they could produce."
> 
> 
> In spite of this comment, they didn't publish any measurements other than brightness. I asked Evan if they had actually measured any half-gain viewing angles since they mention this, as it seems this would have been easy to do while taking the brightness measurements. As I said, I am awaiting his reply.
> 
> 
> Craig*



I heard back from Evan with some answers to my questions about the review. He said they used a Benq 8700+ for most of the review along with a Sanyo Z2. He said they didn't measure any half-gain viewing angles because all the low-gain screens were pretty similar. Oh well, it was the high-gain screens were viewing cones would have been nice to know.


Craig


----------



## Mfusick

My favorite quote from the review:


"If you set up the SilverStar side by side with any other traditional white or gray home theater screen, the SilverStar will look dazzling, and every other screen will look dim. It certainly makes for an impressive demo. But in many important ways it is misleading to present the relative performance of a high gain screen against a low gain screen in this manner. We viewed the SilverStar side by side with the Firehawk, but we also viewed the same material exclusively on each screen in sequence. This latter procedure produces much different results. Viewed with the SilverStar the Firehawk appeared dim, low in contrast and low in color saturation. However standing alone the Firehawk showed very adequate illumination, deeper blacks, better overall contrast, more satisfying color saturation, and superior image sharpness. Furthermore, since it was not overwhelmingly bright the Firehawk was easier to view for hours at a time without developing eye strain and visual fatigue."

www.projectorcentral.com


----------



## Rob Tomlin

Thanks for posting that (ridiculous) quote Mfusick.


That says everything I need to know about this review. "The SilverStar only looks better if you compare it side to side with the Firehawk". Unbelievable.


By the way, I HAVE viewed the SS and Firehawk in the manner they describe, and I STILL found the Firehawk to appear dim, low in contrast and low in color saturation!


----------



## Tryg

The Ford Escort is a pretty decent car if you drive it without the Farrari anywhere in sight. Its just not fair to compare the Farrari side by side with the Ford Escort. It's just plain misleading.


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Tryg_
> *The Ford Escort is a pretty decent car if you drive it without the Farrari anywhere in sight. Its just not fair to compare the Farrari side by side with the Ford Escort. It's just plain misleading.*



I hope this isn't too serious. There is a big difference between comparing cars side by side and comparing screens side by side with our human visual systems (where the brighter screen keeps our eyes from adapting to the dimmer screen). I believe it was Michael Grant who came up with the analogy that I think is better. Would you compare Coke and Pepsi by using 2 straws and drinking them at the same time or would you try them each individually?


The biggest problem I have with his comparison is not mentioning the projector, environment and source, as these have a lot to do with the results that will be achieved.


BTW: I just got a new 3 chip DLP if you are interested in seeing it. It is super bright on my High Power and I think you would like it.


--Darin


----------



## jkirby

I was surprised to find in the review that they consider eye strain to be more prevalent on the SilverStar than the Firehawk.


I was able to watch about 30 minutes on a Firehawk, but on a few minutes with the SilverStar. Oddly enough, after about 20 minutes with the Firehawk I felt I was straining because there wasn't enough light (no joke). Felt like it was reading a book with insufficient light.


Is there any validity to the review's comment about it being easier to see a dimmer picture than a bright one?


Thanks.


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by jkirby_
> *I was able to watch about 30 minutes on a Firehawk, but on a few minutes with the SilverStar. Oddly enough, after about 20 minutes with the Firehawk I felt I was straining because there wasn't enough light (no joke). Felt like it was reading a book with insufficient light.
> 
> 
> Is there any validity to the review's comment about it being easier to see a dimmer picture than a bright one?
> *



I think there is a range that most people will find comfortable, whether that is reading a book or watching a movie. Too dim and it makes sense that you would be uncomfortable, but this is a combination of both the screen and projector. My new projector on my High Power last night was giving my dad a headache until I turned on some overhead lights. I think some of this also depends on the room (although this was in an off-white room), as a blacked out room can make a projector seem even brighter. Also, my experience is that high instantaneous contrast ratio can make dimmer images seem brighter.


I remember one case in the past where I was straining to see some stuff with my Sharp M20x and felt like I wanted the images to be brighter. We switched to my NEC HT1000 that had the same resolution and was dimmer, but had higher contrast ratio. All of a sudden I didn't feel like I wanted the images to be brighter because I could now separate objects easier. So, it wasn't more brightness that I wanted, but more separation between things that should have been separated. It is also possible that two different scalers made some difference, but I think it was the extra separation in the images that made it easier to pick objects out quickly.


My guess is that there aren't a lot of people who will want 50 ft-lamberts in a dark room after they have projectors that have both very high ANSI contrast ratio and high on/off contrast ratio. A projector that could really do a true black screen would create quite a shock if it then jumped to 40+ ft-lamberts. If somebody wants to see what kind of headache they could get from this you can come over to my place and I can simulate it for you. I doubt many will find it enjoyable, though. Most of the people I know running super bright do not have projectors that can go super dim.


BTW: I think part of the whole lesson in this stuff is that a projector isn't much by itself and a screen isn't much by itself. It is the combination that really matters. So, when somebody tells you that projector x is good or bad or screen y is good or bad it is usually a good idea to ask what the other component was.


--Darin


----------



## supercop

darinp2

So what do you think is a appropriate footlambert for home theater viewing?


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by supercop_
> *darinp2
> 
> So what do you think is a appropriate footlambert for home theater viewing?*



Greg Rogers from widescreenreview has mentioned about 12 ft-lamberts, but I believe much of this is to keep for seeing the MPEG2 artifacts. So, I think with cleaner sources (and things like the Algolith Mosquito) this could go up somewhat. My best guess is that once we have these projectors where CR and light output aren't limitations many will settle in at 18 ft-lamberts or less for movies and go somewhat higher for sports or some video material like that (especially when adding ambient light). I think we will always have people who don't want to go above about 12 ft-lamberts, though. And there will also be those who want 40 ft-lamberts and don't mind the transitions from super dark to super bright. I'm pretty comfortable in the 13-15 ft-lambert or so range in my dark theater with my Sharp 11k, but I haven't measured it recently.


--Darin


----------



## formerly HTbuph

I think others have alluded to what I will point out. The increased brightness of the silverstar resulted in the loss of shadow detail in brighter objects. I just looked at this post and noticed it immediately in the picture comparison on the first page of this thread. You can easily see it in the clouds of the sky shot. Both the white and grey screen revealed shadow detail in the white clouds while the silverstar showed a white cloud with no shadow detail. That is when I first noticed it. I then took a closer look at other birghter colored objects and could see the same in all.


----------



## PAP

Just read this whole monster thread. It's enough to drive a man crazy going back and forth about screen choices, especially when you live in a small town and basically have to buy any AV stuff sight unseen.


The kicker for me is that you can't get a SS perforated. Is there anyone here who has gone from a perf. screen (of any type) to a SS?


----------



## Daniel Hutnicki

I dont know if this has been mentioned, but it looks like the new pulldown silverstar will be come out in the near future. Stay tuned


----------



## PAP

If it's a pulldown, does that mean any chance of a perf version?


----------



## JHouse

As I often have said:


A brighter image makes different parts of the image easier to differentiate, in other words, it appears clearer and sharper. Just like turning up the brightness on a 3-way bulb while reading, or turning up the volume while listening.


Also, with a higher average brightness level, your eye adjusts, and judges the darkest parts relative to the brightest parts. The contrast ratio remains the same. The blacks look just as black on a screen with more gain, except in very dark scenes where there are no bright parts to compare to.


However, making the average brightness level of the very dark scenes brighter actually makes the shadow detail much easier to see, as in any other scene, because you are giving your eye more information, just like turning up the lights again.


I love my Hi-Power and PLV-70/HD20 combo, and though I squint sometimes when it get bright suddenly, that seems realistic to me. And I have none of the fatigue that I used to sense with a dim first generation DLP. It's just easier to watch. And it can handle some significant ambient light without destroying the picture. Though it still looks best in the dark.


----------



## mandarax

I don't understand what the problem is ...


Here is the quote... from Mr. Powell..



> Quote:
> "If you set up the SilverStar side by side with any other traditional white or gray home theater screen, the SilverStar will look dazzling, and every other screen will look dim.



I sort of agree but also disagree with this statement... and it makes the entire notation of the silverstar statements subject to scrutinity as to the validity of the statements.... So taking the statement verbatim ..the other screens look like they are reflecting an insufficient amount of light, look dull, lusterless, lacking pronounced clear cut, or vigorous quality or character... seen indistinclty or without clear outlines or details....perceived by the ones senses as indistinct or faint, having little prospect of a favorable outcome, ... but no these qualities are not good for the human being in a home theater environment... One should go with the non dazzling dim screen...


Also the statements about the off axis viewing seem to be a bit off the wall too.... At my companies shootout the very first thing I noticed was that off axis it looked great... not good ... it looked great..


Well I have my own view of the statement used in conjunction with the combination of statements made about the screen ... How about dim witted.. ??


I never used to be a bright screen fanboy... at my shootout I never realized that I had biases built in to me I guess over time... A curious thing happened at the shootout.. We had different varieties of screens set up...

shooting side to side on two BenQ 8700's from the same source... we went through a number of iterations trying to get the most side to side comparisons.. The Silverstar was one of the first ones to go against a number of screens.... then we left up another screen and the Silverstar came down... After about three sets of screens went up I noted that after the short amount of time it takes to actually review the screen shot comparisons that my brain was telling my eyeballs that the stuff coming off the Silverstar was more interesting... and after noting the differences my eyeballs were just kind of taking everything in on the Silverstar.. I know I was a bit tired but I found this one of the most interesting things that happened at the shootout... I concluded that over the years I had possibly been programmed somehow to have this bias.. Who knows ... but it was a revelation to me anyway.... so I guess it was bad after all this time working in the HT business that my brain actually was enjoying the images coming of the Silverstar.. HMMM ... Oh well.. at least I was only giving recommendations based on the statistics given on the feedback sheets from the participants at the shootout... When I took the ratings ... I get someone to just take the scoring and rate the screens based on what people scored highest on their feedback sheet to the lowest... giving a first, second, third, fourth, fifth...etc... I then have her add up all the firsts seconds ,, and take stats off this.. ( someones first could have a score of 80... while someone elses score could have a score of 100) Well guess what ... the highest number of firsts voted for the Silverstar... The hightest number of first and seconds,, Silverstar... The highest number of first, seconds and thirds,,,, the StudioTek 130... Some of the people that were there also scored the Silverstar one of the worst too btw... way too bright etc... But how does one ignore 140 people sitting in a room watching it and that many people liking it the best... are they wrong?? Are they stupid?? Do their brains not function properly to know what they like and do not like for a HT experience... ???? So the bull crap about what is right and wrong in the review by Mr. Powell in my singular worldview should be taken with a microscopic grain of salt...


Here is shot for you.... tell me which part of the pic you like the best.. Be careful its kind of tricky ...you won't want to get it wrong.... I am not sure really why any one takes one persons advise... The variety of screens that get picked both at the shootout and with live demo's if any proves that you should not let others make decisions for you.... trust your own brain and what your eyes are feeding your brain... If you like it... thats the way to go...


Some of the report from Evan tho ,, and actually much of it coincides with the vast majority of what was selected at the shootout... maybe he is one of the people that would have been at the shootout that did not like the Silverstar... again this is only a single person...


What are the screen materials in this pic... ???


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by mandarax_
> *I don't understand what the problem is ...
> 
> 
> Here is the quote... from Mr. Powell..
> 
> ...
> 
> I sort of agree but also disagree with this statement... and it makes the entire notation of the silverstar statements subject to scrutinity as to the validity of the statements.... So taking the statement verbatim ..the other screens look like they are reflecting an insufficient amount of light, look dull, lusterless, lacking pronounced clear cut, or vigorous quality or character... seen indistinclty or without clear outlines or details....perceived by the ones senses as indistinct or faint, having little prospect of a favorable outcome, ... but no these qualities are not good for the human being in a home theater environment... One should go with the non dazzling dim screen...
> 
> 
> Well I have my own view of the statement used in conjunction with the combination of statements made about the screen ... How about dim witted.. ?? ?*



It seems that you have completely missed the point of the statement and have not taken the human visual system into account. As has been pointed out, comparing two screens side-by-side and using that as the basis for which screen you want is a little bit like drinking Coke and Pepsi at the same time by using two straws and keeping each on one half of you mouth and then deciding which one you will drink by itself based just on this single test. Having a brighter screen will change the perception of the other screen, but you seem to be ignoring this effect completely.


When I went to Tryg's place I wanted to make a point, so I asked him what would happen to the whites if we put the 1.0 gain white screen next to the High Power or SilverStar. He said white was white, so it would still be white. We then did the experiment I suggested. I think he was a little bit surprised to see that the whites were now gray on the 1.0 gain screen, but that completely fits the human visual system. There is no level defined for white. It is relative. Whites and colors will tend to get a dullness on any screen when a brighter screen is placed next to them.


The experiment that you have shown here could be repeated with a Vutec 13.9 gain screen with a piece of the SilverStar on top of it and would show the same effect. Except that the SilverStar is the one that you could trash with the same logic. So, why stop at the SilverStar? Why not go with the 13.9 gain screen? Wouldn't it be dim-witted to not do that?


Some people will like the SilverStar or High Power for multiple reasons, but it is far from dim-witted (actually the opposite) to understand that the results when using a screen by itself are much different than the results that will be achieved when a brighter screen is placed next to it.


The same goes for a brighter projector next to a dimmer projector in general. If you took two identical projectors and placed them side-by-side on the same screen and put the bulb on high for one and low for the other the lower side would have duller colors. I wouldn't use this to prove that people are trading off their images for lower fan noise though.


Our visual systems have a lot of adaptability that is basically disabled when doing the bright screen next to dim screen experiment. I think these side-by-side tests are useful for learning certain things, but neglecting to take into account the differences between these and real world usage (where people only use one screen at a time) doesn't make much sense to me.


I had some problems with some of the things that Evan wrote, but I think his understanding that a screen will look much different by itself than with a brighter screen next to it tells me that at least he understands some important things.


Mandarax,


I enjoy a lot of your posts and you seem very knowledgable on a lot of things. However, I think this post neglected certain realities of physics and the human makeup. I would go so far as to say that anyone who is using a side-by-side or pieces of screens together example to show customers that colors look dim on the dimmer screen in this kind of setup in order to sell a brighter screen is using an optical illusion, whether they realize it or not.


--Darin


----------



## mandarax

Darin ... Thanks for the opportunity to respond... I've read and enjoyed your posts too.


I have 13 screens in the showroom... I only do them one at a time in the showroom.. I don't even tell people what they are... I let them decide what they like...


If you are saying that the results of the shootout are not valid.. people would all like a bright screen over the dimmer one this is absolutely not the case... In fact as many people that really liked the Silver Star ...there was about the same number that scored it lower and not marginally lower.. Peculiar as it may sound ... the numbers or stats watching the screens individually does not change.. about the same ratios at the event than with private viewing shown seperately.... The disparity of choices to different folks is so much in fact that it is not possible for me to tell a person that they will like a particular screen.... The stats do help me narrow down the relevant choices by what people write in their comments and as a whole ... but that is it.. Sorry but stating that a SilverStar is not suited for Home Theater ... to me is dimwitted.. I have too many people that love it.. so is it therefore wrong for home theater.. I suppose all the people that purchased a High Power are wrong...as well .. The point is it is a feckless exercise to state what is right and wrong for people when they have the opportunity to look for themselves and actually choose what they like the most that pleases them..


I disagree that if a 13.9 gain screen were shown beside the Silverstar that more people would like it,, or choose it as their favorite.. In fact I will bet that the opposite would happen, but trying to guess what would happen with a 13. gain screen in an event when there is no such thing is also a feckless exercise... I go based on the stats that I get... There is 140 people at the event... Your suggestion is that if the screens would be shown seperately that the results would have been different.. I don't know ... The projector was not set for the High Power... it was set for two identical HCCV screens that we used later for the Projector portion of the shootout... Taking the information or the point that you are trying to make would be that the clear cut winner would then also be the brighter projector... The projectors that got the most votes were the ones that looked the most natural I think... not the brighter ones... I will get some people that also will look at a NEC HT1000 and an LT260k and pick the LT260k. Did they screw up?? or do they see things differently than I do..


Point is we all see things differently ... there is no right or wrong answer.. that is the reality of physics and human makeup... the stats I have to prove this are too significant to ignore,,,,,,,,, if there is a skew in the results it is that there is a consistent percentage of the sample that score "cheap" with the highest marks.. this would actually have gone against the silverstar and the stewart.. but again the sample size corrects this...


In the showroom and at events I never show swatches... they are always full screens... and the event there was two 8700 projectors from the same source... on two seperate full screens... Its not perfect... but it is timely.. Me personally ... I am not drawn to brightness, but my brain does tell me what image is more engaging and interesting to look at and natural... I have my own favorite but that again is a personal issue and the primary reason why I don't have just one or two screens in the showroom.. Nothing would suit me more than to have the choices come in from the shootout that would lessen the variety of screens I carry.. life would be much simpler..


With projectors it seems to be a much simpler process, at least the number of iterations is much smaller.. Fortunately too is the fact that people with a fixed budget help streamline the process that not all the iterations are necessary to go through each and every time.. It is a pain moving all those screens around...


Your guess that people would always pick the brighter screen does not hold true.. in fact there is a greater probability that if the projector was set for the higher gain screen that more people would have actually chosen the Silverstar... not less.. If the projectors were ceiling mounted probably even more again.. I would be guilding the lily if I stated that the coke/pepsi analogy made any useful point on the topic..given the nature of comparing the technique described.. There were no people leaving the room after the first session with screens that looked like Marty Feldman.. rather it was quite easy to focus on one screen at a time.. again not perfect but just because a statement was made to suggest this type of test is similar to your coke/pepsi scenerio doesnt make it so.. I should have come away then being affected with what my favorite screen was and modified what I felt was my favorite screen given that I am a normal carbon unit human like everyone else.... that didnt happen.


I do not try and sell anyone a brighter screen as you suggest.. If that were the case I would only have bright screens in the showroom.. Not sure why you are drawing this happens from your imagination..


In the interest of not getting into another coke/pepsi analogy ... here is the main point that I disagree with.... Lets say Tryg loves the Silverstar... which apparently he does... the man has looked at quite a few screens and his brain tells him that this is the best screen for him... nothing comes closer at present that pleases him more... So now Evan Powell comes along and states that this screen is not suitable for Home Theater.. So to go along with this as a fact, one would then have to say that Trygs brain is not functioning properly... or his 120 million achromatic rods that are giving his brain the brightness information is somehow impaired, abnormal, or the cones giving his eyes the color information is capute... whatever,,, something is amiss because how can it be that if Trygs primary usage is with home theater, and this screen is not suitable for home theater.. I say that Tryg knows what he likes as do the others that love the screen and there is nothing wrong with them... Personal visual perception... Don't let others make decisions for you when it comes to what you like visually.


Here is an analogy for you... Lets say Evan Powell likes to look at portly fat women... lets say it pleases his visual senses... and that he only likes to look at portly fat women and states that looking at thin or athletic looking women is not suitable.. Are you going to go out and marry or date portly fat woman.. ?? (no offence to portly fat women intended... just trying to make an analogy that makes more sense than drinking two cans of pop scenerio... some men like portly fat women and I do not think there is anything wrong with that ) ...


The bottom line was that I thought that for the most part the review was fairly accurate... but it was from Evans singular worldview... and that should be understood... nothing beats seeing it for yourself... and making your own decision.. The margin for error taken from one viewer is substaintially higher... look at the disparity of what these two expert opinions (tryg and evan powell) that I personally value with equal credibility.. Which one is right??


No offence taken Darinp ... one of the reasons my company foots the bill for the events I host is to get information from a larger sample size than my own worldview... I really could care less what screen a person picks as best for them,,, I have never had a person pick a "wrong screen" that sat and took the time to look at them..



Robert


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by mandarax_
> *If you are saying that the results of the shootout are not valid..
> *



I don't think the results are invalid, but I think they only represent part of the equation. The fact is that screens look different when placed next to other screens than they do by themselves and that 99+% of people will only use one projector and screen at a time in their theater. So, while side-by-side tests can be interesting the important thing is what people think of the setup they will have in their theater (or something as close as is reasonable) and not what they think of some other kind of setup (like 2 screens at once).


You made a relatively smart alec comment with:


> Quote:
> *
> 
> ..the other screens look like they are reflecting an insufficient amount of light, look dull, lusterless, lacking pronounced clear cut, or vigorous quality or character...
> 
> ...
> 
> One should go with the non dazzling dim screen...*



However, Evan did not say that these screens would look dim by themselves, he said that they looked dim when placed next to a much brighter screen. There is a world of difference between those things.


> Quote:
> *people would all like a bright screen over the dimmer one this is absolutely not the case..
> *



I did not say that. I said that the brighter screen will tend to dim the colors on the other screen. For instance, it can make it impossible to get something that will be perceived as white. I didn't say this meant they would prefer the brighter screen. It will change the perception of the dimmer screen compared to seeing it by itself and I don't even see how that is really debatable.


> Quote:
> *Sorry but stating that a SilverStar is not suited for Home Theater ...
> *



I agree. As I said, I had a problem with some of his statements. However, the example you used is very misleading. There were multiple reasons why I didn't think his statements about the SilverStar were all that just, but my main one would be that he didn't talk about what projector he was matching it up with and seemed to skip that screens and projectors need to be matched. Even to get the same ft-lamberts you can use different combinations, so any comment that a screen is too bright is bogus just from the fact that a dimmer projector could be used to get to the same ft-lamberts as he gets with another screen and projector. As far as how this relates to other people, I hope that people understand his review was for his preferences and there are always people who will have different preferences. I'm guessing that he knows this too, but was giving his opinions and people should take them as such. I hope he doesn't think his impressions are the only valid ones, but I would be surprised if he thought that.


> Quote:
> *
> 
> I disagree that if a 13.9 gain screen were shown beside the Silverstar that more people would like it,
> *



Did I say that? I don't think I said people would prefer that. I said that if you posted a picture of this it would do much the same thing to the SilverStar image as you've shown with the other screen's images. I think if you tried it you would see the same effect unless you used a long exposure and blew out the whites on the 13.9 side.


> Quote:
> *Your suggestion is that if the screens would be shown seperately that the results would have been different..
> *



I don't know if the results would have been different, but I think it is a scientific fact that a screen will look different with a brighter screen placed next to it than it will by itself. The proximity and the ability of people to focus on one screen over another does make some difference as the problem is bigger when samples are placed over screens and pretty much completely takes away the eye's and brain's abilities to adjust. Your example here is with materials on top of each other.


> Quote:
> *
> 
> Taking the information or the point that you are trying to make would be that the clear cut winner would then also be the brighter projector...
> *



I'm pretty sure I've never made the point that the brighter projector would be the clear cut winner as you suggest.


> Quote:
> *
> 
> Point is we all see things differently ... there is no right or wrong answer..
> *



This is true, but I think it is important to have accurate information at this forum and I think people should understand that putting two or more materials together as you did in the example I responded to will not give the same results as when each material is viewed individually. Just like if somebody posted that you couldn't get white on a gray screen (as has happened in the past). This is bogus factually.


> Quote:
> *
> 
> Your guess that people would always pick the brighter screen does not hold true..
> *



As I said, I'm pretty sure I never said that. Blacks can actually look blacker on a dimmer screen when placed next to a brighter screen (depending on how much washout there is and how much ability for people to focus their eyes on just the one screen), just like the whites will look dimmer and there are a lot of things that go into preferences. But, pretty much any screen will look dimmer when placed next to a brighter screen than it will by itself.


> Quote:
> *Lets say Tryg loves the Silverstar... which apparently he does... the man has looked at quite a few screens and his brain tells him that this is the best screen for him... nothing comes closer at present that pleases him more... So now Evan Powell comes along and states that this screen is not suitable for Home Theater.. So to go along with this as a fact, one would then have to say that Trygs brain is not functioning properly... or his 120 million achromatic rods that are giving his brain the brightness information is somehow impaired, abnormal, or the cones giving his eyes the color information is capute... whatever,,, something is amiss because how can it be that if Trygs primary usage is with home theater, and this screen is not suitable for home theater.. I say that Tryg knows what he likes as do the others that love the screen and there is nothing wrong with them... Personal visual perception... Don't let others make decisions for you when it comes to what you like visually.
> *



I agree, but as I said I hope that people understand that Evan was just giving an opinion (which I didn't agree with) and not a fact like 2+2=4.


I personally think that one reason Tryg likes the brighter images is because he has a D-ILA projector (besides having a very light colored room). In my experience these projectors tend to make the visibility of artifacts less obvious than DLPs. So, while some people with DLPs will also like a bright screen like the SilverStar, there are also a lot of us who are drawn to the brightness at first, but find that the visibility of MPEG2 compression artifacts and things bothers us over time. I also believe that more people will move to brighter screens as sources get cleaner and many of us aren't fighting the tradeoff between brighter images that can be more engaging for a while, but can also make images look more digital.


I personally have gone back and forth between brighter and dimmer mainly because of the artifact issue, but now that I have a Qualia projector I think I will be moving toward a little bit brighter. I think this projetor also has a little bit of a smoothing effect compared to my single chip DLP and my 3 chip DLP, although the Algolith Mosquito tends to smooth those out somewhat. Anyway, that is a digression as this isn't really about what I like or dislike.


So, I think there are a couple of points here for us. One is Evan's opinions that may be stated as facts and I think we agree about a lot of those. The other one is my point that images look different when more than one thing is combined at once as in your example and what is important at the end is how things will look by themselves. These can vary drastically from that example.


--Darin


----------



## craig john




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Tryg_
> *The Ford Escort is a pretty decent car if you drive it without the Farrari anywhere in sight. Its just not fair to compare the Farrari side by side with the Ford Escort. It's just plain misleading.*



Motor Trend must have heard you! This month, they compare the Ford Focus to a Lamborghini Gallardo. They must have known it would be misleading to compare it to a Ferrari.











Craig


----------



## mandarax

Darin... The picture that I attached is not meant for anything but to have people guess what the screen materials are... infotainment... nothing more.. it does seem to help Evans point tho.. although if you know the materials you may get a bit confused with some of the facts... Screenshots can be useful but I wouldnt recommend making a decision based on a screenshot.


You will note that for the most part Evans review except for the Silverstar replicates the majority of the choices made by attendees at the shootout and for the most of the same reasons... But even though many of the people that were at the shootout picked the Silverstar as the favorite it couldnt be declared a winner due to how many people also did not like it..


Its too bad that Ken from Goo didnt get someone to build a decent frame.. seems to have hurt the result.. The frame for the DIY frame that was at the shootout (not on the Goo Screen) didnt get a chance to warp at the event due to how new it was but within days it had warped out about 9" from edge to center and so bad in fact that I couldnt even hang it for our garage sale sign..


Robert


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by mandarax_
> *Its too bad that Ken from Goo didnt get someone to build a decent frame.. seems to have hurt the result.. The frame for the DIY frame that was at the shootout (not on the Goo Screen) didnt get a chance to warp at the event due to how new it was but within days it had warped out about 9" from edge to center and so bad in fact that I couldnt even hang it for our garage sale sign..
> *



Thanks Robert. That is some great information to have. I think your shootout did a great service by getting some real information out about these. I'm all for people doing DIY things, but sometimes the devil is in the details and more can go wrong than we realize. I have a sample piece from Ken from quite a while ago that developed poc marks over time and just looks horrible. This isn't meant as a knock, but just that it must have taken some time to get things tweaked as it does for many businesses. In this case I believe he used a backing material for the samples that just wasn't going to hold up with his Goo and I'm guessing that the suggestions of how to use this stuff have gotten much better since then.


