# The Official Stewart Film Screen thread.



## Alan Gouger

Post all your questions and answers related to Stewart to this thread.

Please, no sales or marketing. It will be removed.


----------



## scottyb

LydMekk


Sounds like you need a Firehawk.


Scott


----------



## Thunder




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *LydMekk* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Have got some prices for the ST 130. Compared to Da-Lite it's quite a leap upwards in price. My question is: is it worth it ?
> 
> 
> Will the PICTURE be better with wither the Studiotek 130 or the Firehawk mentioned by Scottyb over than with the Da-Lite Cinema Vision ?
> 
> 
> Anyone seen these alternatives and care to comment ?




Check this out:

http://www.projectorcentral.com/home...er_screens.htm


----------



## keyser

Is it only possible to get the screen sizes that are on the stewart site... is the deluxe fram only available in 110" and 123" in 16:9.. nothing in between?


----------



## Jonathan Teller

Just how good is the FireHawk at shedding ambient light? Right now, I'm torn between the FireHawk and the Da-Lite High Power. I'm leaning towards the High Power based on input from Tryg and also just on price. Strangely though, I haven't really been able to grasp how the FireHawk and High Power match up against one another.


My setup will be:


- 106" diagonal 16x9 screen: bottom edge 28" off the ground; top edge 6'8" off the ground

- primary seat is 12 feet from screen, dead center width wise, eyes are about 3'6" off the ground

- other seats are just to either side of primary seat (one on either side) and on a riser behind: all seats within 30 degrees of screen center (15 degrees to either side of center)

- projector is 13 feet from screen: center of lens is even with top of screen (6'8" off the ground)

- I will have total darkness for serious movie viewing

- Walls, ceiling, floor and furniture are all dark so reflected light should be at a minimum

- For TV and gatherings though, I will have some ambient light.

- Ambient light is still low and controlled: 4 x 60 Watt sconces; two on either side wall.

- Light from sconces goes up onto ceiling and down along wall.

- All 4 sconces are behind the projector


Now, I've heard that even though I've got a ceiling mount, the High Power will still perform better than most other screens with some ambient light. But I also have a setup that should work well for the FireHawk (at least according to Projector Central).


What I really want to hear are opinions or experience on the High Power vs. the FireHawk in my particular setup.


Thanks,


Jon


----------



## Thunder




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *keyser* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Is it only possible to get the screen sizes that are on the stewart site... is the deluxe fram only available in 110" and 123" in 16:9.. nothing in between?



No, they can do whatever size you need.


----------



## keyser

Do you have to pay extra for this... I´m wondering why they have certain sizes then on their website?


----------



## DanFrancis

No, production just might take a little longer though. The reasoning for "standard" sizes is to allow people to do a quick-type spec for their screen. Kind of like shopping from a catalog. What takes longer with the custom screens is that the extrusions have to be custom cut for the frame, and the skin itself may need to wait for another order to be manufactured (make one very large section of material as opposed to several smaller ones- manufacturing efficiency).


Dan


----------



## keyser

Brilliant.. thanks!


----------



## DanFrancis

No, that's not normal for Stewart. They have 3 different factories in the US, I don't believe any specialize. My first inclination is to say that there's an issue with the dealer. I had my Greyhawk RS (perfed) in 2 weeks from the production date ( 2 weeks from the time I was told it was going to production).


Just my .02


You could try to get the order number from your dealer (generated by Screen Assistant) and then call stewart to see what's up. Stewart P.O.s are done by SA, not by the last name of the customer-like most other manufacturers.


Dan


----------



## Jason Turk

Generally US Stewart screens ship within 2-4 weeks depending on model. However, not sure for overseas sales how their lead times are. You should check with your local dealer to see what's up.


----------



## DanFrancis

Good call, Jason!


I totally missed that LydMekk is located in Norway- yeah, that can add some serious time to screen shipment. (I waited 3 months for my buddy's Screen Research screen- they only send a boat ever once a month, and then there's customs....).


'Sorry about the oversight- my statements are probably inaccurate then.


Dan


----------



## mtmason

I'll share my experience comparing firehawk to high power. I have a similar setup for projector mounting location, screen size, and viewing distance. Currently I'm just using blackout cloth, and am hard pressed to justify the marginal improvement I'll see in dark viewing for the expense. However, I find I'm doing more and more viewing with ambient light. So I ordered samples from Da-Lite and Stewart to check them out. I suggest you do the same (they were free).


In my evaluation I decided on the Firehawk. Although the high power does provide a higher gain image than other screens with a ceiling mount, it's depressing to stand up and see the image get much brighter and seemingly more vibrant. I think I would end up wanting to stand during movies! The firehawk provided the best picture in my actual viewing area. I also found it shed light better in ambient situations. The relative contrast between black and white were more profound to me, especially compared to the high power OUTSIDE of it's sweet spot.


Of all the materials I tested from Stewart and Da-lite only the high power and the firehawk were compelling enough of a difference from black out cloth for me to consider. FWIW the black out cloth was indistinguishable from matt white screen material. I hung both samples on my screen for a while just to see different situations. With lights on, I was always impressed with the firewhawk.


When it comes down to it though, you'll get used to what you have and until you see something better you won't really know what you're missing. With the high-power you'll always see what you're missing every time you stand up. That would drive me crazy! You may be different. Good Luck.


MM


----------



## Daniel Hutnicki

The reason sometimes Stewarts take longer is that every screen they make is made from scratch. Its not like they have the material cut to size already waiting for it to be attached to the frame. Every time an order comes in, every piece of it has to be created from that moment so sometimes it takes a little longer. However, it worth the wait once you receive it because they put quality and lots of quality control into every screen you receive. I understand it can be fustrating to wait, but its worth the wait once you do


----------



## keyser

I´d recomend that noone would buy a firehawk without getting a sample. I notice the sparklies on the finish from my seating position and for that reason I´d never get it.

Is it not possible to have the splattery sparklies smaller and more consistant, it doesn´t sound that hard to to. The silverstar doesn´t have these sparkly splatters(but it has sheen which is another matter).


Was there never a rumour that they were working on an improved firehawk(I´d personally want it not so dark to lower the gain layer a little - for less hotspotting - and I´d like to see improved smoothness to the finish).


----------



## vince2

I have a Firehawk Luxus model A with the following problem: The edges are sticking to something and beginning to wear through the material. The problem is on the upper 1/3 of the screen, along the outside edges near the tab tensioners. It's almost as though the tension wires are rubbing when rolled up. I'm not sure how to fix this or stop it from getting worse. Anyone?


----------



## keyser

 http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/eng.../firehawk.html 

Do stewart have a new version of the firehawk called "g2" out? The gain is 1.25 but it used to be 1.35.. I can´t open their .pdf for more info.


Anyone got more info on this?


----------



## Jim Walter

Bump for details on the "G2" screen


----------



## Daniel Hutnicki

Yes, they reformulated the formula in their laboratory (sounds sinister doesn't it) and came out with a screen that has less sparklies and also slightly less gain


----------



## vfrjim

Are stewart screens come preassembled or do the frames need to be assembled (fixed ones)


----------



## scottyb

They need to be assembled, but it is SIMPLE.


Scott


----------



## keyser

The original version of the firehawk was suppose to have an 1.8 gain layer wasn´t it... then how can the new one which has even less gain still have a narrower viewing cone than the 1.8 gain ultramatte?


----------



## vince2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *vince2* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I have a Firehawk Luxus model A with the following problem: The edges are sticking to something and beginning to wear through the material. The problem is on the upper 1/3 of the screen, along the outside edges near the tab tensioners. It's almost as though the tension wires are rubbing when rolled up. I'm not sure how to fix this or stop it from getting worse. Anyone?





So I'm the only one with this problem?


----------



## g3dahl




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *vince2* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> So I'm the only one with this problem?



Have you checked with Stewart about this? From what I have heard, they are supposed to be really good about supporting their products in the field.


Question: when did Stewart begin manufacturing the G2 version of the Firehawk?


Gary Dahl


----------



## ajkelly

I'm also curious when the G2 firehawk started to roll out. I just received what I assume to be the Firehawk G1 last friday (11-4-05). Have yet to use it. Does anyone know how to tell the difference between the two by model #. My model # is (SNDQ110HFWezX). I would hate to have spent almost 2 grand on the old model. Timing is everything.....................


----------



## df4801

The G2 was supposed to be a "silent" update from stewart.

The changes seem minor from the G1, and it has been shipping for about 6 months now. There is no G1 still available.

(Got this info from my stewart)


----------



## Gideon

FireHawk G2 (From Stewart Website)


FireHawk G2 is ideal for using with digital projection technologies in today's home theaters. FireHawk G2 produces outstanding black levels and color saturation. *Use FireHawk G2 in business and church facilities when ambient light is present.*


FireHawk G2 increases black levels, shadow detailing and color saturation. FireHawk G2 maximizes screen brightness at 40 percent peak foot lambert increase over all existing gray screens. Preserves image contrast by dampening room cross light reflection as much as 90 percent. FireHawk G2 also maximizes the screen's passive black level for digital projectors. FireHawk G2 is available in retractable and fixed screen models.


FireHawk G2 Benefits

Ambient Light Resistance

Increases Black Level

Increases Color Saturation

Bright, Vibrant Image

Washable

Flame Retardant


Performance Response

Projection Screen Flexible Front Projection

Perforations Micro Perforation

Framing and Design Available in fixed screens and motorized

retractable screen models

Masking Available

Gain 1.25

Half Gain @ 30º

Seamless Size Restrictions Contact Manufacturer

Seams None

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Couple of questions:-

1) Does it mean that Firehawk would only be available in micro perforation only? If it is, does it mean that G2 version is superior than the previous non-perforated Firehawk?

2) If we would like to upgrade from previous Firehawk to G2 version, could we get special discounted rate?


----------



## vince2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *g3dahl* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Have you checked with Stewart about this? From what I have heard, they are supposed to be really good about supporting their products in the field....




yes i have. Weeks later and still no response from them. I have posted photos of the problem:


screen.jpg


----------



## mooney

*Re: Firehawk and ambient light*


I attended the Colorado Springs PJ shootout recently and we spent an entire day comparing Stewart Greyhawk, Studiotek 130 and Firehawk. We had two 3 chip DLP Infocus 777 and Sim 3X, 7210, H79, AE900 and Z4 to name a few.


We had room lights from bright, subdued and almost dark. Inputs were content from DVD, and HDTV. Watched the same on all combinations.


I had ordered a Studiotec 130 but after the demo with room lighting I changed my order to a Firehawk. It help to have a bright PJ if you want to watch sports with some room light. The combination of the Infocus 7210 / Firehawk sold me.


----------



## jasonDono

Great to hear. I just ordered a Firehawk for my 7205. We've been projecting on a light blue/green wall and the image was surprisingly good. Even chose it over the HP that we had, but that was with a ceiling mount of the projector. I'm hoping the Firehawk is a dramatic improvement over the wall or my wife is going to kill me.

Jason



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mooney* /forum/post/0
> 
> *Re: Firehawk and ambient light*
> 
> 
> I attended the Colorado Springs PJ shootout recently and we spent an entire day comparing Stewart Greyhawk, Studiotek 130 and Firehawk. We had two 3 chip DLP Infocus 777 and Sim 3X, 7210, H79, AE900 and Z4 to name a few.
> 
> 
> We had room lights from bright, subdued and almost dark. Inputs were content from DVD, and HDTV. Watched the same on all combinations.
> 
> 
> I had ordered a Studiotec 130 but after the demo with room lighting I changed my order to a Firehawk. It help to have a bright PJ if you want to watch sports with some room light. The combination of the Infocus 7210 / Firehawk sold me.


----------



## cameronl

I have brought a 2nd firehawk screen (luxus model a) and it too has slight wearing at the top left/right. It also makes a noise like light tearing (though nothing is tearing!) on the last part of the drop.


The picture looks lovely though (compared to my older owl screen).










CaM


----------



## Axel




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *vince2* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> yes i have. Weeks later and still no response from them. I have posted photos of the problem:
> 
> 
> screen.jpg



Have you tried contacting your dealer?

When I had the same problem with my 110" Firehawk Electriscreen I contacted my dealer (AVS-Jason) and he was able to get me a "repair kit", basically consisting of a small can of paint and a sponge. (It also took several weeks before I got it, though.)

____

Axel


----------



## rocks

Hiya, Stewart users,









I'm from Japan.


I am hesitating very much.

I know FireHawk will preserves image contrast by dampening room cross light reflection. But Studiotek's bright and clear image is so fantastic too. I love Studiotek's great image quality.


However, my theater is not a special room. It is using with living room combinedly.


The reflected light cannot control though the lighting can be completely turned off.

Yes, FireHawk is good for me. I know it.


But I got a ruby, it has good color by Xenon lamp. I do not throw away Studiotek 130 easily.


The user of FireHawk hardly exists in Japan. Does anyone have advice?


Thanks


----------



## vince2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Axel* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> ...When I had the same problem with my 110" Firehawk Electriscreen I contacted my dealer (AVS-Jason) and he was able to get me a "repair kit", basically consisting of a small can of paint and a sponge. (It also took several weeks before I got it, though.)
> 
> ____
> 
> Axel




Finally heard from Stewart. Their new solution to this problem is some black tape to put over the worn edges. It is really a patch job and is noticible when the lights are on. Seems like a major design flaw to me. Maybe this will be fixed in the new version of the screen.


----------



## goten1969

I just unpacked my Stewart after a move and it looks like the screen material has a few small creases in it along with indentations from the snaps. Has anyone had any experience with this and will these disappear after a few weeks under the tension of the frame. Hopefully you will be able to see what I'm talking about in the attached pictures.


----------



## DanFrancis

Yes they will go away on their own. Since the screen in a vinyl-base, you can speed that process with a hair-dryer set to medium heat about 6"-8" away from the screen, keep the dryer moving in a relatively random pattern and you should be fine.


I've had several samples sent to me from Stewart, and they always see to end-up either gently folded or draped over something with a firm edge, so they develop "creases", if I let the samples lay on a flat surface for a couple days at room temp- they go away.


So no worries, these things are more resilient than you might think.


Dan


----------



## DaveN

Has anone used the Horizontal ScreenWall ElectriMask from Stewart? I would love to get rid of the grey bars but I don't know what the premium is for this vs. the standard fixed wall 1.3 gain screen.


----------



## cameronl

the more I examine my screen, the more I think my firewak screen is fine 


CaM


----------



## JlgLaw

Anyone have experience using Stewart's microperf screens? In particular, is it true there is no moire affect with that screen? Thanks!


Jim


----------



## DanFrancis

What would you like to know? I have both a Microperfed Grayhawk RS and StudioTek 130. The two skins are 72" wide 1.78:1 AR, for my Luxus Deluxe frame (this is my reference screen setup, very similar to what Runco uses for their CSMS measurements).


The issue of Microperf and moire isn't cut-and-dry, it depends not only on the projector/technology, but also on the throw distance and screen size. While reviewing the Sony HS-51, I was able to minimize the moire on the screen- but never eliminate it (I had to zoom the image to greater than 100" diag.) Even some DLPs exhibit moire with Microperf, it's not very common for most screen sizes though (92" to 123").


I have yet to see an AT screen that does equally well for both audio and video, the perforated vinyl screens don't do as well with audio, the woven fabric screens have their own video isssues- you really have to pick where you're willing to compromise. Being a Screen Research dealer, I feel that their woven-technology does very well with audio, and I can use their product for very specific applications: when I need an AT screen with an LCD projector without moire. Vutec's soundscreen appears very similar to SR product. I have no experience with Draper's woven product, or with Dalite's perfed product.


The drawback to woven screens is that there IS a visible weave pattern on the screen, it depends on where you're viewing from (distance and angle)- but it is visible. Perfed screens have a similar issue- once you get to within 1X screen width, you begin to notice the holes (depends on screen size, on a tiny screen like mine it could be the reason).


For a long-and-short-of-it answer, I use Stewart- I feel that at this point in time they still make the best screens overall, and offer the most versatility through their product range.

(BTW, I am NOT a Stewart dealer.)


I hope this helps.

Dan


----------



## JlgLaw

Dan


Thanks much for the response. I'll be using the screen with the Ruby. Looking at 110" diag. to a moderately light controlled (day hours) room, light controlled at night but some light wall issues, which I will likely change if a problem. Room is 28x15, plan to view from 14-16 feet (undecided until I see setup), PJ at minimum throw to screen (I think 10.5 ft, ceiling mount, can adjust). I have samples coming from the major players to compare next week. Wife asked about hiding speakers, that's why I'm asking!

Thanks,

Jim


----------



## DanFrancis

Your biggest issue with your situation is that Stewart recommends greater than 1.6X for the lens, so at the widest zoom you might have a little hot-spotting. As far as Microperfing and the 1080P resolution, you shouldn't have any moire from that combo with your screen size. for the issue of ambient light: recommendation is Firehawk. I realize that the darker gray color is unnecessary with the ruby, but you'll benefit from the narrower viewing cone.


If you call Stewart directly, I would imagine that they have already had a ruby there, and if not, the Qualia 004 is almost identical when it comes to the characteristecs that count in this situation- so they can also help you out.


Dan


----------



## JlgLaw

Dan

Thanks for all the info.

Jim


----------



## Ferdinand77

anyone here have used the firehawk with the new Panasonic ae900 ? how is it ?


----------



## msanders847

Hi all!. I'm looking at purchasing a 110" 16:9 firehawk for my infocus X1 projector. Currently I have a 110" Screen Goo that I put up and the picture is pretty good but I'd like to see better detail From everything I've been reading the Firehawk seems to be the way to go for a DLP projector. Any suggestions? My room size is 32' x 16. fully light controlled though the walls are light tan and the ceiling is white 2x2 suspended tiles. Projector is ceiling mounted in a hush box 14'6" from screen. View area seating group 12 feet from the screen. Projector is the X1 with 400hrs, 4800 firmware loaded and calibrated with Avia. Let me know if anyone needs any other details. Looking forward to your input!


----------



## mtmason

I'm not sure what you mean by more detail. Assuming you mean more relative contrast, I think the Firehawk makes sense. The obvious answer is to get some samples and see what you like. I received all the da-lite samples and several from Stewart. The firehawk was my favorite material with my Infocus 7200. However, I'm more interested in performance in ambient light situations. The firehawk looked better (to me) in the complete dark, but really shined when some light was on. Good luck with your search.


MM


----------



## rajdude

*How do you guys get samples from Stewart?*


I want a sample of their ...130 and searched their site...could not find a place where I can order a free sample.


Do I need to call them...which number?


-Rajiv


----------



## Axel




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rajdude* /forum/post/0
> 
> *How do you guys get samples from Stewart?*
> 
> 
> I want a sample of their ...130 and searched their site...could not find a place where I can order a free sample.
> 
> 
> Do I need to call them...which number?
> 
> 
> -Rajiv



I would simply contact our forum hosts....









____

Axel


----------



## LVS

you actually have to get samples directly from Stewart. Just call them, you will have them 2-3 days. they are very responsive.


----------



## msanders847




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mtmason* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean by more detail. Assuming you mean more relative contrast, I think the Firehawk makes sense. The obvious answer is to get some samples and see what you like. I received all the da-lite samples and several from Stewart. The firehawk was my favorite material with my Infocus 7200. However, I'm more interested in performance in ambient light situations. The firehawk looked better (to me) in the complete dark, but really shined when some light was on. Good luck with your search.
> 
> 
> MM



Sorry for not being more clear. Yes, I'm trying for more relative contrast, and better perceived black levels. From what I've read the Firehawk it is the way to go with DLP projectors. Just looking for some opinions "not that you'll find many on the forums







" for someone who has a firehawk preferrably with and X1 and see how they like it compared to anything else they might have tried.


----------



## Lasalle

Does anyone have experience with Stewarts' CineCurve product?

1) About how deep would an 8' wide screen be?

2) Its in a corner section (dedicated seating 200SQFT) of a bigger Rec Room(1200SQFT), what is the impact on off angle viewing?

3) If available with the different Stewart screen materials any recommendations (looking at either a Ruby or 1,3 chip 1080p DLP's)


----------



## JStomberger

I am trying to get a "head start" for when my Stewart 100" permanently tensioned screen comes in and would like to put up appropriate framing before the drywall goes up in my HT -- I cannot find anywhere how far in the mounting brackets are from the edges of the screen on a Stewart Luxus Deluxe Firehawk screen. Any suggestions or experience?


Read the manuals (from Stewart's website) and although it shows a drawing, there aren't any specific measurements. TIA.


----------



## ajkelly

The mounting points can slide in the frame to meet the stud locations. I would think you would be ok if you start with a stud in the middle of your front wall then go with typical stud spacing.


----------



## Madders

Hi Guys,


Just a quick question, can anyone tell me if the Stewart Firehawk screen material is a good match for the Sony HS60 projector (or I think the US equivalent is HS51)? I was looking at getting the Studiotek130 material, but have seen the Firehawk secondhand in the correct size (7ft widescreen format fixed screen). It will be in a studio/loft apartment so not completely light controlled.


Any help making a decision would be appreciated










Cheers,

Steve


----------



## jjakaitis

Need advise on which Stewart Screen for Ruby. I currently own a Stewart Greyhawk with a Sony 10HT projector. Looking to move to Ruby, will my Greyhawk 110" 16x9 still be ok?