Fortunately, there are quite a few people on the DIY forum willing to do lots of testing and tweaking, so I'm sure they'll be able to work issues like this out. However, anybody who decides to be an early adopter should realize that they are probably taking more risk and this is even more the case with things that haven't been put through rigorous testing. There is a reason that companies have beta programs to work some of the kinks out.


--Darin


----------



## mandarax

Darin .... there is always some attraction to doing DIY.. I am not sure that I even would call Goo a DIY... I dabbled with my own coating before even knowing Goo existed... Unfortunately it was just too expensive to make.. would have required a huge amount of support and service that I could not afford and would have therefore driven the price even higher. I have seen the paint mixes and they to me at least never fail to disappoint. The colorometry is all goofed up...the brightness and color uniformity is horrid, and when one looks at the price for this vs just he material.. it just has never made sense... I make mounts for the products I endorse... if someone was trying a DIY on one to make it would cost 9 times as much..Not including the CAD work involved,the designing, engineering, the packaging, invoicing, etc.. A screen is a lot simpler to make.. A person cannot coat as well as a machine can.. If you look at the first mount I did special for a customer that was hand machined, and the plate was cut vs the laser cutter you would see a huge difference... I can't possibly make things as good as a computer controlled machine.. thats why I use them..


Robert


----------



## Ximori

Just my opinion - after reading numerous posts and reviews from Tryg and Ewan, I got the impression that Tryg leans toward more video-like images - vibrant and bright, while Ewan's preferences are more cinematic and film-like where he likes more saturated, low light and tone-balanced colors. These two won't get along and you definitely will get two different opinions from them re screen choices.

But hell I could be wrong on this as I'm no screen expert. I would like to learn though from you guys as I've been wanting to get best screen for my HS20.


----------



## Dark7pt1

Hello Tryg,


Just finished glancing over the review and some of the postings on page 1. KUDOS on your killer review!! A review I've been waiting to find. I appreciated the setup of your review and the way you organized the screenshots for comparison!


I tried to access the URL for the "Screen Primer" but kept getting errors. Mentioning how that site is no longer available. I'd love to get my hands on that pdf as I am a total nubie when it comes to screens. Perhaps we could talk about this in a PM?










Finally, I was under the assumption from talking to various projector enthusiasts that using more than 1.3 gain with a 1000 ansi projector would be too much. Yet your screenshots and insight proved otherwise. That we could indeed benefit from using a high gain Silverstar in a HT. With best results in a completely darkened room....at the appropriate distance from the screen.


Which screen material was used for the 122" Silverstar? Enhanced Gray?


Thanks again for your efforts!!


----------



## Tryg

Most people dont know what their talking about. Especially those that have zero experience in something.


I'm glad you liked the review. That link was very handy but I did notice it was pulled for some reason. You should be able to find other screen primers if you do some searches.


Also, Gray screens are not high gain. You really need to be more than 2 gain to call yourself "high". The Silverstar is somewhere between 2.5 and 3 gain. The materials used I really cant talk about publicly.


To really understand what's "too bright" you need to do some foot lambert calculations. Shoot for 15 fl for dimmer movie theater look, 50 for a direct view CRT and 70 for Plasmas. I prefer the healthy image of 30 - 50 foot lamberts. I'd also lay down money that 10 out of 10 people would prefer the brightness of a high gain screen with a projector rated at 1000 lumens than any screen near unity gain (1 gain).


Dont forget to use only 70% of manufacturers spec'd lumens.


----------



## wsg

Thanks for this information. I'm looking to upgrade from the "wall" screen, and after reading the side-by-side reviews, I'm leaning toward silver. Will this be too bright with a 2000 lumen DLP pj though? Also, are these screens available in 120"+ diagonal and 4:3. Finally, can I use one of these with ambient light or is gray better.


----------



## subwoofer

I was going to start a new thread for this but I figured I would just post it here:


I'm new to front projectors and probably won't get one cause of the amount of ambient light in my tv room. I heard that Sony or someone is coming out with a BLACK screen to project onto that will reduce ambient light dramatically. Is this true?


----------



## wsg

I saw a real interesting thread on this yesterday. Apparently, the sizes may be limited, it may sell for only $500 or as much as $2,000, and the release date is next spring or summer, but these seem very promising! Take a look at the side-by-side screen shot someone posted. The difference is truly amazing.


----------



## PAP

There are only about 50 threads on that screen already. This is not one of them


----------



## smithfarmer

Can someone pm me what the powerbuy price was on a 107" x 60" silverstar ?


----------



## Tryg

WOW!


100,000 views!


Thanks for all the support. I hope this post helped some people.


----------



## Rob Tomlin

Well, I'm still thoroughly enjoying my 122.5" SilverStar.


It's not a perfect screen, but I still wouldn't trade it for any other screens out there right now.


----------



## wsg

As a 4:3 viewer, I'm looking for at least 120" diagonal. I called Vutec last week re: the size limitations on the current Silverstars and was told that larger screens will be released in the next 2-3 months!


----------



## smithfarmer




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by smithfarmer_
> *Can someone pm me what the powerbuy price was on a 107" x 60" silverstar ?*



Bump.


Didn't realize I had PM's disabled.


Thanks in advance, for any info provided.


----------



## Cilent1




> Quote:
> Well, I'm still thoroughly enjoying my 122.5" SilverStar.
> 
> 
> It's not a perfect screen, but I still wouldn't trade it for any other screens out there right now.



What he said!


Tryg, your reviews got me started. Thanks for the effort


----------



## Nicholas Mosher

Here is one of my favorite examples of perceived contrast ratio.











The two tiles labeled "a" and "b" are actually the same exact shade of gray. Their contrast with the surrounding tiles gives them the appearance of having two different colors. Pretty neat I thought.


Anyhoo, I'm lurking through threads in the $3500 and less PJs as well as screens doing my own research. This is a good thread!


----------



## Rob Tomlin

No way that tile A and tile B are the same shade of gray.


----------



## Nicholas Mosher

Edit everything out using paint shop.

Here is a rough job by me. Interesting what happens when you give the tiles equal contrast with their surroundings...


----------



## geocab

There's gotta be some kind of code in the photo, right? If I cover my monitor and only let the two tiles show, they don't look the same to me.


Maybe if I print it out, then cut it.....


----------



## Nicholas Mosher

Even the slightest bit of darker black or brighter white will change the perceived contrast ratio. Even looking at the image I airbrushed I can trick my eyes into thinking the two tiles are slightly different due to the label colors.


----------



## Jeremy Anderson

Wow... you're right. According to Photoshop's eyedropper tool, they're the exact same color. That's freaky.


----------



## Nicholas Mosher

I haven't picked up a PJ yet, but I'm hoping to use perceived contrast as a tool for giving my blacks a deeper look.


Even though I can't see the rainbow effect, DLP bothers me with it's dithering issues so I'm looking at the Z3, AE700U, SP5000, and HS51 LCD units.


I'm considering using a higher gain screen as a means to increasing my perceived contrast ratio. By making my whites brighter, I'm hoping to get the same effect as the above tile "A" that appears darker due to the brighter whites it's surrounded by. In reality the blacks won't be any better (perhaps even worse due to the higher reflected light), but the contrast ratio between the brilliant whites should be larger giving me the impression of darker blacks... I'm hoping


----------



## Ericglo

Nicholas,

As Darin has mentioned, you could use a higher contrast ratio setting with a higher gain screen. I don't know which projectors you are looking at have variable contrast ratio settings, but you might want to look into that. Of course, you could always buy a CRT for the best in contrast ratio.










Ericglo


----------



## Hughman




> Quote:
> _Originally posted by Nicholas Mosher_
> *I'm considering using a higher gain screen as a means to increasing my perceived contrast ratio. By making my whites brighter, I'm hoping to get the same effect as the above tile "A" that appears darker due to the brighter whites it's surrounded by. In reality the blacks won't be any better (perhaps even worse due to the higher reflected light), but the contrast ratio between the brilliant whites should be larger giving me the impression of darker blacks... I'm hoping
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *



Generally it works the other way around, vision is more sensitive to small changes in black levels than to similar changes in whites. Decreasing light intensity at the screen should give the perception of increased contrast whereas increasing intensity may actually have the opposite effect. I suppose this effect would vary depending on the PJ's contrast ratio, the higher the real contrast ratio the greater the perceived effect.


After looking at the checkerboard (that's pretty cool) it looks to me that block B has lightened up considerably due to it's darker surrounding more than block A has darkened.


It's all about perpective, I'm in the process of selecting a screen and in an effort to determine which appears to provide the darkest blacks I taped many on the screen and output on all black image onto them then brought my wife down to take a look. I ask her which one gives the best blacks, she looks puzzled for a moment staring straight ahead so I ask her again and she says what do mean black I see a bunch of white squares on the screen. My temp screen plus the felt borders provided a dark enough contrast that some of the samples appeared more white than black to her.


----------



## Nicholas Mosher

Good point, I'm probably just going to have to order samples like you once I buy a PJ.


----------



## Zilla

Excellent thread. I wish someone would compare these screens to Screen Goo and provide results as well.


----------



## Tryg

Try the "screen showcase" review below


----------



## sbhira

Hi Tryg,


You have done a review of lots of screen materials. You are a fan of silver screen. Have you tried viewing Stewart Silver 3D screen. how do it stand against Vutec Silverstar.


Thanks alot.


Sbhira


----------



## wnielsenbb

Or the Dalite silver, for a more budget conscience silver.


----------



## Tryg

those are made for 3D applications


----------



## Audionuttt

Psssst: It's almost here - SilverStar on a roll!! (I'm delaying my HT to accomodate a 10' wide plus screen for this...) I cannot divulge any more - BUT the wait is almost over











> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Randy Mathis* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> The biggest that they offer is 48"X85" in 16:9 and 48"X112" in 2.35. 58"X104 would be nice. The wife now wants a silverstar after seeing this. She won't go for the 85" though.


----------



## Ximori

Ever since I got the Graywolf screen I wanted to learn more about its properties. I never really got solid answers, then I just remembered Tryg and turned to his reviews.


Having read his reviews again, this time absorbing it, everything now seems to have sunk in. I got to say that this is the guy that should really be writing reviews on the Graywolf, Supernova, Sony Blackscreen, and other "Best Buy" screens.







I'm really surprised that AVS isn't putting his link on top of all these other threads.


Tryg, many thanks to you. yes, I still have a lot to learn; I wonder if you have plans on doing another major review, this time with the newer screen technologies.


I read somewhere where Darin was hoping that the supernova can fight ambient lighting with lesser lumens...on the other hand, Jason had pointed out that the screen is somewhat angular reflective, and not retro...


hey, you cannot cheat physics...


----------



## wnielsenbb

Audionutt, When will the wait be over? I want a supernova, but they are too little. A 10' wide 2.35 silverstar would be quite nice.

Warren.


----------



## Chippy99

Just wanted to add a comment that perhaps you guys haven't considered...


It seems to me that if you have a dedicated Home Theatre, you will most likely have gone for dark carpets, dark walls, velvet drapes, dark painted ceiling etc.


However, if you HT gear is in your living room, you most likely have a white ceiling and light colored walls and doors, and maybe light carpets and furniture too.


In these latter circumstances, you are surely struggling to get decent black levels. Even if your porjector has a 100,000:1 contrast ratio, with high APL scenes lots of light will hit the screen, reflect off onto the walls and surrounding and light up the room. Just notice how NOT dark it is in your room when there is some bright action on screen. And lots of this light gets back onto the screen and ruins the black levels, no matter how good your projector was in the first place.


***However***, what if you go for a dark gray, *highly directional*, high gain screen, like the the Firehawk. Then what happens is that only the light from the wall behind you really impairs the picture. The light off the walls and ceiling hits the screen at an angle and not much of that comes back at you, since the screen has a narrow viewing angle (and therefore reflecting angle).


I would think you *should* get better blacks this way. And if the screen has a gain of more than 1.0, your whites should be perfect too.


It strikes me that screens with narrow viewing angles are surely best for sub-optimal viewing environments. Isn't that the trick behind the new daylight projection screens?


Just a thought.


Chip


----------



## Chippy99




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Nicholas Mosher* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Here is one of my favorite examples of perceived contrast ratio.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The two tiles labeled "a" and "b" are actually the same exact shade of gray. Their contrast with the surrounding tiles gives them the appearance of having two different colors. Pretty neat I thought.
> 
> 
> Anyhoo, I'm lurking through threads in the $3500 and less PJs as well as screens doing my own research. This is a good thread!



Amazing!!!


Just a couple of comments too.


1. I remember an episode of "Horizon" in the UK some years back. The program was all about color and our perception of it.


They took some people and put them in a dark room and showed them a grid of colored squares on the wall. They asked people to look at the orange square. Everyone agreed that it was orange. They measured the light output from the orange square in terms of its R, G and B levels.


Here's the wierd part. They then played around with the light levels (i.e. the hue) in the room, and no matter what they did, the orange square still looks orange. Finally they get a point where they stop and re-measure the light coming from the orange square, and in fact the R G and B levels indicate that it is in fact *green*. But it still looks orange!!!?!!


Basically - even though objectively the square is green - its still more orange than the surrounding squares, so the human brain still thinks its orange.



2. I remember being in a demo at work where we were using an old Barco CRT projector in a dark room. We very soon realised that the red tube had blown, but the projector continued to work, even with only 2 tubes firing. But we persevered.


After 10 minutes or so, we could all see whites on the screen - and reds and blues and greens. But there was no red there because the red tube was still bust. You can't make white light with only blue and green, yet white is what we could see.


Chip


----------



## Tryg

Try test #3

http://www.echalk.co.uk/amusements/O...erception.html 



It demonstrates that your surroundings have an enormous influence on how you perceive colors.


hint: dont let anyone try to sell you a "color corrected" screen. TOTAL SNAKEOIL!


----------



## Rob Tomlin

Cool stuff!


----------



## joerod

I have the Vutec 122" Silverstar and can say it is like having a BIG plasma screen. Watching football in HD is amazing to say the least! I have my screen recessed so it is even with the wall. The 3.5 inch black velvet border really makes the screen look elegant (my wifes word). The family joke around here now is let's go see what's on the "silver" screen...


----------



## LoveMovies

Joerod, Which projector are you using with the Silverstar?


----------



## joerod

I am using a BenQ 7700 for now. I just wanted a good single chip DLP PJ to tide me over til the 3 chippers are more cost effective. Of course if the bulb issue happens again I will be getting an Optoma H79 or 78.


----------



## Sonisame

Atter reading the review for Behr Silverscreen, I went to HomeDepot and got myself a quart of it. I already had Behr's ultra white on my projection wall. I did two coat's of silverscreen on top of it.


WOW, yes it does magically improves the colors and brightness of image.


Thanks Tryg for finding this cool color combination.


Sonisame


----------



## Tryg

Pearlescent topcoating usually provide the best gain characteristics without issues. That's what the pros use


----------



## Rob Tomlin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *joerod* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I have the Vutec 122" Silverstar and can say it is like having a BIG plasma screen. Watching football in HD is amazing to say the least! I have my screen recessed so it is even with the wall. The 3.5 inch black velvet border really makes the screen look elegant (my wifes word). The family joke around here now is let's go see what's on the "silver" screen...



I have the exact same screen and size, and I agree with the description of having a huge plasma screen.


But do you notice the "sheen" in brighter scenes Joe? That is really my only criticism of this screen.


----------



## joerod

Yes, from time to time I do. I will be using an Optoma H79 soon and will see if there is a difference. I can forgive the "sheen" because the screen makes up for it in many other ways...


----------



## Rob Tomlin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *joerod* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Yes, from time to time I do. I will be using an Optoma H79 soon and will see if there is a difference. I can forgive the "sheen" because the screen makes up for it in many other ways...



Agreed....but I still wish the sheen wasn't there.


----------



## wnielsenbb

Have you tried an ND2 filter Rob? It may tame the brightness and thus the sheen.

Warren.


----------



## Rob Tomlin

But cutting down the brightness would defeat one of the main things I like about the screen in the first place, so it seems counterintuitive. I am using a Dwin TV3, which isn't really known for being a light cannon.


----------



## mimason




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Rob Tomlin* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Agreed....but I still wish the sheen wasn't there.



Rob, I've tried a ND filter and that helps a little. My Sony is not a light cannon either but you can find a filter that filters less than a ND2 from B&H as well. I curse at the screen now and then because of the sheen but if I put up my Carada sample 1.4 or 1.0 to compare thinking of greener pastures I end up saying damn this is a nice screen. It's a love hate relationship.


----------



## smithfarmer

I've got that same screen and it's actually 120.5", Vutec's info was incorrect and they have since changed their literature and website. I'm currently using it with an Infocus 4805 mounted at 18.4' and I've never had what I would describe as an overall sheen on the screen. What I did see on a few occasions was an unnatural look on the whitecaps on large ocean waves or surf. This was strange to me because when viewing scenes of snow and icebergs from documentaries of places such as Antarctica I didn't see this.


Anyway, I purchased a Hoya HMC ND2 filter and this artifact is now virtually nonexistent and it still seems like a big plasma on the wall. I also used to suffer from some eye fatigue and that is now gone as well. For $30 it's well worth a try even if it seems counterintuitive.


----------



## Tryg

I think I use to see the sheen with a brand new bulb but now at 1800 on this bulb I cant see any sheen.


I wonder if there is a magical lumen number where this dissapears or if I just don't look for it any more.


I'll try to look for it tonight


----------



## Rob Tomlin

Any follow up Tryg? Did you notice the sheen in the brightest scenes?


----------



## Tryg

Sorry guys this is the third night in a row I've watched a movie but failed to actively look for the sheen. To busy loving the silverstar/movies!


I spend a hell of a lot less on D-ILA bulbs now. I let them run to 2500 hours and they're still bright enough on the Silaverstar!


----------



## Brian P. Hearon

What are your thoughts on the Silverstar screen with the Sony SXRD or JVC LCOS projectors in a light controlled theater?


----------



## johnny_o

Excellent review - very informative. I'm operating an Electrohome 9500LC and am looking for a new screen. I've been told by DaLite that the high power will not work (at least not well) with a ceiling mounted projector as it is unidirectional and will direct light back towords the CRT's. Is this true? If it is, it must operate very differently than most screen materials. My home theatre is in a 2 bedroom apartment so ceiling mounting is my only option due to limited space. Is the Silverstar a better choice for my application? Any insight would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## deanzsyclone




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Brian P. Hearon* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> What are your thoughts on the Silverstar screen with the Sony SXRD or JVC LCOS projectors in a light controlled theater?



Yes I also was wondering this, I still have not bought a screen for my Ruby and after reading the first 8 pages of this thread I'm really leaning toward this as a purchase, but also assumed with the SXRD and some nice 1080p material (wmvhd) this would really be STUNNING, do tell!


----------



## BMELVIN

Is the Vutec SS screen the only way to go for a high gain screen where the projector is ceiling mounted, The new "RUBY" is mounted about 8 ft above my head against the back wall. *Are there any other screen options?* I have the new RUBY and have it ceiling projecting on my DIY wall painted with 3 coats of Ultra Bher bright white 8ft wide 16x9 screen. The walls and carpet are very dark green with total darkness control.


After 300 hours I can already see the difference in bightness. It is still a little brighter than my HS51 projector but I really like the "PLASMA" look when I first got it. I know the studio tek 130 is an option, but the screen sample I used only shows a very slight difference in what I have now so for the cost this is not an option. I used the small SS sample and it looks good but I am still concerned about the "sparkles" on the bright scenes. It is hard to really see this in with the small test sample I have.


----------



## Rob Tomlin

You only see a very small difference between your painted wall and a StudioTek 130? I hope that was a small sample, as it would certainly seem that there should be a rather dramatic improvement over projecting onto a wall.


----------



## LVS

BMELVIN,

I think it comes down to tradeoffs. I have the SS and a Sanyo Z4 (I know not in the same league as the Ruby). I had many samples from Stewart, Carada, etc...


I think you will see some sparklies with SS and if a smoother image is much more important to you than an occasional sparkle then the SS may not be the way to go. To me having the extra brightness, "pop", sharpness and transparency of the silverscreen outweighed seeing some occasional graininess/sparkle. I fought with same issues but glad I ended up with the Silverscreen.


----------



## mimason

The only time really can complain about the SS is with SD material. The screen is pretty reveiling so you will see more imperfections like compression artifacts. This is a blessing as well because good transfers and HD material look fantastic. I think that the SS will be a good screen for the future as tech improves and source compression reduces. Perhaps the middle road best option is a ST 130 if you are at all sensative to sheen but you also won't get the same pop from sports etc. compared to a high gain screen.


IMO the best screen would be an angular reflective DaLite HP but no one has done that yet.


----------



## BMELVIN

I might have to get several samples of the Studio 130 and try it again. I have one small sample of it about 12 inches by 6 inches and taped up against the wall painted with the Bher - Ultra bright white and from my sitting distance 13 ft away I couldnt tell where the sample was on the wall, it just kinda blended in. When I looked at it closer up I can tell the sample is a little brighter but that is it.


----------



## LVS

I did the same tests, with my wall and 1.0 gain sample, I could not tell where the sample was. With the Studiotek 130, Carada BW (1.4), you could see the sample as it did stand out but it was still subtle. What I noticed more than anything was that it smoothed the image and made it look a bit more film like. At times I liked the non-ss material but I always ended up going back. BTW, at least in my room Off screen viewing angles are very good with ss.


You might want to price the ss with Jason Turk if you havn't already. I don't think you will be dissappointed.


----------



## Strahan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *johnny_o* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I've been told by DaLite that the high power will not work (at least not well) with a ceiling mounted projector as it is unidirectional and will direct light back towords the CRT's. Is this true?



Yea, high power from Dalite is retroreflective. I got a sample of their high power and video spectra material yesterday and checked it out.. I was hoping that maybe in my setup it would still be good (8' ceiling, PJ on ceiling). Nope. If I stood on the couch it was VERY much brighter than my wall, but once I sat down there was practically no change. As far as the video spectra, I had the same issue bmelvin had - it seemed to disappear into the wall. I saw no appreciable difference between my white wall and that fabric.


----------



## Danny5

I just wanted to thank Tryg and the other members in this post for helping me decide on the 110" SilverStar. I pick it up in 40 minutes, and I am damn nervous. Not sure how I am going to get it home in my Yukon.










Hope to have some screen shots up soon, just a few more posts to go!










-Danny


----------



## smithfarmer

I picked up my 120" from their place of business and had to rent a box truck to do it. It took 3 of us to unload it. Definitely not a 1 person job. Have fun and good luck.


----------



## deanzsyclone




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Danny5* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I just wanted to thank Tryg and the other members in this post for helping me decide on the 110" SilverStar. I pick it up in 40 minutes, and I am damn nervous. Not sure how I am going to get it home in my Yukon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hope to have some screen shots up soon, just a few more posts to go!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -Danny




Sooooo how do you like it??? I'm still trying to get AV science to send mine, but I dont' know what the hell the hold up is... glad to see you got yours so easily.


----------



## smithfarmer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *deanzsyclone* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I'm still trying to get AV science to send mine, but I dont' know what the hell the hold up is...



CES. Mostly all the Vutec reps go and the place practically shuts down for new orders. The same probably goes for AVS as well. Takes a little time for everyone to get back up to full speed after the show.


----------



## Danny5




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *deanzsyclone* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Sooooo how do you like it??? I'm still trying to get AV science to send mine, but I dont' know what the hell the hold up is... glad to see you got yours so easily.



I have a reseller's license so I can get them direct from a warehouse. They have over a dozen in stock. Its about a 25 mile drive, and I had to borrow a flat bed trailer. Let me post a couple more times and I'll get the shots out.


Of course, this is only the first step in a complete home theater redesign. I only have a single great room in the house, so it has to be multi-purpose.


The screen is freaking gorgeous! The crate is pure mohagany, and there is no way I could have lifted it myself. Luckily, it was right side up, and a quick hit with the drill gun and the screen was free. Now I have to spend a couple hours mounting it properly and figuring out proper heights, etc.


Pics soon!


-Danny


----------



## deanzsyclone




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Danny5* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I have a reseller's license so I can get them direct from a warehouse. They have over a dozen in stock. Its about a 25 mile drive, and I had to borrow a flat bed trailer. Let me post a couple more times and I'll get the shots out.
> 
> 
> Of course, this is only the first step in a complete home theater redesign. I only have a single great room in the house, so it has to be multi-purpose.
> 
> 
> The screen is freaking gorgeous! The crate is pure mohagany, and there is no way I could have lifted it myself. Luckily, it was right side up, and a quick hit with the drill gun and the screen was free. Now I have to spend a couple hours mounting it properly and figuring out proper heights, etc.
> 
> 
> Pics soon!
> 
> 
> -Danny



Nice. Yah I put the order in on Tuesday (today is fri night) and still no word on when it will ship.







So far I'm pretty dissapointed, I don't know what else to do. Untile it show's I'm just keeping the Ruby off for the most part. Yes throw us some screen shots when you get time. L8


----------



## Danny5




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *deanzsyclone* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Nice. Yah I put the order in on Tuesday (today is fri night) and still no word on when it will ship.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So far I'm pretty dissapointed, I don't know what else to do. Untile it show's I'm just keeping the Ruby off for the most part. Yes throw us some screen shots when you get time. L8



Not a problem - was just trying to rack up the necessary posts...


Here ya go:










This is the cover of the box. The only real PITA thing about this is that there is nowhere to hook a rope on too - I drove under 45mph on all side streets on the way home, not going to risk my new screen!


















This is what was in the box. Oooooo - the neighbors had to come over and freak out at how large this thing is!










Here it is in the house, along with all the other things I got that day. This is the actual wall I am going to mount it on. The wife allowed the paint to be this dark, which probably isn't perfect, but its a good compromise.










I am 6'1", so this is a good size comparison so you get an idea of what a 110" screen looks like. I am a screen noob - so I had no idea!!!










And one shot dead on. It sure is pretty, but the mounting system seems overly complicated... *sigh* It will be a few days before I can get to it, I have a TON of other projects going on right now.


Pretty soon I will start a HT buildup thread - building a complete living room on a budget










-Danny


----------



## smithfarmer

Hey Danny, congratulations.


It sure is a heavy crate.










When I called about picking up my screen from Vutec's factory, they were adamant about loading the screen in the upright position and would not allow me to lay it flat saying that it could cause damage to the screens frame. They actually said they would refuse to let me pick it up unless it could be loaded in the upright position. Notice those arrows pointing up ?







I figured they were just being overly cautious and can see that yours came out just fine. Then again, my crate is made out of regular plywood and that might have been the reason for their precautions.


Setup can be a bit tricky and it's definitely a 2 person job.


If you follow Vutec's instruction sheet, you have to be extremely accurate in your measurements.


There are other ways to do it. One way is to attach the brackets to the screen and use 1"x4" fir strips long enough to reach both the brackets on the screen. Screw the strips to the brackets, then remove the brackets from the screen and screw the strips to wall. Just make sure that measurements between the bottom edge of the top strip and top edge of the bottom strips when screwed on the wall are correct. Mount the screen to the brackets and your done.