----------



## jjakaitis

I currently am the owner of Sony 10th projector with a Stewart greyhawk 110" 16x9 screen. I am contemplating moving up to a Ruby projector will my greyhawk be adequate or do I need to change the screen?


----------



## DanFrancis

If you're talking about the original GrayHawk, then I would say change the skin. If you're talking about the newer Grayhawk RS, then it's a neutral enough screen that you can get away with it- but there's one caveat: Ruby is a relatively dim projector, that size screen is really pushing it as far as brightness is concerned.


If it were me purchasing a Ruby, and using a 110" screen- I'd go with a higher gain than .92 of Grayhawk RS. At that screen size, Studiotek is probably a better choice.


Many with Rubies have moved to the Dalite High-Power. Check the LCOS forum for info.


Steve, here's the link to my review of the HS-51 (includes comments about Studiotek, Grayhawk RS, and Firehawk)

http://www.digitalaudiovideo.com/har...iews_13342.htm 


Dan


----------



## Madders

Thanks for the reply Dan. Nice site by the way!


I have actually just bought a Firehawk as there would be some ambient light around so was advised that this may be the best screen to go for. I guess I can always swop out the material at a later date if necessary.


----------



## millerwill

Has anyone seen the 'Stwart Media' screen, the one advertised as being equivalent to a large flat panel tv? (It comes with side speakers in the frame, but hopefully they could make one without them.) It sounds like this screen is similar to the dnp 'supernova'/mirage. Does anyone know anything about it?


----------



## DanFrancis

Currently, the Media Screen uses FireHawk material- Stewart has yet to release their version of a "black" screen. Look for that at the upcoming CEDIA most likely.


They also make the media screen in a rear-projection setup.


Dan


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DanFrancis* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Currently, the Media Screen uses FireHawk material- Stewart has yet to release their version of a "black" screen. Look for that at the upcoming CEDIA most likely.
> 
> 
> They also make the media screen in a rear-projection setup.
> 
> 
> Dan



The info I've seen said the the Media screen was Firehawk MATERIAL with a special 'optical coating', that seems to imply that it is not just a std Firehawk screen. I could, of course, be totally wrong!


----------



## DanFrancis

My point being that Stewart has been in development of a screen like the Supernova from DNP for several years, but it has yet to be released- the soonest I would expect to see it in a "real" setting would be CEDIA 06.


As far as the "special 'optical coating' " on the Firehawk, I could only guess at this point- I haven't spoken with anyone from Stewart since CES.


Dan


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DanFrancis* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> My point being that Stewart has been in development of a screen like the Supernova from DNP for several years, but it has yet to be released- the soonest I would expect to see it in a "real" setting would be CEDIA 06.
> 
> 
> As far as the "special 'optical coating' " on the Firehawk, I could only guess at this point- I haven't spoken with anyone from Stewart since CES.
> 
> 
> Dan



OK, thanks for the comments and info. I guess we will just have to wait and see what Stewart comes up with.


----------



## nathan_h

What's the word on the second hand market/re-sale market for Stewart screens? Being that they are arguably the best line of screens available, I'd think their value would hold up pretty well and there would be a brisk market.


Maybe I'm frequenting the wrong places, but my experience with trying to sell my current fixed Firehawk screen, to raise cash to get closer to buying a motorized Stewart screen, has not worked so well.


As it is, I'm going to use a da-lite pulldown for a while (cannot use a fixed wall screen in my new home) but if I can figure out where buyers and sellers of used Stewart screens connect, I'll be a step closer to selling what I have, and buying what I need. There doesn't seem to be a lot of activity in the for sale area of AVS, nor the usual auction sites.


----------



## dannyhgt

Hi


I have a 92" Studiotek 130. Kind of looking dirty recently with some yellowish marks. On the Stewart website, it says it is washable. How does one go about cleaning it? thanks.


----------



## mtmason




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dannyhgt* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Hi
> 
> 
> I have a 92" Studiotek 130. Kind of looking dirty recently with some yellowish marks. On the Stewart website, it says it is washable. How does one go about cleaning it? thanks.



Here's what the Stewart site says, but I've never tried more than a damp wash cloth: The screen surface on your Stewart screen is extremely delicate. Special attention to these instructions should be followed when cleaning. A draftsman-style

brush may be used to lightly whisk away any loose dirt or dust particles. (This type of brush is usually available at office supply stores.) For tougher spots, use a mild

solution detergent, water, and a sponge. Rub lightly. Blot with a damp sponge to absorb excess water. Do not use any other cleaning materials on the screen. Cleaning instruction are also available in your owners manual.
http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/faq...t_video_screen


----------



## millerwill

In Stewart's description of the Firehawk, it suggests that it is very good in eliminating ambient light from directions horizontal to the screen ("preserves image contrast by dampening room cross light reflection as much as 90%"), and presumably less well on light from above or below the screen. Similarly, I think I have read in other places that the Firehawk is essentially as good as the Supernova with regard to horizontal light, just not as good as vertical light from above or below.


If this is all true, then I find this to be very good, for certainly in my situation (and probably in most people's), ambient light mostly comes from horizontal directions. Am I interpreting all of this correctly? And it this lack of descriminating against vertical light related to the fact that the Firehawk is an 'angular reflective' screen, best mounted on the ceiling at a point higher than the top of the screen?


----------



## fvale

Is this cloth available to use on a DIY frame?


----------



## flint350

I am planning a CH setup of 54" ht. with a 127" width. This yields a 138"D for scope movies and a 110"D for 1.78 format. I am trying to decide btwn the Studiotek 130 and the Ultramatte 150. The Ultra is called a Studiotek with more gain (a good thing), but there must be some differences or they wouldn't make both models under diff. names. I'll be using a 3 chip Sim2 C3X Lite, so the extra gain may prove useful. The primary use is for reasonably dark theater with scope movies. Execpt during NFL football season.


Questions: Other than slight gain advantage, is there a reason for one over the other. The modest diff. in half-gain angle is of little concern to me. I'm more wondering about surface material diffs. Also, when Stewart says they make custom sizes at no extra charge, what is that based on? Do I price the screen at the 1.78 dimension of 96" X 54" (for 54" CH) and they just give me the wider screen (127") free? They don't list any CH sizes, so I don't know how this "custom size free" works.


Lastly, I am assuming their measurements for seam vs. non-seam are H X W (in that order). Otherwise, that plays into the Studiotek decision. They state "no seams" up to 8'6" X 50'. It seems reasonable to me that they are saying H X W, but I have reasoned incorrectly before. Appreciate help with any/all of my questions. Thanks in advance.


----------



## m Robinson

Flint 350,,, First off, no seam is necessary. Neither fabric is axially directional, so they can be run either way. Published sizes and prices reflect sizes which are common, and in no way constrain what is available from Stewart. We build exactly what is requested.


Studiotek has a bit better off axis viewing cone. Ultramatte 150 has as good of a viewing cone as any fabric available at that gain. Since the Studiotek is a little lower in on-axis gain, the cone is wider, which also translates to slight improvement in white field uniformity. The Ultramatte 150 has a slightly smoother surface texture which some viewers prefer.


So if your calculations indicate that foot lamberts are in short supply, the Ultramatte 150 is a good solution. In order to preserve maximum white field uniformity and center to edge brightness uniformity, we encourage use of longer focal lengths, so that the angles of incidence are in a tighter distribution.


Millerwill, Firehawk fabric is not axially directional and will accept or reject light uniformly side to side, or top to bottom.


----------



## hdefjunkie




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Flint 350,,, First off, no seam is necessary. Neither fabric is axially directional, so they can be run either way. Published sizes and prices reflect sizes which are common, and in no way constrain what is available from Stewart. We build exactly what is requested.
> 
> 
> Studiotek has a bit better off axis viewing cone. Ultramatte 150 has as good of a viewing cone as any fabric available at that gain. Since the Studiotek is a little lower in on-axis gain, the cone is wider, which also translates to slight improvement in white field uniformity. The Ultramatte 150 has a slightly smoother surface texture which some viewers prefer.
> 
> 
> So if your calculations indicate that foot lamberts are in short supply, the Ultramatte 150 is a good solution. In order to preserve maximum white field uniformity and center to edge brightness uniformity, we encourage use of longer focal lengths, so that the angles of incidence are in a tighter distribution.
> 
> 
> Millerwill, Firehawk fabric is not axially directional and will accept or reject light uniformly side to side, or top to bottom.



Interesting... It just so happens, I'm currently evaluating both the ST130 and

Ultramatte150 and noticed an ever so slight sheen on the Ultramatte150. Just

curious if the sheen would be contributed to the surface texture or the

optical coating?


----------



## DanFrancis

The texture you see on the surface IS the optical coating, if you flip the material over what you see is the substrate for the screen.


Dan


----------



## flint350




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Flint 350,,, First off, no seam is necessary. Neither fabric is axially directional, so they can be run either way. Published sizes and prices reflect sizes which are common, and in no way constrain what is available from Stewart. We build exactly what is requested.
> 
> 
> Studiotek has a bit better off axis viewing cone. Ultramatte 150 has as good of a viewing cone as any fabric available at that gain. Since the Studiotek is a little lower in on-axis gain, the cone is wider, which also translates to slight improvement in white field uniformity. The Ultramatte 150 has a slightly smoother surface texture which some viewers prefer.
> 
> 
> So if your calculations indicate that foot lamberts are in short supply, the Ultramatte 150 is a good solution. In order to preserve maximum white field uniformity and center to edge brightness uniformity, we encourage use of longer focal lengths, so that the angles of incidence are in a tighter distribution.
> 
> 
> Millerwill, Firehawk fabric is not axially directional and will accept or reject light uniformly side to side, or top to bottom.




m Robinson, thanks for the info. That helps a lot. I have decided on the Ultramatte 150 (with the help of my AVS salesman) in a 127" wide CH setup. I'm sure it will look great. Thanks again.


----------



## sailor06

I am trying to decide on a projector screen for my dedicated theater room. I have light controlled room with walls that of a medium color. The room will be used to watch the occasional football game but mostly for movies. When watching football games there will be some room lights on. I am trying to decide on which Stewart Screen to purchase.


I have a Panasonic AE-900 projector that I will be using and projecting a 123 diagonal image. I am trying to decide on Stewart StudioTek 130 Screen or Stewart Firehawk Screen. I decided on the Stewart Screen because it is the best and I expect the screen to be in my theater for a long time - but with the projector I do expect to replace it in the next 2-3 years with decent DLP projector. Because of the enormous expense of building and equipping the theater room, I have to cut expenses somewhere. For the price, I just could not pass up getting the Panasonic AE-900. I expect the sell the Panasonic in 2-3 years and be able to buy a $4-$5,000 DLP projector. I anticipate that screen technology to pretty much stay the same and want a screen that can I can grow with. My local dealer recommends buying the Firehawk screen and later I can buy the StudioTek 130 material when I buy another projector. I do not have any idea of what the replacement screen material would cost.


Does this make sense? What do you think will be the best choice in screen material for the long term? Which screen is best with the Panasonic AE-900U projecting a 123 image, Stewart StudioTek 130 or Stewart Firehawk?


----------



## m Robinson

Studiotek would excel if you really control the light, and also helps you a lot if you need to use a short throw. Firehawk would be very pleasing as well, and particularly so when ambient light is harder to control. Either one will be plenty bright. The AE900 has a very flexible lens. I have this projector in my family room right now. The screen is 106" diagonal, with a 21.5 foot throw, from the opposite wall, and it looks fantastic. It was utterly scalding bright watching the Olympics in HD, with lighting on, in a convivial party atmosphere.


The long throw helps with Firehawk's slight tendency to hot-spot as compared to Studiotek. The AE900 definitely can use help with room contrast, and the Firehawk really works in this regard. I went with Firehawk, albiet smaller image, and I have lousy light control, an architectural choice in that room.


Mark Robinson

Director of Manufacturing

Stewart Filmscreen Corp


----------



## Glenn Baumann

Mark Robinson or anyone.


Has anybody successfully used the Panasonic AE-900 with a Stewart Studiotek 130 Microperf screen? I have a Studiotek 130 in a 49" X 87" (100" diagonal) size.


Will I experience moire with this particular setup?










Thanks!



...Glenn


----------



## m Robinson

Short answer, no moire.


Mark Robinson

Director of Manufacturing

Stewart Filmscreen Corp


----------



## Glenn Baumann

Mark, another question if you will.


First off my room is totally light controlled. I was going to use my 49" X 87" Studiotek 130 Microperf screen with an 8" CRT projector I have but my particular ceiling will not accomodate the large beast at this time.


Besides your comment that I should not experience moire from pairing of the Microperf and the AE900, do you think that the AE900 will perform well even with the light loss due to the Microperfs... will the lumen output be sufficient with the 130?



...Glenn


----------



## m Robinson




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Glenn Baumann* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Mark, another question if you will.
> 
> 
> First off my room is totally light controlled. I was going to use my 49" X 87" Studiotek 130 Microperf screen with an 8" CRT projector I have but my particular ceiling will not accomodate the large beast at this time.
> 
> 
> Besides your comment that I should not experience moire from pairing of the Microperf and the AE900, do you think that the AE900 will perform well even with the light loss due to the Microperfs... will the lumen output be sufficient with the 130?
> 
> 
> 
> ...Glenn




The loss of light through the perfs is 10%. You'll still have more than enough.


----------



## BRADH

Mark


Iam replacing my CRT with a Samsung sph710ae. Iam in a light contolled room dark walls and floor. I have a Studiotek 130 92" diagonal now. I would like to go bigger 100" diagonal. I dont know if I should go with Studiotek or greyhawk RS or firehawk. I have no way of comparing the different screen.


Thanks

Brad


----------



## m Robinson

Studiotek at that size, too much area to illuminate with the lower gain of the Grayhawk RS.


----------



## BRADH

Mark


Thanks for the help.


Brad


----------



## sailor06





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Studiotek would excel if you really control the light, and also helps you a lot if you need to use a short throw. Firehawk would be very pleasing as well, and particularly so when ambient light is harder to control. Either one will be plenty bright. The AE900 has a very flexible lens. I have this projector in my family room right now. The screen is 106" diagonal, with a 21.5 foot throw, from the opposite wall, and it looks fantastic. It was utterly scalding bright watching the Olympics in HD, with lighting on, in a convivial party atmosphere.
> 
> 
> The long throw helps with Firehawk's slight tendency to hot-spot as compared to Studiotek. The AE900 definitely can use help with room contrast, and the Firehawk really works in this regard. I went with Firehawk, albiet smaller image, and I have lousy light control, an architectural choice in that room.
> 
> 
> Mark Robinson
> 
> Director of Manufacturing
> 
> Stewart Filmscreen Corp



Mark - Thanks for the help. I think that I will start the Firehawk and see how that looks.


----------



## Glenn Baumann

Mark Robinson,


I think I speak for all as I say THANK YOU for your presence here on the Stewart screen thread answering all our questions... it is most refreshing for a manufacturer to do this!











...Glenn


----------



## edfowler

I definately second that, THANK YOU Mark


----------



## thomaco

Mark (or others),


I have a question regarding the FireHawk vs the GrayHawk screens. I am thinking of putting a projector into a family room, so a screen that handles ambient light well is a high priority. The area for the projector and screen is fairly small, so I'm looking at a small screen, say 72" or 82" in diagonal. It will have to be a pull down screen of some type because of no available wall space. The projector will need to be ceiling mounted and will have a maximum throw distance of 13' and probably more on the order of 10' or 11'. Seating will also be on the order of 10' or 11' from the screen. I haven't decided on a projector but am considering the Sony Ruby or a similar quality 1080P DLP when they are available.


I'm wondering if I'm likely to have issues regarding hotspotting with the FireHawk? Given that seating will be fairly close to the screen am I also likely to have problems with brightness dropping off for those sitting to the side of the centre of the screen? Any other comments or suggestions regardng screens?


Thanks.


Richard Thomas


----------



## nathan_h

I had a Firehawk in almost the exact same setup (82 inch diag, seating about 11 ft from the screen, projector about 12 feet from the screen, mounted high on the rear wall (similar to ceiling mount)). No hot spotting, better ambient light rejection that the simply Draper gray screen I had before, and brighter.


The only issue is that the ideal distance for the projector is FURTHER BACK than what my setup would allow, to get the optimum brightness/punch from the Firehawk. This didn't mean it looked bad (far from it) but that it could have looked better if I could have mounted the projector further back.


----------



## DrPyro

I have been trying to find the specifications for a 100" Luxus Deluxe ScreenWall (Firehawk). I'm specifically looking to find the weight of the frame & screen material for hanging purposes.


Thanks....

-Dave


----------



## hdefjunkie

Quote:

Originally Posted by *DrPyro*
I have been trying to find the specifications for a 100" Luxus Deluxe ScreenWall (Firehawk). I'm specifically looking to find the weight of the frame & screen material for hanging purposes.


Thanks....

-Dave
I found the following while crusing the Stewart website a while back.

 

Stewart_deluxe_screenwall.pdf 196.5830078125k . file


----------



## DrPyro

ahh..perfect! Thanks! IMHO, their website is a little hard to navigate for hard numbers & specifications....


-Dave


----------



## Don Stewart




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DrPyro* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> ahh..perfect! Thanks! IMHO, their website is a little hard to navigate for hard numbers & specifications....
> 
> 
> -Dave




Net weight, approx 33 lbs. I agree about the website. We will be constructing a new one that will be easier to navigate.


Regards,


----------



## jkmw

Hi,


I am trying to design into our new dedicated home theater, a set of motorized drapes that will retract in front of a Stewart Lucas Deluxe 16x9 studiotek 130 screen which we have purchased but do not yet have. One dimension that I did not note in the web brochure was the mounting depth necessary for a curtain to clear not just the screen but the border as well. I guess I am assuming that the curtain should not brush back and forth across the screen or border. I somehow manage to measure everything but this dimension when I visit a friends home or see it in a showroom. Please let me know the mounted depth of the screen and border.


Thank You.


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mtmason* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I'll share my experience comparing firehawk to high power. I have a similar setup for projector mounting location, screen size, and viewing distance. Currently I'm just using blackout cloth, and am hard pressed to justify the marginal improvement I'll see in dark viewing for the expense. However, I find I'm doing more and more viewing with ambient light. So I ordered samples from Da-Lite and Stewart to check them out. I suggest you do the same (they were free).
> 
> 
> In my evaluation I decided on the Firehawk. Although the high power does provide a higher gain image than other screens with a ceiling mount, it's depressing to stand up and see the image get much brighter and seemingly more vibrant. I think I would end up wanting to stand during movies! The firehawk provided the best picture in my actual viewing area. I also found it shed light better in ambient situations. The relative contrast between black and white were more profound to me, especially compared to the high power OUTSIDE of it's sweet spot.
> 
> 
> Of all the materials I tested from Stewart and Da-lite only the high power and the firehawk were compelling enough of a difference from black out cloth for me to consider. FWIW the black out cloth was indistinguishable from matt white screen material. I hung both samples on my screen for a while just to see different situations. With lights on, I was always impressed with the firewhawk.
> 
> 
> When it comes down to it though, you'll get used to what you have and until you see something better you won't really know what you're missing. With the high-power you'll always see what you're missing every time you stand up. That would drive me crazy! You may be different. Good Luck.
> 
> 
> MM



mtmason: This post of yours is from quite a while ago, but I'm just working my way through all these screen posts and had a question (if you are still reading these threads!). Since I can mount my pj either 'high' (i.e., on the ceiling) or 'low' (on a stand just behind the sitting area and less than a foot above our heads), I can avoid some of the bad features you noted about the HP (because it is retro-reflective, while the FH is angular-reflective). Thus with the ph mounted optimally for both screens--high for the FH and low for the HP--how do you think your comparison would come out? Tx, Bill


----------



## m Robinson

Hello JKMW,


Thank you very much for the order. The Luxus Deluxe, Snap screen with e-z mount brackets, will stand 1 7/8" off the wall. Is that what you have ordered?


----------



## akm3

This isn't relevant in anyway to the current discussion, but since it is the official stewart discussion thread.


I owned a 2.05:1 Stewart Firehawk that I used with a Sanyo Z2. It was 103" wide.


Amazing screen. Beautiful picture.

Not as *BAM* in your face bright as the Dalite Hipower was, but the image was so much better/satisfying.


ONLY gripe is that very infrequently, if your head was JUST right, you'd get one tiny, tiny 'bright spot' sparkle on the screen. Move your head slightly and it was gone.


I guess the second minor gripe is these things are EXPENSIVE!


Fit, finish, construction, packaging, professionalism, support, looks, pride of ownership, A+.


I sold that screen with the house when I sold my house, but my new house will very likely have another Stewart screen in it.


This random review provided by -Allen


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Hello JKMW,
> 
> 
> Thank you very much for the order. The Luxus Deluxe, Snap screen with e-z mount brackets, will stand 1 7/8" off the wall. Is that what you have ordered?



Like many others here, I'm leaning strongly toward the Firehawk for the screen in the FP set-up I'm planning. I.e., like you, my room is not a dedicated, light-controlled one, though it is usually relatively dark: no direct sunlight even in daytime, just some filtered light through two shuttered windows. The FH sounds ideal.


Just a question: you mentioned that it's best to have as long a throw for the pj as possible. I'm looking at the new Optoma HD81 that will come out later this year, and its throw is limited to 2.2 (screen width), and also my room limits the throw to 16 ft (am looking at a 110" diag screen, so throw would be ~ 2.0, almost as long as the pj allows). The question is, will this throw be long enough to avoid the hotspotting tendency of the FH? This seems to be the only problem of concern, everything else seems to be outstanding. (It will be ceiling mounted, actually on a shelf high on the back wall, very close to the 8.3 ft ceiling.)


----------



## m Robinson

If you have 2:1 that's great, we like to see 1.5:1 or longer, and have bunches of very happy customers at 1.5:1. As far as the mounting goes, help yourself a bit by using a ladder to support your projector temporarily, at the planned height of the shelf. You want the projector to be able to fill the screen without using any anti-keystoning correction.


Thank you for considering Stewart Filmscreen!


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> If you have 2:1 that's great, we like to see 1.5:1 or longer, and have bunches of very happy customers at 1.5:1. As far as the mounting goes, help yourself a bit by using a ladder to support your projector temporarily, at the planned height of the shelf. You want the projector to be able to fill the screen without using any anti-keystoning correction.
> 
> 
> Thank you for considering Stewart Filmscreen!



Thanks for the quick reply! Glad to hear that a 2.0 throw works well. The HD81 has a fixed 27% (of height) offset; i.e., for a 110" diag screen, this means the lens of the pj needs to be ~ 15" above the top of the screen. So with the screen mounted so that eye level (38") is ~ 1/3 of the screen, the pj would be ~ 7.5 ft above the floor.


Is there an optimum height for the pj to be mounted with the FH? E.g., what would this be with my eyes at 38" above the floor, sitting ~12 ftt from the screen, with the center of the screen ~ 47" above the floor, and the pj ~ 16 feet from the screen?


----------



## thomaco

Hi Mark,


I asked this question earlier, but you may have missed it. I did get a useful reply from Nathan.


I'm trying to decide between a Firehawk and Grayhawk screen. It will be going into a family room with some ambient light issues. It will need to be a pull-down/motorised screen because of no wall space. I'm looking at either a 63" or 71" wide screen (16:9 format). Seating will be about 10.5' to 11' from the screen. The projector will be at most 11' to 12' from the screen. (From the room's arrangement it would be better to have the projector closer, at say 7' to 8' from the screen but I think that will introduce too many technical problems.)


I'm wondering what would be your recommendation between the two screens in this situation? As the seating is fairly close to the screen I'm concerned about both hotspotting problems and brightness falling off for those sitting to the side of the screen. I also wonder about the "sparklies" some mention in regards to the Firehawk.


Any comments or suggestions would be appreciated.


Thanks.


Richard



PS I'm in Brisbane Australia and all though most dealers will happily supply me with a Stewart screen, only one has ever had one on display and it was the StudioTek 130. None of the dealers here seem to be able to provide concrete advice.


----------



## jkmw




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Hello JKMW,
> 
> 
> Thank you very much for the order. The Luxus Deluxe, Snap screen with e-z mount brackets, will stand 1 7/8" off the wall. Is that what you have ordered?



Thanks Mark for the information. Wow, that's shallower than I imagined. I purchased the Luxus Deluxe, Snap screen along with a Sony VPL-VW100 from Dave at Gramophone in Columbia, MD.


The 15 x 18 room will be completely light controlled down to pitch black at high noon if so desired but this raises another question that keeps coming to mind. I know we need to have total control over the ambient light in the room with the Studiotek 130 surface, but how much ambient light can I use for things like foot lighting, sconces, lighted poster frames, fiber optic stars, etc. before the picture starts to wash out?


I know trial and error could ultimately answer this question, but I do not want to order the kinds of things that add to the overall light level only to find out that they do more harm to the picture quality than good to the aesthetics. Is there a rule of thumb I can use when adding ambient light to the room?


Thank you again for your help







!


mark w.


----------



## m Robinson

"Is there an optimum height for the pj to be mounted with the FH? E.g., what would this be with my eyes at 38" above the floor, sitting ~12 ftt from the screen, with the center of the screen ~ 47" above the floor, and the pj ~ 16 feet from the screen? "

The Firehawk is an angular reflective surface, somewhat analogous to a billiard table bumper, but picture the bouncing ball being divided into a bunch of smaller balls, but bouncing in a defined distribution, centered on the probable bounce path of the originating impact. This behaviour is uniform in vertical or horizontal performance. So light hitting the surface, exits at a complementary symetrical angle, but diffused and distributed. So an extreme example: Projector on the floor, a large amount of light would be directed upward in a complementary angle, toward the ceiling. A high ceiling mount would direct light down below toward the floor. We always have to look at the recommended lens geometry of a particular projector, as clearly illustrated by the previous data on the upcoming Optoma projector. When you have a flexible lens with vertical offset capablilty, a good way to go is to align the lens with a perpendicular horizontal line, originating at the upper edge of the screen. Many projectors are designed to do exactly that. So optimum for Firehawk is always above the screen surface. The further away you can place the projector, then the distribution of incident angles is tightned. This results in better center-to-edge uniformity, and a wider acceptable viewing angle.


Richard,

In Australia, Mr. Paul Kutcher very ably represents us, and can help you view products in use.


Visual Fidelity Pty Ltd

(Authorized Distributor for

Commercial & Consumer Products)

Paul Kutcher

11A Flight Drive

Tullamarine VIC 3043

Australia


Tel: +61 (0)3 9338 8995

Fax: +61 (0)3 9338 8996


On the fabric selection, the presence of ambient light, other than just re-reflected light would lead me more toward Firehawk, however, you should really use the longer throw option. The Grayhawk would be plenty bright, and would have wider viewing cone, better white field uniformity, but you must be more dedicated to the control of ambient light.


The threat of 'sparklies' is a non issue. We re-formulated Firehawk a little over a year ago, specifically to eliminate sparklies, and to slightly reduce gain, and widen the viewing cone.



JKMW,

The light-producing aesthetic elements you describe, if poorly placed, would harm contrast for any screen. What I have seen in the field, is people using lighting control systems, automated dimmers, which bring the elements down when the projection begins. If you don't want that sort of complexity, use creative placement and manual dimmers instead. Provided you use a surface with the ability to work around some lighting, if you avoid the rear wall, keep that pretty dark, and avoid adjacent areas of the perpendicular walls, you can use the elements. The adjacent perpendicular walls are a great place for deep colored, acoustical treatments. That will help your video and audio. The Studiotek surface will really look much better if you eliminate all of the decorative element lighting while viewing is underway. There will be enough room illumination from the screen alone, to allow people to appreciate where they are, and usually to allow safe ingress and egress, unless it is a really dark scene.


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> When you have a flexible lens with vertical offset capablilty, a good way to go is to align the lens with a perpendicular horizontal line, originating at the upper edge of the screen. Many projectors are designed to do exactly that. So optimum for Firehawk is always above the screen surface. The further away you can place the projector, then the distribution of incident angles is tightned. This results in better center-to-edge uniformity, and a wider acceptable viewing angle.



Mark, you are doing a heroic job in dealing with all these queries; I certainly appreciate it, as I'm sure the others do. (And I think you are also doing well for your company--the old adage of "doing well while also doing good"!)


I do understand the angular-reflective idea well. For example, if I do the calculation for the following scenario: eye level = 38", center of screen = 47", eye to screen = 12 ft, pj lens to screen = 16 ft, then for the light from the pj to hit the screen center and bounch straight to my eye leads to the pj ideally being at ~5 ft above the floor (9" x (16/12) = 12" above the screen center). But this is rather low; e.g., the top of the screen will be at ~78" = 6.5 ft. But I gather from your comments that there is considerable diffussion of the light from my simple 'ray analysis', so that having the pj a foot or so above this 'ideal' position is fine; e.g., so that locating the pj at ~ the height of the top of the screen is a good rule of thumb.


But I do understand that mounting the pj too close to eye level is NOT a good idea for the FH (as it is for retro-reflective screens, such as the Dalite HP or Optoma Graywolf). Is that still the recommendation?


----------



## m Robinson

Mounting at eye level is problematic geometrically for Front Projection, but happens in R.P. apps. where the optics are frequently centered on the screen. I suppose you could put the projector in front of you, it's done with CRT etc. But if you can find a sweet and accessible higher angle, the angular reflective surface can deliver the light right to you optimally..Lengthening the throw, makes this easier, creating a wider, (taller), sweet spot.


----------



## Mitch P.

is 123" diagonal and firehawk too big at 13.5' away when viewing 720p or DVD based material? I hope not, because I just ordered the screen.


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mitch P.* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> is 123" diagonal and firehawk too big at 13.5' away when viewing 720p or DVD based material? I hope not, because I just ordered the screen.



Sounds great to me: you are right at the THX recommended ratio of viewing distance to screen diagonal (1.3). Just hope your pj is bright enough; you'll need 540 Lumens (when calibrated for video) to achieve 15 ftL.


----------



## Mitch P.




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *millerwill* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Sounds great to me: you are right at the THX recommended ratio of viewing distance to screen diagonal (1.3). Just hope your pj is bright enough; you'll need 540 Lumens (when calibrated for video) to achieve 15 ftL.




that's what I thought. Some people keep making me re-calculate and second guess myself. I was going to go with the Optoma HD72 and pair it with my 123" firehawk, but I found that the offset won't work. Next choice was the Optoma H78 but it was too dim. Thus, I'm now at the Samsung HP-H710AE and from what I've been reading, after cal it is putting out enough lumens so I'm 90% sure this is the projector for me. If anyone feels otherwise, please speak up and provide some data to back it up (not just "I think..." as it drives me insane with second guessing hahaa).


Thanks millerwill for the confirmation on the THX viewing as that was what I was going by. My thinking was that I should be planning ahead for when 1080p becomes affordable too. Nothing worse than having to go back and re-buy another screen. I'm in the camp of do it right the first time.


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mitch P.* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> that's what I thought. Some people keep making me re-calculate and second guess myself. I was going to go with the Optoma HD72 and pair it with my 123" firehawk, but I found that the offset won't work. Next choice was the Optoma H78 but it was too dim. Thus, I'm now at the Samsung HP-H710AE and from what I've been reading, after cal it is putting out enough lumens so I'm 90% sure this is the projector for me. If anyone feels otherwise, please speak up and provide some data to back it up (not just "I think..." as it drives me insane with second guessing hahaa).
> 
> 
> Thanks millerwill for the confirmation on the THX viewing as that was what I was going by. My thinking was that I should be planning ahead for when 1080p becomes affordable too. Nothing worse than having to go back and re-buy another screen. I'm in the camp of do it right the first time.



The Sam 170 pj has been getting great reviews. Be sure to read its review in projectorcentral.com, where they say that when properly calibrated for video it produces 465 Lumens; this should be sufficient for your size screen, but just barely.


----------



## jkmw




> Quote:
> When you have a flexible lens with vertical offset capablilty, a good way to go is to align the lens with a perpendicular horizontal line, originating at the upper edge of the screen. Many projectors are designed to do exactly that. So optimum for Firehawk is always above the screen surface. The further away you can place the projector, then the distribution of incident angles is tightned. This results in better center-to-edge uniformity, and a wider acceptable viewing angle.



Mark,


I hope my personal note of thanks for your considered responses to my questions doesn't seem redundant especially as it is from me and not someone else speaking for me







. This entire Home Theater design and implementation thing is Truly a labor of love and I really appreciate all the help I have received and can get especially from people like you, the Experts.


I wanted to keep this brief but having read your comments about the angular reflectivity of the FH in recent posts, I began wondering whether this was an issue with the ST in a dark room. I began my projector installation analysis by trying to achieve a recommended vertical viewing angle of 15 degrees for the front row, (measured as the angle of the perpendicular horizontal viewing height, (I used 39") to the top of the screen). I wound up with a 17.18 degree vertical viewing angle at 11' 3" back from the screen. The Sony VPL-VW100 has plenty of vertical offset capability. Using the Sony recommended ceiling mount, I find I am well within the maximum offset when attached to a 1" thick mounting board on my 8' ceiling. This puts the center of the lens 11 7/16" down from the ceiling and roughly 3.75" above the top edge of the screen. This distance above the screen can of course be decreased by raising the screen, (and increasing the viewing angle), or lowering the projector, (raising headroom concerns for the second row viewers). Is the angular reflection of light from the projector a factor I should take into account with the Studiotek 130?


Thank you again for all your help. You have already saved us $hundreds







in lighting effects we never really needed!


mark


ps - ambient light problems, you think? (parts of screen in direct sunlight mounted in outdoor gazebo), cgim.audiogon.com/i/vs/s/f/1069629658.jpg Hope they aren't using a StudioTek 130.


----------



## CycloneMike

I currently have a Stewart Grayhawk Luxus Screenwall fixed screen SN092H, 80W x 45H. (3 years old). My projector is a Sanyo PLV60HT LCD with a 1200 ANSI Lumen output and a 700:1 contrast ratio. The projector is ceiling mounted with the lens approximately 14 feet from the screen.


The installation is in a basement HT/family room with 2 small windows and the lighting in the room can be easily controlled for viewing. Overhead lights are usually off when viewing DVD and lights behind the seating position are often on during TV viewing. The room has an acoustic ceiling (white) and the walls are a beige color. (Sherwin Williams Dhurrie Beige to be exact). Color scheme will not be changed.


I have been very happy with the results, but am considering some acoustical changes to the room by going with in-wall front 3 speakers versus floor standing and will thus need a microperf style screen.


First, can replacement screen material, without the frame be ordered? Is there any trade-in allowance for previous customers? What would be recommended? Another Grayhawk (or Grayhawk RS) or would a Firehawk G2 be more appropriate?


Thanks,

Mike


----------



## shovven

What are the differences between the new G2 and the "old" Firehawk material regarding hotspot and uniformity?? The "old" did hotspot quite a bit... How much better is it now??


Shovven


----------



## scottyb




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Mounting at eye level is problematic geometrically for Front Projection, but happens in R.P. apps. where the optics are frequently centered on the screen. I suppose you could put the projector in front of you, it's done with CRT etc. But if you can find a sweet and accessible higher angle, the angular reflective surface can deliver the light right to you optimally..Lengthening the throw, makes this easier, creating a wider, (taller), sweet spot.




Mark,


Quick question. I own a Firehawk 16:9, 100" dia. The top of the screen is 7' high and our projector lens is 15' from screen and 6' high. Our seating is 13' from screen and the room is only 13' wide so horizontal is a non issue. From reading your above post would there be any advantage to me moving the projector higher on the back wall? It's on an adjustable shelf so it wouldn't be too much work if there is some benefit, but I don't want to spend the time if it's negligible.


Thanks in advance for your help and, not brown-nosing, but I think the Firehawk is a GREAT screen. This is my third Stewart screen and I'd purchase again in a heartbeat.


Scott


----------



## m Robinson

I took some time off last week and am responding a bit late, sorry, but here goes...


Mark,

Thanks for the nice comments. The Studiotek should easily accomodate the small amount of deviation from perfect vertical angle. It is pretty forgiving, has a wide viewing cone, and exemplary resistance to color shift. How high above finished floor is bottom of the image area?


Mike,

The PLV-60 has served you well I'll wager. We've had one here for years. We will tilt the perf pattern at about 24 degrees at that size to minimize moire artifact. Yes we do make "Screen Only" sales, we have the data from your original purchase. We do not take trade in screens, but folks do often appreciate an opportunity to purchase a well cared for, used screen, even without a frame. You could put up an ad here on AVS or at Videogon, and test the waters. Firehawk is appreciated by many folks who own the PLV series projectors. They throw a lot of light, but the contrast ratio is not the major selling point for that platform.


Shovven,

Firehawk G-2 is an internal upgrade which we did not feel was "monumental" enough to promote. The information has gotten around and the substance of the change is a difference in the partical size distribution in one of the pigments. This change was done to eliminate "star" artifacts, when folks would see a brilliant tiny mirror within the image, and to widen the veiwing cone a little bit, by reducing the gain. This also reduces hot-spot. Hot-spot with Firehawk is very much tied to applied throw distance, and with both versions of the fabric, we recommend 1.5 :1 or longer throw distances. So yes, G2 is "better" in terms of hot-spot, but still less appropriate for short-throw installations, than Studiotek, Snomatte, or Grayhawk or Graymatte.


ScottyB,

It would be interesting to do, but probably close to negligible. If I understand you correctly, the raised position would create symmetry in the angle of incidence, versus the vertical viewing angle? I like the sound of what you have right now, and if the elevation of the projector, forces you to use anti-keystoning correction, stay away from that. Thank you for the kind words, and we are honored to be of service!


----------



## jkmw




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Mark,
> 
> Thanks for the nice comments. The Studiotek should easily accomodate the small amount of deviation from perfect vertical angle. It is pretty forgiving, has a wide viewing cone, and exemplary resistance to color shift. How high above finished floor is bottom of the image area?



Mark,


Hope your vacation was energizing!


In direct answer to your question, the image area is 31 3/4" off the floor. But if I may back up to something you wrote referring to a perfect viewing angle. Is this in reference to what the Studiotek 'likes' as in the correct angle of reflectivity for the Studioteks specific screen surface? Please forgive me if it sounds like I'm beating a dead horse, (what's the origin of that expression? Must endeavor to be more politically correct), but if necessary, I can move the center of the pj lens down, closer to the top of the image area. I am actually in the process of mounting the pj right now and if I need to, now is my best time to make adjustments.


Thank you Mark for all your help!


Mark (jkmw)


----------



## m Robinson

The Studiotek surface consists of small planar particles distributed at random angles, this optical coating is applied to a mostly Lambertian substrate. The net effect is a surface with mostly Lambertian behavior, but with a slight bias away from the Lambertian hemispherical distribution characteristic. (quick review, Lambertian surfaces take incoming light and reflect the light in a diffuse manner, so that though projected light arriving can be collimated and highly directional, light exiting the surface is distributed into an even hemispheric assortment of energy, at proportionally distributed reduced intensity).


Back to the angled particles. So light which is not diffused hemi spherically, is partially reflected in a distribution, centered on a complementary angle.(quick review for newbies, complementary angles added together have a sum of 90 degrees). To make it even more complicated, the individual angled particles are coated with a diffusing pigment. Some light is absorbed as well.


So to find out the probable path of light hitting the angled surfaces on the screen fabric at an angle, (read slowly, sorry), you ray-trace the light back to the source, (lens), find that angle, then subtract that angle from 90, there is the bias line denoting the center of the distribution destinations of that light, because our optical coating is applied at many angles, and just part of the light hits the angled particles. Most of the light is diffused. This preserves white field uniformity. The fabric is a blend of diffusion and angular reflectivity. It is actually much more a diffusing surface than a "gain" surface.


Let's go a little further. So as the gain value of a given angular reflective surface increases, usually, a higher proportion of the light is directed angularly, and less is diffused in the Lambertian model. It gets fairly complex, but it is consistent. Silver screen fabrics ordinarily operate at the opposite extreme of Studiotek, in that they do more angular reflecting and much less Lambertian diffusing.


For you Mark, choosing Studiotek, the partial angular reflectivity is not something you need to dwell upon. It is more of a consideration for users of Firehawk and other competing products with a greater proportion of angular reflectivity behavior.


----------



## jkmw




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> The Studiotek surface consists of small planar particles distributed at random angles, this optical coating is applied to a mostly Lambertian substrate. The net effect is a surface with mostly Lambertian behavior, but with a slight bias away from the Lambertian hemispherical distribution characteristic. (quick review, Lambertian surfaces take incoming light and reflect the light in a diffuse manner, so that though projected light arriving can be collimated and highly directional, light exiting the surface is distributed into an even hemispheric assortment of energy, at proportionally distributed reduced intensity).
> 
> 
> Back to the angled particles. So light which is not diffused hemi spherically, is partially reflected in a distribution, centered on a complementary angle.(quick review for newbies, complementary angles added together have a sum of 90 degrees). To make it even more complicated, the individual angled particles are coated with a diffusing pigment. Some light is absorbed as well.
> 
> 
> So to find out the probable path of light hitting the angled surfaces on the screen fabric at an angle, (read slowly, sorry), you ray-trace the light back to the source, (lens), find that angle, then subtract that angle from 90, there is the bias line denoting the center of the distribution destinations of that light, because our optical coating is applied at many angles, and just part of the light hits the angled particles. Most of the light is diffused. This preserves white field uniformity. The fabric is a blend of diffusion and angular reflectivity. It is actually much more a diffusing surface than a "gain" surface.
> 
> 
> Let's go a little further. So as the gain value of a given angular reflective surface increases, usually, a higher proportion of the light is directed angularly, and less is diffused in the Lambertian model. It gets fairly complex, but it is consistent. Silver screen fabrics ordinarily operate at the opposite extreme of Studiotek, in that they do more angular reflecting and much less Lambertian diffusing.
> 
> 
> For you Mark, choosing Studiotek, the partial angular reflectivity is not something you need to dwell upon. It is more of a consideration for users of Firehawk and other competing products with a greater proportion of angular reflectivity behavior.




WOW! Thanks again Mark, I'm really getting into the physics of this thing. Maybe I missed my calling. So in a word of caution to self, the fact that the Studiotek is more diffusing than reflective, (I know that oversimplifies it alot), implies that ambient light will be equally diffused....oops, and accounts for the fact that angular reflectivity should not be considered an issue, (or less of an issue), with the Studiotek screen. Now I can mount the pj within the Sony specs and be satisfied I did it correctly.


I really appreciate the time and effort you put into answering my questions! In my book you are a Gentleman and a Scholar.