If you prefer to have a snug fit against the wall, you can mount the brackets to the screen and just use one fir strips as a template. Screw the strip to the top mounting brackets and then unscrew the strip from the brackets. You then take the strip and making sure to keep the side that was away from the screen when attached to the brackets is the same side that is placed against the wall, make sure it's level and then use finishing nails in the holes in the fir strip. Remove the strip from the wall, then remove the finishing nails and mount the brackets where the holes from the nails are at in the wall. Do the same for the bottom brackets making a new set of holes in the strip as you will find the predrilled holes in the bottom of the frame aren't in exactly the same spot as they are at the top of the frame. This may sound a bit complicated, but it's easier than it sounds and it really works quite well.


Once it's up, it sure looks sweet and you'll be more than happy to show it off to your friends and neighbors.










I basically did the same thing as you are getting ready to do. I used my great room as well. If you click on my username on the left side of the posting column you can then click to see my gallery which contains some older shots of my setup.


BTW, is your border the 1.5" velvet trim ?


----------



## mimason

Vutec shipped me 2 screens through Southern Freight and both were flat on the bed liner of the truck. The first one had a surface defect but the 2nd one was fine. No frame damage from shipment either.


----------



## wlelandj

Thanks for the review Tryg, I'm definately leaning the SS way. There's no substitute for pics, at least in my case as there is NOWHERE to demo screens where I am and so little literature/reviews much less comparisons out there. I just ordered my AE900U and I'm waiting on a quote on the SS. Keep the pics coming Danny. We eagerly await!


Once I get my little HT up and running I hope to share also. It should be pretty funny and a example of excess for the space available, but I have excuses for all that














My wife and I are moving out/selling our home and into a trailor to cut back and pay back some retirement she'd drawn out (3 yrs 'till eligible!). Anyway the 123" SS will just fit into the wall space avail.










-Leland


----------



## smithfarmer

Yeah, I just went and looked at my crate in the garage and it has the red arrows pointing up but does not say anything like "This end up". Just the Vutec name painted in blue and the red arrows. Oh well, it only cost me $50 bucks for 2 hours rental on the box truck and I saved way more than that on the price of my screen.


----------



## smithfarmer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wlelandj* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Anyway the 123" SS will just fit into the wall space avail



You'll have a little more room than you think. The large SilverStar is 120.5" diagonal. You'll save 1" in height and 2" in width.


Edit: Don't for get to add the 6.5" in either direction to allow for the frame.


----------



## Audionuttt

Has anybody seen or had experience with the new flexible Silver Star on rolls?


Las I heard it was due to be 54" wide and as long as you need.


I've a 130" screen I'd like to replace with the SS, but do not want to down size from 130 at 2.35 to one diagonal to 120 at 16x9.


(Currently 16x9 is ~~120" in my set up, with 2.35 aspect zoomed to the same height at about 130" diag, and 3x4 stuff viewd in the center at about 96" I maintain the 52" height for each aspect and zoom to fit..)


----------



## smithfarmer

Not lately. I do know that it is possible to get a fixed frame SilverStar up to 120" wide.


----------



## Audionuttt

It isn't. They were working on and purportedly released their flexible variant. I can't find anything on it other than it has been released in a retractable flexible variant. The roll width is something like 54" wide. That would easilly be capable of coivering my current set up.


----------



## smithfarmer

The last I heard was that they were having problems with it and it was pulled from the market. The best you can do is a 120" wide fixed frame.


----------



## Rob Tomlin

I heard it was pulled from the market as well.


----------



## smithfarmer

Audionutt, give Vutec a call and see what they say. You actually may be able to get a 52"x122" or 54"x126" or larger fixed frame SilverStar. I checked some old PM's of mine and a fellow AVS'er said that Vutec could go as wide as you want. 54"x126" gives you 138" diagonal which is pretty damned big. Even if 120" wide is their largest, it gets you pretty close to 130" diagonal


----------



## Audionuttt

I'm sitting at 120" wide after masking now. It would be Awesome if they could do 122.5w x 52h.


----------



## Eldoradophoto

Anyone out there using the SilverStar with a Sanyo Z4? I'm trying to make my decision on screen choice and it's tough! I have complete light control when I want it (movies, about 80% of the time) and some llow to medium level ight when I want it (sports with friends over, etc., about 20% of the time). Walls are dark, ceiling is dark, projector ceiling mounted. Seating is at 13' and 18'.


Is this a SilverStar situation? Or some other screen material?


Please help. I can only afford to do this once!


Thanks


----------



## Eldoradophoto

Anyone out there using the SilverStar with a Sanyo Z4? I'm trying to make my decision on screen choice and it's tough! I have complete light control when I want it (movies, about 80% of the time) and some llow to medium level ight when I want it (sports with friends over, etc., about 20% of the time). Walls are dark, ceiling is dark, projector ceiling mounted. Seating is at 13' and 18'.


Is this a SilverStar situation? Or some other screen material?


Please help. I can only afford to do this once!


Thanks


----------



## BMELVIN

Did you get your Silverstar yet? I was just wondering how the Ruby and SS combo go together? Please send me a email or post your comments once you get this combo set up. I have a Ruby on a painted bright wall right now 110 and have been going back and forth on what screen to get. I am happy with the painted wall set up but I do like the picture bright. Thanks


----------



## Danny5




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *smithfarmer* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> BTW, is your border the 1.5" velvet trim ?



Yes, with beveled edges.


Thanks for the advice about the fir strips! We are going to follow the measurements on the paper, which place the plates 4ft apart. I have a special laser level that spins on a tripod and marks a laser line on the wall. We'll use this to place the plates at the exact height, and then its just a matter of getting the plates spaced properly.


That shouldn't be too bad either since they have about 2-4 inches of total play.


Anybody ever put in the bottom plates too? I am toying with the idea of just using the top plates, the bottom plates really seem like overkill...


-Danny


----------



## LVS

Danny5,

Did you actually get brackets with oval holes or just round. Mine were round with virtually no play, so measurements had to be precise. I would definitely recommend templates as suggested especially if the brackets don't allow any fudge factor. I used the measurements method and no matter how careful and how many times you measure, it will still be an exercise in futility and humility!







Also, just as stated by smithfarmer, the bottom brackets are not in line with the top brackets, so don't try to use a laser level for the bottom brackets based on the top mounted bracket locations (learned this the hard way).


I think you will need the bottom brackets. They don't necessarily support any weight however, it keeps the bottom from being lifted up, could be important if you have tiny people in your house.


I thought about removing the screen from the frame. If you do this you can get access to the brackets as they are attached to the frame and you could use as the template to drill the holes. I didn't want to risk scratching the screen material. Has anyone mounted this screen by removing it from the frame?


----------



## joerod

I use the 120.5" silverstar with an Optoma H79 and it works great! The Sanyo would be great as well. I think they would be an ideal combo...


----------



## Danny5




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *LVS* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Danny5,
> 
> Did you actually get brackets with oval holes or just round?



The holes on my brackets are oval. This allows the brackets to move up and down by about 1/2". I shouldn't need to use this adjustment, since I will be ensuring the brackets are perfectly level on the wall.



> Quote:
> Also, just as stated by smithfarmer, the bottom brackets are not in line with the top brackets, so don't try to use a laser level for the bottom brackets based on the top mounted bracket locations (learned this the hard way).



Now you have me all confused. The brackets on my screen are exactly in the same location, just on the bottom. I should be able to run the laser level at the bottom location as well...


-Danny


----------



## LVS

Danny5,

Sorry to have confused you. Yes, you can use the laser level to level the 2 bottom brackets with each other.


I was saying don't run the laser level vertically from the top bracket to determine alignement horizontally of the bottom bracket. If you are still confused just ignore the statement and do what you are doing.


Where you really need the ovals is in the horizontal placement of the bracket instead of the vertical to aid in the frame to bracket alignment. I did not have oval holes in my brackets at all.


----------



## smithfarmer




> Quote:
> QUOTE=Danny5]Yes, with beveled edges.



I was just curious, as your screen looked different than mine. I went with the 3.25" beveled frame.



> Quote:
> Thanks for the advice about the fir strips! We are going to follow the measurements on the paper, which place the plates 4ft apart. I have a special laser level that spins on a tripod and marks a laser line on the wall. We'll use this to place the plates at the exact height, and then its just a matter of getting the plates spaced properly.
> 
> 
> That shouldn't be too bad either since they have about 2-4 inches of total play.



It sure will be a lot easier spacing them if you have oval holes in your brackets to allow for some leeway. Like LVS stated, my brackets were not oval shaped either.



> Quote:
> Anybody ever put in the bottom plates too? I am toying with the idea of just using the top plates, the bottom plates really seem like overkill...



My situation was a little different than most. I have 9' ceilings and the wall that I hung my scree on is a dividing wall between rooms and is only 7'6" with 1'6" between the ceiling and the top of the wall.


I actually installed my brackets in reverse so they look like an upsidedown L. This allowed me to literally hang the screen from the top of the wall and then screw the brackets in making it very easy for me. I did not use the bottom brackets and everything has been fine for over a year now. You'll probably be fine going with just the top brackets, but you have to decide on if it's a risk worth taking. As you know, the screens aren't cheap.


----------



## marx-7

Has anyone used the SilverStar with a shelf mounted projecter that is only about 4-5 feet off the ground?


----------



## mimason




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *marx-7* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Has anyone used the SilverStar with a shelf mounted projecter that is only about 4-5 feet off the ground?



You are explaining a scenario that may be better served with a DaLite HP unless you have a wide viewing angle. Of course, there should be no disadvantage to do this with a SS either.


----------



## marx-7

Well I have a sofa directly under the shelf and it is just a bit wider that the screen would be. I have heard some great things about the SilverStar but I don't know much about the angular thing people were talking about where it would be best to ceiling mount the pj. I guess in terms of viewing angles, the people sitting on the sofa are about 1 foot below the pj and if we have a lot of people, then we have some bean bags that we throw out onto the floor. Since all my seats are in front of the screen and not to the sides, I am more worried about the vierticle axis for viewing.


The other question I had about the SilverStar is if it really does make the picture stand out more than on other screens.


----------



## mbaxter

Your setup just happens to be an absolutely *perfect* match for the Da-Lite HighPower screen. Consider yourself lucky as most people using HP are having to sacrifice some of its gain due to room\\layout constraints. You will get peak performance from the sitting position, better than what you'd get with the Silverstar, and still get excellent gain even from the floor. And no sparklies. Or waves. And you can retract the screen when not in use for better asthetic appeal.


Oh, and you'd pay less than 1/4 the cost of the Silverstar.


It's a no brainer...


----------



## marx-7

That sounds wonderful!!! Thanks so much for the info. I talked with Da-Lite (I actually posted the text, in the screens forum, since they have a live chat feature) and the guy said that the HP would work well also, then he went on to say that the silver screens are not for regular home theater viewing...anyway if you want to check it out: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=635943 


I thought it was odd that he said that silver isnt for home use since we have seen some wonderful pics of the SilverStar.


By the way, did I mention that the screen will be 80 inches wide (16:9) and the people on the floor will be about 80 inches away and the people on the sofa will be about 108 inches (9ft) away from the screen. I am hoping that the HP has a wide enough viewing angle vertically for this small of a set up. So far you two (MBAXTER and MIMASON) have given me some great advice, I just wanted to know if this screen will work well in that small space.


----------



## marx-7

I forgot to say that the pj is an AE700U by Panasonic


----------



## wnielsenbb

There are silver screens (from Da-Lite for example) that are for 3D viewing not home theater. Don't ask me why. The Silverstar is an exception to that. It was designed for Home Theater.

Warren.


----------



## Danny5

Well the screen went up without a hitch. Took about an hour with us checking, doublechecking, and triple checking everything. We used a 4ft level and a tape measure to put it up. I decided that I wanted about 18" under the screen, and then marked the studs on the wall where the brackets should be.


Here is the final product:




















All in all, it was a very easy install. The brackets were oval for good up and down positioning, and the screen had some side to say clearance as well.


-Danny


----------



## wnielsenbb

Very nice. Altough I do see some definite hotspotting in that first photo.









How does it look with the projector?


warren.


----------



## Danny5




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wnielsenbb* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Very nice. Altough I do see some definite hotspotting in that first photo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How does it look with the projector?
> 
> 
> warren.



I'll let you know when I buy one


----------



## oceanfr

good review thanks


----------



## Meester

Tip for Dan,


Most women don't like to hear how much a new projector, screen or surround set will cost. Be course they have no interest in it. See what money you can miss, don't buy something you will regret later. Then if you have the products, show her the perfect picture and sound. After that say the price, if she complains?! Well, and then say: you don't love me anymore?!


It always worked with me here in the Netherlands


----------



## hmcewin

Marx 7


Your situation sounds perfect for the HP. Depending on how high your screen is from the floor will determine the effectiveness of the 2.8 gain of the HP.


My situation is similar to yours with my projector monuted 28" from the floor on a table. The sweet spot is about four feet to either side of the projector. My problem is I have some seating outside the sweet spot on the sides of the room that is 15 ft. wide. So, I am thinking about getting the SS.


I tried ceiling mounting my projector and it really compromised the gain of the Hi Power. My picture went from a knock your socks off to just so so. Some have reported differing results with ceiling mount. I prefer a plasma like brightness and this is what I got with the HP and table mount.


Oh yes, my screen is 106" Model C pulldown that is constructed like a tank. Can not say enought about the quality of Dalite screens.


----------



## Dave J

Has anyone tried the Silverstar with the HDPJ52? I'm very curious about how that combination would work. If you could compare totally light controlled HT viewing with ambient light viewing that would be great.


Thanks!


----------



## Danny5

Ok - last 2 pics for a while. Keep in mind I took this during the day. The brightness of the screen kinda makes the room look dimmer than it really is... This is with an Epson 550 at full brightness. At night, its possible to go to Living Room mode and have a GREAT picture!




















-Danny


----------



## mimason

PICS don't do screen justice. Looks pretty washed out. How about some fresh one's with some light control.


----------



## Danny5

Ok - last one - lights out - the movie is Spiderman, the mode is Theater.


-Danny


----------



## Tryg

Pretty awesome Danny!


----------



## Stitz

Danny, it looks like the screen is hotspotting (centered around the globe). Do you see that in person? maybe its just my vision playing tricks. ..


----------



## Danny5

Since I am not really sure what hotspotting is (I have an idea, just never seen it) I took a picture of my 50" Plasma on the same scene. Looks like its just the scene, and not any defect in the Silverstar.











-Danny


----------



## xboy360

heh the plasma is brighter.. 


Which plasma is that?


----------



## wnielsenbb

It is a lot smaller too.


----------



## smithfarmer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by xboy360
> 
> heh the plasma is brighter..
> 
> 
> Which plasma is that?




It's also not the exact same frame that is being shown. Take a look at the bottom part of the advertisement for the whiskey right above the globe to see what I'm referring to. If anything, the top of the globe on the plasma shot has less detail.


Danny, have you calibrated the pj with Avia or DVE yet ?


----------



## Danny5

The Plasma screen is a Vizio 50" from Costco.


Both the Plasma and my pj have been calibrated with Avia.


It may not be the exact same millisecond in the movie, but its as close as I am going to do for you finiky AV dorks 


-Danny


----------



## wnielsenbb

I appreciate the screenshots and think they both look very nice.


----------



## Dashka1

Need assistance with screen selection for my Z4.

My conditions:

1. I can control lighting in the room;

2. Projection distance 15.5';

3. Projector ceiling mounted @ 9.5';

4. Seating distance about 16'-17';

5. Planning to use fixed wall 119" Diag. screen.

Need help with: screen color (gray or white), screen gain, and a MILION $$$$ question "screen manufacturer". I am very interested in Saaria.


Thank you for the help.


----------



## Dashka1

Need assistance with screen selection for my Z4.

My conditions:

1. I can control lighting in the room;

2. Projection distance 15.5';

3. Projector ceiling mounted @ 9.5';

4. Seating distance about 16'-17';

5. Planning to use fixed wall 119" Diag. screen.

Need help with: screen color (gray or white), screen gain, and a MILION $$$$ question "screen manufacturer". I am very interested in Saaria.


Thank you for the help.


----------



## hmcewin

I have had my 110" Silverstar for a few days now. I have been amazed at what this screen does for an image!! The most noticeable attribute is the 3 D effect it displays with HD material. I agree with Tryg, a screen, and this one in particular can make more difference than upgrading a projector. I have had a 1.5 BW Vutec, DaLite HiPower and this one trumps them all.


I think folks in the HT hobby arena are really missing the boat if they do not consider the SS.


Oh yes, I am have an HT 510 NEC machine that now projects an image that looks as good as some of the $2500 ones and in some cases a lot better. Running in econo mode with 1000+ hours.


If you are looking for a remarkable upgrade to your system, take a look at the SS. The small sample they send does no justice to this screen. I took the advice of Tryg and the contributors to this thread and wholeheartedly agree with their assessment of the performance of the SS screen. No other vendor has anything like it.


It looks like a million bucks on the front wall of my HT with its 3 1/4 black velvet frame.


Some indicated the difficulty in installing it. I did it by myself with a tape measure, level and electric screw driver. Took about an hour. Just be sure to measure all the dimensions on the screen itself. The top mounts did not line up with the bottom ones on my screen. So don't assume you can mount the bottom brackets to line up with the top ones.


----------



## mimason




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hmcewin* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I have had a 1.5 BW Vutec, DaLite HiPower and this one trumps them all.




I have a SS but would be interested to hear your comments on the HP. I've heard numerous posts that under the right setup(table top mounted and narrow viewing angle) the HP would be better than the SS due to lack of sheen.


----------



## hmcewin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mimason* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I have a SS but would be interested to hear your comments on the HP. I've heard numerous posts that under the right setup(table top mounted and narrow viewing angle) the HP would be better than the SS due to lack of sheen.



I liked the HIpower when the proj was table mounted. I moved my proj to ceiling and the Hipower became ordinary. Even with the Hipower on table, I still prefer the SS. The sheen does not bother me. It is a tradeoff I am willing to accept.


----------



## joerod

My 120.5" SS looks like a HUGE plasma. I wouldn't trade it for any other screen on the market. With a great PJ you will not see any sheen or sparkles. Kudos to VUTEC!


----------



## Rob Tomlin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *joerod* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> My 120.5" SS looks like a HUGE plasma. I wouldn't trade it for any other screen on the market. With a great PJ you will not see any sheen or sparkles. Kudos to VUTEC!



Hey Joe, why do you think the sheen or sparkles would be affected by the PJ?


----------



## joerod

Good question Rob, when I had a benq 7700 I would notice in brighter sky scenes sheen sometimes. With the H79 I see a brilliant, perfect, noise free picture. The 7700 was very bright, and it helped produce that artifact that some complain about with the SS...


----------



## smithfarmer

I removed this post of mine from a different thread and thought that I'd post it here in case anyone was interested.


*120.5" SilverStar in ambient lighting conditions.*


Keep in mind that I am in no way a qualified photographer at doing this. I'm an amateur at best and still don't really know how to use the camera which is a Fuji F10. I bought it around Christmas and experimented a bit with it back then and haven't used it since and had already forgotten most of what I learned from my initial use of it.


The room is 15' x 23' and has 4 recessed lights that are 65 watts each. Two in the middle about 13' from the screen and the back two are 20' from the screen.


Projector is an Infocus SP4805 in econo mode with a Hoya HMC ND2 filter on the lens and almost 700 hours on the lamp. Estimated lumens are around 300.


The camera is in auto mode for everything except for the ISO speed which is set at 800.


I screwed up and forgot to take a shot of the front of the room with lights on. This is what the back half looks like with the lights at 100%.












From last nights game:


Lights on 100%









At 70%









At 30%









No lights











Fifth Element


Lights on 100%









At 70%









At 30%









Lights off


----------



## smithfarmer

From last years Super Bowl


Lights on 100%









At 80%









At 50%









At 25%










Except for the 100% on and the lights off shots, the other percentages are estimates. My dimmer is the Lutron Maestro. It has seven tiny led's that light up on the wall plate from off to full on, but it takes about twelve button presses to reach 100% on.


I am going to try and do this again but with different screen shots and more accurate numbers for the lighting levels sometime over the next week or so and will post it in a separate thread.


----------



## Erik Westlund

Great setup! Great idea!

Might I suggest to borrow or rent a light meter and turn off the projector before each test?

ew


----------



## dnoyeB

Lights off is excellent.


Overall I am having trouble. Currently I have a giant sheet of white paper on my wall. This looks good except the wall color comin thru.


Anyway, I got several samples from dalite, and the white just looks much more vibrant. How does one really test with a tiny little sample. I need a whole screen, then I need to color and brightness adjust the projector to match the screen. Putting pieces up side by side is not doing them justice. The white just thrashes the others. And the brighter the white the better its looking.


Even in this thread the white looks the best. The silver has overbrightness in some shots and the grey has overdarkness in some, red flower is good example. White seems like a good compromise. At the end of the day, the grey screen just looks like a darker white screen.


I assume the grey looks better with the lights on, but the white looks good enough to watch TV.


I'm really stuck comprehending why I would buy anything but the most flattest white I can find!?! Hell if the sheet of paper were thicker I could just use that... Maybe I can go to a print shop and request a giant piece of white posterboard. Print shots are dead serious about color, so if they say its white then its WHITE.


Im having a tough time with grey.


----------



## Erik Westlund




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dnoyeB* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Lights off is excellent. ...Im having a tough time with grey.



Well. Maybe a professional photographer can enlighten us. (pardon the pun)

There is a thing about color temperature that can change the story between what screen to use with the right combination of on screen projected lighting and ambient lighting and such.

I could only imagine that if a screen isn't completely "light balanced" then any illuminated/projected image thrown onto the surface could be good but not as accurate as the projector, projecting this image. That being said, screen choices are not something to decide on to better an image: rather what screen to purchase to minimize degradation.

As for an example noted before. A grey screen can be good at minimizing reflecting ambient light therby retaining a better contrast level. If your application demands it. etc.

So one would think. The best tests for ultimate picture would be to test for no ambient light in the room at all. It's a no brainer that any projector/ screen can look better with the lights totally off. If your application is with a little more every day use, you might likely end up with some ambient light to function around the room better.

Even having no ambient light in the room is not fully possible. The sheer light thrown from the projector, reflected off the screen and onto a few walls can also raise the ambient light as well. Unless you had special walls that absorbed lighting better such as a textured matt-black surface.

A question I might ask is. How much ambient lighting is average for the average user while watching something on their front projector?


I'd figure about 30-50% lighting as tested above. I say that because it could allow most to find their way out of and back to their chair without tripping over something. It could allow better overall functionality like to converse with the person next to you while visiting or reading something. Even if it's just to read the buttons on your remote or to find the right remote off the coffee table.

--

So at what lumens could this theoretical 30-50% lighting level be?

What projector could sku these tests?

And with this info, what screen to base this off of would best operate during this environment the best? Concidering that this lighing situation could likely be the most widely used.


That's probably why the gray screens are popular now that the projectors can keep up.

However, my application is where there is a bit of ambient light. I like to entertain and most of the time I have friends over when I use the screen. I have a bit of lights on to converse and walk about the room if necessary. You know? to go grab another beer and such.

Because of the broader seating angle, less color shift, no sparklies, and overall good pic for a DLP projector I use a matte white Day-Lite.

If I want to use it during the day with the drapes open, I should get a grey screen. If I want to impress the visitors with best contrast and all, it's lights out!(totally). This also goes without saying that for each lighting situation your settings on your projector system could use a little tweaking to maximize each application.

I'm curious if anyone would care to use their light meter for such a test?

ew


----------



## dnoyeB

I agree with you Erik. The problem is the screen manufacturers are not giving us enough information. Or were not getting it.


Matte White:

Gain: 1.0

View angle: 50


High Contrast Cinema Vision (grey)

Gain: 1.1

View angle: 45


How does a grey screen that is not curved have more gain that a white screen? I suppose thats because the grey screen is smoother and reflects in more direct angles as opposed to the matte screen that reflects at random angles. In computer graphics terms, the HCCV has more specular reflectance while the Matte White has less. The MW reflects in a diffuse way.


So the gist of the grey screen technique seems to be, make it darker than white so it reflects less surrounding light, then make it shiny so it reflects more light but within a tighter angle. Giving you about the same overall reflectance. So there is a difference between reflectance and gain. Most writeups seem to conflate the two.


Thus I would think that a grey screen can give you less washout. I hate to call this increased contrast because this effect only works with the lights on. With the lights off the grey screen looses its advantage and becomes the worse screen giving you less reflectance and a tighter viewing angle due to its gain. Even with the lights on, the grey screen requires the projector to put more light on it.


So basically noone should ever be choosing between a grey screen and a white screen. We should start calling them, a day-viewing screen (specular, dark) and a night-viewing screen (diffuse, light). The two have totall different uses and one is not good at the others job. Decide your viewing conditions, then you know which type of screen to go with. Then you can compare various versions of that type of screen.



So for me since my basement has barely any light, and I have special dimmable sconces with low wattage bulbs pointing away from the screen, there is no point in a grey screen.


Did I get anything wrong here?


----------



## wnielsenbb

It isn't quite that simple. A bright LCD display could benefit from a grey screen for night viewing by enhancing the black levels and toning down over-brightness.


----------



## krazebg

SS vs HP(on the table) which one has better 3D look?


----------



## Rob Tomlin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *joerod* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Good question Rob, when I had a benq 7700 I would notice in brighter sky scenes sheen sometimes. With the H79 I see a brilliant, perfect, noise free picture. The 7700 was very bright, and it helped produce that artifact that some complain about with the SS...



Interesting.


Thanks for the reply Joe.


----------



## Tryg




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *krazebg* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> SS vs HP(on the table) which one has better 3D look?



Screen is a passive device. look for a good projector


----------



## ctviggen

After reviewing the screen shots on the first page, I think the SS looks the worst. It's overly bright and washes out anything that's partially bright. For instance, in the shot with the two women sitting to eat, the texture of the stone material behind them can be seen on the white and grey; on the SS, it's completely washed out. Based on just the front page (not having read this entire thread), I personally wouldn't have a SS. (That's viewing these on my current LCD monitor, which doesn't have the deepest of blacks.) In my situation, where I need a pulldown/electric screen, it does not appear that Vutec makes a SS.


----------



## mlang46

I have been thinking about the Da_lite high power screen because I want to go to a 2:35 ratio 115 inch wide screen and because the High power is a retroreflective screen the fall off in Brightness as the viewing angle increases is going to go as the cos squared as opposed to the cos 4 th in a typical lambetertian screen. I currently own a 100 inch diagonal firehawk , which is a reflective screen and I am concerned that the wider viewing angle will show a dramatic falloff in Brightness at the edges of the viewing field. I am also concerned about ambient light from the side, as the screen is in my living room and a retroreflective screen should have better ambient rejection in that situation. I have thought about curved screens but since the projector lens is designed to image a flat field I would worry about defocus.


thanks for doing the test it was extremely informative


----------



## Tryg




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mlang46* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I am concerned that the wider viewing angle will show a dramatic falloff in Brightness at the edges of the viewing field.



Shouldn't if you view along the light path


----------



## blding_THX

ctviggen, I looked as well, and I can make out plenty of stone texture on the facing column behind the 2 women sitting to eat. Maybe your PC monitor should be adjusted??? I think screen shots like these should not be scrutinized in that manner, rather, look at the over all saturation and likewise comparison to each area of the shot, the SS wins every time. The SS is not washed out - I've tried to find evidence of wash out on these screen shots and it doesn't exist. Try this, save the pic to the HD on your PC. Now open that pic in the photo editor - any photo editor and adjust the brightness down just a little, you'll see the texture of the stone, meaning it is not washed out since the camera did detect the texture, even though your display setting could not render it. Also further proving that the SS does not wash out the image, - if it did the camera screen shot would not have detected it.


----------



## wnielsenbb

I love my Silverstar. Very glad I went with it.

Very seldom I get some sheen, which I understand not all projectors get, but it is well worth it. I can watch football in the morning with tons of ambient light, and at night it is just awesome.

Warren.


----------



## deanzsyclone




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ctviggen* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> After reviewing the screen shots on the first page, I think the SS looks the worst. It's overly bright and washes out anything that's partially bright. For instance, in the shot with the two women sitting to eat, the texture of the stone material behind them can be seen on the white and grey; on the SS, it's completely washed out. Based on just the front page (not having read this entire thread), I personally wouldn't have a SS. (That's viewing these on my current LCD monitor, which doesn't have the deepest of blacks.) In my situation, where I need a pulldown/electric screen, it does not appear that Vutec makes a SS.



Hmmm I can see the texture fine on my pc monitor. What is that vide/film from? I'd like to try it on my screen as well.


----------



## brianlvi3

Great review!!! Thanks.


----------



## Tryg

new review coming soon!


----------



## Wet1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Tryg* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> new review coming soon!



I'm looking forward to the new screen reviews!


----------



## dlplover

Tryg,


I noticed Da-Lite also makes some silver screens.


I tried to link for you, but it made me delete links since I'm below 5 posts









Go to da-lite choose products and then selecting the right screen surface in the box on the right.


I had a question and this is actually up to anyone -


I'm new to the projector scene. I'm either going to get the Optoma DV10 or the HD70. I'm going to get a portable screen and I was wondering is there a significant difference between Matte Silver and Matte White?


In other words, from the review, silver is supposed to look better but for worse source material (lower res projector? or am I reading that wrong and only for poor content?) there's sparkling that happens. Or would that only be a problem on the Silver screen reviewed here and not the matte silver?


I noticed that the reported gain on the matte silver is 1.3 and "silver vision" is 1.5 (still lower than your testing model).


Thanks,

Ben


----------



## Tryg

Silver Vision is for 3D projection systems


----------



## dlplover

Would I receive any benefit using matte silver with either of those projectors (Optoma DV10 or HD70) or would it make more sense for me to just stick with white? I like the picture quality, based on the images, of the silver versus the others, but would I need a better projector so that it didn't sparkle or is that only a problem when the content is worse (lower resolution I'm assuming) than the projector? If it makes any difference, one of those projectors is 480p and the other is 720p.


Thanks,

Ben


----------



## wnielsenbb

The sparklies only affect certain projectors. Mine is one of them, but it really doesn't bother me. I wouldn't trade my silverstar for anything.. well maybe a Supernova. If they end up bothering you could add a cheap filter to the projector to tame them. The other silver screens aren't made for image quality, they are just made for 3D projection. Now whether that is bad or not nobody ever anwsers. I have seen no reviews of them. I can say they will not look like the Silverstar, which looks more white than silver.

Warren.


----------



## joerod

I agree. I would not trade in mine either. I love the nice plasma look. I use mine with a ruby and it is very bright. On or off the screen looks impressive!


----------



## deanzsyclone




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *joerod* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I agree. I would not trade in mine either. I love the nice plasma look. I use mine with a ruby and it is very bright. On or off the screen looks impressive!




Hell yah... ruby and a silverstar ROCK! I'm thouroughly enjoying my hddvd and bluray movies with this setup.


----------



## smithfarmer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *deanzsyclone* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Hell yah... ruby and a silverstar ROCK! I'm thouroughly enjoying my hddvd and bluray movies with this setup.



I'm only using an IF 4805 with the SS and I think this combo rocks. I'm in on the preorder for the RS1 so I can imagine it will only get better with my HD cable and soon to be purchased HD DVD player. My only concern is the RS1/SS combo may be too revealing for use with SD content.


I don't watch very much SD cable but do use a Bravo D1 for SD DVD. It gives me a 1:1 pixel mapped image on the 4805 and it looks great. How does the Ruby/SS combo look to you guys with SD content?


----------



## joerod

SD content has never been an issue. I now use a crystalio II with my ruby/SS. But even before I never complained about the SD material. Of course I do watch 90% HD now. Even on Sunday when I discovered an afternoon game on Sunday ticket was only available in SD I still found it on a NY local HD channel... Never give up!


----------



## RustyWatkins

Does anyone know if the Silverstar is available in 2.35 format? It's not mentioned on their website (that I can find).


Seems like the perfect screen for the Perl if I wanted to push a little over 100" width in light controlled HT.


Rusty


----------



## Tryg

yes it's available in 2.35


basically 10' is max width


----------



## wnielsenbb

The max 2.35 screen is the same width as the 16x9 120" screen I have 105", just shorter height. It is even cheaper (which makes sense but isn't always done.) From Jason Turk

'SS has a max size. It can be no taller than 59 and no wider than 105.'

Warren.


----------



## smithfarmer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wnielsenbb* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> The max 2.35 screen is the same width as the 16x9 120" screen I have 105", just shorter height. It is even cheaper (which makes sense but isn't always done.) From Jason Turk
> 
> 'SS has a max size. It can be no taller than 59 and no wider than 105.'
> 
> Warren.



Warren,


The SS is available in a 2.35:1 aspect ratio up to 119" wide. For the 1.78:1 aspect ratio screens like we have the max width is 105".


----------



## wnielsenbb

Doh! Tryg, you better straighten Jason out. I would have been tempted with the 119" 2.35. Still the 16x9 is awesome for HDTV, which I watch mostly these days. Before the Silverstar I could only watch at night, so not much TV, but now it is awesome.

It would be great with the pearl.

Warren.


----------



## RustyWatkins

This really seems like an awsome screen, almost too good to be true







, but the thing that concerns me a little is that some reviews talk about noticeable hot spotting and high sensitivity to even slight off-axis viewing. Have any of you guys that own a Silverstar noticed this? And perhaps there is hot spotting but is it bad enough to be an issue? I certainly expect to see off-axis drop-off on a high gain screen anyway.


I realize this will be very subjective, as are the reports, but I'm still interested in opinions).


Thanks in advance,

Rusty


----------



## wnielsenbb

I think they fixed those issues. I have no hotspotting, and can get like 95 degrees off axis and it is still awesome. It is like a giant plasma. I think they squished the vertical to get brightness instead of the horizontal. Haven't tested that though. The only issue is sparklies, which I get once in a while, nowhere near enough to bother me. That is only an issue on certain projectors too. Perhaps a brightness thing. It is really an amazing screen. Even my wife was impressed, and AV things don't usually impress her at all.

Warren.


----------



## mimason




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *RustyWatkins* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> This really seems like an awsome screen, almost too good to be true
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> , but the thing that concerns me a little is that some reviews talk about noticeable hot spotting and high sensitivity to even slight off-axis viewing. Have any of you guys that own a Silverstar noticed this? And perhaps there is hot spotting but is it bad enough to be an issue? I certainly expect to see off-axis drop-off on a high gain screen anyway.
> 
> 
> I realize this will be very subjective, as are the reports, but I'm still interested in opinions).
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> 
> Rusty



The SS actually does hot spot but is it so minimal it is a non issue. I can sit 40% off axis and still get a nice punchy image without noticing hot spotting under normal viewing. Sure, you can throw up a blue screen and see the drop off but come on lets be reasonable and use real world material. If fact, I prefer off-axis viewing more than straight on because the screen sheen is much less noticeable.


----------



## millerwill

It would be very interesting to have an up-dated head-to-head comparison of the SS and the Dalite HighPower screens, since they seem to be the two most popular high gain screens. I certainly know some of the characteristics of the two (e.g., the viewing cone of the HP is narrower, but it lacks the 'sheen' of the SS that annoys some people) and have read all of this thread. And I don't think testimonials from satisfied customers is very useful--it's clear that many people are happy with either screen that they have--but rather a direct comparison of the strengths and weaknesses of the two compared to one another. I would be esp interested in how they compare in a 'non-ideal' room, i.e., one with a modest level of ambient light from reflections from light-colored room surfaces.


----------



## wnielsenbb

The Hi-power is only good if your projector is table mounted. The SS is for ceiling mounted. It is pretty much that simple. Ceiling mounted a HP is simply a white screen.

Warren.


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wnielsenbb* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> The Hi-power is only good if your projector is table mounted. The SS is for ceiling mounted. It is pretty much that simple. Ceiling mounted a HP is simply a white screen.
> 
> Warren.



Warren, thanks. Yes, I am aware of this and could mount the pj in either location to optomize each screen's capabilties. The main concern I have re the SS is that I've read that it is not as effective in dealing with ambient light as the HP. And then I've heard other persons say that the SS is 'great' in dealing with ambient light situations. Maybe it is 'good', but I wonder if the HP is 'better' (or not). I think it will take someone who has seen both to make this comparison.


----------



## wnielsenbb

I have tons of ambient light, a full 8'x8' uncovered patio door in the kitchen ajoining my open family room, lots of other uncovered windows in adjecent rooms. In the day football and TV shows still looks awesome on the SS. Bright movies like Nemo are great. Dark movies, like Batman Begins don't work. At night, even with lights on everything is good. Of course lights off is still the best. I don't know if the HP would be just as good, but no way would I go with table mounting. I tried it for a month or so and hated it; People walking in front of the screen, kids running around, me setting beers beside my projector.. too many things to worry about. I was much much happier after ceiling mounting it, thus the SS was my only consideration.

Warren.


----------



## millerwill

Very useful info; thanks. FWIW, rather than a table mount, I would put it on a stand right behind the viewers' heads; but this would still have the same negatives from your situation. So it's good to here that the SS does do well in ambient light.


----------



## mimason




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wnielsenbb* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> The Hi-power is only good if your projector is table mounted. The SS is for ceiling mounted. It is pretty much that simple. Ceiling mounted a HP is simply a white screen.
> 
> Warren.




This is totally wrong....err I mean half wrong







I have a ceiling mounted pj w/ HP and am getting approx 2.0 gain. The SS I have behind the pulldown HP is playing second fiddle. There are trade-offs with each screen but there are successful ceiling mountings with the HP that yield excellent results. The key is to get the angle less than 15% or thereabouts from seated eye level and lense to center of the screen.


----------



## Tryg

Watch for my next review coming soon. It will cover this topic!


I'm very excited for this one!


----------



## smithfarmer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Tryg* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Watch for my next review coming soon.



How soon? Before the end of the year?


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Tryg* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Watch for my next review coming soon. It will cover this topic!
> 
> 
> I'm very excited for this one!



I'm also excited to see it! Will it be hear on this thread, or will you start a new one?


----------



## Tryg

hopefully before the end of the year...New Thread!!!


----------



## adamfl

Hi,

I am looking at the SS\\ pearl combo. 110"


throw distance is 12 ft. would this be a problem with hotspoting or sparklies?

Thanks.


----------



## joerod

Sitting 12 feet back from my 120.5" SS using a Ruby we have never had any issues. It will look like a nice BIG plasma on your wall!


----------



## deanzsyclone




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *joerod* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Sitting 12 feet back from my 120.5" SS using a Ruby we have never had any issues. It will look like a nice BIG plasma on your wall!



I second that!


----------



## millerwill

Does anyone REALLY know what the gain of the SS is? I see quotes of 6.0, while others say its ~ 3.0, etc. Also, does the SS do well in rooms that are not totally blacked out? E.g., during the daytime (like now!), my room is reasonably dark; I can just barely read a newpaper, but it would be too dark to do so comfortably.


----------



## Tryg

2.8-2.9


----------



## millerwill

Tryg, thanks for the reply! So only about the same as the HiPower; interesting. I'm on the preorder list for a RS1 and trying to decide on a screen. I've been assuming that I would go with a HP (mounted on a stand right behind our heads), but mounting it high (on the ceiling ceiling, or on a high shelf above a door frame) would be more convenient (i.e., more out of the way), so I have been thinking about whether a SS would be as good a screen for me.


I have gone back and re-read your initial post in this thread (which is now some while ago) and am very much looking forward to your new one. Any thoughts on how these two screens would compare with a pj like the RS1, i.e., a 1080p lcos? I've read some posts that the SS has a surface 'structure' that can be distracing for some people, and wonder if this would be even more noticeable with a high quality 1080p pj. I've also read many posts that say that the HP effectively 'disappears', i.e., has essentially no visible surface structure.


In my room I don't really need the wider viewing cone of the SS, since it's just my wife and I, and we will sit well within the width of the screen. And we will be sitting relatively close--~12.5 to 13 ft from a 120 to 126" diag screen (~ 1.4 to 1.5 screen widths), which you noted was maybe not so good for the SS (but I think is supposed to be OK for the HP). So the only advantage I see for the SS is the convenience on putting the pj up on the ceiling and out of the way. This would be convenient, but I wouldn't want to do it if it is not as good PQ-wise.


----------



## MstrSergio

Hello everyone,


Tryg, thank you very much for this review. Im very interested in this ss screen. I cant find any place near me where they sell this screen. Im getting close to desperate.. Does anybody of you know where i can purchuase this screen? I live in The Netherlands. If this request isnt alloud, i appologise. Could somebody pm me then? Thanks in advance


----------



## Lone Granger




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *joerod* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Sitting 12 feet back from my 120.5" SS using a Ruby we have never had any issues. It will look like a nice BIG plasma on your wall!



Is that 120" WIDE? - seems some confusion over max 16:9 SS width avail - what sort of price is a 10' wide SS?


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Lone Granger* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Is that 120" WIDE? - seems some confusion over max 16:9 SS width avail - what sort of price is a 10' wide SS?



It's 120" diag, ~ 105" wide; this is the largest SS available.


----------



## Lone Granger




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *millerwill* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> It's 120" diag, ~ 105" wide; this is the largest SS available.




darn, darn, darn - what about HP - can that be had in 12' x 7' roll-up - presumably a lot cheaper - any ideas what sort of price?


----------



## millerwill

The Dalite Model C (which can be had with the HP material) is a manual pulldown model with max size 78"x139" (6.5'x11.5'). Check the Dalite website.


----------



## joerod

Yes that's diagonal...


----------



## smithfarmer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *millerwill* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> It's 120" diag, ~ 105" wide; this is the largest SS available.



You are correct for a 16:9 screen the max width is 105", but for a 2.35:1 aspect ratio the SS is available up to a 119" width.


----------



## Garman

Question on the Vutec Silverstar, going to be getting the Sony Pearl, how would this screen match up with this projector? I am currently using a Vutec, with a 1.3 gain screen in a dark room. Just wondering if this would be brighter etc...


Thanks,


----------



## joerod

As posted many times I love my Ruby/SilverStar combo so I am sure it would look great with the Pearl as well...


----------



## smithfarmer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Garman* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Question on the Vutec Silverstar, going to be getting the Sony Pearl, how would this screen match up with this projectors? I am currently using a Vutec, with a 1.3 gain screen in a dark room. Just wondering if this would be brighter etc...
> 
> 
> Thanks,



SS has over twice the gain of your current screen.


----------



## Garman

smithfarmer: I know that I can count







JK, high gain screens don't always mean better. Just was wondering what this combo would look like. Since I haven't seen the combo, it looks like it would be a good match, thanks for the input. Now if anyone knows where I can buy a fixed 92" screen let me know.. PM me....


----------



## smithfarmer

Joerod has the Ruby, the Pearls older sister, same basic tech and he loves his combo. In a few of the Pearl/Ruby threads I've read, others seem to be quite happy with their Pearl/Ruby SS combo.


----------



## Garman

joerod: Is there any decent dealers down by you that deal with Vutec? Looking to replace my current screen which is in mint condition, I have found any dealers around here yet that carry Vutec, be willing to drive of course if the price is right. Thanks, PM me.......


----------



## smithfarmer

Garman,


Don't forget, tryg is supposed to have his all new super dooper screen review posted by the end of the month.


----------



## millerwill

Only couple of more weeks to go.


----------



## Garman

I would like to replace the screen soon, next couple months or so.. So I can wait for the super dooper review







Thanks for the helpful input guys!


----------



## wnielsenbb

Garman, with the SS you could go to a larger screen and have plenty of brightness if you like.

I got my SS from our friendly hosts. Jason Turk to be exact.

Warren.


----------



## millerwill

Can you guys with an SS comment on how it responds to light reflected from light-colored room surfaces? Do you need dark walls, ceiling, etc.?


----------



## wnielsenbb

That is why I got it actually. I have a very light room. The high gain makes the projected image brighter and so it doesn't get washed out.

Warren.


----------



## joerod

I would definitely wait for Tyrg's sure to be steller review...


----------



## smithfarmer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *millerwill* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Can you guys with an SS comment on how it responds to light reflected from light-colored room surfaces? Do you need dark walls, ceiling, etc.?



Bill, if you go back to page 24 you can see my setup. I have burgandy walls, a white ceiling and off white carpeting. What you don't really see in those screen shots is that I also have a white couch very near the screen along the side wall and two chairs that match the couch along the opposite side wall.


On a side note, darker room colors will always have a much greater impact no matter which screen you eventually choose. You don't need it but it always helps. Is the wife dead set against you changing the rooms color?


The reason I'm asking is judging from what I've read of your posts, you are going to spend a decent sum and have a pretty nice media room when all is said and done. Why not take it one step further and paint the room?


Keep in mind it can be very tastefully done to achieve a very high WAF. For some great ideas on color scemes you could peruse the AVS galleries, find a few that you like and then show them to the wife. You might be surprised at her response and find her quite receptive to the idea. Last but not least, it will be much easier to paint the room before you get the pj mounted and the screen hung.


You've got the time. T-minus 6 weeks and counting....


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *smithfarmer* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Bill, if you go back to page 24 you can see my setup. I have burgandy walls, a white ceiling and off white carpeting. What you don't really see in those screen shots is that I also have a white couch very near the screen along the side wall and two chairs that match the couch along the opposite side wall.
> 
> 
> On a side note, darker room colors will always have a much greater impact no matter which screen you eventually choose. You don't need it but it always helps. Is the wife dead set against you changing the rooms color?
> 
> 
> The reason I'm asking is judging from what I've read of your posts, you are going to spend a decent sum and have a pretty nice media room when all is said and done. Why not take it one step further and paint the room?
> 
> 
> Keep in mind it can be very tastefully done to achieve a very high WAF. For some great ideas on color scemes you could peruse the AVS galleries, find a few that you like and then show them to the wife. You might be surprised at her response and find her quite receptive to the idea. Last but not least, it will be much easier to paint the room before you get the pj mounted and the screen hung.
> 
> 
> You've got the time. T-minus 6 weeks and counting....



Smithfarmer, thanks very much for the comments and suggestions. I'm afraid that the wife--and even I--are not interested in painting the walls dark/black. It is an informal den, though, and does have lots of 'stuff' around the room, pics and rugs on the walls. The back wall is the 'worst offender'--a closet with white enamel paint--but the wife has agreed to put a hanging over the closet door. So the retro-reflective HP will not be compromised by major reflections off the back wall. The ceiling is of course an off white, and it may then be the worst source of reflections; but it aint going to get covered with black velvet!


If it were just me, I would mount the RS1 on a stand just behind my head and go with the HP screen. But if the wife really thinks it's too much in the way and I ceiling mount the RS1, then the choice will be between the FH and SS. In this case I think I would prefer the FH if the RS1 is bright enough for it; but I am willing to consider the SS (Tryg certainly likes it a lot, and Jason also uses it, so it must be pretty satisfactory!). Too bad one can't check these out of the library and try them out in your own room before deciding!


----------



## Garman

Is there a lot of hot spotting with the Vutec Silverstar? Might be going with this combo with a Sony Pearl I just picked up... Currently I am jusing just a 1.3 gain Vutec in dark room.


----------



## hmcewin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *millerwill* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Can you guys with an SS comment on how it responds to light reflected from light-colored room surfaces? Do you need dark walls, ceiling, etc.?




Bill,


I have owned the HP and now have the SS. HT has light walls but the front wall where the screen is mounted is painted a flat black. The SS is a fantastic screen and after trying many over the years, it is head and shoulders above the rest. I liked the HP but could not deal with the dramatic change in gain as I moved from one seat to the other. Drove me crazy. The HP with a ceiling mount was very much handicapped. However before ceiling mounting the projector, the HP was great for the folks sitting beside it but get 5' to the side and it became ordinary.


To answer your question, yes the SS performs very well with light walls. You will see a lot of speculation from people who do not own one about the qualities of the screen . Pay no attention. Look to the people who own one and evaluate from their comments. The screen is definitely worth the 3 or 4 times what the HP cost. It is the best decision I have made regarding my HT. I am now looking to upgrade my projector but I do not expect the same wow factor as just getting the SS.


Hope this helps.


Henry


----------



## millerwill

Henry, Thanks for the feedback. Boy, what a range of different opinions, which I'm confident are all sincere. I guess it's because no two rooms are really the same, nor individuals preferences and tastes.


----------



## kheiden

I just ordered my 90" 2.35:1 Aspect Ratio Silverstar today.

Honestly, the pictures in this thread did all the talking for me. I used to own a Stewart 16 x 9 but there is little that could get me to believe that somehow there is something wrong with what these photos seem to show. I think the debate about what's "appropriate" for a home theater environment vs a trade show environment is marketing hooey. My eyes have never lied to me and I am hopeful that my experience with the actual screen rivals what I've seen on this throrough review and comparison. Simply amazing stuff. I'll let you know once everything's in place if anyone's interested.


----------



## joerod

Congrats you won't be dissapointed!


----------



## Garman

kheiden/joerod: I am looking to use the SilverStar to use with the Pearl. Someone told me this material is difficult to clean if for someone it gets dirty? Have no clue if this is true, I am looking for a 92" fixed 16x9 screen with a 2" felt border do they sell this type? And if so where is a good price to find one, wondering if I can use my mounts I have with my current, 88" VuTec 1.3 gain screen.


Thanks for any helpful info.


Gar


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Garman* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> kheiden/joerod: I am looking to use the SilverStar to use with the Pearl. Someone told me this material is difficult to clean if for someone it gets dirty? Have no clue if this is true, I am looking for a 92" fixed 16x9 screen with a 2" felt border do they sell this type? And if so where is a good price to find one, wondering if I can use my mounts I have with my current, 88" VuTec 1.3 gain screen.
> 
> 
> Thanks for any helpful info.
> 
> 
> Gar



check vutec on the internet and you'll find your answers.


----------



## Makomachine

Tryg,


I'm going to be sitting about 1.4x screen width in my primary viewing location with a ~120" screen with the new RS1. This room is going to be my primary viewing room for TV, sports, & movies - with a majority being done with HD material. The room will have flat black ceilings and front wall and dark red "flat" paint for the side walls with no windows. I have to ceiling mount my PJ due to room limitations and wonder if the SS still ranks tops for this type of setup. Am I going to regret sitting this close to a SS/RS1 combo or is it going to be the bees knees?







I'm coming from a 65" Pioneer Elite PRO-730HD Rear projection CRT and I don't think a little sheen is going to bother me as long as the perceived blacks are good and the colors have some punch. I'm hoping artifacts are minimal with the RS1 and I try to avoid bad source material - being an owner of an HD-DVD player, HD cable/dvr, etc.


FYI - I've got a screen sample request in to Vutec for additional confirmation but really would like your confirmation.


----------



## Tryg

you'll love it!


----------



## Makomachine

Thanks Tryg - appreciate the vote of confidence. Sounds like the best combination for my particular setup and the "mileage" I plan on putting on it!


----------



## Tryg

Still love mine. I have to argue with my girlfriend every night which is better the Silverstar or High Power


----------



## joerod

My vote goes to the Silverstar!


----------



## mimason




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Tryg* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Still love mine. I have to argue with my girlfriend every night which is better the Silverstar or High Power



LOL.


My wife won so I took down my HP for the SS. I have to admit I still prefer the HP but it totally wrecked the aesthetics of our HT room to get the PQ to look great. I had the pull down HP in front of the SS which is a very ugly screen and then I had to lower the pj with pipe extenders which further takes away from the room. Now that the SS is back on duty I moved the pj flush back to the ceiling and must admit that our room is much improved overall in fit and finish.


I think my friends wifes must really hate me inside because after watching the football games and a few BD and HD-DVD demos they are all talking about new displays/setups.


----------



## Makomachine

My wife and I have been watching a 65" Pio Elite CRT RPTV for the last four years and this will be our first venture into FP. As long as the RS1/SS combo provides good perceived blacks we'll be happy campers. The wife is pretty particular about image brightness and blacks that are "gray" from what we've seen in person so far. She kind of embarressed an Infocus dealer who was treating her like she didn't know what she was talking about when viewing an IN76 demo. She asked him where the blacks went...


----------



## smithfarmer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Makomachine* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> As long as the RS1/SS combo provides good perceived blacks we'll be happy campers. The wife is pretty particular about image brightness and blacks that are "gray" from what we've seen in person so far. She kind of embarressed an Infocus dealer who was treating her like she didn't know what she was talking about when viewing an IN76 demo. She asked him where the blacks went...




















I can tell you that blacks look pretty damned black to me with the Infocus 4805/SS, but I have read quite a few posts saying that the IN76 has elevated black levels when compared to the 4805. I expect this to not even remotely be an issue with our RS1/SS combo and am very confident that we will have nice inky blacks.


----------



## joerod

Blacks have never been a problem with my set up...


----------



## Tryg




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *joerod* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> My vote goes to the Silverstar!



She "claims" Silverstar is better too.


----------



## Makomachine

Finally made it to Stereo East in Frisco, TX today and saw the 123" Sharp1080p/Silverstar combo. All I can say is WOW! It was quite an amazing picture and sold me instantly on the Silverstar for the new RS1. I can see what some people are calling "sheen" on some of the bright scenes - but had to really look for it. Given that my wife didn't notice it - and I didn't notice it during viewing without specifically looking for it, it's really a non-issue. Looked like a 120" plasma - with great contrast and lots of "pop" to the image. I'm sold - now just need to get a quote from AVS to see what this baby is going to set me back.


----------



## hmcewin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Makomachine* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Finally made it to Stereo East in Frisco, TX today and saw the 123" Sharp1080p/Silverstar combo. All I can say is WOW! It was quite an amazing picture and sold me instantly on the Silverstar for the new RS1. I can see what some people are calling "sheen" on some of the bright scenes - but had to really look for it. Given that my wife didn't notice it - and I didn't notice it during viewing without specifically looking for it, it's really a non-issue. Looked like a 120" plasma - with great contrast and lots of "pop" to the image. I'm sold - now just need to get a quote from AVS to see what this baby is going to set me back.



The SS is truly a remarkable screen with a discernable difference when compared to any other screen I looked at. Am thrilled with the HD1000/SS combination. Looks great in total darkness and very good in ambient light. I am sure it will be stunning with the RS1.


As to price, I looked at it as a long term investment in my HT. Over the years, like any quality product, you will enjoy the it long after the price becomes insignificant.


Cheers,


Henry


----------



## joerod

I am looking forward to watching the Big Game during our watch-easy today on the SS. Can't wait!!!


----------



## smithfarmer

Mako, just to set the record straight, many dealers are erroneously stating a 123" diagonal size and that is due to older Vutec brochures. If you go to Vutec's website you will see that the nominal screen viewing area is actually 120.5" in size. It's not a big difference but it is something I thought you should know.


I don't know if the one you saw had it but make sure to get the 3.25" beveled black velvet frame. It does an excellent job of hiding any overscan, plus it looks sweet and will make the wife very happy.


Welcome to the club.


----------



## joerod

Vutec's Deluxe Black bezel frame is The Best in the business!