Sincerely,


Mark

(jkmw)


----------



## BRADH

Mark


I just wanted to let you know that I order my Stewart Grayhawk RS 83.75"wide here from Jason, from order to delivery It only took 3 days







. I order the screen to go with my Samsung 710AE what a perfect match. I was using a Studiotek 130 which worked great with my CRT and the Samsung DLP but I was missing the very deepest blacks with the DLP. With the Grayhawk RS I now have the blacks and the great colors I had with the Studiotek.


I just wanted to say thanks for all the info you post here and thank everybody and Stewart for making a great product and great customer service







. Thanks again.


Brad


----------



## ahammons

To Stewart: How do I go about getting a piece of Firehawk screen to compare to the DNP screen. I just got a DNP a few days ago and while the image is bright with ambient light I am seeing a rather "grainy" looking image with noticeable hot spots.


thanks

arlie


----------



## millerwill

ahammons: Please let us hear how the FH-DNP comparison comes out for you.


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ahammons* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> To Stewart: How do I go about getting a piece of Firehawk screen to compare to the DNP screen. I just got a DNP a few days ago and while the image is bright with ambient light I am seeing a rather "grainy" looking image with noticeable hot spots.
> 
> 
> thanks
> 
> arlie



I requested screen samples from Stewart via their website and received them a few weeks later. It took longer than the other screen companies -- but the samples were 3 or 4 times as large as what anyone else sent me. (I think they were waiting until they had large scraps, perhaps?)


----------



## ahammons

I will let you know what the comparsion is when I get a sample from Stewart. I did just go to their website and sent a request to [email protected] . That was the only email addr I found on the site.


arlie


----------



## ddrobbin

Where do I get a Stewart StudioTek 130 screen not at list price?


----------



## scottyb

Right here at AVS. Look for Jason or Dave


----------



## ddrobbin

How do I contact Jason or Dave


----------



## scottyb

Contact your AVS team for pricing information and details!

877-823-4452


If it's Jason tell him scottyb sent ya.


----------



## jkmw

I have had my Ruby/Studiotek 130 combo up and running for about a week now and I wanted to offer my initial observations. As with all Stewart screens the frame is I think, exceptionally well made. The frame assembly was precise and the screen snapped on without a hitch. The Studiotek 130 surface provides a detailed and vivid image, that is, with ambient light under total control. There are No hot spots or moire effects. I feel the need to reiterate my statement that the image from my Ruby is stunning on this screen....with the caveat that the viewer must be in a totaly dark, 0 ambient light controlled room. Turn on a table lamp and poof, the screen begins to wash out. Once any ambient light is introduced that causes this effect, any additional light increases the 'wash out' but not as dramatically as that initial input. I have found Mark Robinson's statement, "The Studiotek surface will really look much better if you eliminate all of the decorative element lighting while viewing is underway.", to be absolutely correct. Any body else notice this effect?


I would hope that while the Studiotek gives up image quality in the presence of any ambient light, it gains the edge with a precisely defined, dramatically vivid image when used in a totaly dark home theater setting. This _*is*_ what I was looking for when deciding upon which screen to purchase. But now I must come up with a way to shield the room/screen when the kids come in and go out, come in, go out ad infinitum, through the rear doors







. Maybe I'll convert my adjacent dining room into a lobby







. (to Wife, "What do you think hunny? OK?")


----------



## kevivoe

@ m Robinson or anyone else that can provide the answer


I am looking for an angular reflective white screen in the 1.3-1.5 gain range. I do not like the diffusing of the 130 for HDTV. Is there a Stewart screen for my application? Also, I do not like the gray Firehawk ... too dim looking and I see the screen through the image in many scenes.


k


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *kevivoe* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> @ m Robinson or anyone else that can provide the answer
> 
> 
> I am looking for an angular reflective white screen in the 1.3-1.5 gain range. I do not like the diffusing of the 130 for HDTV. Is there a Stewart screen for my application? Also, I do not like the gray Firehawk ... too dim looking and I see the screen through the image in many scenes.
> 
> 
> k



Sounds to me like you're looking for the Dalite HighPower.


Edit: Oops, the HP is retro-reflective. Sorry.


----------



## Mitch P.




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *kevivoe* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> @ m Robinson or anyone else that can provide the answer
> 
> 
> I am looking for an angular reflective white screen in the 1.3-1.5 gain range. I do not like the diffusing of the 130 for HDTV. Is there a Stewart screen for my application? Also, I do not like the gray Firehawk ... too dim looking and I see the screen through the image in many scenes.
> 
> 
> k



I don't see the screen through the scene's with my 123" firehawk. If you're local, you're welcome to stop by and see for yourself. If you DO see it though, don't point it out!


----------



## kevivoe




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *millerwill* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Sounds to me like you're looking for the Dalite HighPower.
> 
> 
> Edit: Oops, the HP is retro-reflective. Sorry.




Yea, I have a high power sample and it would work for HDTV except for the retro-reflective part of it. I considered moving to a coffee table mount it's that good. Very smooth surface which is what I need now and for future 1080p surely.


One screen DOES NOT last a lifetime IMHO. At 480p all looked similar. At 720p, I see differences, some I like, some I do not. At 1080p I know what I'll need so I am getting a screen for that application based off of my experience moving from 480 to 720.


k


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *kevivoe* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I do not like the gray Firehawk ... too dim looking



If the Firehawk, at 1.3 gain is too dim, I doubt that any screen at 1.3 or 1.5 will be much different. If what you like is the Dalite hipower, except for the angularity, you may need to ask around in a non-Stewart thread for advice.


----------



## SGiles

Mark,


Is there any way to identify Stewart screen material already mounted in an existing theater, without paperwork or any way to contact the previous owner. It happens to be a 16:9 format, 89"x50" with what appears to be a Deluxe frame.


I can be pretty sure it is not a GrayHawk.


Thanks for your support.


----------



## raoul

Mark, (and others),


I own a JVC HX2 which has been calibrated by W. Phelps. It's great, puts out 500+ lumens at 1100 contrast (after calibration). I'm very happy with it. I'm trying to pick a decent screen now. The current contenders are the StudioTek and the Firehawk. I have a SilverStar sample on the way. I do have some ambient light but when I really want to view a movie, I'm able to get the room dark.


My projector is ceiling mounted 14 ft away from the screen (at screen height) and I sit about 11-12 ft away from the screen. I want to run my setup in 2.35:1 constant height. I plan for a 40" x 94" screen with 16:9 content showing in the center 72" of the screen. The screen will be 28" off the ground, going up to 68" up. When sitting on my couch/daybed (very low) I tend have my head about 3ft up. I sit about 2 ft off center when viewing.


I find that there's a HUGE drop off in brightness towards the far edge with the Firehawk material, this is much less noticable on the StudioTek material. I prefer the firehawk material when I'm on center looking at the sample in the center of the screen area. It has a it of sparkle, which I don't really mind so much, and some color shift (things look every so slightly cooler). On the whole though the picture on the StudioTek, black levels and shadow detail in dark scenes aside, looks better.


So now my question is, sorry for the long run in, can I correct for the drop in gain, and create a more uniform viewing experience by building a curved screen, or even a Torus with the Firehawk material?


R-S


----------



## m Robinson

S Giles,

There is a serial number on the screen binding, located along the bottom edge of the fabric, on the audience right side. You can gently un-snap 8-9 snaps and fold the material upward and see this tag. We'll be able to attribute and access the record for that unit.


Raoul,

A single axis curve would normalize the incident angles somewhat and improve center to edge uniformity. A single axis curve would also reduce pincushion artifact from use of a short throw anamorphic. If you are using the typical screen material samples, you see the total net effect of the narrower Firehawk viewing cone in the most unflattering way possible. If you were looking at a whole screen on the other hand, although the difference is still there, the very gradual nature of the fall-off is much more acceptable to the eye.


Regarding the two fabrics in conjuction with your room and the JVC projector, the Studiotek does corral you into the need to diligently control ambient light. The upside is the viewing cone improvement and the more uniform white field performance. The Firehawk gives up viewing cone, but allows a more versatile viewing environment, and will help with the black level and shadow detail.


----------



## raoul

Mark,


I had the samples taped in a column on top of each other, GreyHawk, FireHawk and StudioTek. I moved them around a fair amount and I have to say, the off axis drop off seems really drastic when you compare the two materials side by side. I didn't like the GreyHawk, I realize it's useful for ambient light rejection and enhancing black but the level of white crush was too much for me. The other thing that I found a bit strange about the firehawk was the material never completly disappeared like the StudioTek, however the rest of it looks quite nice. Regarding the single axis curve, how deep would the curve have to be for an 8.5ft wide screen? Are we talking about a circular curve or an elliptical curve?



R-S


----------



## m Robinson

With an anamorphic lens? The radius would not be less than 30 feet, and would be circular. The rise being some portion of about 3 inches per side. This varies with throw distance, the shorter the throw, the more curvature required to provide a rectangular viewing area, free of pincushion.


----------



## raoul

Thanks Mark. Is there a formula I can use? I have a 14 ft throw and sit 12 ft away. I want an 8.5ft wide 2.35:1 screen.


----------



## Andrew Wolfe




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jkmw* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I have had my Ruby/Studiotek 130 combo up and running for about a week now and I wanted to offer my initial observations. As with all Stewart screens the frame is I think, exceptionally well made. The frame assembly was precise and the screen snapped on without a hitch. The Studiotek 130 surface provides a detailed and vivid image, that is, with ambient light under total control. There are No hot spots or moire effects. I feel the need to reiterate my statement that the image from my Ruby is stunning on this screen....with the caveat that the viewer must be in a totaly dark, 0 ambient light controlled room. Turn on a table lamp and poof, the screen begins to wash out. Once any ambient light is introduced that causes this effect, any additional light increases the 'wash out' but not as dramatically as that initial input. I have found Mark Robinson's statement, "The Studiotek surface will really look much better if you eliminate all of the decorative element lighting while viewing is underway.", to be absolutely correct. Any body else notice this effect?
> 
> 
> I would hope that while the Studiotek gives up image quality in the presence of any ambient light, it gains the edge with a precisely defined, dramatically vivid image when used in a totaly dark home theater setting. This _*is*_ what I was looking for when deciding upon which screen to purchase. But now I must come up with a way to shield the room/screen when the kids come in and go out, come in, go out ad infinitum, through the rear doors
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Maybe I'll convert my adjacent dining room into a lobby
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . (to Wife, "What do you think hunny? OK?")




I have the same setup and I've seen the same effect. Great when it is pitch black - but noticably unsatisfying when there is any light - fo example when someone opens the fridge in the adjoining kitchen.


----------



## CChoi83

Hello everyone. I have a Faroudja 1080phd and dvp1080 on the way. My dealer put in the order for the GrayHawk Reference @ 122.75 (or so the drawing states) diag. My questions are:


1. Is the Faroudja bright enough for the GrayHawk?

2. Am I pushing it in terms of screen size in terms of brightness/contrast?

3. What are the main differences in terms of flat and curved screens? I saw the picture thread and I must say those looks AWESOME. I really liked lawdawg's screen and room. Very clean and stealth. But what's up with the curved screen? Would I be better off with it instead of a flat one?

4. Any other reccomendations?


Just some info:


Room is light controlled. There are NO windows and it is completely dark. Room dimensions are 23' deep, 19' wide, 7.5' high (I could've made it about 10' but didn't, I'll explain that later if anyone wants to know). Any suggestions?


Best regards,

Chris


----------



## raoul

I have just tried the GreyHawk and I would NOT recommend it for a completly light controlled room. Expecially with your projector. With 2100:1 contrast ratio after calibration and 700 lumens your projector is reasonably bright (not a light canon) and has good contrast. It has a BEAUTIFUL picture which in my opinion, you'll ruin with a GreyHawk. The screen is good for ambient light control but you don't need that here. You have a cave to watch in!


It is true that D-ILA's can use a little help with black level from a grey screen but when you see a non white white you'll wonder why you paid for this set up.


I would either go for a Stewart StudioTek130 which is brighter and for the most part a lot cleaner looking than the GreyHawk. That's my opinion. I have the JVC HX2 , it doesn't have the contrast of your PJ but it is optimized by Phelps like yours is and is a DILA like yours is. On my machine, the black levels here can use all the help they can get and I still decided against the GreyHawk because of t what it does to white in the picture.


You basically get 700 Lumens / (71 * 109 / 144) (area) = 13. ft lamberts of brightness. If you use the the GreyHawk that drops by 10% (0.9 gain) to 11.7 which in a dark room viewing is really fine. The bulb will age and you'll probably end up watching about 10 ftL but again, it's ok in a dark room.


In my opinion, the correct screen to get, if you're not going for a super bright screen is the Screen Reseach. It's a white negative gain screen. It'll drop your black levels without harming the white levels. You can also then place your center behind the screen for the best sound quality.


If you don't mind the black levels and prefer a slightly brighter image, then go for the StudioTek 130 ((16+ ftL on your projector) It's just a superior screen to the GreyHawk. Your projector doesn't have the brightness for the GreyHawk and it really messes with the peak whites. It has a higher gain than the Screen Research and is also a refrence screen.


If you're going to curve your screen, and you're doing this via an installer etc, then spring for a curved 2.35:1 studiotek screen in constant height mode and an ISCO 3 lens. Much more cinematic by far!


The firehawk is also another option but I wouldn't use it for the same reason's I wouldn't use the GreyHawk. Improving blacks shoulon't come at the cost of harming your whites! If you do go for the FireHawk then ship your machine back to phelps for recalibration.


----------



## wm

Raoul,


Thanks for responding to this one. I completely agree, it would be a shame to put this projector on a gray screen! We demo it at trade shows with a 108" wide ST130 and it looks gorgeous.


I agree about the Screen Research screen but not at the size this person is going to use. You said "without harming the white levels" but that is incorrect. The overall output drops, including white. I think you meant "without harming the color". The SR screen is completely neutral.


William


----------



## raoul

Yes. It doesn't harm the color, it will drop the ft lamberts a bit. That will probably help increase black levels. By and large, to my eyes, the StudioTek, in the right environment, an environment he seems to have, produces the best overall image.


I do agree about the screen size though, too big by half for this machine on either GreyHawk or Screen Research. I guess I was saying, if I were choosing between a GreyHawk and a SR I'd choose the SR!


----------



## CChoi83

Thanks for the advice. I visited my dealer today and asked him to change the order. I just hope that it's not too late because he told me that once they start fabricating the screen the order can not be cancelled. The new order will be a StudioTek 130, 2.35:1 @ 120". I asked him to get my prices on both flat and curved versions. How would I exactly go about calibrating the unit for a curved screen anyhow? I know about the 2.35:1 lenses but not sure about the curved screen. Anyone? Thanks again everyone.


----------



## raoul

Your dealer should eat the price of the GreyHawk, he should have known better than to recommend it for such a large screen with such a low lumens projector. Unless, of course, he told you about it. Black levels play a very large part in projecting a decent image but they're just one factor. Given that your machine is a Faroudja and is htere for a Phelps calibrated D-ILA from JVC you'll do very well on the StudioTek.


Also, you should check with AVS about their prices for Stewart Screens. They may be able to get you a deal on a curved screen. From your thread I though you had a 16:9 screen, now you're ordering a 2.35:1 screen, which is great but did you buy an anamorphic lens? Will you be buying a micro-perfed screen so you can place your front speakers behind the screen? This may eat a foot or so into your room, but will be worth it. Make sure you have the throw distances required for your projector to be able to put out an image that wide with an anamorphic lens.


R-S


----------



## CChoi83

My dealer has yet to have anyone order the DILA projectors so I am his first. As for a lens I have not decided yet on which to buy. I am looking at ISCO but their website states that the JVC HD10K is "pending". I am NOT hiding my speakers as I will be using this system for a good bit of music as well. The L/R speakers are B&W 800D's powered by 2 McIntosh MC1201's and the center is a HTM2D fed by a MC207.


Mr. Phelps, are the lenses on the MF1 interchangeable? Can I swap the long throw for the short throw lens? I only ask because Faroudja's site doesn't have the MF1 listed yet and I can't find anything about the subject on JVC's site for the HD10K.


----------



## Cam Man

Mark,

Let me pick your brain on ST 130 and UM 150 for a moment.


I am trying to decide between a 2.35 ST 130 or UM 150 with MicroPerf, in 110" or 120". I'm pretty sure I can reach reference white luminance with a gain of 1.3 in high lamp mode after calibration. I have one four foot seating row at 14' from the screen. Viewing position from far left seat to far right seat is 80". Projector throw is 16', but can be more. It seems to me that this is friendly to uniformity in general, is it not? Do you get the sense that UM 150 would be a good choice in this case?


I looked at the UM 150 Gain Performance graph on the Stewart site. At my viewing distance (14'), the far left and right seats (40" off center each) are only 13 degrees off axis. The graph indicates that the far left and right would only be down .1 in gain (at 1.4 gain). Microperf costs us .18 in negative gain resulting in a net gain for UM 150 of 1.32, correct? That's seems like a winning scenario for UM 150...unless I'm missing something.


What say you?


----------



## wm

Chris,


You cannot swap the lens. You have to order it with the lens you want. Each projector is individually Optimized with the lens it ships with.


William


----------



## raoul

If that's the case then it's best to tell William what screen you're using it with too!


----------



## m Robinson

The Ultramatte 150 has a pretty wide viewing cone. You are specifiying a fairly large screen, 42 square feet, so the choice is correct, and you'll remain flexible in so far as a projector you might source later on, wouldn't necessarily have to be as much of a light cannon.


Lets take a calibrated projector putting out 500 real lumens, we divide for square footage, yeilding 11.9 fl. at unity gain. Multiplying that by 1.5 gives you the flexibility to remain comfortably within or slightly above SMPTE spec. even perforated. So I validate your plan.


I'm a broken record on this, but long throw is the key to being able to use a screen with gain, and have satisfying off axis performance and center to edge uniformity.


----------



## Cam Man

Thanks, Mark.



> Quote:
> I'm a broken record on this, but long throw is the key to being able to use a screen with gain, and have satisfying off axis performance and center to edge uniformity.



Right now at 16' throw to a 120" screen, that is a 1.6 throw. Adequate? I can be a bit longer.


Let's take this another step. How would a curved screen fit this scenario? What must I consider, or should I avoid?


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I'm a broken record on this, but long throw is the key to being able to use a screen with gain, and have satisfying off axis performance and center to edge uniformity.



The viewing ratio is an important part of the equation also. For people who want to sit close there is only so much that long throw can do for an angular-reflective screen with high gain. Retro-reflective high gain screens follow different rules to a large degree and the common wisdom about high gain screens doesn't necessarily apply to them (like longer throw can make uniformity worse with them).


--Darin


----------



## CChoi83




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *raoul* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> If that's the case then it's best to tell William what screen you're using it with too!



Okay, I called up Stewart earlier and good news, my original order for the GrayHawk was cancelled. I forgot the name of the gentleman that I spoke to but he even spoke about this thread. I was suprised. "Wait, you're from New York and you have a MF1 on the way. I read your post on avsforums." Great guy to deal with. Very helpful. I asked for the screen dimensions and I'm going with a Stewart StudioTek 130 @ 2.35:1 @ 130" diag.


I also called Meridian/Faroudja and the gentleman there said that 130" is about max. After that I'd start to lose a bit too much brightness but 130" should be alright. Very helpful man as well.


Mr. Phelps, you asked to know about the width of my screen. The viewable width is 119.5" and the height is 51". It will be flat.


----------



## Cam Man




> Quote:
> I have one four foot seating row at 14' from the screen.



Meant to say "one four seat row..."


----------



## CChoi83

I've searched through the Stewart website to look for masking options but I couldn't find anything that pointed to a fixed screen that has masking. I'm looking for vertical masking but it seems that it's only available to roll down screens. Does anyone know? I get this feeling that I'll have to do a DIY masking once I get my screen.


----------



## Dennis Erskine

Stewart offers both vertical and horizontal masking for their fixed screens.
http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/eng...ons/vswem.html 
http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/eng...ns/hzswem.html 
http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/eng...ions/4way.html


----------



## raoul




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *CChoi83* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I've searched through the Stewart website to look for masking options but I couldn't find anything that pointed to a fixed screen that has masking. I'm looking for vertical masking but it seems that it's only available to roll down screens. Does anyone know? I get this feeling that I'll have to do a DIY masking once I get my screen.



You need to call up Jason Turk at AVScience and talk to him about a screen. He'll sort you out with a good price and knows about all of the Stewart options. Stewarts curved screens also have masking.


----------



## CChoi83




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Dennis Erskine* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Stewart offers both vertical and horizontal masking for their fixed screens.
> http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/eng...ons/vswem.html
> http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/eng...ns/hzswem.html
> http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/eng...ions/4way.html



Thank you Mr. Erksine! Couldn't find a fixed screen with vertical masking, only horizontal which I didn't want.


Raoul,


Based on your opinion, would I need a curved screen? After speaking to Stewart Filmscreen, they said it was more a matter of opinion. If my screen was ginormous I would most likely need it but if not, then it's not necessary. How would I take care of pincushioning and a anormophic lens on a curved screen?


----------



## Dennis Erskine

What's with your dealer? He should be able to answer these questions for you.