----------



## smithfarmer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hmcewin* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> As to price, I looked at it as a long term investment in my HT. Over the years, like any quality product, you will enjoy the it long after the price becomes insignificant.



My thoughts exactly. I figured I'd have it for at least 10 years and when you look at it that way, it's not bad at all. The yearly cost is equivalent to the price of a nice dinner with a decent bottle of wine for you and the wife. Down the road, you will have long forgotten about those dinners but still have the screen.


----------



## joerod

Amen to that!!! ^^^


----------



## deanzsyclone

Is it just me or does the silver screen show the smallest details. I believe that I can see how much better my HD-DVDs look over my blu-ray purchased and rented disk do. Little artfacts, contrast issues from scene to scene, low light grain ect. I do love this screen though.


----------



## joerod

Yes, over time you will appreciate it even more. When I demo my set up I always point out what a great job the SS does. It is truly a great part of my theater!


----------



## Makomachine

Thanks for the input from everyone. The wife and I were able to sit within a foot of our normal viewing distance with the setup and it's sized perfectly. If it's 123" or 120.5" won't make a difference as long as it is what we saw. (Thanks though for the heads up - can't believe they don't update that on their specs)


I've got a request in for a quote on this screen and now I can't wait for the house to get done and the HT to come together so we can start enjoying it! I'm jealous of you that got to watch the SB last night in "larger than life" size!


----------



## joerod

They need to update that spec. It may not make a difference but I will call Vutec...


----------



## kheiden

As for cleaning, I used a damp cloth and it worked fine. The worst problem I have is that one of the many contractors who were in and out of the basement poked a very tiny hole in the bottom of the material and it's like foam core so I don't think it's repairable. It's not noticable unless you stand within a few feet of it with something bright on the screen.


I'll tell you when I first saw the Silverstar I was very distracted by the shinies. When I met Trygg at CES he advised me well to wait a few weeks. He was right. I'm very happy with this purchase. I get zero hotspots and great viewing from all angles in the room. The only time when the shinies get to me is when extremely white things are on screen. Let's just say that the Happy Feet Blu-ray disc prbably isn't the best demo material with all the constant snowscapes. American Idol in HD looks better than anything I've thrown up there to be honest. It's frackin' amazing.


On a side note, I read an article by Joe Kane in Widescreen Review this month that states emphatically that gain over 1.3 is not advised. I have great resect for Mr. Kane. I trust his experience a great deal but his article really pointed out to me how subjective screen ownership can be. He's probably dead right on paper. I just don't know that he's right about the correct setup for me.


I would guess that the shinies don't happen on any other screen and by that measure, the SS can't be judged under some consistent criteria because if no other screen exhibits that characteristic, the shiny thing by definition is an artifact, and thus undesirable. No matter what, the Silverstar is truly a unique creature.


For example, no matter how good a set of speakers look on paper, you positively, absolutely should listen to them before buying them because they have to please your tastes or they're not worth whatever you pay for them. Likewise, I think screens are a very subjective purchase. Hell, I nearly got lynched on these forums for saying I like SRS Circle Surround II better than Dolby PLII. Such is the nature of speaking your mind in disagreement of a well-respected, monolithic brand like Dolby or in the case of screens, Stewart.


For me, Trygg's pictures told me all I needed to know to make my purchase. I do wish the shinies had been able to come across in photos though, in the spirit of getting all the facts out there. I still think I'd have chosen the Silverstar because the way colors jump off the screen is like nothing else I've ever seen, and I used to own a Stewart Studiotek 130. I actually had to back down my saturation a little from normal on the SS because the colors were on the edge of unreal.


----------



## joerod

I still love my Silverstar either with my theater completely dark or with some lighting. Either way I fell I have the best of both worlds. I read joe kane's review to and unless you live with a screen it's hard to judge it...


----------



## wnielsenbb

I sure love my Silverstar.

I have an HD DVD player, but like kheiden, still think American Idol is astounding. Every time I watch it I just get amazed at the picture.

Warren.


----------



## kenabb

I've got the 103" SilverStar with a Sony 51A. I run it on low lamp and it's a great. Live basketball in HD is a knockout. It's sure nice to uncrate it and just hang it up. No creases or ripples. The only problem is sawing up the crate to get rid of it. A small inconvenience for an undamaged screen.


----------



## smithfarmer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *kheiden* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> On a side note, I read an article by Joe Kane in Widescreen Review this month that states emphatically that gain over 1.3 is not advised.



I read that article and I think Joe Kane is a bit biased towards the StudioTek since he pretty much says the screen was designed to his specifications. Maybe he gets royalties from Stewart on everyone that is sold.










I have no doubt that the ST130 is a great screen but it can't give me the pop that I get from the SS. No matter what Joe Kane says, I've said it before and it still holds true to this day, "If I were starting my HT over from scratch and had to choose a screen under 120" wide, I would gladly go with another SS".



> Quote:
> I would guess that the shinies don't happen on any other screen and by that measure, the SS can't be judged under some consistent criteria because if no other screen exhibits that characteristic, the shiny thing by definition is an artifact, and thus undesirable.



There are quite a few highly rated screens out there that exhibit this artifact or worse. Have you ever seen a FireHawk?


----------



## wnielsenbb

kenabb, I kept my crate in case I move. Storing it sucks, but I just figured out it would make a great roof for a shed.










Just had a party this weekend and my wife has spent tons making our house all pretty (going for the model home look,) but the hit of the house was the SS. Everyone was just amazed at the screen, even before I turned the projector on. A View from Space on HD DVD just blew everyone away.

Warren.


----------



## Simonsd1

I purchased the SS a few weeks ago, based on the comments/reviews on this forum. I woudl say the comments about comparing it to a 100"+ plasma are right on. It is very bright and the colors are awesome.


That said, after watching 4 movies so far, the sparkles and screen contour that I see in the white sections of an image do bother me. Hopefully, over time I don't notice it.


I don't suppose there is any way to minimize the sparkling effect, other than lowering the brightness, is there?


P.S. My projector is the Panasonic PT-AX100U.


----------



## mjallyn

Very nice detailed review - covered all the key points. I'll be bookmarking this thread to return when I'm finally ready to upgrade from my painted wall!


----------



## deanzsyclone




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Simonsd1* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I purchased the SS a few weeks ago, based on the comments/reviews on this forum. I woudl say the comments about comparing it to a 100"+ plasma are right on. It is very bright and the colors are awesome.
> 
> 
> That said, after watching 4 movies so far, the sparkles and screen contour that I see in the white sections of an image do bother me. Hopefully, over time I don't notice it.
> 
> 
> I don't suppose there is any way to minimize the sparkling effect, other than lowering the brightness, is there?
> 
> 
> P.S. My projector is the Panasonic PT-AX100U.



Welcome to the club, your going to drool every time you turn on your projector. Funny I can't see the sparklies any more, they went away after the first week or two. But on rare occasions I see them just for a brief moment. The image is so fantasticly better that I could care less of this very tiny issue, and that's comming from a VERY picky person when it comes to image qaulity. The pay off is leaps and bounds beyond what I was expecting.


Wow your projector is much brighter than mine, I can only imagin how it looks at your place.


----------



## joerod

I never see them anymore. I know they are there because when I first purchased mine but trust us, you won't see them soon. I love watching a great NFL game on mine!


----------



## Tryg




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wnielsenbb* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Everyone was just amazed at the screen, even before I turned the projector on.



Thats how good it is










You dont even need a projector!


----------



## Simonsd1

Most displays have some type of compromise, so I would still recommend the SS. Compared to the traces of moving whites over dark backgrounds on my plasma, I am sure the sparkles of the SS will be less obtrusive over time.


I am really happy with combination of the bright Panasonic AX100 & the SS. The image can be blindingly bright without blooming.


----------



## Lonnie P

I recently got my SS from Tryg at AVS & love it. I had that an uneasy feeling after seeing how much I spent & was really hoping it would be worth the money. After seeing it I'm really glad I got it.


As for the 120 vs. 123" confusion, I noticed the same errors on the Vutec website.

It is actually a 120.5" with a 59" x 105" area.


Lonnie


----------



## hmcewin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *reio-ta* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I saw no mention of this anywhere, I do like how the Silverstar works, but it scratches so easily. I was going to buy a 110" 16:9 Silverstar, so I ordered a sample. The stuff works great but is an awful material! The sample I have has tons of these roller marks from shipping. I then rubbed my finger, just from the ridges of my fingerprints were enough to scratch the material! I then ran my nail over it, woah, it's almost like a gash! The roller marks are viewable from about ten feet away, where I'll be putting seating
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The marks won't wash away either. Eventually I'll have some company over, friends or family, and one of them will run their nails over it. Then the screen is ruined. If I put a sign on it that says don't touch, that will make someone want to touch it more! Suggestions?



I have had my SS for several months. During that time I have dusted it with a duster and even vacuumed it with a brush attachment with no damage to the screen. Have had kids in the therater and not one of them went up to the screen and attempted to scratch it with their fingernails! Not saying it could not happen but it possibly could. My impression of the surface is that it is not easily scratched but I have not tried to!!


If that is the environment you plan on installing it in, I would be hesitant to do so. All screens can be damaged by gashing with a finger nail. Probably some more than others.


----------



## joerod

I have not hadany issues either with my screen being scratched I did have a STUPID carpet installer bump it hard and that left a slight mark. That was day one! I called vuted and they told me to mix water with 402 (I am not 100% sure so call them to verify) and scrub it. I did whatever they told me to do and it removed whatever blemish that jerk made... I was so close to having them buy me a new screen...


----------



## deanzsyclone




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *reio-ta* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I saw no mention of this anywhere, I do like how the Silverstar works, but it scratches so easily. I was going to buy a 110" 16:9 Silverstar, so I ordered a sample. The stuff works great but is an awful material! The sample I have has tons of these roller marks from shipping. I then rubbed my finger, just from the ridges of my fingerprints were enough to scratch the material! I then ran my nail over it, woah, it's almost like a gash! The roller marks are viewable from about ten feet away, where I'll be putting seating
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The marks won't wash away either. Eventually I'll have some company over, friends or family, and one of them will run their nails over it. Then the screen is ruined. If I put a sign on it that says don't touch, that will make someone want to touch it more! Suggestions?



Roller marks? Now I was prompted to go look at my screen for such a thing and I could not find a single "roller mark" even from a foot away. I have a couple or spots on my screen at this point in it's life. It kind of looks like a dot of soda dried on the screen, I'll try the 409 and water trick and I'm sure it will be fine, but to be honest I can't see them at all durring movie time. But I'll clean them off none the less. Scrathes, well I have no kids just adults in the home, so no issues. But it sure is the best screen I have seen so far. Yes I have seen a few.


----------



## wnielsenbb

I have had my screen for over a year. I have a few kids and they bring all the neighbor kids over. No issues with my screen at all.

Warren.


----------



## rabident




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Simonsd1* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I don't suppose there is any way to minimize the sparkling effect, other than lowering the brightness, is there?



You could try not looking at them










Seriously, for me it was like looking at a mirror. If you focus on the glass covering the mirror you can make out dust spots, water specs, maybe even a fingerprint. But if you focus on the image in the mirror as most people do, then you don't notice what's on the surface of the glass itself.


----------



## Makomachine

As stated earlier in this thread, I was strongly considering the SS with my new RS1. Well I bit the bullet and bought a 123" SS for the new HT. It really is a great image and while I can 'find' the sparklies, it's not something I notice unless I look for it other than in really bright scenes. Granted I only have 12 hrs on the PJ so it is incredibly bright at the moment and I'm guessing that will be less of an issue as the lamp ages a bit. I wouldn't hesitate to purchase it again - we had a movie premier with 7 different 'non-HT' educated people and not one said they saw the sparklies other than me.


----------



## McGarnigal

I use a Pany AE1000U on my SS 110" and I love it. I sit 11ft away from the screen. I have to agree with Makomachine, I have seen sparkles on the screen but only on brighter scenes. I seem to be the only one who notices these sparkles. Even when I bring it to their attention they still cannot see it.


In a nutshell thhe screen rocks. One of my friends thought it was a plasma screen at first glance. He spent 5 mins looking at the screen up close wondering why it was so bright even with the lights on.


----------



## Makomachine

Anybody ever used a ND2 or ND4 filter to tame the brightness from a new projector with the SS and does it help minimize the sparkle effect? Just curious - might be something I want to try. Gotta spend that money somewhere, right?


----------



## smithfarmer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Makomachine* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Anybody ever used a ND2 or ND4 filter to tame the brightness from a new projector with the SS and does it help minimize the sparkle effect? Just curious - might be something I want to try. Gotta spend that money somewhere, right?



I'm still using a HOYA HMC ND2 filter with my Infocus 4805 that has over 1500 hours on the lamp and the image is still plenty bright. It's exactly what you're looking for. I canceled my RS1 order last night but had planned on using an ND4 with it for the first 300 hours or so and then switch over to an ND2.

http://www.2filter.com/hoya/hoyasolidND06.html


----------



## Makomachine




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *smithfarmer* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I'm still using a HOYA HMC ND2 filter with my Infocus 4805 that has over 1500 hours on the lamp and the image is still plenty bright. It's exactly what you're looking for. I canceled my RS1 order last night but had planned on using an ND4 with it for the first 300 hours or so and then switch over to an ND2.
> 
> http://www.2filter.com/hoya/hoyasolidND06.html



Do you find that it reduces the sparklies or does it make a difference? I think I'm going to try and pick one up at the local camera shop if it does.


----------



## wnielsenbb

Why did you cancel the RS1? I was thinking about ordering one myself.

Warren.


----------



## Makomachine




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Makomachine* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Do you find that it reduces the sparklies or does it make a difference? I think I'm going to try and pick one up at the local camera shop if it does.



Just ordered an ND2 and an ND4 - will report my findings next week on their impact as it relates to sparklies and the RS1/SS combo on a new lamp.


----------



## smithfarmer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wnielsenbb* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Why did you cancel the RS1? I was thinking about ordering one myself.
> 
> Warren.



It wasn't an easy decision by any stretch but I'm looking for more control over color and gamma than what the RS1 offers. I decided to wait until CEDIA and see what JVC is going to come up with in regards to an RS2.


----------



## smithfarmer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Makomachine* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Just ordered an ND2 and an ND4 - will report my findings next week on their impact as it relates to sparklies and the RS1/SS combo on a new lamp.



I think you'll be quite happy with the results. My 4805 is mounted at 18' 4" from the screen and the ND2 filter virtually eliminated this artifact for me. Did you go with the Hoya HMC filters?


----------



## Makomachine




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *smithfarmer* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I think you'll be quite happy with the results. My 4805 is mounted at 18' 4" from the screen and the ND2 filter virtually eliminated this artifact for me. Did you go with the Hoya HMC filters?



I did - thanks for the link and the advice. I'll post a quick update to this thread once I get everything up and running. Checked the PJ hour meter tonight and I'm showing 89 hrs at this point. I'm guessing the ND4 for a while will be the right choice but will confirm once I receive them. Did you find it messed with any of the other PJ's settings at all like focus, sharpness, etc?


----------



## smithfarmer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Makomachine* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I did - thanks for the link and the advice. I'll post a quick update to this thread once I get everything up and running. Checked the PJ hour meter tonight and I'm showing 89 hrs at this point. I'm guessing the ND4 for a while will be the right choice but will confirm once I receive them. Did you find it messed with any of the other PJ's settings at all like focus, sharpness, etc?



89 hours already?










Didn't you just get the RS1 about 10 days ago? Sounds like you're using it every night.










All the filter does is reduce the amount of projected light. It doesn't affect anything else regarding the image. Use the ND4 first. It reduces the lumens by 75%. The ND2 reduces the lumens by 50%. It sounds like a lot but don't worry, the SS will still give you a very nice image with plenty of pop.


----------



## Makomachine




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *smithfarmer* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 89 hours already?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Didn't you just get the RS1 about 10 days ago? Sounds like you're using it every night.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All the filter does is reduce the amount of projected light. It doesn't affect anything else regarding the image. Use the ND4 first. It reduces the lumens by 75%. The ND2 reduces the lumens by 50%. It sounds like a lot but don't worry, the SS will still give you a very nice image with plenty of pop.



Yes, we've had it on every day since setting it up. I have a 50" plasma, but nobody wants to watch that 'small' tv.










I actually tried the ND4 and ND2 - got them via UPS today. I think the ND4 is just a little to 'dim' for me and I'm going to use the ND2 for a while. Haven't watched much yet and want to get some hours on it before I make any real observations. Going to without to the ND2 does change things quite a bit. Just need to give it some time viewing it before I give a readout on how things look. I'll follow up in the next few days.


----------



## plissken99

I'm about to buy an RS1 myself, and was wonder about getting the Silverstar for it. How are the blacks with this combo? Coming from a CRT projector, thats my primary concern. Hell I haven't even rules out grey screens, can't until I get it home to see what it's like on a white screen(the demo is on a 96' greyhawk). I've kinda wanted to go to a larger screen(currently 119'), in the 150' neighborhood, and the Silverstar makes that impossible.


Also I like to sit about 10ft from the screen, will the Silverstar show me a little too much as far as artifacts? Finally these light filters to reduce the sparklie artifact? Doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose of the SS?


----------



## wnielsenbb

I sit 10 feet from my SS and the only artifact that bothers me is the SDE from my 720p projector. I dont think that will be an issue with the RS1, which is part of why I want one.

One advantage of the SS when using the filter: The filter can be removed as your bulb dims, on a regular screen you can do nothing but buy a new bulb or watch a worse image. Also if you are watching football in the morning and there is some amient light, you will really appreciate the image.

If you have a dark room you may well like another screen better. Projectorcentral dismissed the SS outright, but for those of us who have them, you couldn't take them for anything.

Warren.


----------



## joerod

My first row is about 11 feet back from my 120.5" SS and we love it! I of course use a Sony Ruby with it and I have never had a single complaint about my screen. The SS looks great with an image on it and without! The Silver Screen is what it is all about!


----------



## Makomachine

I can say with a high degree of confidence that the ND2 reduces the 'sheen' down to almost nothing. Definitely an improvement and the image is still very bright. I'm very pleased with the combo now - and when the lamp dims, I can remove the filter and have a similar image through the end of the bulb life.


I highly recommend this screen accompanied with a high quality filter when the lamp is new. Wouldn't trade it now...


Blacks are VERY good. I come from a 65" Pio Elite CRT and have found most PJ's wanting in the black arena. The RS1 w/ this screen is perfect - blacks are black, not dark gray. I will say that the image improves with time - got ~100 hrs on it now and it just keeps looking better to me. Highly recommended.


----------



## plissken99

I do have complete light control. Basically a silver screen doesn't make the blacks worse than a white screen does right? Because I'm gonna start out viewing on a white screen anyway. If I feel the blacks are good enough, a SS may be the way to go.


----------



## Makomachine




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *plissken99* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I do have complete light control. Basically a silver screen doesn't make the blacks worse than a white screen does right? Because I'm gonna start out viewing on a white screen anyway. If I feel the blacks are good enough, a SS may be the way to go.



I would suggest you see one in person before making the decision. There are tradeoffs with every PJ/screen combination. I can live with the compromises the SS presents - others may not be able to do it and prefer a dimmer image with a screen that COMPLETELY vanishes from the picture. I haven't seen the Dalite HP but if your situation works well with it - which mind doesn't - it is another good option to view as well. Key point is view before you buy, IMO...


----------



## joerod

Seeing one in person always has its advantages... I have to admit though I blind bought the SS and do not regret it... Even my wife can tell when we are at someone elses place the differece in screen qualities...


----------



## plissken99




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Makomachine* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I would suggest you see one in person before making the decision. There are tradeoffs with every PJ/screen combination. I can live with the compromises the SS presents - others may not be able to do it and prefer a dimmer image *with a screen that COMPLETELY vanishes from the picture*. I haven't seen the Dalite HP but if your situation works well with it - which mind doesn't - it is another good option to view as well. Key point is view before you buy, IMO...



See thats intersting. How does the screen not vanish? Or do you mean you just don't think about the screen?


----------



## Makomachine




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *plissken99* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> See thats intersting. How does the screen not vanish? Or do you mean you just don't think about the screen?



plissken99 -- You can see a 'sheen' in very bright scenes with a new lamp, which is similar to the silkscreen effect on a rear projection set from what I'm told. It really is a non-issue with myself and the people that have seen it thus far - but I can see how it would bother some people. It's only in real bright scenes, like snow scenes, blue sky shots, etc - but I do recommend you take a look at it first to make sure it doesn't bother you.


----------



## Rob Tomlin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Makomachine* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> plissken99 -- You can see a 'sheen' in very bright scenes with a new lamp, which is similar to the silkscreen effect on a rear projection set from what I'm told. It really is a non-issue with myself and the people that have seen it thus far - but I can see how it would bother some people. It's only in real bright scenes, like snow scenes, blue sky shots, etc - but I do recommend you take a look at it first to make sure it doesn't bother you.



I agree with this...except it isn't "just" with a new lamp. And yes, I would describe it as the silkscreen effect on some rear projection sets. I liked many attributes of the Silverstar, but in the end the sheen bothered me enough that I did not buy another one when we moved and built a new HT.


----------



## littleguy123

I have just installed my new vutec silverstar screen and it does look extremely good in a totally dark room. With some ambient light on it is also very viewable and acceptable.

I am using it with the Pan ae900 which projects right smack in the middle of the screen.

My question is, will the screen work better with ambient light if I project from the ceiling at an angle?


Also, my bulb is up to 1500 hours so I wonder if changing the bulb will make a big difference?


----------



## wnielsenbb

I believe it is a normally reflective screen (not retro reflective like the Hi Power,) so ideally you want the projector at the same angle above the screen center that you are below the screen center. I am quite sure it is fine how you have it. It will be brighter when you change the bulb.

You don't have some polarized 3d glasses around do you? I heard the SS works for 3d and with the lcd projector being polarized naturally you should have one eye black with the glasses. That would be good to know. I worry the SS can't really do it, or that the Panny's microlens messes that up. Thinking of going 3D.

Warren.


----------



## GaTek

I just heard some news from BBC about the white board screen could harm kids' eyes in school.


Have no idea about whether the health makes sense or the image stimulation makes sense.


----------



## hmcewin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *littleguy123* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I have just installed my new vutec silverstar screen and it does look extremely good in a totally dark room. With some ambient light on it is also very viewable and acceptable.
> 
> I am using it with the Pan ae900 which projects right smack in the middle of the screen.
> 
> My question is, will the screen work better with ambient light if I project from the ceiling at an angle?
> 
> 
> Also, my bulb is up to 1500 hours so I wonder if changing the bulb will make a big difference?



The SS will perform better with a ceiling mounted projector. I tried mine both ways and the ceiling mount provides better gain and more even lighting across the screen. I think the Panny can be mounted about a foot above the screen and will do a fantastic job with the SS.


----------



## joerod

SO are screens could be harmful to our eyes? Is that with an image on it or with nothing?


----------



## littleguy123

thanks for the response hmcewin. So if I install the panny 900 a foot above the screen do i use the lense shift or do I tilt the projector and ajust with keystone correction?


----------



## wnielsenbb

Mount it level and use lens shift for sure.

Warren.


----------



## littleguy123

So instead of going 1 foot higher I should just go to the top of the screen?


----------



## wnielsenbb

No, you can go 1 foot higher, just keep the projector level and lens shift the image down. Lens shift keeps your full pixel width, where keystone correction will lose pixels, and be not so good looking.

Warren.


----------



## littleguy123

Thanks for the info Warren.


----------



## nastyboy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *littleguy123* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I have just installed my new vutec silverstar screen and it does look extremely good in a totally dark room. With some ambient light on it is also very viewable and acceptable.
> 
> I am using it with the Pan ae900 which projects right smack in the middle of the screen.
> 
> My question is, will the screen work better with ambient light if I project from the ceiling at an angle?
> 
> 
> Also, my bulb is up to 1500 hours so I wonder if changing the bulb will make a big difference?



I also have this projector my room is 14 x 10 using a 74" screen that I made a while back using 2 pass black out cloth. My room has no ambient light. The walls, ceiling and carpet are a dark purple. With the lights off you cannot see an inch in front of you face. I am thinking about upgrading my screen and like what I see in regards to the Vutec Silverstar but after describing my room conditions to various sales staff at different stores they state that the gain will be to high.


If I were to spray my screen Goo Systems sales said I should go with " Digital Grey Light"


If I were to go with other types of screen assemblies others are saying " Cinima Vision or Hi Def Grey "


Could you supply some more detailed info on your room setup to help me make the correct screen selection for ultimate viewing pleasure.


----------



## wnielsenbb

Grey will give you better blacks.

The SS will give you colors that just pop. If you like the vivid image of a plasma you will like the SS. Current good projectors like the JVC RS1 have awesome blacks, so the grey screen isn't necessary. Considering that, even if you don't have one now, you will someday I assume, I would have to recommend the SS.

A pure white screen would be my second choice. Grey is a desperate attempt to improve blacks, when they should, and are being, improved in the projector.

I am just building a dedicated room now. I am looking forward to the SS in it. An extra bonus is I belive the SS will work with 3D. With the low price of projectors, and condidering there is a company making realtime 2D-3D conversion software, getting two projectors polarized for 3D is a pretty inexpensive thing now.

Warren.


----------



## nastyboy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wnielsenbb* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> ...I would have to recommend the SS.
> 
> A pure white screen would be my second choice. Grey is a desperate attempt to improve blacks, when they should, and are being, improved in the projector...
> 
> Warren.



Thanks for the info. Any good places in Canada with decent pricing for the Fixed Vutec SS.


Have Great day.


----------



## wnielsenbb

No idea about that. I got mine from our friendly sponsers.

Warren.


----------



## nastyboy

I phoned up Vutec and talked to inside sales guy, Mike, who tracked down a couple of Canadian dealers that have them in stock. Now its just an issue with pricing and size of screen. Thanks again.


----------



## littleguy123

I live in Montreal and I ordered my SS directly over the phone from BH Video on 9th ave in NYC. They gave me great service and the screen arrived in perfect condition. They said delivery would be in 2-4 weeks and I got in 4 weeks. Since this screen is manufactured in the USA I only had to pay the gst and prov tax to canadian customs (because of NAFTA).


----------



## kkohr1467




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Makomachine* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Do you find that it reduces the sparklies or does it make a difference? I think I'm going to try and pick one up at the local camera shop if it does.




What size filter is everyone purchasing?


----------



## wnielsenbb

You probably have to look on a thread for your projector to find the filter size. Different projectors are different.

Warren.


----------



## kkohr1467




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wnielsenbb* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> You probably have to look on a thread for your projector to find the filter size. Different projectors are different.
> 
> Warren.



I have the RS1 but there is no thread on this lens to attach the filter so I guess I would have to lay the filter over top the lens. I have the SS but find the sparklies very annoying.


----------



## wnielsenbb

people have found filters for the 7700 that snug fit and work just fine.


----------



## littleguy123

What is this filter everyone is talking about? What does it do?


----------



## mnn1265




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *nastyboy* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Thanks for the info. Any good places in Canada with decent pricing for the Fixed Vutec SS.
> 
> 
> Have Great day.



Decent pricing is an oxymoron in context to the Vutec SS screens.


Over $3000 for a stretched (essentially) plastic material is insane!


And I thought Monster cable was gouging people...


----------



## joerod

But these are worth every penny!


----------



## hmcewin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mnn1265* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Decent pricing is an oxymoron in context to the Vutec SS screens.
> 
> 
> Over $3000 for a stretched (essentially) plastic material is insane!
> 
> 
> And I thought Monster cable was gouging people...



The Vutec SS is not a stretched material. It is a silver looking hardboard with a very nice 3.25" velour frame. My 110" SS cost $1600 including freight in the U.S.A.


Your Monster cable reference here is inappropriate. I, like many others feel the SS is worth every penny and there is a performace difference that is discernably better. In this case you get what you pay for.


I do agree with one thing you said. Monster Cable is a total rip.


----------



## kenabb




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *joerod* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> But these are worth every penny!



You are correct Sir.


----------



## mnn1265




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hmcewin* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> The Vutec SS is not a stretched material. It is a silver looking hardboard with a very nice 3.25" velour frame. My 110" SS cost $1600 including freight in the U.S.A.
> 
> 
> Your Monster cable reference here is inappropriate. I, like many others feel the SS is worth every penny and there is a performace difference that is discernably better. In this case you get what you pay for.
> 
> 
> I do agree with one thing you said. Monster Cable is a total rip.



I appologize for that comment and to those of you that have purchased one of these screens, undoubtedly with much research and consideration. I don't mean to suggest the money was foolishly spent.


What I meant was that a thin sheet of "silver looking hardboard" that comes in at $3000 for use as a 120" diagonal screen seems very excessive. My comparison to Monster was used in the sense that that company also charges exorbatant amounts of money for what is basically a copper wire. Of course I do realize that in the case of Monster cable you can buy a zip cord and get the same performance as the branded wire whereas with the Vutec you can't quite achieve the same results with some pvc board from a hardware store.


I can understand the justification that this product required much research to achieve the secret ingredients and the fact that they probably sell a relatively small quantity of them but the price is staggering! I mean that's as much money as the average Indian person spends in a year (adjusted GDP)... and for what... "a silver looking hardboard."


Sorry I just had a momentary sense of outrage at the thought... but of course I know people spend many times that amount of money for a purse, a baseball card, a hankerchief or other seemingly trivial items. Even though I can afford it I just don't think I can bring myself to spend that much money on a piece of hardboard. I'm sure I'm being a hypocrite because I know I waste money on all kinds of products... there's just something about this catagory at this price that I can't stomach!


----------



## Archanon

This is probably a bit off topic, but...


I was about to mount my silverstar and I just noticed that they didn't ship me any set-screws to affix the screen to the mounting brackets. I'm sure it's something I can just get at the hardware store but I don't know if it's a machine screw or a metal screw, or something else. Would someone mind looking at it and telling me which it is? Thanks


----------



## geocab

Mine are normal set screws that you need an allen wrench for. I don't know the size off hand, though. Did you check the frame itself if the screws are already in it? Because mine were.


----------



## Archanon

It's still in the bubblewrap, but I've checked 2 of the 4 holes and they are empty. It they are taped to the wrapping or the back I would not have found them yet. I'll go look...


----------



## Archanon

Ok, I found 3 of em, definitely missing one. Good enough for now, I'll have Vutec ship me one more. Thanks for the clue.


----------



## geocab

Great! A lot easier than needing to run to the store.


----------



## deanzsyclone




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mnn1265* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I appologize for that comment and to those of you that have purchased one of these screens, undoubtedly with much research and consideration. I don't mean to suggest the money was foolishly spent.
> 
> 
> What I meant was that a thin sheet of "silver looking hardboard" that comes in at $3000 for use as a 120" diagonal screen seems very excessive. My comparison to Monster was used in the sense that that company also charges exorbatant amounts of money for what is basically a copper wire. Of course I do realize that in the case of Monster cable you can buy a zip cord and get the same performance as the branded wire whereas with the Vutec you can't quite achieve the same results with some pvc board from a hardware store.
> 
> 
> I can understand the justification that this product required much research to achieve the secret ingredients and the fact that they probably sell a relatively small quantity of them but the price is staggering! I mean that's as much money as the average Indian person spends in a year (adjusted GDP)... and for what... "a silver looking hardboard."
> 
> 
> Sorry I just had a momentary sense of outrage at the thought... but of course I know people spend many times that amount of money for a purse, a baseball card, a hankerchief or other seemingly trivial items. Even though I can afford it I just don't think I can bring myself to spend that much money on a piece of hardboard. I'm sure I'm being a hypocrite because I know I waste money on all kinds of products... there's just something about this catagory at this price that I can't stomach!



I used to sell monster cable, I never once saw a picture difference between thier cable and a standard well made cable of much lesser cost. But I see a night and day difference with my SS, and what I had before, AND what I have seen at other home theater setups. But yes they are a bit on the pricy side, but I'm glad to see what did come to me was of excelent qaulity in build but of course leaps and bounds better in picture qaulity. Can't say mine cost 3gs I'm thinking it was more like 2500 including the shipping. Still a hefty price tag.


----------



## Sherardp

Holy hannah that silver screen looks amazing. Looks like I saw this thread a little late. Very impressed, how much would a 16:9 126 diagonal silver screen cost? Right off the bat the difference is huge, I notice more "pop" in the pics on the silver screen.


----------



## smithfarmer

mnn1265,


The cost of the SS is about on par with the prices charged by Stewart for their Studiotek and FireHawk screens and much less than Mirage charges for their DNP Supernova Screen.


Sherardp,


Max size is 105" wide 16:9 Aspect Ratio or 119" wide 2.35:1 AR.


Some of you guys need to shop around some. Excluding shipping, I paid less than 2K for my 105" wide 16:9 SS.


----------



## joerod

Here's a couple of pics with nothing on the Vutec SS...


----------



## mnn1265




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *smithfarmer* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> mnn1265,
> 
> 
> The cost of the SS is about on par with the prices charged by Stewart for their Studiotek and FireHawk screens and much less than Mirage charges for their DNP Supernova Screen.



Yes indeed, and I certainly didn't mean to single-out Vutec because as you pointed out they are hardly the most expensive stuff out there.


I myself purchased a Da-Lite screen a few years for about $1000 and at the time I felt that was a helluva lot to pay for a screen... this was just a classic case of sticker shock.


----------



## mnn1265




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Sherardp* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Holy hannah that silver screen looks amazing. Looks like I saw this thread a little late. Very impressed, how much would a 16:9 126 diagonal silver screen cost? Right off the bat the difference is huge, I notice more "pop" in the pics on the silver screen.



From what I found online about $3k for a 126" screen.


----------



## smithfarmer

With 3 clicks of my mouse I found this from a very reputable company:




> Quote:
> Vutec Silver Star Fixed Frame Projection Screen - 60 x 107" - 123" Diagonal - HDTV Format (16:9 Aspect)
> 
> 
> Mfr# SS123BV ******# VUSSBV60107
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Price: $ 1,834.95



The above price excludes shipping. Call up the guys here at AVS that bring you this great forum. They will more than likely beat it.


----------



## mnn1265




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *smithfarmer* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> With 3 clicks of my mouse I found this from a very reputable company:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The above price excludes shipping. Call up the guys here at AVS that bring you this great forum. They will more than likely beat it.



What kind of evil magic do you employ to find such deals?










Thanks, that's much closer to sanity...


----------



## joerod

Oh yeah! Go AVS for the SS...


----------



## wnielsenbb

That price sounds like about what I paid AVS for my SS.

Warren.


----------



## smithfarmer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mnn1265* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> What kind of evil magic do you employ to find such deals?



Google is your friend.










Seriously though, I didn't know AVS sold screens when I bought mine otherwise I would definitely have went through them. Give them a call and make sure you get a price on one with the 3.25" deluxe black velvet frame. It's worth the extra coin.


----------



## wnielsenbb

Oh, yeah. That is what they sell by default. You wouldn't want it any other way. That is one awesome frame.

Warren.


----------



## mrossi2

applogize if this has been asked and answered someplace else. But if i like the look of this silver screen BUT have my center channel mounted in wall behind the screen...


can i get something that is sound permeable?

i need something 100" diagonal for a jvc rs1 - ceiling mounted 12 feet away.. viewing from 12 feet also.


----------



## kenabb




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mrossi2* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> applogize if this has been asked and answered someplace else. But if i like the look of this silver screen BUT have my center channel mounted in wall behind the screen...
> 
> 
> can i get something that is sound permeable?
> 
> i need something 100" diagonal for a jvc rs1 - ceiling mounted 12 feet away.. viewing from 12 feet also.



If your asking will the sound go thru the screen, not very well. The screen is mounted on a solid stiff backing material and shipped in one mountable piece. I believe they have a perforated screen but I don't what the reflective quality is.


----------



## mrossi2

yes a perforated or microperforated version of this silver...


----------



## wnielsenbb

I would move the speaker, or get a good center channel speaker, rather than get a perforated screen. The screen will cover the hole.









Warren.


----------



## mrossi2

always an option. i think i'm going to go with an AT screen - see i i hate it and then spend frmo there


----------



## lennyd

One question and if its been covered, I apologize for missing it but is this Vutec SS any good with ambient light falling on it? My room has PVC blinds (verticals) which do a good job to darkent the room but some light still gets through.


Is the field of view (viewing angle) okay with this? Some of my seating is way to the side say 50 degrees.


Thanks


----------



## mimason




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *lennyd* /forum/post/11654184
> 
> 
> One question and if its been covered, I apologize for missing it but is this Vutec SS any good with ambient light falling on it? My room has PVC blinds (verticals) which do a good job to darkent the room but some light still gets through.
> 
> 
> Is the field of view (viewing angle) okay with this? Some of my seating is way to the side say 50 degrees.
> 
> 
> Thanks



As you are well aware there are trade-offs with most if not all screens. The SS is decent at ambient light rejection, much better than a white screen but not as good as an HP for example. OTOH, when you start talking about 50 degree viewing angles the SS is very good. Hotspotting is honestly a nonissue unless you like watching a blue screen for any lenght of time. With an HP at 50 degrees you will have to get full gain in the sweetspot setup for angles at 50 to be acceptable. MHO after owning both.


----------



## eastry

What's the word on hotspot probability on a Da-Lite Model C CSR with Silver Matte? I'm torn between that and the high contrast white matte of the same model. It's a 65"x116" screen and the light from the projector could definitely use the boost in brightness and contrast that the silver screens seem to give. Any recommendations? I'm pretty new to the projector world and I'm on a tight budget so I can't spring for anything super high end, but I found these on sale for $618 with no tax or shipping costs so I'm going for it. Also, the High Power screen is about $40 more, is it worth it? A large viewing angle would be nice but not required.


----------



## mcspeed

The VuTec silverstar looks very impressive. I have two problems with it 1) Shipped assembled as one complete unit, I don't think I can get it upstairs to my theater and 2) Would like to go slightly larger than VuTec offers.


Proector is a Sharp XVZ 10000. Any suggestions on what would be close or as close as possible to SS?


----------



## wnielsenbb

mcspeed. If 120" isn't enough you could go 2.35 and get a wider SilverStar. It would be the same height as the 120", but wider. I think maybe you could disassemble it to bring upstairs, you would have to check with Vutec. I need to do that too and hadn't thought about it. Yuck. Luckily I have a large open loft I could raise it to with lots of help. The High Power screen is usually recommended and would meet your needs I believe.


eastry: I would get the High Power for 40 bucks. Owners really like them.


hdblu: Look in the DIY forum, there are many recommendations for paint you could just paint a wall with. You would need to sand it smooth. An easier cheap solution is Black Out Cloth. I used that for a year. Just used foam mounting tape to tape it to the wall and got two rolls of wide black ribbon to mask it. Worked fine and cost like 16 bucks. Warren.


----------



## mcspeed

High power = Da-Lite?


----------



## wnielsenbb

Yes.


----------



## smithfarmer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wnielsenbb* /forum/post/11711706
> 
> 
> mcspeed. If 120" isn't enough you could go 2.35 and get a wider SilverStar. It would be the same height as the 120", but wider.



I believe the height on a 119" wide 2.35:1 screen is around 51" compared to 59" for a 120" 16:9 screen.


----------



## wnielsenbb

It isn't 119". I believe 59" is the height limit for SS material, but the width is open, so you would get 59" x 138" = 150" diagonal 2.35 screen. I am not sure about that of course, Vutec could verify.

Warren.


----------



## smithfarmer

The maximum height available is 72" as this is the height of the metal foil rolls used in manufacturing the screens and that height is generally only used for 4:3 aspect ratio screens.


For a 2.35:1 aspect ratio screen, the maximum available seamless width on the is 119". You can go wider but there will be a seam.


----------



## Fred334

Thanks for the dimensions. I was wondering how far I could go before I got a seam.


----------



## wnielsenbb

Smithfarmer, good info. So you can go 136" diagnol 16x9 then? 67"x119" I suppose a call to Vutec would be the first order of business if that was the direction you wanted to go.


Warren.


----------



## smithfarmer

Warren, I just checked some archived posts of mine and the metal foil used in the screens is 60" in height. The frame takes away 1/2" from the top and bottom so max visible screen height available is 59". Sorry for the incorrect info.


----------



## Tryg

Does anyone still like their Silverstar? I do


----------



## Rob Tomlin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Tryg* /forum/post/12150744
> 
> 
> Does anyone still like their Silverstar? I do



Nope.


The sheen got to be too much for me.


YMMV.


----------



## jakeman

Still going strong in my HT with everyone still commenting on the great punchy image. The only time I thought the sheen was an issue was when I first set up the RS1 which Tryg sold me earlier this year. A ND2 filter on the lense did the trick which effectively cut the screen gain in half.


----------



## wnielsenbb

Still loving my SS. Especially now that my bulb has over 2k hours.

Warren.


----------



## Dr. Lecter

Hi, any suggestions how to buy a SS in Germany?


Of course, I can order it in the US, e.g. here:

w w w.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/326416-REG/Vutec_SS123BV_Silver_Star_Fixed_Frame.html 


But the shipping costs are nearly at 1.400,- $


I´ve asked Vutec directly, but they said the don´t ship to Germany - normally...


So please, can somebody help to BUY a SS? Any ideas?


At the moment we use an Optoma Graywolf with 1.8 Gain, but we habe a very bright living room so a much higher gain would make more fun, I think.


Thanks in advance


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Rob Tomlin* /forum/post/12150812
> 
> 
> Nope.
> 
> 
> The sheen got to be too much for me.
> 
> 
> YMMV.



Likewise.


I don't own one but have seen the SS in action (with the JVC RS1 projector). Terrific image in terms of punchiness and vibrancy, but the sheen bothered me too much. It reminded me of the Silk Screen Effect I see on RPTVs in which I see the sparkly screen structure overlaying the image which, frankly, drives me nuts. (And it's why I find my plasma such a pleasant, natural, unsullied viewing experience).


As Rob says: YMMV.


----------



## wnielsenbb

You should try a Dalite high power screen. Pretty close to the SS I hear, but a lot cheaper to buy and ship.

Warren.


----------



## GsHTPC

Is there a comprable paint or mix one could use to achive similar performance of the SS?


----------



## johnorloff

I'm buying the Silverstar (they're currently backordered-- will take 5 weeks)-- and am a little nervous about the shine... but I don't think I have much choice-- other than replacing my bulb ever 600 hours. My da-lite (hi-con cinema vision) just isn't cutting it (and I can't use the HP with a ceiling mount).


Just replaced the bulb (after only 600 hours), and voila-- BEAUTIFUL. But that will last only another 100 hours or so... 300, then I'll start to get annoyed... by 600... can't watch it... The SS sample still was fine on the 600 hours... of course that was on 8x10", and the shine COULD annoy me....


I actually started to think, well hey, the bulbs are 400 bucks, the screen 2200... thats 5 bulbs... that I seem to go through in about 5 months... that gets me through two years... will I be buying a new PJ by then anyway-- presumably a brighter one? Then I thought-- I start to get annoyed with brightness 300-400 in.... so, no... SS, come on down!


Glad you still like yours Tryg!


Hope I can sell my 6 month old Da-Lite!


----------



## wnielsenbb

John, just get a ND2 filter for the new bulb when you have the SS. That will tame any shimmer. Pop it out when the bulb dims and bam! new bulb look. I ran my BenQ 7700 on low bulb till about 1800 hours before switching to high mode. After 2300 hours it is still very bright in the dark, although it isn't cutting through ambient like it used to. Love my SS.

GsHTPC, check the DIY screen forum. I think trying to get high gain with paint would be very difficult to keep uniformity. Sounds like an excersize in frustration. I think in the end you would wish you had got a Dalite HP for not much more than diy.

Warren.


----------



## hmcewin

I have had my SS for about a year after owning Hipower, Gray Wolf. The ss is a perfect performer for me. Yes, if you sit and search for a sparklies you will ocassionally find one in a bright scene featuring sky. But for 99.9% of the time I am watching any kind of content on the ss, it simply is the best screen available today.


Once in a while I go into a HT store to check out new stuff. Most of the high end stores carry the Stewart line. I look at them and walk away even more convinced the ss has been my best purchase in terms of providing satisfaction. What a great screen.


Do not let those (very few) nay sayers complaining about sparklies keep you from considering this screen.


Henry


----------



## WOLVERNOLE




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hmcewin* /forum/post/12350018
> 
> 
> Once in a while I go into a HT store to check out new stuff. Most of the high end stores carry the Stewart line. I look at them and walk away even more convinced the ss has been my best purchase in terms of providing satisfaction.
> 
> Henry



Henry-

What do you find egregious about the Stewart screens, and WHICH ones have you seen, and in what environment? Just asking. I want enough light, but I AM bothered by SSE, which the bright "sparklies" resemble on the SS to me...but I digress...again, tell me your reaction and expereince with Stewart- and which one (s).







Thanks.


----------



## wnielsenbb

I have seen the Stewart screens in a few stores too, and after watching my SS they just look bland. I just got a Panny AE2000U







That smooth screen is amazing. No pixel structure at all. Haven't got it calibrated at all and it looks good, but a bit bright. Now I can sit as close to the screen as I want. My toes hit the center channel speaker, so I might back up a few inches. 5 feet from a 120" screen rules!

I would try a ND2 filter to reduce sparklies before trying a different screen.

Warren.


----------



## jakeman

That's good summary of my sentiments about the SS as well. Its a wonderfully vibrant screen with the wide viewing cone which makes it easy to sit anywhere in the HT and appreciate the same image. I agree the sheen thing is blown way out of proportion. Its like that with all audio/video products...if you go looking for small artifacts you will eventually find them. For a long time I never noticed it until I took a closer look at bright shots of the sky or white mountainsides.


There is an awful lot of hype at these forums regarding the Stewart screens and having viewed several of them I'm always left wondering what all the fuss is about. No way would I downgrade from the SS to one of the Stewart screens and lose the punch and detail which makes the HT experience so enjoyable.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jakeman* /forum/post/12351390
> 
> 
> I agree the sheen thing is blown way out of proportion. .



I don't think it's blown way out of proportion. It's just one of those artifacts where you have people who say: A. "don't see it," or B. "Can see it but doesn't bother me" all the way to C "See it and it bugs me."


Like DLP rainbows.


You get people representing all those points of view around here about the SS screen so I don't think it's blown out of proportion. For those it bugs...it really bugs.


It's an artifact that I find myself particularly sensitive to. I've been using a plasma for my HT for many years so I'm not used to having to deal with any screen-based artifacts. And one of the artifacts that bugged me most on RTPVs was the sparkly Silk Screen Effect. As I've researched projectors to upgrade from my plasma HT it's been similar: I keep seeing a screen surface on many projection screens over the image that I have never had to deal with when watching movies at home. I find it really jumps out at me and hard to ignore. In fact I was just watching a JVC RS1 on a Stewart Firehawk

screen and have decided to cross it off my list because I kept seeing the screen structure on bright parts of the image. I really want my screen to "disappear" when an image projects upon it.


At the moment some screen samples from Carada seem to be doing that for

me.


But of course to chase that particular goal (no visible screen structure) I'll have to take a hit in performance that others wouldn't think is worth it (e.g. forsake the brightness and vividness of something like a SilverStar).


Aside from the screen texture issue for me, I think the SilverStar is an awesome screen from having seen the RS1 projected on to it. Great wow factor.


----------



## WOLVERNOLE

Rich-

What about the Stewart Studiotek 130 ( 1.3 gain/white) ??? Pretty smooth, with just a liiiittle help on brightness).


----------



## Tryg

The fact is almost all angular reflective screens allow you to see the screen. If it has an optical coating like the Stewarts or others its guaranteed. The ones that come closest to "disappearing" are those that are uncoated and have great diffusion. Usually uncoated white PVC.


Carada bright white

Stewart snow white

Draper 1300

Vutec ?

etc etc etc


The other screen that disappears is the Da-Lite High Power because its retro-reflective.


Yes you can see sparklies on the Silverstar. But you are getting almost 3 gain in return. To only get a 1.3 gain and see sparklies doesnt make much sense to me. You can do the same brightness with the above screens without any artifacts. This to me is a better image


----------



## Chad T

What happened to the pics on the first page of the thread? I can't get them to load. Have enjoyed reading the commentary, but the pics sure would help.


----------



## Tryg

It's your browser. Use Firefox, or update explorer. I recommend Firefox


----------



## Chad T

I'm using Firefox 2.0.0.10 and no dice. I'll give IE7 a try.


Edit: Can't get them to show in IE7 either.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *WOLVERNOLE* /forum/post/12352891
> 
> 
> Rich-
> 
> What about the Stewart Studiotek 130 ( 1.3 gain/white) ??? Pretty smooth, with just a liiiittle help on brightness).



I've seen the StudioTek before, but when I wasn't watching critically as far as screen performance. I've seen the occasionally person report they even see some texture/sparklies on the StudioTek.


Even if the StudioiTek 130 doesn't have a screen structure, I can get the Carada brilliant white, same gain and it has been reviewed and measured to be extremely similar in performance to the ST 130 for much cheaper. (Gotta find some way of stopping the HT money hemorrhage). Or I can go with the Carada Classic Cinema White which does a bit better with black levels. Still deciding.


But try as I might I can't see the screen texture at all when an image is projected on any of the Carada screen samples.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Chad T* /forum/post/12353512
> 
> 
> I'm using Firefox 2.0.0.10 and no dice. I'll give IE7 a try.
> 
> 
> Edit: Can't get them to show in IE7 either.



I had this problem over the weekend when I was reading one of Tryg's threads that had been archived. Someone suggested Mozilla for a browser and I downloaded that and it worked.


----------



## wnielsenbb

The RS1 is a very bright projector for the Silverstar. It would need a ND2 filter for sure.

Warren.


----------



## Chad T




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/12353733
> 
> 
> I had this problem over the weekend when I was reading one of Tryg's threads that had been archived. Someone suggested Mozilla for a browser and I downloaded that and it worked.



I downloaded Mozilla 1.7.13. That appears to be an out of date, unsupported software, but I can now see the images! Thanks.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Chad T* /forum/post/12353887
> 
> 
> I downloaded Mozilla 1.7.13. That appears to be an out of date, unsupported software, but I can now see the images! Thanks.



I have version 2.0.0.10 loaded and it works for me. I use it only for Tryg's old screen threads and internet explorer for everything else.


----------



## hmcewin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *WOLVERNOLE* /forum/post/12350289
> 
> 
> Henry-
> 
> What do you find egregious about the Stewart screens, and WHICH ones have you seen, and in what environment? Just asking. I want enough light, but I AM bothered by SSE, which the bright "sparklies" resemble on the SS to me...but I digress...again, tell me your reaction and expereince with Stewart- and which one (s).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks.




Stewart 1.3, Firehawk, Grayhawk are ones I have seen in HT stores. The 1.3 is blah. The gray ones have poor whites and no pop like the SS does. Not to mention the inflated prices of the Stewarts. I liked the sample of the Carada Bright White after the SS. You may want to take a look at it.


Henry


----------



## R Harkness

It's all about matching projector to the right screen/screen size.


I've seen the JVC RS1 on the Silverstar and it was killer.


But I think the mosty dynamic, plasma-like image I've ever seen remains the Sharp Z2k projected on a Stewart Firehawk screen. Before I saw that, being a plasma lover myself, I'd never thought front projection could approach plasma.


----------



## msink




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Tryg* /forum/post/12150744
> 
> 
> Does anyone still like their Silverstar? I do



Love mine. Trying to get my friends to upgrade to one as well. 110" Velvet Frame.. would be great!


If anyone is interested in possible AVS PowerBuy on these screens please see:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=946303 


Mark


----------



## FiveMillionWays

So which is better hi power or silverstar?


----------



## mimason




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *FiveMillionWays* /forum/post/12470189
> 
> 
> So which is better hi power or silverstar?



I have both. The high power is better due to SS sheen issues but I am using the SS now full time. Reason, wife likes the SS because my pull down HP is ugly and I see some screen door with the HP that I don't see with the SS. When I unload my HS51(cross fingers it breaks







) I will look at a something else. Worst case scenario is I keep one hell of a pretty darn good screen = SS


----------



## mtbdudex




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *msink* /forum/post/12398595
> 
> 
> Love mine. Trying to get my friends to upgrade to one as well. 110" Velvet Frame.. would be great!
> 
> 
> If anyone is interested in possible AVS PowerBuy on these screens please see:
> 
> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=946303
> 
> 
> Mark



Is the powerbuy over?

I tried the link and appears so.

How'd it go?

Can I get in "after the fact" as a newbie to the 2.35:1 scene??


----------



## msink

There was no power buy. It took so long to get pricing that by the time we got prices, most of the 25 or so who expressed interest had bought some other screen, or a SilverStar somewhere else, and we didnt have enough interest left to get a deal.


----------



## NickTheo

Anyone know where to get a good price on a Deluxe model 123" Silverstar?? (XWF model I believe - with the black velvet frame)


I'm in the market to buy one right now and I was hoping to shop around a little.


I'm also curious what present owners of the screen paid for theirs.


Thanks in advance for all the help!!!


----------



## Marc Rumsey




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *NickTheo* /forum/post/13051808
> 
> 
> Anyone know where to get a good price on a Deluxe model 123" Silverstar?? (XWF model I believe - with the black velvet frame)
> 
> 
> I'm in the market to buy one right now and I was hoping to shop around a little.
> 
> 
> I'm also curious what present owners of the screen paid for theirs.
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance for all the help!!!



Check your PM's...


----------



## Tryg

Wow, 200,000 views. Hope this review helped some people.


----------



## beveridge-2sw

Hello Tryg, I have a very old 80's 120" 4:3 very curved silver hi gain screen i think it is like 1 to 13 gain this is not curved like the new ones of today but curved to give gain etc..anyways will this work ok with say a new epson 1080p ub fp? ..


since you really like silver screens i though you would be the person to ask this question to...


thanks for your help


Lawrence


----------



## roboticman

Has anyone heard if any other manufacturers will ever be coming out with a SilverStar clone line of screens? The images look stunning, but the price is equally stunning. (Perhaps a 3rd or 4th mortgage?) It just seems as though Vutec would have some competition, as this seems the answer to getting a good bright image for HT.


This is especially true when one's bulb begins to age, and all you need to do is crank up brightness from the low levels you needed when the bulb was new.


But - any news on the Silver Screen front?

Or - another powerbuy attempt for those who have not already purchased?


Anyone? . . .


----------



## wnielsenbb

The HP is close for a lot less money.

The Silverstar is an amazing feat of engineering. I don't imagine it is easy to duplicate.

The price isn't bad if you consider the fact you may have it forever. I spent more on HD DVD.









Warren.


----------



## msink




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *roboticman* /forum/post/13296907
> 
> 
> Or - another powerbuy attempt for those who have not already purchased?
> 
> 
> Anyone? . . .