An anamorphic lens (depending on throw distance) can create pincushioning. The curved screen solves the pincushion. In addition a curved screen will improve uniformity. The amount of the curve required would need to come from either Meridian, your dealer, or Stewart. It is likely that neither Meridian nor your dealer have alot of experience with CH 2.35:1 applications (yet) so Stewart may be your better source; however, do your dealer the courtesy of informing him that you wish to speak to Stewart directly.


----------



## raoul

Just call Jason at AVS, tell him your projector, order your anamorphic lens through him (with your rig it seems like you're in the ISCO3 league) and then they'll work out, with Stewart, what the curve should be.


For a screen your size, a curve is encouraged.


I also agree with Denis, call your dealer and tell him you're ordering your screen through someone with experience in this area.


----------



## CChoi83

I DID speak with Stewart and the gentleman told me that it was a matter of personal preference unless the screen was like 150"+. I also spoke to Mr. Pointdexter today about the ISCO and he's running a 150" flat. I don't think it'd be a problem. I'll have to call Stewart one more time tomorrow. Is there anyone that I should specifically speak to?


----------



## raoul

You can run it flat on 120" wide but you really do want to have the curve for uniformity. Mind you, on a Studiotek, the difference will be smallish. Don't sweat the curve too much if it's going to be hard however it looks like you're going top end all the way with the ISCO, Projector, etc. so you shouldn't cut corners on the screen.


----------



## Dennis Erskine

Invest in a plane ticket and come to Atlanta and see our 120" curved screen and ISCO lens. I would also differ with Stewart in that the choice is based on physics (throw distance, optics, viewing angles).


----------



## CChoi83

Yes, I know what you are both saying. I'm awaiting an e-mail from ISCO for recommendations based on JVC's HD10K since the Faroudja uses the same lens. My main concern was pincushioning since the MF1 doesn't have any keystone adjustments. They're not big on it.


----------



## raoul

Is the Faroudja the same as teh HD10K or the HD2K?


Did you try using:

http://www.jvcdig.com/lens_calculator.htm 


the lens calculator there will let you work out what your image will look like when you dial in the correct numbers.


Other person to speak to about this is Phelps as his name is on the product. Be sure to send William all your info when you do send it for calibration, mount orientation (table or ceiling), send him the lens and if you buy an exotic screen, send him a screen sample to calibrate against.


----------



## CChoi83




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *raoul* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Is the Faroudja the same as teh HD10K or the HD2K?
> 
> 
> Did you try using:
> 
> http://www.jvcdig.com/lens_calculator.htm
> 
> 
> the lens calculator there will let you work out what your image will look like when you dial in the correct numbers.
> 
> 
> Other person to speak to about this is Phelps as his name is on the product. Be sure to send William all your info when you do send it for calibration, mount orientation (table or ceiling), send him the lens and if you buy an exotic screen, send him a screen sample to calibrate against.



The Faroudja DILA-1080pHD is based on the HD2K and the DILA-1080MF1 is based on the new HD10K which is what I'm getting.


Raoul, thanks for the suggestions. Mr. Phelps and I have e-mailed eachother a few times already. I don't think calibration is neccessary right now since the calibration was done using a Stewart StudioTek 130 screen which is also what I'm getting. I've also spoken to Mr. Rawls at Faroudja who happens to live in NY. He's doesn't have an opinion yet on curved screens but he'd wants to come by to see my setup for 2.35:1 purposes as they are working on a lens solution as well. I'd wait for Faroudja's lens but I don't want to put this off any longer and I'm pretty sure they will be using ISCO's as well.


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *raoul* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> You can run it flat on 120" wide but you really do want to have the curve for uniformity. Mind you, on a Studiotek, the difference will be smallish.



If going with a curve the 1.5 gain might even make sense because of the reduction in hotspotting that the curve would provide. I don't know if their 1.5 gain material has any other downsides compared to the 1.3 gain material though.


--Darin


----------



## raoul

I agree. I thought about that but didn't want to upset CChoi any more. I mean, why not go for the VideoMatte 2.0 and have Phelps calibrate accordingly?


----------



## CChoi83




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *raoul* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I agree. I thought about that but didn't want to upset CChoi any more. I mean, why not go for the VideoMatte 2.0 and have Phelps calibrate accordingly?



Because with the StudioTek, I most probably won't have to. This is an enjoyable experience but I don't want it to turn in to a hassle. Obviously, it takes time to do things right but right now, I don't want to spend any more time than I have to. ETA for my equipment (except screen) is due next week, Thurs-Fri. I'll get everything ready, get my screen, and if it needs to be tweaked, I'll send it to Mr. Phelps. If not, even better.


Raoul, using JVC's lens calc, it seems as if I will have a problem with keystone and pincushioning. I'm not sure if I'm doing it right. Not to mention that my dealer and I haven't exactly decided the mounting height/distance. We're both guessing anywhere from 19-22 feet or so. The room is 23 feet deep. Don't forget that I'm adding the ISCO III so the longer the better. Or am I thinking wrong?


----------



## raoul

The lens offset on the JVC is designed so that if the projector lens is at the height of the top of the screen you'll get no keystoning. Similarly, if it's a table mount, the projector should be at the bottom of the screen. Design your projector mounting accordingly.


R-S


----------



## wm




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *raoul* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> The lens offset on the JVC is designed so that if the projector lens is at the height of the top of the screen you'll get no keystoning...



Not in this case. The DILA1080-MF1 has lens (image) shift.


----------



## raoul

oh. very nice. so then will he get keystoning?


r-s


----------



## Cam Man




> Quote:
> If going with a curve the 1.5 gain might even make sense because of the reduction in hotspotting that the curve would provide. I don't know if their 1.5 gain material has any other downsides compared to the 1.3 gain material though.



I just did a busy bit of testing of UM 150 and ST 130 anticipating UM's 1.5 gain being necessary in my application. Thought you would like to hear results.


Although capable of an extra foot lambert or two, Ultramatte had some idiocyncracies that bear mentioning. The higher gain makes a very unforgiving surface; the slightest undulation being very visible. I am more _aware_ of the surface of UM. The gain causes that, and the surface has tiny little sparklies that attracted my attention too much at times (high luminance in program material).


Uniformity was an important issue to look at. Edge (last quarter of area) luminance was interesting. Of course the PJ naturally has probably 10-15% edge fall-off. The gain of the screens compounded that...depending. UM had the most serious fall off, about 35%. ST was less pronounced, but cumulatively more than is allowed in the DCI digital cinema specs. It seems the most improvement on this would be made using a curved screen. Further testing revealed that ST 130 would do very well with a curve and get edge luminance up to within the DCI digital cinema specs and tolerances (actually very near the nominal specs; DCI specs nominal, and tolerances for both reference viewing theaters, and commercial theaters).


----------



## wm




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *raoul* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> oh. very nice. so then will he get keystoning? r-s



Not if the image shift is adjusted properly. That's the point to having image shift.


----------



## red5908

I'm installing an Optoma HD72 DLP projector in a fully light controlled room. I am planning to use a 100" Stewart screen. The projector will be mounted about 12.5 to 13.5 feet from the screen. My front seating will be probably about 12 feet from the screen.


I am trying to decide what fabric to use my dealer says I could go with either the Firehawk or Grayhawk?


Any advice on which way to go or other alternatives to be considered?


----------



## ~JC~

I am about to assemble and install my 110" diag Firehawk. I have heard that these can be quite tricky to hang, although in searching this thread, noone seems to have asked this question. Are there specific tips, or is it simply not as hard to do as I am imagining? Thanks in advance.


----------



## SimpleTheater

I'm between a Screen Research 110" wide 16:9 and a Stewart Studio Tek 130 w/Micro Perf. Does anyone know the retail pricing for the StudioTek in the size I'm looking for?


At this point, I think price is the only factor I'm looking at between the two screens, but if someone has opinions as to the firehawk or other offerings please chime in. I'm planning on using the Optoma H81, which is not released yet.


--SimpleTheater


----------



## raoul

ScreenResearch is 0.9 gain. Stewart StudioTek 1.3 gain. The StudioTek will appear brighter. The StudioTek w/ MicroPerf will require equalization, the ScreenResearch will not.


----------



## SimpleTheater




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *raoul* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> ScreenResearch is 0.9 gain. Stewart StudioTek 1.3 gain. The StudioTek will appear brighter. The StudioTek w/ MicroPerf will require equalization, the ScreenResearch will not.



Yes, I'm familiar with that information. The nice thing about Stewart is they can microperf any of their screens, so if I want a neutral screen I can go that route.


THX requires equalization, but I know HAA recommends rolling of the high frequencies, and some say do NOT use the Stewart equalizer because you actually want the roll off (obviously an area of debate, since THX requires the EQ for certification).


So, back to my first question - anyone know pricing for Stewart? I don't want discount pricing because I know that's not allowed, MSRP is fine.


Thanks,

SimpleTheater


----------



## giomania




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *SimpleTheater* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Yes, I'm familiar with that information. The nice thing about Stewart is they can microperf any of their screens, so if I want a neutral screen I can go that route.
> 
> 
> THX requires equalization, but I know HAA recommends rolling of the high frequencies, and some say do NOT use the Stewart equalizer because you actually want the roll off (obviously an area of debate, since THX requires the EQ for certification).
> 
> 
> So, back to my first question - anyone know pricing for Stewart? I don't want discount pricing because I know that's not allowed, MSRP is fine.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> SimpleTheater



If memory serves, a 110" Luxus Deluxe ScreenWall fixed screen (not a motorized drop screen) is around $2,400 MSRP.


----------



## SimpleTheater




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *giomania* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> If memory serves, a 110" Luxus Deluxe ScreenWall fixed screen (not a motorized drop screen) is around $2,400 MSRP.



Thanks, but I doubt that's w/micro perf or Screen Research would be out of business.


I'm getting 110" wide 16:9 quotes on SR for around $5k. If Stewart really is 1/2 the price, I'll go with them immediately.


--SimpleTheater


----------



## giomania




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *SimpleTheater* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Thanks, but I doubt that's w/micro perf or Screen Research would be out of business.
> 
> 
> I'm getting 110" wide 16:9 quotes on SR for around $5k. If Stewart really is 1/2 the price, I'll go with them immediately.
> 
> 
> --SimpleTheater



Sorry, I forgot the key ingredient in the above formula, which is the screen material: StudioTek 130 without perforation.


----------



## drober30

Although not a newbie in many areas when I clicked over into the projector/screen forums I am in the deep end treading water!


I have decided on the IN76 for my projector.


It will be ceiling mounted between 10' -11' feet away from the screen. I think this is the recommended throw distance for this projector.


My viewing distance is 10' feet. I would like a 92" screen


It will be in my basement where light can be controlled but I would like my recessed lighting on in areas as people gather around the bar and I can have sports on the screen.


After reading this thread I think the FireHawk G2 might be the screen for such an area but I hope you can't see the screen through the source like one person pointed out.


Also, it was mentioned with the studio tek? (I think) that when the person stood up the screen got brighter? I would prefer consistency from center to left and right. My off center viewing is small. In other words I have a sectional that does not extend to far past center. However, off center viewing would be great for people standing by the bar or hanging out around the room.


Please recommend a screen for this application.


Thanks!


----------



## m Robinson

What size image are you specifying? Where is the bar lighting in relationship to the screen, and can all the other zones be extinguished? Firehawk is definitely a candidate but so could Grayhawk RS, but that would be tougher to light. The Grayhawk is a bit better at disappering. The use of Studiotek would be unlikely to succeed in conjunction with the bar lighting.


The idea of the gain changing a lot when a viewer stands, would be a phenomenon of a really short throw setup, with a lot of vertical shift, and sounds like a common scenario which applies to retro-reflective fabrics a bit more than angular reflective fabrics.


My preference is in general to favor the longer throw option within your room constraints, as this will normalize various angles, reducing hot spot artifacts and widening the available viewing cone for all 2nd choice seating locations in the room.


Thanks for considering Stewart Filmscreen!


----------



## vhuang

I'm planning on getting a new Luxus Deluxe screen for my theatre.


Source is a Mitsubishi HC3 (1300 lumens) ceiling mounted 13' from the front wall.


I'm sitting almost directly under the projector.


The room is 16 ft wide and 18 ft front to back, 8ft ceilings.


Some ambient light from a hallway during the day. I can make it pitch black if I close the door.


I'd like a 1.78:1 format screen but don't know what material is best suited for my configuration. Also what size would work best? I'm thinking 100", is 110" too big?


Thanks,

Vernon


----------



## Mitch P.

For what it's worth, I'm sitting 14'5" away with a 123" Firehawk and couldn't be happier! I'm using an Infocus IN76 and it is perfectly suited to the Firehawk's 1.25 gain material. Still best to watch during the evening hours and control the light though - but that's obvious. G'luck!


----------



## Brad/Viper-Fan

Does anyone know how well a Stewart Videomatte 200 MicroPerf screen would work with the Ruby? I'm interested in a higher gain THX screen.

Pro's/Con's?


----------



## m Robinson

I've got a Ruby in house right now. There is no moire at any size. I plan to test the lumen output over the range of the zoom lens, this week and see what sort of impact various throw distances will have. Ultramatte 200 is an excellent screen. I would recommend generally that longer throws work better with it, for minimization of hot-spot problems. One must also control ambient lighting to a higher degree in comparison with Firehawk.


----------



## Brad/Viper-Fan

Ultramatte 200 is an excellent screen. I would recommend generally that longer throws work better with it, for minimization of hot-spot problems. One must also control ambient lighting to a higher degree in comparison with Firehawk.[/quote]


Mark,


I was refering to the Videomatte 200 but since you mentioned it, what is the difference between the Videomatte 200 and the Ultramatte 200?


Also since the viewing cone is close to the Firehawk G2 (26deg. vs 24deg.) wouldn't these white screens reject ambient light much better than a Studiotek 130? I know gray rejects better than white but doesn't the viewing cone also help this?


I would like not to have a gray screen if possible since I like colors better on a white screen. But my room does have light colored walls.


----------



## m Robinson

The UM-200 and Videomatte are pretty similar in gain, but UM-200 is available in larger sizes. Videomatte, years ago had a gain factor of 2.2 but we lowered the gain as projectors improved.


As far as relative performance in ambient light, the higher gain fabrics will get you brighter rendition at the top of the dynamic range, so yes to a degree, the dark areas of image content are relatively darker. The difference is no where near the difference when a neutral density gray screen is used.


Remember that in ambient light, the cumulative light falling on the screen surface, from openings, or from cross reflected projection light, is the color black as you will see it, for all intents and purposes. Look at the screen as the projector warms up or in a fade to black, that is your system "black".


In high ambient light it will be a white color or muted non reflective white. Then we add collimated projected light above that level, to whatever level the output of the projector allows, of course multiplied by the relative gain factor. With a bright projector, you can get some dynamic range from "black"(actually dull white) to white, (brilliantly illuminated screen surface). But with a gray screen you get way blacker from the bottom of the range, and if the material is engineered to respond to collimated projected light, and is less responsive to light coming from less perpendicular angles, then black is much deeper.


The trade off is at the top of the dynamic range. It is possible to overhaul the gray tint of a screen with projected light power and get a calibrated white field. People argue this to death. It is done. A sample pasted on a whiter wall is not indicative of the performance of the screen, since cross reflection from the base material is still washing everything out. And granted you must have a more powerful projector to light a Grayhawk RS, than what is needed for a given foot Lambert performace level with a white screen. But if proper set-up is followed, an accurate picture is obtainable with either.


Firehawk is pretty good at rendering a believable white and providing blacks where other fabrics just cannot. It not as textbook white field accurate, but it makes projectors with reduced black level performance look much better, and salvages many rooms which otherwise wash out to unacceptable degrees. Images are believable and that is why people create Home Theatres.


Naturally it would be wonderful if all viewing environments were black floored, had black ceilings and walls, and so forth. It would also be nice if digital engines could acutally render a black field where IRE=0 was pitch black, few to none can. Gray screens help with both of these issues.


----------



## Brad/Viper-Fan

Thanks Mark,


Hows your testing of the Ruby coming along?


----------



## bpowers

I've decided to buy a Ruby projector, mainly because of the RBE on DLP. My room dimensions are 21L x17Wx9H and is dedicated to home theater. I will be sitting 15-18 feet from the screen. I can control the light in the room and make it so I can't see my hand in front of my face, though I will not always view in complete darkness. I'm considering a Stewart Firehawk G2 deluxe screen wall, but I can't decide on the screen size. I've narrowed it down to 123" or 135" 16:9. Given the Ruby projector and given the room dimensions, which size should I go with? The projector will be ceiling mounted.




Bruce


----------



## TomsHT




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bpowers* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I've decided to buy a Ruby projector, mainly because of the RBE on DLP. My room dimensions are 21L x17Wx9H and is dedicated to home theater. I will be sitting 15-18 feet from the screen. I can control the light in the room and make it so I can't see my hand in front of my face, though I will not always view in complete darkness. I'm considering a Stewart Firehawk G2 deluxe screen wall, but I can't decide on the screen size. I've narrowed it down to 123" or 135" 16:9. Given the Ruby projector and given the room dimensions, which size should I go with? The projector will be ceiling mounted.
> 
> 
> 
> Bruce



Are you having risers built? I would not suggest any higher then the 123, 110 might even be more prefereable. Besides the feeling of being to close to a screen that could be to large you also want to consider by the screen size how high off the floor the screen will be mounted. The larger the screen the lower the front of the screen will be towards the floor making it harder for say a second row to see the whole screen.


----------



## bpowers

Thanks for the reply.


I will not add risers, the room will have the appearance of a comfy family room as opposed to a theater (beanbags, couch, etc). How high off the floor the screen is mounted is important in that I want my center channel to be correctly positioned with the two main speakers which will be relatively tall( Vienna Acoustics Strauss). What is minimum/optimal distance from the ceiling to the top the screen?


----------



## dannynoonan

Hey Mark (or anyone else).


I am setting up a new system in my basement.


Projector will be an Epson Pro 800 with a 92" diagonal 16:9 motorized Firehawk.


The situation I am concerned with is the heighth of the screen.


My ceiling will be just over 7'.


However I was wondering about recessing the screen into the ceiling. If I recess it about 6-8 inches, I will have actual viewing screen 6-8 inches from the ceiling and about 28 inches from the floor.


The ceiling now is constructed of 12" joists, so there is plenty of room above to mount.


This will give me room for my built in LCR below the screen.


Is this doable, or am I missing something?


----------



## m Robinson

You are not "locked in" to any specific amount of black-drop, when you order a Stewart Screen, so adding (or subtracting) a bit of drop to suit your situation, is as easy as asking your dealer.


----------



## bpowers

Hi Mark,


I purchased a Studiotek 123" and a Ruby projector today. If I've read everything in this forum correctly, in a light controlled room, the Studiotek screen is a "better" option, correct? My room dimensions are printed above.


My other choice was a Firehawk G2, but I was worried about colors not beng as saturated as they should with a grey screen. It seems that the high contrast ratio of the Ruby should produce much more satisfying black levels than did past projectors. This should create less of a need for a darker Grey screen in a light controlled room(?)


Also, given the many comments concerning the drop off of Ansi Lumens with a $1,000 400W Zenon bulb, I was concerned that not having a bright enough screen would be problematic after 400hrs with the Ruby and I wouldn't see as much picture detail in shadows.


Lastly, I have not seen the Ruby paired with a Firehawk, but I did see the Ruby with a Studiotek. The room was light controlled, but I though the picture was fine even with the light's in the room dimmed as opposed to pitch black.


Any additional opinions Mark? This is my first projector system and I want to be sure I'm heading in the right direction


----------



## TheLion

Can anyone here give me some insights about how the different Stewart screen materials compare regarding sharpness and color punch. I will go with a Stewart Screenwall Deluxe and was thinking about Studiotek 130 vs. Ultramatte 150. Projector: The upcoming 1080p Optoma H81. 10 feet wide. Room completely light controlled with black walls/ceiling. I appreciate Studioteks color accuracy and "sharpness"/well defined details above all BUT I was asking myself how e.g. the Ultramatte 150 would compare - other than the slightly higher gain - when it comes specifically to "sharpness" and color fidelity/color punch? I would take more vibrant colors over absolute accuracy!


Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks.


----------



## Brad/Viper-Fan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bpowers* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Hi Mark,
> 
> 
> I purchased a Studiotek 123" and a Ruby projector today. If I've read everything in this forum correctly, in a light controlled room, the Studiotek screen is a "better" option, correct? My room dimensions are printed above.
> 
> 
> My other choice was a Firehawk G2, but I was worried about colors not beng as saturated as they should with a grey screen. It seems that the high contrast ratio of the Ruby should produce much more satisfying black levels than did past projectors. This should create less of a need for a darker Grey screen in a light controlled room(?)
> 
> 
> Also, given the many comments concerning the drop off of Ansi Lumens with a $1,000 400W Zenon bulb, I was concerned that not having a bright enough screen would be problematic after 400hrs with the Ruby and I wouldn't see as much picture detail in shadows.
> 
> 
> Lastly, I have not seen the Ruby paired with a Firehawk, but I did see the Ruby with a Studiotek. The room was light controlled, but I though the picture was fine even with the light's in the room dimmed as opposed to pitch black.
> 
> 
> Any additional opinions Mark? This is my first projector system and I want to be sure I'm heading in the right direction




Most reviews I've read recommend 100" or less for best image with the least noticeable artifacts. I've seen the Ruby on a 110" Studiotech in a light controlled room and found the brightness to be satisfactory but as the lamp ages it might start looking dim. IMHO 123" is to big and will produce a dim image on a 1.3 gain Studiotech.