I tried a powerbuy a month or so ago, but Vutec made promises they couldnt keep, and strung 25+ people along for about 2 months to the point that most people dropped off the powerbuy, and bought something else, and so it never happen. I went with Carada. I have a Silverstar but needed to get my friend a screen.


Mark


----------



## keenanball

Hi There,


My wife and I are in the design stages of our home theater. Is there anyone in the Massachusetts area that would be willing to let us see a Silverstar in action? This screen sounds like the real deal but I am hesitant in making the purchase without seeing one first. I have spent months on these forums soaking in all the info. Thanks for everyones detailed posts.


We are thinking of the following for the video system:

Room 12' x 19'

Panasonic PT-AE2000U (ceiling mounted 12-14ft from screen)

HTB or CAVX HE Lens on slide

PS3 for BlueRay

Vutec 128" Diag 2.35 Silverstar Screen (results in 100 diag 16x9)

13ft Seating Distance

Full light control and masking.


Any assistance that could be given would be greatly appreciated.


Thanks,

Keenan


----------



## wnielsenbb

You could some see mine in Phoenix.







Just a bit out of the way.

I have the 120" Silverstar 16x9 with that same projector in a complete bat cave.

I think the Silverstar is a bit too bright for the panny. It actually hurt my eyes a bit the first time I turned it on (it defaults to some silly bright mode.) The brightness is nice, but the downside (shimmer) makes me think a standard white screen would be better.

Or course you could put a filter on, then when the bulb dims remove it, and it would look awesome again.

My observations are from a 7' seating distance though, so ymmv.

I really think the SilverStar is best in non-light controlled situations, or dimmer projectors.

I am going to full silver for 3D pretty soon, so that may be worse.

Warren.


----------



## ls1115




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wnielsenbb* /forum/post/13311696
> 
> 
> You could some see mine in Phoenix.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the Silverstar is a bit too bright for the panny. It actually hurt my eyes a bit the first time I turned it on (it defaults to some silly bright mode.) The brightness is nice, but the downside (shimmer) makes me think a standard white screen would be better.
> 
> Or course you could put a filter on, then when the bulb dims remove it, and it would look awesome again.



Amen!! I am considering a 127" wide 2.35 :1 Silverstar + RS2 + Isco 3 in a light controlled room. Hopefully will see one in action at Vutec in Miami. I have seen a SS demo (with a Mits. 5000) and could not see sparklies, but I wasn't really looking for them.


----------



## xpat78

Hi guys, I have been reading the thread and I am sold.. I just bought a MITS HC4900 and I am trying to find the perfect match for it.


I have plenty of room in my basement (27' x 16' x 7') and would like to get this screen on around 120"... if you guys have any recommendations or even better any experience with it and an HC4900 it would be great to read some.


Where can I get a Silverstar around DC? or if not have it shipped?


Thanks!


----------



## wnielsenbb

I got mine from AVS.

Warren.


----------



## Marc Rumsey




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *xpat78* /forum/post/13518588
> 
> 
> Hi guys, I have been reading the thread and I am sold.. I just bought a MITS HC4900 and I am trying to find the perfect match for it.
> 
> 
> I have plenty of room in my basement (27' x 16' x 7') and would like to get this screen on around 120"... if you guys have any recommendations or even better any experience with it and an HC4900 it would be great to read some.
> 
> 
> Where can I get a Silverstar around DC? or if not have it shipped?
> 
> 
> Thanks!



You've got mail!


----------



## alanl715

I am planning on (blank) projector that will be mounted on the back wall 34' from my 14' wide (not the diagonal measurement) (blank-was planning on Screen Goo screen). I will have electric almost black-out shades. I am sitting 18' from the screen.

I was told i need at least 12-14 footlamberts.

Anyone have opinions on the projector at that distance that can deliver? Is screen goo the way to go?

thanks, alan


----------



## Marc Rumsey




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *alanl715* /forum/post/14037746
> 
> 
> I am planning on (blank) projector that will be mounted on the back wall 34' from my 14' wide (not the diagonal measurement) (blank-was planning on Screen Goo screen). I will have electric almost black-out shades. I am sitting 18' from the screen.
> 
> I was told i need at least 12-14 footlamberts.
> 
> Anyone have opinions on the projector at that distance that can deliver? Is screen goo the way to go?
> 
> thanks, alan




Basically, the projector brightness you need will depend on the gain of your screen and the square footage of the screen:


Ft-Lamberts = Lumens / Square Feet x Gain


As your screen gain goes up, the necessary lumens go down. Here's a post that goes into more detail:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...5#post13873615 


Remember that as with most things, there are trade-offs. A super-high gain translates into a narrow viewing cone, or sometimes a "sheen". Screen manufacturers will send samples if you like. I don't know if Screen Goo does, but if so, I would recommend taking advantage of that.


----------



## silver700

I posted this on another forum and just wanted some feed back. I have a jvc -hd100 paired with the dalite cinema vision screen. It is 119" 16X9 screen. The jvc is ceiling mounted 16' ft away and the couch is 15' from screen. My question is I want a brighter picture but I dont want to loose the black levels i get from the jvc. If i go to the ss will i loose a lot of the black. Has anyone paired these two together. Sorry for being such a novice.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *silver700* /forum/post/14333584
> 
> 
> I posted this on another forum and just wanted some feed back. I have a jvc -hd100 paired with the dalite cinema vision screen. It is 119" 16X9 screen. The jvc is ceiling mounted 16' ft away and the couch is 15' from screen. My question is I want a brighter picture but I dont want to loose the black levels i get from the jvc. If i go to the ss will i loose a lot of the black. Has anyone paired these two together. Sorry for being such a novice.



Any chance you live in the northeast? There's a showroom near me with an RS1 and a 110" Silverstar. Looks awesome. The blacks are excellent there because the contrast between dark and light is accentuated by the high gain of the Silverstar. I find the Silverstar does a better job than the High Power in terms of blacks, since it's a silver rather than a white material.


Check out the Sony VW200 thread. joerod and rudolpht have Silverstars.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=947922


----------



## silver700

hrd, thanks for the reply. No i live in Texas. Well that is a relief. I used to own a z12000 sharp projector but decided to upgrade to the hd100(rs2). In the process I lost some of the brightness that the Sharp had. I tried the hp dalite but since my projector was ceiling mounted, it didn't work so well. I guess I am going to try the SS and hope that i have finally solved my problem with brightness.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *silver700* /forum/post/14340007
> 
> 
> hrd, thanks for the reply. No i live in Texas. Well that is a relief. I used to own a z12000 sharp projector but decided to upgrade to the hd100(rs2). In the process I lost some of the brightness that the Sharp had. I tried the hp dalite but since my projector was ceiling mounted, it didn't work so well. I guess I am going to try the SS and hope that i have finally solved my problem with brightness.



Since you're in Texas, you could visit Screen Innovations and check out the new Black Diamond. Even if you have a bat cave and don't need a light-rejecting screen, you might find the trip worthwhile. They're in Austin.


----------



## silver700

I might just check out the BD. I'll let you know what i thought of it.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *silver700* /forum/post/14340967
> 
> 
> I might just check out the BD. I let you know what i thought of it.



The Silverstar does have a few issues. It comes preassembled and shipped in a giant crate, so you have to have the clearance to get it into the theater room. Some AVS members have mentioned they bought one or wanted to buy one, but had issues with getting it inside and especially down a flight of stairs into a basement. I was bothered by the appearance of the screen surface when sitting close, but not when sitting further back, and since I like to sit close, it was a big issue for me.


I looked around and AV Science had really good prices on the Silverstar. I'm currently waiting to see when I can get a demo of a Black Diamond and for their motorized screen to come out.


----------



## silver700

If I might ask, what were the issues? Also, how far back would you say is ideal for this screen? Thanks


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *silver700* /forum/post/14348390
> 
> 
> If I might ask, what were the issues? Also, how far back would you say is ideal for this screen? Thanks



It's a fixed frame screen that is preassembled. If someone buys the 120" Silverstar with the wider frame, which is popular, he's got to move a preassembled screen that is 65.5" high by 111.5" wide and can't be bent. Some people can't fit something that size down basement stairs, or to wherever it's going.


At the showroom with the RS1 and 110" Silverstar, the front row was 11 feet from the screen. The screen surface was too easily visible at that distance. I had no issues at all from the back row, which was maybe three or four feet back from the first row. Moving even two feet back made a big difference.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *silver700* /forum/post/14348390
> 
> 
> If I might ask, what were the issues? Also, how far back would you say is ideal for this screen? Thanks



More on the issues:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&highlight=rs2


----------



## silver700




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/14359172
> 
> 
> More on the issues:
> 
> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...&highlight=rs2



thanks again for your help.


----------



## silver700

I just got a sample of the Silverstar screen. It came in a 8" X 12" framed block. I currently have the dalite cinema vision screen and I have to say that the Silverstar really doesn't seem that much brighter at all. In fact, when I had a few dalite samples, the high power dalite material seemed brighter. Of course it has a horrible viewing angle. The Silverstar looked good from just about any angle, but it really wasn't that much brighter than what I currently have. I'm a little disappointed.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *silver700* /forum/post/14363951
> 
> 
> I just got a sample of the Silverstar screen. It came in a 8" X 12" framed block. I currently have the dalite cinema vision screen and I have to say that the Silverstar really doesn't seem that much brighter at all. In fact, when I had a few dalite samples, the high power dalite material seemed brighter. Of course it has a horrible viewing angle. The Silverstar looked good from just about any angle, but it really wasn't that much brighter than what I currently have. I'm a little disappointed.



My sample seemed bright. I had it up at the same time as my High Power sample. I've also taken it to a friend's house to put up in front of his C3X1080and RS2 he was trying out with the possibility of buying and we always noticed the difference. I recommend you try to get a demo of a Silverstar. Maybe Vutec has an area rep that can show you a large version. I visited the area rep for New England in Amesbury, MA and demoed an Epson Pro 1080UB with their 60" diagonal Silverstar. Also, search through the old Silverstar threads and see if you can find any forum members in your area with Silverstars who would show you their screen. Or start a new thread postong a request to do that.


----------



## silver700

Ok, I noticed that I actually received 2 samples in the box. I did not realize this. So I put the 2 samples together and put them up against my existing screen and it is brighter. Where I really noticed the difference are scenes that have white images. The whites are really white, whereas on my dalite screen the whites are more of a off white almost a grey white. I guess I was just expecting a really bright, almost blooming effect. But I have to say it is brighter and you can pretty much sit from one side to the other without loosing any brightness. With hp dalite, if you move just a few feet to the side, you loose any brightness you might have gained. As for the "sparklies", well if i only saw them in bright white scenes and I really had to concetrate on seeing them in order to see them. So I dont think they will be an issue. I am curious to see the BD screen still.


----------



## mtbdudex




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *silver700* /forum/post/14369628
> 
> 
> Ok, I noticed that I actually received 2 samples in the box. I did not realize this. So I put the 2 samples together and put them up against my existing screen and it is brighter. Where I really noticed the difference are scenes that have white images. The whites are really white, whereas on my dalite screen the whites are more of a off white almost a grey white. I guess I was just expecting a really bright, almost blooming effect. But I have to say it is brighter and you can pretty much sit from one side to the other without loosing any brightness. With hp dalite, if you move just a few feet to the side, you loose any brightness you might have gained. As for the "sparklies", well if i only saw them in bright white scenes and I really had to concetrate on seeing them in order to see them. So I dont think they will be an issue. I am curious to see the BD screen still.



+1 on the SS over the HP Dalite, via just samples...










These picts of just the SS don't do it the justice it deserves for "pop":


----------



## mtbdudex

Open Q to owners with the Vutec SS.


I'm almost done with my DIY 2.35:1 curved DW laminate screen.

Intention was while kids "young" this is the screen material, then in 3-4 years to upgrade to the Vutec SS. As stated, my wife and I really liked the Vutec SS hands down over many other samples.


Q:

Is the foam core board flexible enough to bend to my DIY frame?

Has someone already made a DIY curved screen with Vutec SS?

I'd just attach it directly over the DW laminate in the future.

The curved wood frame is approx 55" high x 123" wide, each section 3.5" wide , that will give me about 129" diag 2.35:1 with border applied.

Radius of curvature is 39.6', about 3.7" deep of a curve.


----------



## wnielsenbb

I think you can't get ss that wide. Maybe. It is a pretty thick piece of board. Very heavy. It might be flexible. I doubt anyone has disassembled theirs, but I am going to sometime. I got 3D screen material to put in the frame. Just haven't got my second projector to do 3D yet. I will let you know how flexible it is when I do.

Warren.


----------



## smithfarmer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mtbdudex* /forum/post/15206415
> 
> 
> Open Q to owners with the Vutec SS.
> 
> Q:
> 
> Is the foam core board flexible enough to bend to my DIY frame?
> 
> Has someone already made a DIY curved screen with Vutec SS?
> 
> I'd just attach it directly over the DW laminate in the future.
> 
> The curved wood frame is approx 55" high x 123" wide, each section 3.5" wide , that will give me about 129" diag 2.35:1 with border applied.
> 
> Radius of curvature is 39.6', about 3.7" deep of a curve.




I honestly don't think you can bend the foam core without ruining the screen.


Vutec now makes the SS in a much larger size than when I bought my 120" diagonal 16:9 screen a few years ago. Scroll to the bottom for scope screen sizes:

http://www.vutec.com/Products/Vutec_...ens/SilverStar


----------



## wnielsenbb

Oh, that largest scope screen would be very nice. Another point is they don't sell the material without the frame, and the frame is the greatest cost. I would probably give up the curved screen for the SS.

Warren.


----------



## smithfarmer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wnielsenbb* /forum/post/15215316
> 
> 
> Oh, that largest scope screen would be very nice.



Agreed!



> Quote:
> I would probably give up the curved screen for the SS.



I agree here as well but a curved screen sure looks cool.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *smithfarmer* /forum/post/15211663
> 
> 
> I honestly don't think you can bend the foam core without ruining the screen.
> 
> 
> Vutec now makes the SS in a much larger size than when I bought my 120" diagonal 16:9 screen a few years ago. Scroll to the bottom for scope screen sizes:
> 
> http://www.vutec.com/Products/Vutec_...ens/SilverStar



You can buy the two largest scope sizes with the 3.25" XWF frame. The web page for the XWF frame does not list the two largest scope sizes, but they are available.

http://www.vutec.com/Products/Vision...SilverStar_XWF


----------



## mikesc

I am in the process of setting up my first HT and my A/V guy told me going over 1.4gain would cause more problems than would help. But looking at that SilverStar which is 6.0 gain according to the Vutec site looks by far the best. I am getting a Mitsu HC7000 and the room has practically no ambient light. Front row is 13 ft and looking for a 122 in screen. So what's the problem? Projecter too bright for the high gain?


----------



## FLBoy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mikesc* /forum/post/16288643
> 
> 
> I am in the process of setting up my first HT and my A/V guy told me going over 1.4gain would cause more problems than would help. But looking at that SilverStar which is 6.0 gain according to the Vutec site looks by far the best. I am getting a Mitsu HC7000 and the room has practically no ambient light. Front row is 13 ft and looking for a 122 in screen. So what's the problem? Projecter too bright for the high gain?



In a multi-row, multi-seat HT, I would try to avoid a high gain screen. Due to the directional nature of high gain screens, you will end up with some very good seats and some not so good seats. A way to ensure equal brightness for all seats is to use a matte white 1.0 gain screen. Unfortunately, the HC7000 is too dim for a 122" 1.0 gain screen. What you need IMO is a brighter PJ, such as the Panny PT-AE3000U. Here's a link to a review of the HC7000, which includes a shootout with the AE3000U.


----------



## smithfarmer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *FLBoy* /forum/post/16292785
> 
> 
> In a multi-row, multi-seat HT, I would try to avoid a high gain screen. Due to the directional nature of high gain screens, you will end up with some very good seats and some not so good seats. A way to ensure equal brightness for all seats is to use a matte white 1.0 gain screen.



Any SilverStar owner will tell you that what you have posted above is simply not true. I know you are a big proponent of the HP screen and what you've posted applies to it because it is a retro reflective screen whereas all light is direcet back to it's source. It's a great screen but has very restrictive setup requirements and this limits it's ability to be useful for many people.


The SS on the other hand is an angular reflective screen and has totally different viewing characteristics than the HP and one of the widest viewing cones available. This screen looks identical from any seat in either row I choose to sit in. I have pics of my SS and room on page 24 or 26 of this thread.



mikesc,


The SS's gain is actually around 3.0 than 6.0 and should be more than sufficient for what you need.


----------



## FLBoy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *smithfarmer* /forum/post/16295866
> 
> 
> Any SilverStar owner will tell you that what you have posted above is simply not true.



Based on this thread (look towards the end of post #1), I would have to say I (mostly) stand by my statement. The SS appears to lose significant brightness at angles greater than 30 degrees.


Judging from your photos, your HT is narrow enough to keep the viewing angles small. I dare say either the HP or the SS would be satisfactory there. I was thinking along the lines of a wider theater, say 5-6 seats wide. I admit I should have been more specific, especially since mikesc did not describe the size and shape of his HT. Thanks for keeping me on my toes.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *FLBoy* /forum/post/16297696
> 
> 
> Based on this thread (look towards the end of post #1), I would have to say I (mostly) stand by my statement. The SS appears to lose significant brightness at angles greater than 30 degrees.
> 
> 
> Judging from your photos, your HT is narrow enough to keep the viewing angles small. I dare say either the HP or the SS would be satisfactory there. I was thinking along the lines of a wider theater, say 5-6 seats wide. I admit I should have been more specific, especially since mikesc did not describe the size and shape of his HT. Thanks for keeping me on my toes.



I've seen the Silverstar maybe half a dozen times, with four different projectors, and currently have use of a 36" by 18" Silverstar sample, and I believe the Silverstar has a wide enough viewing cone to be an excellent match for mikesc's theater room. Tryg's review is over six years old. Maybe Vutec changed the screen characteristics since then.


Some people don't like how the brightness of the Silverstar fabric makes the screen surface easier to see, but since first row will be at 13 feet, that should be less of an issue than if first row were closer.


The Silverstar has a few other issues that might be concerns: it is available only in a fixed frame format, it is a lot more expensive than some other screens, it is shipped pre-assembled in a large heavy crate and is too large to be maneuvered into some theater rooms, and the fabric may be somewhat fragile (at least Jason Turk posted it was fragile). Also, the Silverstar's size, unless you are a commerical entity looking for a large enough screen that you are willing to accept a seam in the screen, is limited in height to 59 inches...by the way, this limitation means the largest 16X9 Silverstar, at 59" by 105", is really only 120.5" diagonal.


mikesc, if your budget can handle an HC7000 and a 120.5" diagonal Silverstar, you should consider buying a JVC RS10 with a 120.5" diagonal Silverstar, or even a JVC RS20. You really want as high a level of native contrast as you can get when using a high gain screen.


----------



## mikesc

My media room is 20x20. I plan on 5 seats across on each of the 2 rows. Is a 1.3 Vutec Brite White a good choice with the Panny AE3000u? I plan on the 123 in screen. Thx.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mikesc* /forum/post/16301188
> 
> 
> My media room is 20x20. I plan on 5 seats across on each of the 2 rows. Is a 1.3 Vutec Brite White a good choice with the Panny AE3000u? I plan on the 123 in screen. Thx.



I don't know anything about that screen. I think if you do a search on the fourms, you will find few forum members own it and there is not much posted about it.


Personally, I don't recommend anything by Panasonic, since there have been too many reliability issues with their projectors.


----------



## mikesc




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hrd* /forum/post/16301444
> 
> 
> I don't know anything about that screen. I think if you do a search on the fourms, you will find few forum members own it and there is not much posted about it.
> 
> 
> Personally, I don't recommend anything by Panasonic, since there have been too many reliability issues with their projectors.



The A3000u seems like a steal for the price. I will have to look into reliability issues.


The Vutec rep said that brightness can always be adjusted down on the projector, prolonging the bulb life, if the swcreen comes off a too bright. That made sense to me and answered my fear on getting a SiverStar 6.0 gain screen. Is there a preferred screen here for a gain between 1.0 -1.3? I thought Vutec was pretty common.


----------



## wnielsenbb

I have the Panny ae2000 with the Silverstar. I sit at 7' and love it. ~2000 hours on the bulb and I have switched to bright mode. Nice and bright. Very good pop. You do notice the screen texture on really bright scenes; more so on computer games than movies. The SS isn't really fabric anymore. Maybe it is but it is affixed to a 1/2" board. There is no possibility of tearing it. I shot it with an airsoft gun and it just put a tiny dent in it. Never can see it viewing. The viewing cone is awesome too. I bought it for my living room which had no light control at all, and it worked awesome. Now I have a bat cave and could probably use a low gain projector, but I doubt I would be happy losing the pop of the SS.

Warren.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mikesc* /forum/post/16302403
> 
> 
> The A3000u seems like a steal for the price. I will have to look into reliability issues.
> 
> 
> The Vutec rep said that brightness can always be adjusted down on the projector, prolonging the bulb life, if the swcreen comes off a too bright. That made sense to me and answered my fear on getting a SiverStar 6.0 gain screen. Is there a preferred screen here for a gain between 1.0 -1.3? I thought Vutec was pretty common.



120.5" diagonal is a large enough screen that you might not have a big issue with it being too bright. Most projectors have low and high bulb settings and some, like the RS10, have an adjustable iris.


Vutec does not seem to be common on the forum. A lot of forum members want Stewart screens, because of their reputation, and the ones who do not often do not because they want much more reasonable prices, which the Silverstar does not have. Any chance you could demo some screens? What area are you in?


----------



## wnielsenbb

I think their niche is more in poor light controlled situations. The SS made a gigantic difference in my living room. Still like the properties in my bat cave.

You can always use a filter to cut down the brightness. Then you can take it off when the bulb dims. I didn't need one. There were times when the bulb was new really bright scenes, like a shot of the sun, would actually make me squint. Not sure how you could see that as a negative though.









Warren.


----------



## mikesc

I do have a bat cave. Right now I am thinking the Vutec 1.3 BW will be what I need. I could pay less for the 1.0 matte, buit I would rather have the option to have a brighter picture. Still undecided on the Panny 3000 vs the HC7000 but leaning towards the Panny for the value and the lumen count over the Mitsu.


----------



## renmeister

Tryg, I'm trying to put together a projector and screen. Had zero clue of the color variations and the dramatic effect on the viewer, me. All of the retail sales people so far quickly blow by the screen thing. I thought there might be more to it? It' just like audio, one weak link reduces the sum total to weak no matter the quality of the components.







RS


----------



## wnielsenbb

Today's projectors are all so good, the screen will make more of a difference than the projector choice. Also, remember, the screen you pick will last through many projectors. Choose wisely.










Warren.


----------



## gordhome

Hi all,

Love these forums!!! Well, I got my RS20 (thank you AVS) and even projected against my DIY painted wall I am thrilled. I have some samples from Vutek, Dalite, and Carada that show me I can get a little better. And I want it. ;-)


My seating and projector placement prohibit the HP, although that would have been my first choice, I sat the projector on a table and loved the screen while in the cone but must go ceiling mount to obtain the WAF.


I kinda want to go bigger than I probably should; I am sitting 12' back and am looking at a 2.35:1 setup at 136"+ Diagonal.


I want lots of light but don't really want lots of artifacts. I will use BluRay as my only source and have no desire for TV viewing. Ambient light is not much of a concern - not a bat cave, but no light falls on the screen area. I have dark walls and this area is dedicated to the theater.


Anyway, I am really looking closely at the SS or the BW (Carada). I am concerned the BW will not have me enough light as my bulb wears. Also, I am concerned I might see too many artifacts or sparkles sitting that close to that big a SS screen.


Also, what is your take on the somewhat negative ProjectorCentral review on the SS? The findings there seem to contradict much of what I have read in this thread.


Your thoughts are very much appreciated.


Gordon


----------



## GreatGreg

Hey guys, I have gone full-circle in my screen shopping.


Panasonic AE3000

2.35:1 fixed frame 125" diagonal

16' deep room

watch only at night (light very well controlled, besides, it gets dark in Canada pretty early for about half the year. )


Started out reading and everything told me that I should be looking for a matte white screen. Narrowed it down to a Da-Lite Cinema Contour with Da-Mat screen.


Talked to a buddy of mine who has a Stewart Firehawk with his NEC HT1000 and he is basically telling me that white is a mistake and that I should go grey because he loves his blacks and the Panasonic is too bright anyway. Greys will always increase the contrast without affecting colour, and basically there are no downsides to going grey.


So then I start browsing at grey vs. white discussions and came across Tryg's grey vs. white vs. silver. And if there is anything in this thread that isn't convincing enough to say that Silverstar is the be-all-end-all of screens, then I don't know what is!


I keep reading and found someone saying that the Silverstar is too bright & sparkly for new Panasonics. So I guess I am back to the Da-Lite white!


Is that about right? I thought that you didn't pick a screen based on the projector, but in this case, it looks like the SS may be too bright for the Panasonic AE3000.


Greg


----------



## geocab

I would say it depends on your personal preference if you find the screen too bright or not. I have a 92" Silverstar paired with a BenQ W20000 and I love the PQ I get. I don't think it's too bright at all and the picture is very detailed. I see the sparklies in very bright white scenes and similar, but they honestly don't bother me, or distract me from what I'm watching.


----------



## XJ6




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *geocab* /forum/post/16956757
> 
> 
> I would say it depends on your personal preference if you find the screen too bright or not. I have a 92" Silverstar paired with a BenQ W20000 and I love the PQ I get. I don't think it's too bright at all and the picture is very detailed. I see the sparklies in very bright white scenes and similar, but they honestly don't bother me, or distract me from what I'm watching.



+1, I have a Benq W5k and a 110" SS and I simply love it. When it's allowed (you know by whom) I will turn on the 'TV' and watch it - with great pleasure - from our dining area which puts us at about 45 deg and 20ft from the screen. I can comfortably watch HDTV during the day or DVD/BDs without turning off the lights at night. Honestly, the PJ has not quite become our full-time TV but it's very close to becoming one. If you're afraid that the SS would be too bright with your PJ then don't be. Most PJs will give you much less than 800 lumens in their best modes and the bulb will dim over time. So, it can never be too bright!


As far as Vutec customer service goes, I only had a minor problem with my screen: it did not come with the 4 #8 screws. I called both my dealer and Vutec about this problem and this was Fri afternoon. The next Mon I received two FedEx packages for a total of 8 screws







I don't know what would of happened had I had a bigger problem though.


Thanks go to Tryg and many others for directly/indirectly leading me to this screen.


Cheers,


----------



## wnielsenbb

+2, I have a 120" ss with a panny ae2000. I sit 7' from the screen, so you won't see more artifacts than me. I still love it. You can always put a filter on if it is too bright when the bulb is new, and when it gets older you will really appreciate the screen. At the end of my bulb life the image was still amazing. I think anyone with a projector will tell you too bright is better than too dim.

Warren


----------



## GreatGreg

One concern I had with a higher gain screen was hotspotting.


With a SilverStar or a High Power, is there a danger of hotspotting on a brighter projector?


If so, can this be remedied by just turning the brightness down? I don't see why not.


Thanks,

Greg


----------



## XJ6




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GreatGreg* /forum/post/16968277
> 
> 
> One concern I had with a higher gain screen was hotspotting.
> 
> 
> With a SilverStar or a High Power, is there a danger of hotspotting on a brighter projector?
> 
> 
> If so, can this be remedied by just turning the brightness down? I don't see why not.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Greg



Greg,

It's funny that you answer your own question









Hotspotting may be harder to be fixed than you'd think. If a screen exhibits hotspotting, as you reduce the brightness the hot spot is still relatively hotter than other spots. How much reduction do you have to make before the hot spot becomes 'warm'?