----------



## bpowers




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Brad/Viper-Fan* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Most reviews I've read recommend 100" or less for best image with the least noticeable artifacts. I've seen the Ruby on a 110" Studiotech in a light controlled room and found the brightness to be satisfactory but as the lamp ages it might start looking dim. IMHO 123" is to big and will produce a dim image on a 1.3 gain Studiotech.



Do you think the ultramatte is a better choice or is there another high quality, positive gain screen that supports a ceiling mounted Ruby? I think the High Power does not like ceiling mounted projectors.


I had the vendor put the screen and ruby order on hold until I figure out which screen is best.


----------



## Brad/Viper-Fan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bpowers* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Do you think the ultramatte is a better choice or is there another high quality, positive gain screen that supports a ceiling mounted Ruby? I think the High Power does not like ceiling mounted projectors.
> 
> 
> I had the vendor put the screen and ruby order on hold until I figure out which screen is best.




If you can't lower the projector enough to make the High Power work (assuming you don't mind the narrow viewing cone) maybe the Ultramatte 200 would be best for that size screen. Some like the Silver Star, I don't.

Maybe you should consider a 3 chip DLP like the Infocus 333 or 777 (higher light output) for such a large screen.

I would reduce the size of the screen for the Ruby, you choose.


----------



## Randito3

Hi,


I was going to buy the Da-Lite screen for the price, but have changed my mind and want a Stewart Filmscreen. I need some advice though. Here is my setup, my room final dimensions are 13' w x 18.6' L. I want a large screen, thinking of going for a 115" to 120" diagonal 16x9 screen. My projector is the Panasonic AE900u. My seating distance will be 12' from the screen for the first row and about 16' for the second row with a 10" riser. I plan on putting my PJ on the back wall with it just about even with the top of the screen so that would put the lens close to the 16.5-17' throw spot. My room will be light controlled, building it right now!


Most of the veiwing will be done in total darkness, but on occasion I will have a single can light that will be on just above the seating area (get togethers). What screen do you guys think will work best with this setup the Studiotek 130 or the Firehawk? Also, What about the PJ picture at that distance with a 115" or 120" diagonal screen? I want it to be bright and project a great image. One of my main reasons for going for the larger screen is because I have over 600 DVD's and half are 1.78/1.85 and the other half are 2.35/2.40 size. YES, I have gone through each one and checked. When I show the the 2.35 movies on a smaller screen it will be to small and lose that theater feel for me. Anyway, looking forward to your input.



Randy


----------



## TomsHT




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Randito3* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> 
> I was going to buy the Da-Lite screen for the price, but have changed my mind and want a Stewart Filmscreen. I need some advice though. Here is my setup, my room final dimensions are 13' w x 18.6' L. I want a large screen, thinking of going for a 115" to 120" diagonal 16x9 screen. My projector is the Panasonic AE900u. My seating distance will be 12' from the screen for the first row and about 16' for the second row with a 10" riser. I plan on putting my PJ on the back wall with it just about even with the top of the screen so that would put the lens close to the 16.5-17' throw spot. My room will be light controlled, building it right now!
> 
> 
> Most of the veiwing will be done in total darkness, but on occasion I will have a single can light that will be on just above the seating area (get togethers). What screen do you guys think will work best with this setup the Studiotek 130 or the Firehawk? Also, What about the PJ picture at that distance with a 115" or 120" diagonal screen? I want it to be bright and project a great image. One of my main reasons for going for the larger screen is because I have over 600 DVD's and half are 1.78/1.85 and the other half are 2.35/2.40 size. YES, I have gone through each one and checked. When I show the the 2.35 movies on a smaller screen it will be to small and lose that theater feel for me. Anyway, looking forward to your input.
> 
> 
> 
> Randy



Hi Randy, the Firehawk is an awesome screen but expensive. I have a Firehawk and its great. My room is 14x20 with a 110" screen.


You didnt mention how high your ceiling is. One of the things you should calculate into your screen size is from the top to the bottom of the screen. You may find out that with say a 120" that it might stretch to close to your floor depending on how high your mounting it. Having it to low to the floor might make it troublesome for your second row to view the bottom of the screen.


----------



## Cam Man

Randy,

I recently went down the same road...testing ST 130 with a Panny 900. Distances are very similar; throw 16', viewing 14'. I explored several screen sizes examining luminance, luminance uniformity, and resolution. It is a CH 2.35 system. Here is what I found.


With a CH system you have 20% more brightness. The numbers following are with a CH system. At that throw distance you will hit about 15 FL at center on low lamp. You will be able to go to about a 100" wide screen before going below 12 FL in low lamp. You might be able to hit 12 FL on high lamp on a 110" screen. ST 130 looks really good because of that little bit of gain...but at the throw distance, and sitting distance you are planning, with a screen wider than about 90" you will have some lack of uniformity. It will not be particularly noticable to the casual eye on a 100 IRE full field, but you can certainly measure it. As I remember, it was down about 30% at the edges on a 115" screen. On dark scenes you may notice you are losing shadow detail near the edges due to this. Is that a deal-breaker? I wouldn't think so, but at least you know what to expect with your Panny. BTW, all the above is a solid screen, not Microperf.


With regards to resolution, the Panny still looked quite good at those sizes with HD-DVD CH 2.35, but not as good as 1080p is going to look.


It seems the only risk you will have is getting the screen too big for the Panny to reach the proper luminance for a large screen in a large room. The ST 130 gain will help you with that. I personally would not choose Firehawk in that room and projector, due to the gray which will eat up too much light. If you're gonna spend a fair amount of money with Stewart, it seems logical to carefully consider giving it the best chance. If you are planning to upgrade to a higher lumen1080 machine down the road, going 110"+ might be worth it. You could limp by for while with a picture that was a little under illuminated.


----------



## f1restarter

Does the Firehawk also come in 119" or only 123"? I will be needing a 119" screen for my IF-7205.


----------



## TomsHT

There was a real good deal in the for sale section here yesterday on a firehawk 100"


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *f1restarter* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Does the Firehawk also come in 119" or only 123"? I will be needing a 119" screen for my IF-7205.



Any size you want, up to a certain limit before it starts having seams.


----------



## f1restarter

Thanks for the info, nathan. Yeah i think the Firehawk would be the best option for my 7205 although i have now around 1300 hours on the lamp but it's still plenty bright even in the low lamp mode and my white living room. I think the screen that comes closest to the FH is the Da-Lite HCCV, IMO, but it cannot produce the level of detail in dark scenes like the FH nor the low blacks like it. For the price you still cant beat the HCCV, though.


----------



## Magma

Room: 17' w x 20' deep

Ceiling: 9'

Projector: Optoma H81

Screen: Stewart Horizontal Electriscreen Electrimask (110 Diag) - G2

Viewing Distance: 15' back

Viewing Height (AFF): 45

Projector Throw: 14'-6

Project Offset Calc: Alpha = 27% translates into 14


- What is an "acceptable" viewing pitch other than horizontal -- 3-5 degrees?

- Any real pitfalls of ordering excessive blackdrop >14"

- Like clean borders but is horizontal masking a ferrari?


----------



## bolly

I am building and want to install my media room myself. All I am sure of is that I want a 123" firehawk motorised perforated screen. 16:9. My room is 15ft x 18ft and have a large french door directly oppose the screen with a tall window to the left. Firehawk because I have read a lot about it on your forum.


Viewing position I anticipate will be about 12ft from screen. I am leaning towards a 3chip projector - Runco, Infocus or Sim2. I am torn between the cost of the 3chip and the picture quality. For a room of this size do I really need a 3chip DLP to get fantastic picture? Which ones would you recommend?

bolly


----------



## millerwill

bolly: Others more knowledgeable than I can give you more detainled advice, but there are at least 2 things that I can mention. First, you will need a very BRIGHT pj, e.g., like the Mits wd-2000, or one of the 3-chip dlps', like the SIM C3X, or Inf 777. And second, you should be sure that the distance from the lens of the pj to the screen is at least 1.6 X SW (SW = screen width), to prevent hot-spotting with the Firehawk. You should have a great pic!


----------



## bolly

Thanks for the info millerwill. Is there a projector that is cheaper and would do a good job at giving very good picture?



I was hoping more people will contribute to my question.


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bolly* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Thanks for the info millerwill. Is there a projector that is cheaper and would do a good job at giving very good picture?
> 
> 
> 
> I was hoping more people will contribute to my question.



I think the best bet, for the money, may be the Mits wd-2000; read about it over in the projector forum.


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bolly* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I was hoping more people will contribute to my question.



You'll likely find out much more by asking about this in the projectors section of the forum.


----------



## jeff65

I need Help. I am attaching a Firehawk screen that I recently purchased to an existing frame I already have. Which side of the screen should I project on, the smooth side or the rougher side? Both sides are very similar in color if not identical.


Thanks


----------



## spkrgeek

I'm planning to upgrade to the Ruby (VPL-VW100) and wanted to upgrade to a Luxus Deluxe at the same time. My setup is perhaps a little strange in that I need to mount the projector on a pedestal that is located directly behind the main viewing location approximately 1 foot above the viewers head and directly in line with the center of screen. With this setup, the viewing angle and projection angle almost coincide (I only sit 10.5 ft away from a 100" screen.)


My question is: what Stewart screen material should I get for my setup if I want to maximize black level and brightness, without hotspoting problems? I've demoed the projector on FireHawk and that seems like a natural choice, but from what I read about the FireHawk material my setup would not work due to the potential for hotspoting.


Could someone verify that FireHawk will not work and perhaps recommend something else from Stewart?


----------



## m Robinson

For Jeff65, rough side is the viewing side. This should be marked with a blue sticker by the way, perhaps it's deeper in the roll, if you have not unrolled the entire fabric. Rule of thumb also is that the image side is rolled toward the interior of the roll, so should face up, if the roll is prone on a horizontal surface and the material coming off the roll is against the surface.


Spkrgeek, What is your room like in terms of light control? If the walls/ceiling/follor are darkened and all ambient light sources are controlled, then Studiotek 130 would offer less hotspotting, and more punch. But the Firehawk is not really as bad with hotspotting as some would describe, and works really well when cross reflected or ambient light is less controlled.


regards,


----------



## spkrgeek




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Spkrgeek, What is your room like in terms of light control? If the walls/ceiling/follor are darkened and all ambient light sources are controlled, then Studiotek 130 would offer less hotspotting, and more punch. But the Firehawk is not really as bad with hotspotting as some would describe, and works really well when cross reflected or ambient light is less controlled.



Hi Mark, Thanks for the info. My room is fairly dark in color (ceiling excepted) and well light controlled. Based on this, it seems like the Studiotek 130 is my best bet.


Another question: I currently own a pair of Stewart T Stand legs that I've been using with a screen from another manufacturer. When I order my new Luxus Deluxe do I need to have my dealer order the screen for T Stand mounting? I noticed that the Luxus installation manual had two different mounting options for T-Stands: a "standard" mounting and a "wrap-around" mounting. Do I have an option of how the T-Stands would be attached to the Luxus Deluxe or are they only mounted in the "standard" way. I'd prefer the "wrap-around" mounting where the legs go behind the screen, but wasn't sure if this was available with all screen types. Thanks again.


----------



## Mike N Ike

I know Stewart's recommendation is that the PJ be ceiling mounted for the Firehawk. But with my cathedral ceilings this will never happen. Has anyone used the Firehawk with a table mount and if so what did you think?



Thanks,

Mike


----------



## m Robinson

Can I call you Geek for short?







Depending on the age of the stands, they may have been made for a 1.5" square tube frame which mounted different (outboard of the frame), than the present Deluxe frame,(behind the frame), but no big deal.


Where the upright meets the base, you can rotate the upright 90 degrees, re-drill with a 5/16" bit, and re-install the uprights so that the fastener through-holes are on the correct axis to address the rear of the frame. Should work, will work.


----------



## m Robinson

Many of the Stewart range of products are angular reflective to a degree. This means that the light reflecting off the surface of the screen will be centered in distribution, on an angle complementary to the incident angle. But the fabrics do have pretty wide angle performance per increment of gain. So the short answer is that if the projector is really low, some light will end up headed toward a position higher than a seated viewer might occupy, but not to excess. What we recommend is that the projector be pulled back behind the viewer if possible, and if it is close to equal to head height it will work well.


A retro-reflective screen would direct the light more back toward the elevation of the source, so may be a way to go for you. Da-lite and Kikuchi make pretty good examples of this type of fabric.


We do have many very happy customers with low mounted projectors, and in the CRT days, it was pretty much 50/50 due to the bulk of many projectors.


----------



## WOLF35

Mark,

do you have any update on your Ruby? I have purchased a ruby for my 14x21x9 light controlled room. There was a screw up with my screen order and after reading this thread I am thankful I do not have the screen yet. I am now leaning toward a 123" Studiotech for the room or would the Ultramatte 200 be a better fit. I will be mounting the Ruby from the ceiling and will have a riser for the second row. First row will be 12-13' from the screen. I have seen a Ruby with the Firehawk G2 in a light controlled room and it seemed dim but it could have been the set up. Thanks for all the great information!


Gerry


----------



## m Robinson

She has returned to Sony. Wolf, the 123" diagonal is certainly at the big end for the calibrated light output of the Ruby. The Ruby does put out more light at shorter throws, as comprehensively measured by Tryg and Darin,(confirmed subjectively by me) so a higher gain screen could give you visible center-to-edge brightness issues, or hot-spotting at the short end of the zoom.


Ultramatte 150 would be a good choice, if you are bound and determined to have a screen that large. The hot-spotting is less than Firehawk even though the gain is higher, and the image will have more punch. The caveat is that you really need to keep the lights off, and comprehensive light damping within the room is highly beneficial as you'll get minimal perceived contrast help from the screen. This combination should yeild a minimum of 16 foot lamberts-plus in your room.


Regards,


----------



## Brian P. Hearon

What screens sizes are available for the CineCurve 2.35? I cannot find this info anywhere on the Stewart website.


----------



## m Robinson

All curved units are made to order, so any size is possible. We like to know the projector, throw distance, type of anamorphic lens, desired image size, then we'll make what you need. The entire range of front projection fabrics can be fitted. There are a lot of options. To date in home cinema, we've made units as wide as 20 feet and as small as 7 feet wide. Lots of folks are ordering between 9-15 foot wide units.


----------



## belvebak

Mark,


How would a Firehawk screen perform with a short-throw projector like the Optoma HD 7100. I am considering this projector for my media room that has pretty good light control. The walls and carpet are a light brown in color. The furthest I can place the projector for a 92 inch screen is 10.8 ft. and the viewing distance would be 12 feet. I am worried about hot-spotting at this relatively short throw distance.


Thanks in advance.


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *belvebak* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Mark,
> 
> 
> How would a Firehawk screen perform with a short-throw projector like the Optoma HD 7100. I am considering this projector for my media room that has pretty good light control. The walls and carpet are a light brown in color. The furthest I can place the projector for a 92 inch screen is 10.8 ft. and the viewing distance would be 12 feet. I am worried about hot-spotting at this relatively short throw distance.
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance.



I'm not Mark, and he will be the authority, but I do think the short throw lens of the 7100 makes the FH not a good choice for a screen in this case.


----------



## belvebak




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *millerwill* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I'm not Mark, and he will be the authority, but I do think the short throw lens of the 7100 makes the FH not a good choice for a screen in this case.



Thanks for the response. Any suggestion on a good screen for this projector?


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *belvebak* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Thanks for the response. Any suggestion on a good screen for this projector?



The short throw should make it very easy to mount the pj on a table or shelf just about or above eye level, and not far behind your heads. This would be ideal for a retro-reflective screen like the Dalite High Power or Optoma GrayWolf. But I'm sure there are others, and it will also depend on the ambient light situation for your room.


----------



## jeffinator

Mark (and anyone else who wants to chime in),


I have a BenQ PE7700 (that finally works), and I'm going to take the plunge and invest in a Real Screen. I have narrowed my choices down to these two fine products. Although I have looked at and tested the samples sent to me by Stewart, I'm having some difficulty visualizing how the screens will look full size.


I really like the black levels the Firehawk gives me, but the recommendations in this thread make me think the Firehawk is only for people who have ambient light leakage.


Let me say a little about my room: it is about 16' x 18'. I'm looking to get a screen either 106" or 110" diagonally, 16:9. My projector will have to be 13' to 14' back from the screen to hit those sizes. The main seating area is about 15' back, behind the projector--although there are sometimes people slightly in front and to the side of the projector as well. I have almost complete light control, with the occasional small slivers of light leaking through window edges. I mostly watch at night, however, so light pollution isn't a problem.


What is the best placement of my projector for these screens, taking into consideration projector zoom? Should I be toward the low end of magnification? Are there any special considerations with some of the viewing area being behind the projector?


Is the Firehawk designed ONLY to be used in situations where there's ambient light?


The wall where my screen will be is white. Should I consider painting this wall another color, or covering it with black fabric, to remove the white reference?


At this point, I'm leaning toward the Firehawk. Can I go wrong? The spec sheets for the Firehawk and Greyhawk RS are very similar, the main differences being gain and viewing angle. In practice, the pictures they provide are not as similar as their specs would suggest. On the forum, there seem to be more recommendations for the Firehawk than the Greyhawk. What's the target customer for each?


Thanks in advance.


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jeffinator* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Is the Firehawk designed ONLY to be used in situations where there's ambient light?



No. It can work great in a light controlled room. Note that "light controlled" doesn't just mean light not leaking in. It also means light spilling from the projected image and bouncing off white walls (etc) and back onto the screen, washing out the image.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jeffinator* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> The wall where my screen will be is white. Should I consider painting this wall another color, or covering it with black fabric, to remove the white reference?



A darker color would be good, though it's not so much about removing the "white reference" as about reducing the amount of stray light in the room to have a truly "light controlled" room.


--


I've had both a real Firehawk (older formulation), and a screen similar to the Grayhawk, and I preferred the Firehawk. But if you cannot ceiling mount the projector, or have critical viewers sitting off to the sides, or have a throw of less than 2 screen widths, the Firehawk is not ideal. Otherwise, especially with the new formulation, I cannot think of why you would not want the Firehawk. (Note that I used a Firehawk with less than the recommended throw and still liked it better than anything else I had seen.)


--


In fact, as soon as I find a used retractible Firehawk 16x9 at 92inch diag, I'm going to pick one up! I had to give up my fixed-wall Firehawk when I moved into a home without space for an "on the wall" screen -- and couldn't get the scratch together to buy a new retractible Firehawk.


----------



## Vincent Kennedy

I have a light controlled Home Theater and I am about to purchase a screen. I would just like a little feedback on my choice.


The Room: (Size and light control elements)

It is 14x22. The room has an 8' ceiling. There are only 2 small basement windows which are blacked out and covered. The walls are Hunter Green. The Ceiling and the wall on which the image will be projected are flat black.


Projector:

Infocus IN76 Ceiling mounted. It is 15' From the wall.


Seating:

First Row - 10 Feet back Ground Level

Second Row - 16 Feet back 12" elevated

Third Row - 22 Feet back 24" elevated


Use:

Movies - 25% Lighting - Complete Dark

HDTV - 50% Lighting - Minimal Light - 15-20% illumination

HD Sports - 10% Lighting - Minimal Light - 25-40% illumination

Video Games - 15% Lighting - Minimal Light - 25-40% illumination


Screen Choice:

110" Firehawk. Luxus Deluxe Screenwall


I think I have made the right choice for the room/projector/use. I just wanted a sounding board before I actually set the purchase in motion. Any feedback?


----------



## m Robinson

Late reply, sorry, Jury Duty!

Looks like a solid combination to me!


It is interesting how you have characterized the lighting in your space while viewing different content. My only caution would be, if there is secondary lighting, try to keep it away from the back wall, opposite the screen, and avoid downlights, in the screen end of the room.


Thanks for considering Stewart Filmscreen!


----------



## jeffinator

Mark,


Any additional advice regarding my previous post on top of Nathan's?


----------



## Vincent Kennedy

Mark,

I just reread my message as it was posted and realized it was a little confusing. There was more formatting before I actually posted it. The first percentage is the amount of time I will be using the room for that activity. The second percentage was how much lighting there will be while doing that activity.


Here is my rationale for the lighting percentages:

Basically Dark for movies - Don't you dare move or talk!

A little light for TV so we can get up and use the facilities/get refreshments without changing the light or tripping in the dark - Still no talking.

I added a little more lighting for Video Games and Sporting events, because they are more social and I expect talking and moving around - Besides there has to be adequate light so my "guests" can fully appreciate my taunting!


Now if I can only get my wife to abide by those talking rules!


----------



## m Robinson




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jeffinator* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Mark,
> 
> 
> Any additional advice regarding my previous post on top of Nathan's?



I think Nathan spoke pretty eloquently to the questions, and I like it when Customers offer their expertise, since their challenges and circumstances are more in line with questioners, since their environments are more similar. In other words, thanks Nathan +1 etc.


----------



## richcolorado

Hello, I am building my first home theatre with a front projector. I will be using a Sony Ruby. The room is 14-1/2 wide by 18-1/2 feet wide with 7-1/2 ft high ceiling. My main seating area will be 12 to 13 feet back from the screen, depending upon how far reclined the seats are. I will be using a 100" screen and will have a second row on a riser behind the first row. Due to a post behind the first row, my projector can be mounted no further back than about 11 feet and can be mounted as far forward as is permitted. I will be ceiling mounting the projector. The room is a dedicated theater and will be totally light controlled with all dark surfaces. I have a few screen questions. First of all, should I go with 1.78 or 1.85? I will watch primarily DVD's with some HD from Dish. I am also wondering on how close to mount the proejctor and which screen material to choose. After having read lots of threads on AVS I am considering Studiotek 130 or Firehawk. I am also wondering about the High Power as I have read about it here, although I tend to think Stewart is a good choice for me. Any suggestions or insights would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Rich


----------



## m Robinson

Your setup as described, will have your projector at 1.5:1 throw distance which is good for most screen materials. Use all of the throw distance you have. I would stick with a 1.78:1 screen size and live with small unprojected areas, (less than one inch each), above and below when viewing content in 1.85.


Studiotek would be great in there, since you've planned to control light. Firehawk would also be an option and would get your in-room black level deeper without question, though there is a trade-off in absolute color fidelity. The Ruby would easily light either surface, even at the middle of the lens, and you woudn't need the high-power, which is an excellent screen, but narrower in viewing cone, and more suited to low mounted projectors.


Thank you for considering Stewart Filmscreen and have fun in your theater!


----------



## martinw

Hi All,

I am new to the world of front projection, been lurking here for a while. I am convinced that Stewart is clearly the manufacturer of choice for my screen. (AVS will be vendor). Mount will be a wall mounted electric screen. But *BIG* question. I would really appreciate any advice.


What screen material? What size?


My setup:

Room : 24ft x 36ft, 12ft ceiling ht in center, pitched down to 8ft; light yellow walls. Very low level recessed bar lighting possibly in rear, light control on windows.

Projector: Epson TW600, same as Cinema 800 in North America

Mount: Ceiling mount at any height or distance from screen is no problem

Viewing:Usual combination of movies, TV Sports, and my sons's Xbox 360


I test set up the projector (shot on a painted wall) on a 5ft high floor stand; 22ft from wall, . Image 134"x 75" at a 30"bottom height. Cable HD.


Image is amazing, bright, sharp: exceeds my expectations! Can't wait to see it with a real screen.


Again, appreciate any help.


Thanks,

Martin


----------



## ctviggen

I have been examining the Stewart lines of screens with microperf. I have some questions to which I cannot find the answer. My first question is what happens to the gain with microperf? The light loss is 10.2 percent according to Stewart, but what does that translate to in gain? For instance, the Greyhawk has a gain of 0.92. What would the gain of a microperf Greyhawk be? Also, I am thinking of placing an electronic screen in front of sliding glass doors. I will use blackout curtains around the sliding glass doors, but what is the effect of having light behind a microperf screen? Would this destroy the imaging quality?


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ctviggen* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I have been examining the Stewart lines of screens with microperf. I have some questions to which I cannot find the answer. My first question is what happens to the gain with microperf? The light loss is 10.2 percent according to Stewart, but what does that translate to in gain? For instance, the Greyhawk has a gain of 0.92. What would the gain of a microperf Greyhawk be? Also, I am thinking of placing an electronic screen in front of sliding glass doors. I will use blackout curtains around the sliding glass doors, but what is the effect of having light behind a microperf screen? Would this destroy the imaging quality?



I believe 10% is .1 gain on a 1.0 gain screen. On the grayhawk is would be .09 gain lost giving an effetive gain for the screen of about .83 or so.


Light behind ANY screen is a bad idea, in my opinion.


----------



## ctviggen

Thanks. Yes, we will have blackout curtains (and likely will watch at night), so there should be very little or no light behind the screen. What I am worried about is light that gets around the screen and reflects off the non-blackout portion of the blackout curtains (which will be a light color to placate the spouse; the walls of the room will be dark, though). Unfortunately, that's the room I have and must use. When I was looking at houses to buy, I tried to buy one with an unfinished basement. Sadly, those houses were way out of my price range.


So that probably means that unless I choose my projector and screen size carefully, I might not be able to use the Greyhawk.


----------



## rds

Hi all,

Anyone have the email for the Miami dealers of Stewart screens?

Thanks!

Ruben


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ctviggen* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Thanks. Yes, we will have blackout curtains (and likely will watch at night), so there should be very little or no light behind the screen. What I am worried about is light that gets around the screen and reflects off the non-blackout portion of the blackout curtains (which will be a light color to placate the spouse; the walls of the room will be dark, though). Unfortunately, that's the room I have and must use. When I was looking at houses to buy, I tried to buy one with an unfinished basement. Sadly, those houses were way out of my price range.
> 
> 
> So that probably means that unless I choose my projector and screen size carefully, I might not be able to use the Greyhawk.



Firehawk has better ambient light rejection, so if there is some possible light spill from around the curtains, I'd say go for that.


(I'm not familiar via experience with microperf screen tradeoffs, so I'll refrain from trying to answer that part of your question in more depth. I might consider a microperf in my future, if I was convined it was sonically invisible, since I'd prefer to use a single Magnepan MMG for a center speaker instead of their good but less well-blending MMG-C speaker. But that's a different topic.)


----------



## nowandthen




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rds* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Anyone have the email for the Miami dealers of Stewart screens?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Ruben



AV Science (this forum) is a retailer for Stewart Screens. Support your "local" AVS.


----------



## subversive

I just put up my new 82" Luxus Deluxe FireHawk. It went up nice and easy and it gives a fantastic picture, however it has some wrinkles on the bottom right edge (above the Stewart logo). It's not a huge deal, however they are visible at times when displaying lighter images. Is this sort of thing common with Stewart fixed frames?


thanks


----------



## AV Man

Hello Everyone,


I would really appreciate some help. I recently picked up a Sharp XVZ12000 and am very confused about the best screen for this projector. In speaking with local retailers, I am getting conflicting information about screen options.


So you are aware, I will be using it in a dedicated space in my basement, which will give me the ability to control the lighting. I will be seated about 14 feet and am also curious about the most appropriate screen size for this viewing distance.


Thanks in advance for any and all advice!


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *subversive* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> ...it has some wrinkles on the bottom right edge (above the Stewart logo). It's not a huge deal, however they are visible at times when displaying lighter images. Is this sort of thing common with Stewart fixed frames?



If the tension doesn't flatten out the wrinkles, you may want to consider returning it to your dealer. Sounds like there may have been a problem with how it was packed or installed.


----------



## sage

Can anyone comment on the spectral response of the StudioTek 130 when used with a UHP bulb projector? I have a Pearl on order. It looks like the StudioTek is somewhat minus green where I'd expect the UHP bulb to have a green peak; I think the way I read that is that the StudioTek's gain for green is somewhat less. The net should be less tweaking in order to acheive a correct grayscale.


Given a very dark / pitch black room, will a 90" wide 16x9 be too large for this projector (assuming short throw, d65 calibrated)? My back of the envelope calculates give me a range of about 12 to 24 ft./lamberts depending on bulb life.


----------



## millerwill

12-24 ftL sounds ideal for a very dark room.


----------



## sage

Here's my math if someone wantso to check it or my assumptions:


* 600 lumens for post d65 calibration for the Pearl (I'm going to be at about the shortest throw possible)

* 90 inches x 51" = ~32 sq/ft.

* 600 lumens / 32 sq/ft = 18.75 ft lamberts

* 18.75 x 1.3 g for the screen = 24 ft. lamberts (decreasing to about .5 over bulb life)


Is my math good?


----------



## millerwill

You get a passing grade in arithmetic.


----------



## sage




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *millerwill* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> You get a passing grade in arithmetic.



Yay me! :=) Thanks Bill.


If I can make the geometry work, I'll go for a 90", if not, 85".


----------



## AV Man

Any thoughts on my above post? I have the money set aside and am planning to purchase something in the next few weeks. I am torn between the Firehawk, Greyhawk and the Studiotek 130. All three have been recommended to me but I am still not sure which one would be best for my projector and environment.


Thanks.


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Man* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Any thoughts on my above post? I have the money set aside and am planning to purchase something in the next few weeks. I am torn between the Firehawk, Greyhawk and the Studiotek 130. All three have been recommended to me but I am still not sure which one would be best for my projector and environment.
> 
> 
> Thanks.



I strongly recommend viewing each and seeing what you think. If a local dealer doesn't have them set up in their shop, shame on them. However, Stewart will send you nice large samples to play with, if you contact them via their web site. (I call them "large" because what I received was 4 times the size of what DaLite sent me.)


----------



## m Robinson

At a 14 foot viewing distance, in terms of field of view, you can use a pretty large screen, up to a 123" diagonal. I'm not familiar with what the Sharp puts out in lumens when calibrated properly, but I think we could assume at least 550. So at unity gain, 1.0, you would have at least 12.5 foot Lamberts on a 123" diagonal, which is workable if your theater space is very dark, including walls, floor, ceiling etc. If you go to Grayhawk, you would achieve a lower black floor, but you would need to reduce the screen size to something like a 100" diagonal to retain punch.


The Firehawk is chosen by many of our customers, since the gain is higher, and you get some latitude with ambient light control and cross reflection from decor elements. The fabric black level, when the projector is in the dark state, is very impressive. If the projector can be mounted at at least 1.5:1 screen widths away, then the Firehawk is a great choice. It can hot-spot if you mount it closer. We have a new formulation of Firehawk with a 1.1 gain and wider viewing cone, which is aimed at short throw installs and situations where viewers wish to sit really close to 1080p displays.


The Studiotek is a great choice provided your environment is very well damped for cross reflection. The weakness of this fabric is that if light does bounce around off the rear wall, or sidewalls, ceiling etc., contrast ratio goes down quickly. That said, if you do achieve a very dark theater space, the Studiotek is going to give you the most accurate white-field and color space. The Grayhawk also calibrates out really well, but requires roughly 35% more light to attain equivalent brightness, achieved either through projector selection, or a reduction in screen size. Both fabrics have exemplary off-axis viewing cones, but not excessive, so as to create even more cross reflection stimulus.


Viewing the fabrics as an entire screen is the best way to evaluate which one meets your needs most satisfactorily. I would say that we do sell more Firehawk as a rule, with single chip DLP projectors, but the other fabrics also have devoted followings amongst our dealers.


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> We have a new formulation of Firehawk with a 1.1 gain and wider viewing cone, which is aimed at short throw installs and situations where viewers wish to sit really close to 1080p displays.



Mark, this is VERY interesting! (Is this the new screen rumored to be specially designed with the Pearl pj in mind?) Question: does it still require (for best results) a ceiling mount, or can it be mounted near the screen center (vertically)? I guess I'm asking if it is still primarily 'angular reflective'.


----------



## m Robinson

The idea that an angular reflective screen must be used with a ceiling mounted projector, is nominally true but exaggerated a bit. The new Firehawk is formulated to widen the viewing cone, which further assists in mounting flexibility.


The angular reflective screen types generally do reflect light in an angle complementary to the incident angle but there is also quite a bit of diffusion, generally spreading light as well. We're not talking about an array of mirrors. We're talking about a diffusor with some angular elements in it, which pull away some of the energy that would have gone way off axis, and re-directs that energy toward the previously mentioned complementary angle.


Throw distance influences the behavior of angular reflective or retro-reflective fabrics. The shorter the throw, the more care toward vertical placement must be excercised. As the projector becomes more distant from the screen surface, the standard deviation of all incident angles of light reaching the screen, tightens up. This collimating effect, improves center-to-edge, brightness uniformity.


Projector designers have identified a single lens option per platform as a significant avenue to thier ability to offer high performance at desirable price points. As has been noted here and elsewhere, the lenses do not offer uniform light transmission at every throw option. So we made a sucessful effort to produce a contrast enhanced product, which would provide fewer artifacts when used at shorter throw distances.


I still prefer high mounted projectors when there is an offset, for our range of fabrics generally. But I wouldn't say a lower mount wouldn't suceed, particularly if the throw distance was over 1.6:1.


----------



## AV Man

Thanks Nathan and Mark, I really appreciate the responses. Mark, thanks for such detail, I found your response very educational and informative. Nathan, great idea on the samples. I will be ordering some shortly, thanks.


Mark, If you don't mind, I was hoping you might be able to answer a few additional questions.


I measured my mounting location and based on my measurements the front of the lens will be about 15 feet from the screen, which seems to put me well past the 1.5:1 ratio you mention above for either screen size. As a result, I believe the regular Firehawk (1.25 gain) would be an option without running the risk of hot spotting.


I have seen the Firehawk (I believe the 1.25 gain model) in some local retailers; however, I notice that it appears to have a bit of reflectivity or sparkle in the light areas of the image. Maybe I am being over critical as I know the Firehawk is extremely popular and well regarded but I do find it a bit distracting. Does this sound accurate or could it be something else going on at the retailer?


If the above is accurate, would I encounter a similar experience with the Greyhawk or Studiotek 130? Unfortunately, I haven't found either on display in my local market (West of Philadelphia). I mention this because I am most interested in the best possible picture and was hoping you could recommend one of the three screens as the "best" for my circumstances. To help with your recommendation, I have provided the specs for the projector below. I hope the specs help but if you need me to provide additional information, please let me know.


Thanks in advance for your assistance.

Regards, Chris


HDTV Compatible 1080i (in Advanced Intelligent Compression), 720p, 480i/p

Aspect Ratio 4:3/16:9

Resolution 1280 x 720

Brightness 900 ANSI Lumens (in High Brightness Mode)

Contrast Ratio 5500:1 (in High Contrast Mode)

Component Inputs Component/RGB x 2 (5 RCA), Video x 1 (RCA), S-Video x 1, DV-I/HDCP (Component and Digital/Analog RGB, Wired Remote Control x 1 (3.5mm Mini Jack), RS-232C Serial Port x 1 (9-Pin D-Sub), DC 12V Output x 1

Anamorphic DVD Capable Yes

3D Y/C Digital Comb Filter Yes

Optical Lens Shift Yes, 1 Full Screen Height

Film Mode Yes, 24 Hz Progressive Format

Computer RGB Input Signals SXGA, XGA, SVGA, Mac 21"/19" (in Advanced Intelligent Compression), SVGA, VGA, VESA, Mac 16"/13"

Video System NTSC/NTSC4.43/PAL/PAL(60Hz)/PAL-M/PAL-N/SECAM

Lens Type 1:1.35x Zoom Lens

Projection Lamp Type/Life 270W SHP/2000 Hours

RGB Input Type DVI-I/HDCP Connector

Component Input Type RCA Connector

S-Video Type 4-Pin Mini DIN Connector

Composite Video Type RCA Connector

Wired Remote Control Type 3.5 mm Minijack

RS-232C Serial Port 9-Pin D-Sub Connector

Gamma Correction Yes

Color Temperature Adjustment Yes

Detachable AC Cord Yes

Optional Ceiling Bracket AN-CM250

Wireless Remote Control Yes

Optional Digital Decoder Required Yes (for HDTV)

Power Source 100-240V AC, 50/60Hz (Multi-Voltage)

Power Consumption 365W (0.1W in Standby)

Dimensions

(w x h x d) 18 11/16" x 7" x 15 49/50" (475 x 178 x 406mm) (main body only)

18 11/16" x 7" x 19 1/2" (475 x 178 x 496mm) (including terminal cover)

Weight 20.7 lbs. (9.4 kg)


----------



## badgerdms

Hi Mark,


As others have said thanks so much for doing this. I was all set to go and buy the Sony XBR2 next month when Sony introduced the Pearl (supposedly even brighter than the Ruby) for a price that I can't say no to. Anyway my room is completely light controlled, and is painted a fairly dark gray (that really sucks up the lighting). It's about 13' across and 23' wide (with a wider alcove in back). My initial guess was that I was going to use either the 110" or 100" screen and was going to mount the projector about 15' back. For movies, I'd keep the room black, but for sports and TV I would probably leave some lighting on (dimmed side wall sconces). I was thinking Greyhawk, but after reading a bit it sounds like the Studiotek might be more the ticket. Thoughts?


Thanks,


Dave


----------



## millerwill

Are there any specifics of the new G3 version of the Firehawk (that is reported to have a different undercoating to make it finer grained for 1080p pj's)? Is its gain the same as the G2?


----------



## m Robinson

A.V. man, the sparkle phenomenon should not be a problem at all with Studiotek, should be low probability with Grayhawk, and a bit higher probability with Firehawk. The Firehawk SST is formulated with lower gain and a different ratio of active elements in the optical coating, to reduce the sparke phenomenon. This allows viewers to sit closer without seeing the screen surface.


Sparkling can become evident in white content, when small screens are hit with higher output projectors, lighting in the 40 footlambert range. When the surface is illuminated between 10 and 25 foot lamberts, it's not common to get sparklie complaints, and we get very few generally. Sparkly stuff can be seen in any gain screen if you get right up next to the surface. Which people do when they go to showrooms and are holding up samples etcetera. In the world of actual viewing we had some sparkly problems which we addressed for the majority, when we revised fabrics two years ago February with the G-2 range.


Badger,

If you want to use the Studiotek fabric, you will wash out your hard earned contrast, pretty much instantly when the incidental light comes on. The Grayhawk is slightly better equipped to function in the presence of ambient light. Firehawk is the product we offer which can actually pull that off, but you pay for it with reduced off axis performance and reduced uniformity of white field. So go with the Studiotek, but leave the lighting off. You will get re-reflected light in the venue anyway, which may or may not be enough for you in the sports viewing function. But for ambient light viewing, the Firehawk is more suitable.


My family room theatre is pretty much the same size you cited in your post. I'm using a 106" diagonal 16:9 screen. I didn't want to go wider, cause I wanted to leave some room for the speakers, so that they wouldn't be shoe horned into the corners of the room, and they could function away from boudary reflections a bit, which is really beneficial acoustically.


Thanks for considering Stewart Filmscreen!


----------



## m Robinson

I had the browser open a long time and didn't realize you'd posted, after I saw the thread,


Anyway. The G-3 is not a substrate revision, it is an optical coating revision. We've developed the ability to apply a smoother grained surface optical coating, while preserving and slightly increasing the viewing cone.


The SST is a further revision of the optical coating, same substrate, but a different balance of pigmentation to widen the cone, reduce the net size further of the angular reflective elements, so that the coating is not visible until you are close enough to see the pixel grid on a 1080p projector. In doing so, the gain is reduced a bit. The gain is 1.1 and you need to have the horsepower to light it. I would venture to say that it looks best at 100" and smaller with the outputs of the 1080p projectors I've tested with it, which include some favorites here.


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I had the browser open a long time and didn't realize you'd posted, after I saw the thread,
> 
> 
> Anyway. The G-3 is not a substrate revision, it is an optical coating revision. We've developed the ability to apply a smoother grained surface optical coating, while preserving and slightly increasing the viewing cone.
> 
> 
> The SST is a further revision of the optical coating, same substrate, but a different balance of pigmentation to widen the cone, reduce the net size further of the angular reflective elements, so that the coating is not visible until you are close enough to see the pixel grid on a 1080p projector. In doing so, the gain is reduced a bit. The gain is 1.1 and you need to have the horsepower to light it. I would venture to say that it looks best at 100" and smaller with the outputs of the 1080p projectors I've tested with it, which include some favorites here.



Mark, thanks much for all the helpful info you've provided! Is the gain of the G3 still 1.25, or has it changed?


----------



## vdmai

Is the FH SST available in electric Model A available now or for ordering? How long would it typically take to build? (or is it a stock item?)


Thanks.


----------



## Cain

m Robinson, can you help me please???


I have a 8 foot wide Stewart Curved screen.


Will using a StudioTek 1.3 be a problem for me?? IOW will it tend to wash out itself since it is curved slightly ???


----------



## m Robinson

The gain, on axis, for Firehawk G3 is indeed 1.25 nominally. We are shipping either product, an electrically operated screen in the size of your choice has a factory lead time of 9 working days or less. A snap mounted, unmasked would be about 5 working days. Masking equipped, fixed frame orders have long leadtimes, 6-8 weeks depending on feature set. These lead times will get a bit longer pretty quickly, we booked a lot of work this week.


Cain, if we supplied the frame, and the nominal radius is 30 feet or greater, the screen should not cross reflect on to itself. What will happen however is that the curve will help a little bit with ANSI or in room contrast ratio, since the curve attenuates a bit of room exciting, relfected light, by directing it a bit away from the walls.

The Studiotek is an almost Lambertian flat field screen, but the amount of angular reflective, non-specular gain is just enough to avoid straight diffusion all the way out to over 80 degrees, unlike our Snomatte 1.0 and other Lambertian behaving fabrics. Your screen is a great size, what are you using it for, would you complete your question? From what I read here, you need at least 600 calibrated real world lumens to optimize for that screen size, a bit less if your room is well treated for cross reflection. That leaves the field pretty well stocked for your decision.


Over the years we've found very little real world utility in off axis performance that exceeds 60 degrees or even 40 degrees per side, provided the screen is not specular from poorly engineered false gain.


The one exception where extreme off axis peformance would be needed is for rear projection screens with edge matched or edgeblended images.


We have special low gain gray fabrics for front projection edge blending and we use the Snomatte in some applications of that type.


----------



## Cain

Thank you for the reply and information. Don got me this curved screen and the material i have is not your normal stuff. My first projector a HT300HD Sim2 was really dim. I'm probably going to get that new JVC projector 1st Qtr 2007, and I'll be loking for new screen material at that time. I saw it at CEDIA and it looked amazing on a StudioTek 1.30 screen.