When you check out the little screen samples, it's impossible to tell if the full screens will have hotspots. So, if I may give you a tip, get *two* sets of samples of all the screens you're interested in. Put one set in the center and the other along the perimeter of where the screen will be installed. If you see a big delta in brightness between any respective pair, chances are that's the one with the problem. Since your friend already has a PJ setup, bring your PJ and your set of samples to his place and try (your friend should have the 2nd set of samples







).

Good night.


----------



## FLBoy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GreatGreg* /forum/post/16968277
> 
> 
> One concern I had with a higher gain screen was hotspotting.
> 
> 
> With a SilverStar or a High Power, is there a danger of hotspotting on a brighter projector?
> 
> 
> If so, can this be remedied by just turning the brightness down? I don't see why not.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Greg



Short throw (the distance from the front of the projector lens to the screen) can bring about hot spotting with angular reflective screens (ordinary gain screens). The general rule with angular reflective white screens is that the projector throw should be greater than the screen gain multiplied by the screen *width* to avoid hot spotting. Gray gain screens are even more prone to hot spotting, so add about 0.3 to 0.4 to the published gain for gray before multiplying.


Hot spotting typically is caused by nonuniform screen gain that results in brightness nonuniformity greater than two to one. (The human eye/brain tunes out brightness variation of less than that as long as the brightness variation is gradual.)


Retroreflective screens, such as the High Power, work best with the projector lens near the viewers' eyes. It is nearly impossible to make a retroreflective screen hot spot. It can be done, but one has to really work at it by, say, placing the projector 20 feet from the screen and then sitting 3 feet from the screen to watch.


The SilverStar is a strange bird. It is supposedly angular reflective, but it seems to me to behave somewhat between angular and retro. I have never seen one, so can't comment on its behavior vis-a-vis hot spotting.


I own a HP and can vouch for its freedom from hot spotting. Just be advised that the HP requires the projector to be mounted down low near seated viewer eye level for best results, which some folk are resistant to doing.


----------



## GreatGreg

Thanks everyone for your input.


In my room, the projector is about 16' from the screen, and the sofa is seated about 1' in front of the projector.


The projector is wall-mounted about 7' from the ground. When seated, eye-level is about 4' from the ground.


I did the math, and the maximum (vertical) angle from the projector to the eye is approx. 10.7 degrees, maybe 14 degrees if it is a shorter person. 


I think that should be okay for an SS or HP screen. I guess, "too bright" is a problem which can be controlled vs. "not bright enough".


I've ordered samples of the HP (as well as Da-Mat, and Cinema Vision). I've also ordered (two) samples of the SS, to try and see if it will be a big difference or not.


Can't wait to try them out!


Greg


----------



## wnielsenbb

my ss doesn't hotspot at all. I don't know how. When I first got my ae2000u it defaulted on "normal" which is very bright as opposed to "cinema 1" which is much better for image quality. I am projecting at 16' onto a 120" screen and sit 7' from the screen. When I turned it on it was painful bright.







Swithing to "Cinema 1" and it was just very pleasntly bright. On bright scenes, like snow or sun, I see artifacts. No hotspotting, but just sparklies. On the couch behind, which is probably at 13' seating distance I don't think you notice. I prefer the IMax experience though.









Warren.


----------



## deanzsyclone




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GreatGreg* /forum/post/16980732
> 
> 
> Thanks everyone for your input.
> 
> 
> In my room, the projector is about 16' from the screen, and the sofa is seated about 1' in front of the projector.
> 
> 
> The projector is wall-mounted about 7' from the ground. When seated, eye-level is about 4' from the ground.
> 
> 
> I did the math, and the maximum (vertical) angle from the projector to the eye is approx. 10.7 degrees, maybe 14 degrees if it is a shorter person.
> 
> 
> I think that should be okay for an SS or HP screen. I guess, "too bright" is a problem which can be controlled vs. "not bright enough".
> 
> 
> I've ordered samples of the HP (as well as Da-Mat, and Cinema Vision). I've also ordered (two) samples of the SS, to try and see if it will be a big difference or not.
> 
> 
> Can't wait to try them out!
> 
> 
> Greg



I have both screens, ss, and hp, BIG difference.


----------



## naughtybutnice

Guys (and gals),


The original opening thread discussed white, gray, and silver screens and I have found this to be extremely helpful (Thanks Tryg). However, as it was written a number of years ago, I'm wondering whether technology and/or screen materials have changed since then...


I've been leaning towards a grey (Draper HiDef Gray ) screen until i read this very helpful thread and saw the comparison pictures. I also went to my local HT specialist store a coupel of days ago and they have a Draper Onyx in HDGray set up in a dark room. At first I thought that the gray was great until they put up a white (albeit Stewart Studiotek white) screen material next to it.

Exactly like the OP's pictures, I immediately noticed a much ''brighter'' picture on the white (for obvious resaons) and the picture really 'popped'. Colors were much more saturated and scenes generally looked more lively (I suppose the analogy would be plasma vs LCD here).

But what suprised me was that in dark scenes(Batman and Ratatouille), I didn't see THAT much of a difference in black levels (their PJ was the same as mine BTW - an Epson 6500ub).


I know it's all personal preference but the conclusion that I came to was that perhaps the Stewart white was too 'bright' and the Draper Grey was too 'dull' for me.

What I'm really looking for is a slightly more reflective gray screen or a less reflective white screen - if that makes sense - that would be a happy compromise for me.


Having said all of that, my question is whether anyone knows if the Draper M1300 and HiDef Gray, The Stewart StudioTek and Firehawk, and The Da-Lite CV and HCCV have changed in any way since then?


What I see in the OP's pictures is that the white (draper M1300) to me looks closer to what I want as compared to the Stewart Gray (and reinforces the conclusion that I came to at the HT store) but being from a few years ago, i'm wondering of materials have changed since then?


----------



## wnielsenbb

Or get the white and put a filter on your projector while the bulb is fresh, because it won't stay fresh. You can remove the filter for the second half of the bulb life and still have nice brightness. I just don't see a use for gray screens with modern projectors. They were designed for projectors that had crappy blacks and even budget projectors don't have that problem anymore.

Warren.


----------



## GreatGreg

I got samples Friday night from Stewart -- the UltraMatte 130 (white), the UltraMatte 200 (silver) and the Firehawk G3 (grey).


We watched I LOVE YOU, MAN (funny movie!), and 17 AGAIN (very good movie) with all three samples across the bottom of the screen.


I am not terribly experienced in picture rating, but the FG3 was of course the blackest of all, but now I do see what people were talking about in that the brightness is significantly less than that of the other two.


Between the UM130 and the UM200, my wife saw a visibly brighter picture out of the UM200 and she really likes that material now. Both were bright, and a lot better than the white wall I am temporarily using, but the UM200 had an extra kick of brightness -- maybe 50% more.


Afterwards, I popped in A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET and ROBOCOP. Yes, the FG3's blacks totally kick-ass. It was the same black as the rest of the wall outside of the image area. However, I don't think I want to sacrifice my whites to get my blacks. For the most part, the whites were still bright, but of course, not as bright as the UM130 and UM200.


My logic is that I could also turn down the brightness on the Panasonic 3000 and go with the silver. That way, I can crank it up again in the future when the bulb dims.


I'm also awaiting similar samples from Da-Lite and Draper.


Greg


----------



## naughtybutnice

Definitely leaning towards the white screes now..but i still need samples to view.


Does anyone know if the fabirsc have changed since the original review?


----------



## FLBoy

GreatGreg: Be careful. You have not said what size screen you are planning. With the UM200 material anything wider than 8' (110" diagonal 16:9) will hot spot at 16' throw. Personally, I would not go with anything higher than the UM150 at 16' throw, unless you are planning a very small screen. Note that hot spotting *will not* show up on a small sample.


----------



## Big Picture

I'm getting a Panasonic PT-AE4000 projector and I'm interested in using a 134" wide 2:35 Silverstar with it in my bat cave. Would this screen be a good choice?


Thank you.


----------



## wnielsenbb

I am using a AE2000u on a 120" 16x9 SS in a bat cave. I would love that 134" 2.35. I am sure you will be very happy with it.


----------



## fleaman

I read the 1st page of this thread which was started in 2003. The comparisons between white/grey/silver were interesting and informative, for the PJ's available at the time, meaning, low contrast, low lumens.


Today I think most of the current PJ's have enough horsepower and contrast to make screen picking decisions quite different than back in 2003.


For instance, I'm thinking of getting a Mits HC3800 which is a light cannon compared to PJ's from 2003 and my current Optoma H31 (currently only a 60" screen). The HC3800 is about 570 lumens @ D65 in low lamp mode. Being that I will run a small screen (small room!), which is only 67"x38" viewable, it seems best to go with a negative gain grey, a .9 gain grey in this case. My room is also not a dedicated theater room, so I can't black out walls, ceilings, etc. Color of room is off-white (kinda peach). So, under these circumstances, a .9 gray screen (being it's small), seems like the better choice.


----------



## JHouse




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GreatGreg* /forum/post/17014939
> 
> 
> I got samples Friday night from Stewart -- the UltraMatte 130 (white), the UltraMatte 200 (silver) and the Firehawk G3 (grey).
> 
> 
> We watched I LOVE YOU, MAN (funny movie!), and 17 AGAIN (very good movie) with all three samples across the bottom of the screen.
> 
> 
> I am not terribly experienced in picture rating, but ....
> 
> 
> I'm also awaiting similar samples from Da-Lite and Draper.
> 
> 
> Greg



WARNING: Have you ever tried to pick a paint sample from a card or a small patch on the wall? Did you notice that after all your discriminating and struggling that you were completely surprised by what the room looked like when it was all painted?


Samples will fool you completely because your eye can't isolate them or expand them mentally. This sample stuff is very treacherous business.


For example, if you're screen material is capable of hotspotting, you won't get that out of a sample, as has been pointed out.


----------



## JHouse




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *naughtybutnice* /forum/post/17019786
> 
> 
> Definitely leaning towards the white screes now..but i still need samples to view.
> 
> 
> Does anyone know if the fabirsc have changed since the original review?



Check out the other recently active High Power threads (at the end). There is a new version of the High Power that has a wider viewing cone and has only dropped to 2.4 gain, while retaining the non-hotspotting characteristics, and the wrinkle hiding properties, and the lateral ambient rejection properties.


----------



## wnielsenbb

Fleaman, with that small of a screen (77" diagnal immig [if my math is good {cause you can't have enough acyronyms}]) in that room I would just go with a rear projection system. an 82" rear projection tv (or 72" if that is too big) is probably the same price as your projector/screen combo, and a lot easier to install and a lot better with ambient light.

Warren.


----------



## fleaman




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wnielsenbb* /forum/post/17866147
> 
> 
> Fleaman, with that small of a screen (77" diagnal immig [if my math is good {cause you can't have enough acyronyms}]) in that room I would just go with a rear projection system. an 82" rear projection tv (or 72" if that is too big) is probably the same price as your projector/screen combo, and a lot easier to install and a lot better with ambient light.
> 
> Warren.



Uhm, a 82" rear projection in a small room










I already have a front projection set up that works great (as mentioned in my post)....Optoma H31 with a 60" screen sitting about 9ft away. I use a 32" LED LCD for TV stuff then pull the PJ screen down for the movie stuff. In a small room it's great, big screen, practically no footprint. Rear projection would ruin that of course + I never liked the look of rear projection systems at all.


I'm just upgrading....1080p PJ, slightly larger screen (can't go much larger), but with all those lumens, my point was that a grey screen would work better for my set up than say a white or even silverstar as the beginning of this thread mentioned.


----------



## JHouse




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wnielsenbb* /forum/post/17866147
> 
> 
> Fleaman, with that small of a screen (77" diagnal immig [if my math is good {cause you can't have enough acyronyms}]) in that room I would just go with a rear projection system. an 82" rear projection tv (or 72" if that is too big) is probably the same price as your projector/screen combo, and a lot easier to install and a lot better with ambient light.
> 
> Warren.



That's true. Vizio just announced a 75" LCD flat screen for about $3,500 US. How frick'n cool would THAT be?


----------



## fleaman




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *JHouse* /forum/post/17866378
> 
> 
> That's true. Vizio just announced a 75" LCD flat screen for about $3,500 US. How frick'n cool would THAT be?



Well, it's more than 2x more $$$ than a Mits HC3800 + electric grey screen, and I doubt very much it would look better. Plus it would always be there on my wall...looking huge! With a PJ you only have the screen down when you need it.


----------



## JHouse




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fleaman* /forum/post/17866424
> 
> 
> Well, it's more than 2x more $$$ than a Mits HC3800 + electric grey screen, and I doubt very much it would look better. Plus it would always be there on my wall...looking huge! With a PJ you only have the screen down when you need it.



Well, see I would never have the occasion to have it off. I won't go in a room without a BIG TV being on. But that's just me.


----------



## fleaman




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *JHouse* /forum/post/17866531
> 
> 
> Well, see I would never have the occasion to have it off. I won't go in a room without a BIG TV being on. But that's just me.



Maybe if everything was HD. SD on a 75" from 9ft away is just too horrid for me, but on a 32" from 9ft I can handle it...


----------



## JHouse




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fleaman* /forum/post/17866964
> 
> 
> Maybe if everything was HD. SD on a 75" from 9ft away is just too horrid for me, but on a 32" from 9ft I can handle it...



Everything IS HD, if you put only HD channels in your favorites list.


----------



## wnielsenbb

Ok, so granted you want front projection, there are two schools of thought on handling ambient light, a gray screen to reduce all light, so blacks look blacker, or something like the silverstar or HP to increase light making the brights brighter. So say you take a 1000 lumen projector (using simple numbers for simple math) and a .5 gain gray screen. Now your blacks are good say 5 lumens from ambient (say 10 ambient lumens cut in half by the gain) and your brights are effectivly 500 lumens. If you get a SS or HP screen with say 2 gain: Your blacks are less black now 20 lumens (the 10 ambient gets doubled) but your brights are now 2000 lumens.

so with the gray your brights are 495 lumens above black, with the hp your brights are 1980 lumens above black. Considering your eyes consider black relative to light you get see much more contrast with the HP screen in ambient light.

The video on Vutec's website on the silverstar really does well to present the point I am making.

Considering the size of your screen you will indeed have a smoking bright picture, but I have no doubt you will be greatly impressed. I know my jump to the SS in my non light controlled family room made a vastly larger difference in enjoyment than going to a 1080p projector did.

Note: None of this is accurate, it is just my opinion and presented with bad math and all just to present a point.


----------



## JHouse

And gray screens are duller than dog balls.


----------



## fleaman




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wnielsenbb* /forum/post/17870929
> 
> 
> Ok, so granted you want front projection, there are two schools of thought on handling ambient light, a gray screen to reduce all light, so blacks look blacker, or something like the silverstar or HP to increase light making the brights brighter. So say you take a 1000 lumen projector (using simple numbers for simple math) and a .5 gain gray screen. Now your blacks are good say 5 lumens from ambient (say 10 ambient lumens cut in half by the gain) and your brights are effectivly 500 lumens. If you get a SS or HP screen with say 2 gain: Your blacks are less black now 20 lumens (the 10 ambient gets doubled) but your brights are now 2000 lumens.
> 
> so with the gray your brights are 495 lumens above black, with the hp your brights are 1980 lumens above black. Considering your eyes consider black relative to light you get see much more contrast with the HP screen in ambient light.
> 
> The video on Vutec's website on the silverstar really does well to present the point I am making.
> 
> Considering the size of your screen you will indeed have a smoking bright picture, but I have no doubt you will be greatly impressed. I know my jump to the SS in my non light controlled family room made a vastly larger difference in enjoyment than going to a 1080p projector did.
> 
> Note: None of this is accurate, it is just my opinion and presented with bad math and all just to present a point.



I assume this response is for me










1. I already have front projection, just upgrading to 1080p.

2. I don't have any ambient light (never said I did), but I don't have a black room, it's off white colors (peachy)

3. Your lumens to gain calculations are not correct at all since you have to take screen size (area) into account, which you didn't at all.


With 565 lumens and a 70" wide screen and .9 gain grey screen, you would get 26.76 fL (foot lamberts). 0.9 x 565/19sq ft (70"x39") = 26.76 fL (though it would actually be higher since the screen I might use will only have a 67x38 viewable area).

14-16 fL is considered a good target for a dark theater.


----------



## wnielsenbb

yes, fleaman, I was referencing you.







You said "My room is also not a dedicated theater room, so I can't black out walls, ceilings, etc. Color of room is off-white (kinda peach)." That = ambient light, even if pitch black the projected image will light up the room creating ambient light.

I said it was bad math







I was using the effect of the gain on effective lumens of the projector, not fL of the resultant image. I suck at math. I was just pointing out the effective contrast is much higher with the hp screen.

14-16 fL is a good target for a movie theater with a 70 foot screen, quite sad for home. Apples 30" cinema display has 100 fL.


----------



## fleaman




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wnielsenbb* /forum/post/17871700
> 
> 
> yes, fleaman, I was referencing you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You said "My room is also not a dedicated theater room, so I can't black out walls, ceilings, etc. Color of room is off-white (kinda peach)." That = ambient light, even if pitch black the projected image will light up the room creating ambient light.



Actually it's reflective light.


Ambient means light from outside or lights on inside. At least it does around here











> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wnielsenbb* /forum/post/17871700
> 
> 
> I said it was bad math
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was using the effect of the gain on effective lumens of the projector, not fL of the resultant image. I suck at math. I was just pointing out the effective contrast is much higher with the hp screen.



Contrast does not change with screen types, only brightness/black levels (equally). You can increase brightness with HP, but black levels will increase too, and vice versa with grey screens. Contrast stays the same. I'm trying to get better blacks (HC3800 isn't known for inky blacks), by sacrificing brightness which the HC3800 has in spades---especially on the tiny screen I would use.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wnielsenbb* /forum/post/17871700
> 
> 
> 14-16 fL is a good target for a movie theater with a 70 foot screen, quite sad for home. Apples 30" cinema display has 100 fL.



This is like the difference between a movie theater and a TV. Sure, if I watch sports (don't) or the news, etc., I'd like to watch it at TV fL levels (which I have a LED LCD for). But movies I like to be movie theater like. Even so, I'll still be a good 75% higher than movie theater fL levels with a .9 grey screen (and in fact, many movie theaters are much lower than 14-16fL). 100fL on a 70" screen would literally make me have to put sunglasses on! Even with my lowly Optoma H31 on a 60" screen, going from a black scene to a very bright scene sometimes makes my eyes squint a bit.


----------



## wnielsenbb

I did say effective contrast, not actual contrast ratio (an almost useless stat.) I know the actual contrast ratio doesn't change, I am saying by doubling the levels of black and white, yes, you keep the same mathematical contrast ratio, but the brights are really bright making a bigger difference between black and white. That is why the new super high contrast displays don't make the difference they sound like they should. By lowering the black level you get really good contrast ratios, but the difference between black and white doesn't change very much at all.

I kinda like bright scenes to look like bright scenes myself. I realize there are people trying to reproduce theater dimness, which is really dictated by the poor framerate, rather than quality reasons. I do think most people will take the bright punchy image over the dull one, even on movies.


----------



## JHouse

I do.


----------



## fleaman




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wnielsenbb* /forum/post/17873489
> 
> 
> I kinda like bright scenes to look like bright scenes myself. I realize there are people trying to reproduce theater dimness, which is really dictated by the poor framerate, rather than quality reasons. I do think most people will take the bright punchy image over the dull one, even on movies.



I don't see how I would have any problem getting bright punchy images on a .9 grey with 27fL coming off it


----------



## wnielsenbb

Well, for one thing to consider is 27fL on a new bulb is probably as low as 13fL as the bulb dims. It could very well be that you will be really happy with the gray screen. It would be nice if you could try both.


----------



## JHouse




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wnielsenbb* /forum/post/17880152
> 
> 
> Well, for one thing to consider is 27fL on a new bulb is probably as low as 13fL as the bulb dims. It could very well be that you will be really happy with the gray screen. It would be nice if you could try both.



But that's just a subtle, diplomatic and politically correct way of saying if you see them side by side you will dump the gray screen.










Very devious. Congrats!


----------



## bud16415




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *JHouse* /forum/post/17880462
> 
> 
> But that's just a subtle, diplomatic and politically correct way of saying if you see them side by side you will dump the gray screen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Very devious. Congrats!



How can you view them side by side when each will require a completely different calibration in terms of brightness. Even using the definition of ambient light as light coming into the room other than that made by the projector, (one I don't agree with) saying no external light makes it into the room. You still have the half of the screen that is being overdriven in the case of calibrating to the lower gain or darker screen bouncing light around the room causing an ambient source. In the case of calibrating to the whiter or higher gain screen and under driving the gray screen your eyes iris will set its f-stop based on the brighter half image and clue you to dump the gray screen because it will look to be way to dark.


The only true test IMHO is to view both separate with the same foot lamberts returning to your eyes off each of the screens not out of the projector and then judge the effect of ambient on the perceived CR you see.


----------



## JHouse

All true. You need them set up in two adjacent rooms so you can just slide side to side. Of course, your eyes will have to adjust with each move.


But the trick is getting the same fL out of each screen. You sure can't use the same projector.


----------



## wnielsenbb

Or simply spend a few days with the gray screen and it's measly 27fl, then spend a few days with the hp screen and its lovely 60fL (assuming 2 gain) and see which you enjoy more. Of course the real test would be toward the other end of the bulbs life when you will be comparing 13.5fL from the gray with 30fL from the HP. If 60fL is too bright you could always use an nd2 filter for the first half of the bulbs life.


----------



## JHouse

Or set the bulb on low.


----------



## fleaman




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wnielsenbb* /forum/post/17882008
> 
> 
> Or simply spend a few days with the gray screen and it's measly 27fl, then spend a few days with the hp screen and its lovely 60fL (assuming 2 gain) and see which you enjoy more. Of course the real test would be toward the other end of the bulbs life when you will be comparing 13.5fL from the gray with 30fL from the HP. If 60fL is too bright you could always use an nd2 filter for the first half of the bulbs life.



I am taking this all under advisement, but still playing devils advocate since no one else is










First, some updated calculations: The screen viewable area is actually 67x38, with that we get:

> .9 gain grey x 565(lumens)/17.67sqft = 28.77fL

> 1.0 gain white x 565/17.67sqft = 32fL (31.97 actually)


That's only a 3.2fL difference between .9 grey and 1.0 white.


Now, for those here that are the super high fL fanboys, what fL are you actually getting in your theater? You don't have to actually measure, but just calculate via screen size, gain and lumens your PJ is putting out calibrated (to D65 I assume). I can't imagine anyone is really getting 60fL










Lamp aging is a good point and something I've thought about. Yet with almost 29fL to start off with, I obviously can afford losing lumens over time. Remember, I don't watch sports/news on the PJ, just movies. I also don't like 'torch' modes, my LCD LED is calibrated at moderate brightness (backlight level), not store torch modes (which I hate). With the lights off at night, I can watch my LCD w/o squinting.


Now, I currently have a 60" matte white BO screen, probably 1.0 gain, so I'll be able to test it out before I buy the grey. I won't bother with a grey 'sample' as it seems to be a waste trying to judge a whole screen/image on just a few sq inches of a sample. But I already know that even with my Optoma H31 on this small 1.0 white screen, there were times in the past (new lamp) when even my guests squinted in slight pain as a scene switched from very dark to very bright. I would think that anyone getting 60fL from a large screen would literally have to put sunglasses on during bright scenes










ND2 filter> I've thought of this too. But it seems that a grey screen offers benefits the ND2 won't. This, and much of why I'm leaning towards a .9 grey can be explained in this short thread I started in October, and darinp2's article in HT secrets>

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1186634 

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/techn...s.html?start=1 


I would venture to guess that most of you posting support for HP screens (or just against grey) and the like are running much bigger screens than me? I can understand that of course, if I was running a larger screen, I would not at all go for a negative gain grey, I'd go white. But my screen viewing area is gonna be only 67x38, matched to a PJ with 565 lumens in low lamp mode.


Thoughts?


----------



## wnielsenbb

Well, my 120" SS is rated at 6.0 gain. My AE-2000U is running normal mode right now, which projectorcentral rates at 900 lumens. So that would be 6.0*900/51.22 = 105.42 fL. I NEVER watch sports/news it isn't hooked up to cable, but I play WoW and XBox on it a lot.

Plus I am only sitting 7' from the 10' diagnal screen. I like the Imax experience.










Of course I don't think the SS is really 6.0 gain, and I have a few hundred hours on the bulb. I should pick up a light meter.


----------



## wnielsenbb

Maybe it is just me, but if looking at the sun makes me squint outside, looking at the sun on my projector should make me squint. No gain no pain.

yeah, sorry.


----------



## fleaman




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wnielsenbb* /forum/post/17883594
> 
> 
> Maybe it is just me, but if looking at the sun makes me squint outside, looking at the sun on my projector should make me squint. No gain no pain.
> 
> yeah, sorry.



It's only the reflective rays of the sun we see in the image, not the sun itself. And even in 'sun shots', it's a filtered image....


(though you were probably being sarcastic).


Of course looking into the PJ gives that same 'sun' effect, not matter the PJ.


----------



## fleaman




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wnielsenbb* /forum/post/17883542
> 
> 
> Well, my 120" SS is rated at 6.0 gain. My AE-2000U is running normal mode right now, which projectorcentral rates at 900 lumens. So that would be 6.0*900/51.22 = 105.42 fL. I NEVER watch sports/news it isn't hooked up to cable, but I play WoW and XBox on it a lot.
> 
> Plus I am only sitting 7' from the 10' diagnal screen. I like the Imax experience.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course I don't think the SS is really 6.0 gain, and I have a few hundred hours on the bulb. I should pick up a light meter.



Ok then!


Wow.


----------



## hrd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wnielsenbb* /forum/post/17883542
> 
> 
> Well, my 120" SS is rated at 6.0 gain. My AE-2000U is running normal mode right now, which projectorcentral rates at 900 lumens. So that would be 6.0*900/51.22 = 105.42 fL. I NEVER watch sports/news it isn't hooked up to cable, but I play WoW and XBox on it a lot.
> 
> Plus I am only sitting 7' from the 10' diagnal screen. I like the Imax experience.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course I don't think the SS is really 6.0 gain, and I have a few hundred hours on the bulb. I should pick up a light meter.



In Tryg's review on the first page of this thread, he says he thinks the gain is more like half that.


----------



## Dinomon

Tryg or anyone else, For my Sony VPL-VW60 PJ, should I go with Silver instead of White or Grey. This will be used in family room. THanks!!


----------



## wnielsenbb

Wow, you found a very old thread. I put my projector in my family room and when I got my Silverscreen I was amazed by the difference over my previous white screen (blackout cloth). The video on Vutec's website really shows the difference.
http://www.vutec.com/Products/Vutec_...ens/SilverStar


----------



## Dinomon

wnielsenbb, so you are saying to go with Silverscren instead of bright white or gray?


----------



## wnielsenbb

I would without hesitation recommend the SS over white or grey.

I did just read a review of the screen innovations Black Diamond screen however.

This sounds even better. You should google that.

Maybe the thread should be White, Grey, Silver or Black.


----------



## Tryg

ttt


----------



## wnielsenbb

ttt? 
Wow, you dug this thread out of the grave.


----------