I have attached photos of my HT, and my screen. My ceiling is very dark grey and my walls are also medium dark grey.


Here is the info ion my screen:


Screen:


Stewart Filmscreen

Curved Screen (Custom designed)

Platinum Screen Material; 2.5 Gain MicroPerf

(MicroPerf results in a 10.2% loss of actual gain)

The screen is 100" wide and 56 1/4" tall, and is curved 4".


Here is my HT:

http://www.cainslair.com/cainht.htm 


Thanks for any help here.


-- Cain


----------



## yumbus

I'm on the verge of purchasing a Sony Pearl projector (the VPL-VW50) and a firehawk screen - I will likely take delivery in late November (when I finish my basement). I just found out that Stewart is coming out with the SST -- which apparently is specifically made for the Sony Pearl.


Should I be telling my retailer to expressly order the SST? What makes it unique to the Pearl?


Also, I'm in the process of finishing a basement media room with the following measurements 20'x14'x9.' There will be no windows in the room. Thoughts on what color I should paint the walls? And how far back from the screen should the projector be mounted on the ceiling?


----------



## ddogg777

Anyone in AZ want to buy my Stewart Electriscreen?


----------



## Mr_archi

i am really Concerned about the Sparkle issue ... as i went to a store in my city that demonstrated the Grayhawk with a 720p Projection Design FRONT projector ... i have noticed Sparkling Tiny Spots (stars) in the screen in the same position more often which was extremly annoying !!!!!! ... i wonder if that case is Common with the Firehawk G3 .. that i am planning to get with the Optoma hd81 1080p Projector for a 21 ft through distance on a 123" 16:9 format screen ..... as the light output is 1400 Lumins .... what do u guys suggest ....since it's gonna be a dedicated HT .. as Contrast and blk levels are Mandatory for a movie performance ! ... while i can have a slight dimm lighting in the space ...

thanx


----------



## ddogg777

There's a 120" electric stewart screen on ebay if anyone wants it. hint hint.


----------



## ctviggen

Are you sure it's 120x96? That's an aspect ratio of 1.25. A 4x3 screen has an aspect ratio of 1.33 and a 16x9 has an aspect ratio of 1.78.


----------



## m Robinson

Cain, that is a moderate radius, and should continue to assist in controlling cross reflected light. If you get the serial # off the screen fabric, I can access the file and produce another skin for the frame. I can also just work off the dims, do you have snaps or s-hooks?


M_archi,

We've been working on our optical coatings, and most of the line is revised with more uniformity being the goal. I invite you to e-mail our website, attn: Andrew Cox, and get some decent sized samples to test with your projector and geometry. I think you'll be pleased.


The SST fabric was developed at the request of Sony, the goal being a versatile fabric, which could be viewed at close range, (now more appropriate, with the pixel structure of 1080p platforms), and would not sparkle or "scintillate" prior to the viewer detecting the pixels. The gain is lower, the off axis viewing is a bit improved, the texture is very uniform. It will work with all sorts of projectors. You just do what we've always done, compute the light values, assess the environment and make a selection.


Yumbus, If you can do it, paint those walls, ceiling etc. a deep color or a gray which is more than half way between white and black. Black is great obviously, but sometimes hard to do because of WAF considerations.


We remain application driven, that's why all of our Front Projection fabrics are priced uniformly, with the exception of perfed materials. That way a price bias does not color your fabric selection. That is within the Stewart line of fabrics anyway. I know our prices can seem surreal, but we've chosen to do things a certain way, in house, high degree of corporate responsibilty as regards the environment, in the U.S. with a eye to detail, and a great bunch of employees. All of that costs money. Sorry about the soapbox.


----------



## millerwill

Mark, thanks much for continuing to post here and provide very useful info. How about the new G3 version of the Firehawk. I've seen posts that it, too, is supposedly more suited to 1080p pj's. Is it still 1.25 gain, recommended throw >/= 1.6, etc. ? Any other relevant considerations? TIA


----------



## m Robinson

The higher gain can make the screen a bit more visible at shorter viewing distances. The G-3 is a bit better at rejecting ambient light as well. Gain is 1.25 on axis, with a 28 degree half-gain. The revised fabrics are all smoother, and thus suited to high resolution projectors. It's a really nice flat planar surface, not as rough as our previous Firehawk or Studiotek.


----------



## ddogg777




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ctviggen* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Are you sure it's 120x96? That's an aspect ratio of 1.25. A 4x3 screen has an aspect ratio of 1.33 and a 16x9 has an aspect ratio of 1.78.



The box says 10' by 8'. I think it was a university sized screen.


----------



## JoeFinn

Hi,


I have purchased 82" Stewart Luxus Deluxe Screenwall 16:9 Grayhawk RS.

Little about my setup:

- Sony HS60(low lamp, gamma 0), DVDO VP30, Denon 1920 SDI and Topfield 5100t

- Very well light controlled room, ceiling black (only 4% light reflect), sidewalls light grey (soon black velvet), size 4.5m (14.8f), 3.3m(10.8f), 2.4m(7.9f)

- Projection distance about 3.4m(11.2f)

- Projection height from floor about 1.8m(5.9f)

- Screen height from floor about 0.9m(2.9f)


I'm having trouble with the shining, blooming on highest white level? Naturally I have tried adjusting setup every way possible but always the very highest level of white seem to glow/peak/shine/bloom.


Have I chosen wrong screen type for my room? Anything to do to fix this?


I wiped my screen with lightly damp (only water) soft cloth. Could this be the cause for this kind glaring/shining. What kind of effect could be expected if surface was was wiped too hard or something?


Is this type of problem called hotspot or what does it mean?


---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Question about screen surface:


Is it normal that surface seems to have very very small shining/sparkling particles as part of the grey surface? If I go very close to the screen and look at the projected image/pixel then those particles shine like little stars, size could be maybe 10% of one pixel. They are usually not visible from 3 meter viewing distance, sometimes I spot them.


Are these kind of "stars" normal or should the screen surface only be solid grey even when looking at it from a very close distance?


Could these have anything to do with peaking whites?


I have been very satisfied with the screen quality and frame/design is fantastic, but I want to make sure that everything is ok and this seems like the right forum to ask. Sorry about the long post but I'm getting desperate with this problem.


I wish I had known when I purchased this screen that I could have ordered any size screen. I would have bought smaller, but I did not know this or maybe this is not possible here in Finland.


----------



## m Robinson

Grayhawk RS is a gain screen, even though it is a neutral density gray. Most gray screens are well below unity gain, in the .6-.7 range, but Grayhawk has an optical coating which brings the gain up to .95. This coating is an angular reflective and diffusive mixture which brings some of the light which was headed off axis, back toward the viewing area. This is purposeful, to bring a bit of "life" to the image, designed to allow white and light colors to avoid a drab presentation. As you state, the optical coating is ususally not visible at normal viewing distances.


You have a pretty bright LCD projector, which potentially could be putting out over 1000 lumens. On a 20 square foot screen, that's 50 Foot Lamberts, which is enough energy to show all sorts of problems. I'm interested to determine how much light you have. Grayhawk is not typically a fabric which hot-spots or solarizes to the degree you describe. The surface is washable, within reason, but if it's glossy or ******, there is a problem. Have your dealer contact Kaspar Mortenson in our Denmark Plant, and he can work with you to get you more satisfied. We have alternate fabrics, Graymatte, at .7 gain, Snomatte, a true Lambertian 1.0, and a revised Grayhawk RS with a finer optical coating. We'll get something worked out.


----------



## rlhjr34

Anyone know what the retail pricing is going to be for the new line of cinemascope screens? I see they have several new models available besides the cinecurve from last year. Also, any knowledge of what sizes they are going to offer?


----------



## JoeFinn




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Grayhawk RS is a gain screen, even though it is a neutral density gray. Most gray screens are well below unity gain, in the .6-.7 range, but Grayhawk has an optical coating which brings the gain up to .95. This coating is an angular reflective and diffusive mixture which brings some of the light which was headed off axis, back toward the viewing area. This is purposeful, to bring a bit of "life" to the image, designed to allow white and light colors to avoid a drab presentation. As you state, the optical coating is ususally not visible at normal viewing distances.
> 
> 
> You have a pretty bright LCD projector, which potentially could be putting out over 1000 lumens. On a 20 square foot screen, that's 50 Foot Lamberts, which is enough energy to show all sorts of problems. I'm interested to determine how much light you have. Grayhawk is not typically a fabric which hot-spots or solarizes to the degree you describe. The surface is washable, within reason, but if it's glossy or ******, there is a problem. Have your dealer contact Kaspar Mortenson in our Denmark Plant, and he can work with you to get you more satisfied. We have alternate fabrics, Graymatte, at .7 gain, Snomatte, a true Lambertian 1.0, and a revised Grayhawk RS with a finer optical coating. We'll get something worked out.



I am blown away. Thank you very much for your fast reply and also for making me feel like I'm an important customer. This is exactly the reason why I gladly pay some extra to get superb product and this kind of service. I am sooo not used to this kind of customer service here in Finland, as you can see from my reply.










This problem is very frustrating because the picture is fantastic, almost perfect, if there are no very bright images, like sun linght through window or very bright sky. The brightest parts kind of "attack" from the screen .







Very hard to describe though. I got the screen in february so the revised Grayhawk RS has come after that?


I also want to be a good customer and be 100% sure that something else is not at fault here. I wonder if this could be in anyway projectors fault? I still have warranty and I have been thinking about whether to send it for check up or not. Maybe I will still try to contact Sony service and check with them and also try to view the image on an another surface to see if it also has similar issues. Any closeup pictures from the surface how it "normally" should look like?


I will contact my dealer as a last resort because I think my problems are not going to be very high on his todo list. The reason why I'm reluctant to contact him is due to some difficulties when I was not happy with the projector I bought. Luckily we managed to sort that out though, but there are also few hundred miles of distance between us to make things harder.


[OFF TOPIC/SARCASM]

Finland is the promised land of all customer service. It does not matter how many thousands of euros one is willing to spend, in my case roughly 6000, if one is not happy what one bought, it is not the dealers problem.


----------



## m Robinson

Joe, Do you have a "Video Essentials" DVD? It's an excellent investment. With it, you can do some calibration that will tell you quite a bit about the performance of your system. If you would like to do something in the interim prior to ordering and recieving the "video essentials" , look through your DVD assortment and find a title which has the "THX Optimizer" attachment in the special features, "Finding Nemo" has it, as do many other releases. Get that in the player and do the recommended setups for basic contrast, brightness and color. This will get you on a basic footing which may be more satisfactory than your present results.


Kaspar Mortensen can be reached @ (011)453-648-2204, he may be able to get you in touch with a calibrator in your vicinity.


----------



## SirJohnFalstaff

I'm looking for some advice for a new screen that I'm hoping to buy after Christmas. Right now I have a 100" Da-lite HCCV screen paired with a Panasonic AE-900U. I'll soon be moving into a new house with a much larger home theatre and I want to upgrade my screen and eventually the projector. I was hoping that the next screen I'll buy will be my last one for some time, so I'm not afraid to pay more than my Da-lite screen. I'll be in a completely light controlled room, always watching movies in total darkness--no Saturday afternoon sports for this guy. I'm looking at a 120" screen as I'll be sitting about 14 feet back. As far as the projector, I've been really happy with the AE-900U and will be hard pressed to go with anything besides an LCD Panasonic, maybe upgrading to a future 1080p model in a year or two like the AE1000. The dimensions of the room are 13 feet wide, 8 feet high, and 19.5 feet long, and the projector will always be sitting on a shelf 57 inches from the floor.


I'm wondering if the Grayhawk would be my best choice, or would the Firehawk better suit my needs.


----------



## longbow




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> The SST fabric was developed at the request of Sony, the goal being a versatile fabric, which could be viewed at close range, (now more appropriate, with the pixel structure of 1080p platforms), and would not sparkle or "scintillate" prior to the viewer detecting the pixels. The gain is lower, the off axis viewing is a bit improved, the texture is very uniform. It will work with all sorts of projectors. You just do what we've always done, compute the light values, assess the environment and make a selection.



Mark, I have purchased 3 Stewart screens over the years, all ST130's. I love that fabric. I currently have a Sony HS51 but am considering a new VW50 for the new theater under construction. Room is 24X15X11. I have not decided yet on a projector postion. Room is totally light controlled.


Would the SST be a better choice for something between 106" and 120" 16X9 with the Pearl?


Thanks!


----------



## JoeFinn




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Joe, Do you have a "Video Essentials" DVD? It's an excellent investment. With it, you can do some calibration that will tell you quite a bit about the performance of your system. If you would like to do something in the interim prior to ordering and recieving the "video essentials" , look through your DVD assortment and find a title which has the "THX Optimizer" attachment in the special features, "Finding Nemo" has it, as do many other releases. Get that in the player and do the recommended setups for basic contrast, brightness and color. This will get you on a basic footing which may be more satisfactory than your present results.
> 
> 
> Kaspar Mortensen can be reached @ (011)453-648-2204, he may be able to get you in touch with a calibrator in your vicinity.



I have DVE PAL, Avia and also Finding Nemo







As I said I have tried calibrating my system to the death, but I have seriously started to doubt my abilities because of the problem. I doubt that Kaspar has a contact here, but it would be fantastic if there is one. I will call and check.


As I was wathcing last night I tried to analyze the problem and noticed one thing. The thing that bothers is that sometimes on bright image parts it seems like I'm looking the actual image through something. Like there is an "glass" between the actual image and me. Does this sound anything you have heard before?


----------



## JoeFinn




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Kaspar Mortensen can be reached @ (011)453-648-2204, he may be able to get you in touch with a calibrator in your vicinity.



I tried calling to the number you gave, but I get response that the number is not in use. I also tried with denmark land code +45 11 453-648-2204. Does he have an email address, or probably what is he's email address is the proper question. Could you send it privately if you do not want to write it here?


Edit:

Okay, it seems that it might be KaspEr Mortensen and number when calling from Europe is +45 36 48 2204. I will try again later...


----------



## weatherby

Mark I am seriously considering the Optoma HD81 for my new HT. I believe it has 900 lumens calibrated. I will be going with a 123" electric screen, ceiling mounting the projector. It is not a dedicated theater and has some ambient light issues. Would the FireHawk G3 be the best choice for my setup?

Thanks.


----------



## m Robinson

Yes, Firehawk G3 for ambient light. That should work well. Did you get the revised drawings?


----------



## weatherby

Thanks Mark. I did get the revised drawings. I'll probably be ordering a screen through AVS shortly. Appreciate your assistance.


----------



## grellberg

Hi Mark,


Like everybody here I'm going to get a Pearl







.


I'm thinking about a 106" or 110" diagonal, and will sit about 12.5 ft from the screen, and the Pearl mounted about 14' to 15' from the screen. Seating area is narrow, just 2-3 viewers on a big couch.


The room (22x30x 8'8" ceiling) is light controlled, light brown (KM Wise Owl) walls, but light carpet and off white ceiling (which I will probably paint a shade or two darker).


From the little comparisons I've seen, I like the pop of the ST1.3 or 1.5, but I'm concerned about reflections and bounce back from the light surfaces.

Can you offer any thoughts or suggestions vs a FHg3?

Second, with all the talk on the forum about the High Power, I'm surprised there is not more interest in the 2.0 as I believe it is more flexible in projector placement than the HP. What am I missing?

thanks in advance for any help.


----------



## mark meyers

I have a 5 year old dual (masking at sides) aspect 110" greyhawk. I also think that my projector is dim even with a new bulb(Sharp XV-Z9000). Can I get better performance ie brightness with a firehawk? Is it possible to just get the material and not have to replace everything?


I want to buy a Sony Pearl? but if it is too dim again!


----------



## m Robinson

Grellberg, The specification for any theater is a choice of compromises. The St-130 and Um-130 require more in-room light absorbtion to give optimum performance. The Firehawk will deliver contrast under compromised room treatment, but you trade off-axis cone. You don't require off axis viewing from the description you posted. At your screen size, I'd probably treat the room to reduce cross reflection, then go with Studiotek 130.


Mark Myers,

We can retro-fit any Stewart screen fabric to your existing unit. I believe that a Firehawk SST would be bright enough at that size when the bulb is new, but would be less satisfying as the bulb loses power. But it would still be nearly 15% brighter than your present fabric. The Firehawk G-3 might be better for you. Studiotek 130 would warrant consideration if you commit to cross reflected light control.


----------



## ydastous

Hello,


I currently Have a Studiotek 130 (16:9 100 inches diag) with MicroPerf (5 year old)

and I will received soon the Sony Pearl (VPL-VW50) projector.


What factors in the positionning of the Projector can help reduce the moire effect ?

Should I try to install the Projector as far of possible of the screen, or nearer as possible ?

Should I try to put the projector exaclty at the horizontal center or i "uncenter" a bit it will

be better ?


Thanks for any advice !!!


Yves


----------



## m Robinson





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ydastous* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> 
> I currently Have a Studiotek 130 (16:9 100 inches diag) with MicroPerf (5 year old)
> 
> and I will received soon the Sony Pearl (VPL-VW50) projector.
> 
> 
> What factors in the positionning of the Projector can help reduce the moire effect ?
> 
> Should I try to install the Projector as far of possible of the screen, or nearer as possible ?
> 
> Should I try to put the projector exaclty at the horizontal center or i "uncenter" a bit it will
> 
> be better ?
> 
> 
> Thanks for any advice !!!
> 
> 
> Yves




This projector has been tested thorougly here and the rotation which was applied to your unit when manufactured, is compatible with this projector at the size you contemplate. As far as placement goes, it really doesn't influence the possibility of moire. The net image size for a given imaging chip determines that. With SXRD chips, Stewart Microperf is largely compatible and does not moire, with small rotational adjustment needed only for very small images and ironically very large images. Your size is going to be just fine.


As far as the zoom choice goes, the experience of many Forum members, and myself is that the Pearl does provide a significant additional light output when situated at the shorter end of the throw range. The lens is a medium to long throw unit. Your Studiotek fabric will be very satisfactory at any throw, so go short and reap the benefits of the additional lumens.


----------



## longbow

m Robinson,


I have purchased 3 Stewart screens over the years, all ST130's. I love that fabric.


I currently have a Sony HS51 but am considering a new VW50 for the new theater under construction. Room is 24X15X11. I have not decided yet on a projector postion. Room is totally light controlled.


Would the SST be a better choice for something between 106" and 120" 16X9 with the Pearl?


Thanks!


----------



## acksnay

Hello all ...


I have a year old 120" 2.35ar v.2 Firehawk mounted on a Luxus frame. The frame is attached in the usual manner at 3 places to wall studs that have been covered by GOM. One fine afternoon a couple of the boys were playing in the HT room when one of them bumped into the screen, hitting the middle frame support. So now there's a crease -- dead center screen, top third -- running about a foot and a half down. The effect is a dark line during bright scenes of uniform color. It's pretty distracting for me, and I can't seem to stop looking for it.


What's the cure? I do have access behind the screen.


It's been about 3 months, so it hasn't "worked itself out".


Hair dryer?


Thanks!


----------



## m Robinson

Eric,


If your Theater is totally light controlled, including darkened walls to limit cross-reflection, then the SST is not necessarily the best choice, stick with Studiotek. The tint of the SST would give you just a bit better absolute black, but there's some tradeoff in absolute color fidelity, off axis viewing, and center to edge uniformity. You are working with a nice big room. The SST also is aimed pretty squarely at the 100" and below customers for the most part. Sony requested a fabric which is usable in varying environments. The VW 50 is priced to broaden the market, and the SST fabric is designed for versatility. But when people choose to go to larger sizes, light control becomes critical, you could light a 110, with a new bulb and using that projector at it's shortest throw, but you would be best served at that size, by a screen with 1.3 gain.


Aksnay, If you see a crease, an actual hard angle, then get behind the fabric and heat it with hair dryer, so that it is warm to the touch, for about 5 minutes. Rub the area, but only touch the back of the fabric. It appears possible to me that the kids may have marred or scuffed the fabric, and there's no fix for that.


----------



## sage

I am throwing a 106" diag. image at 11.5 feet. Seating is at about 10'. Would I see hotspoting with a StudioTek 130?


I am otherwise a good canidate for it (black velvet, full light control).


----------



## Chris Rein




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Eric,
> 
> 
> If your Theater is totally light controlled, including darkened walls to limit cross-reflection, then the SST is not necessarily the best choice, stick with Studiotek. The tint of the SST would give you just a bit better absolute black, but there's some tradeoff in absolute color fidelity, off axis viewing, and center to edge uniformity. You are working with a nice big room. The SST also is aimed pretty squarely at the 100" and below customers for the most part. Sony requested a fabric which is usable in varying environments. The VW 50 is priced to broaden the market, and the SST fabric is designed for versatility. But when people choose to go to larger sizes, light control becomes critical, you could light a 110, with a new bulb and using that projector at it's shortest throw, but you would be best served at that size, by a screen with 1.3 gain.



Good stuff here Mark! I have a Studiotek130 (110") and have been debating the Sony Pearl (VW50). The room is a dedicated room, total light control with dark walls. Only downside is the min throw of the 110" is 14 feet and I would need to mount it approx 16 to 17 feet (19 is max) and fear that it won't be bright enough. I guess I would have to run it in high lamp mode as well, which bothers me as I am replacing a DWIN TV3e that keeps blowing through bulbs about 2 times a year. I am barely getting 500 hours out of the darn things to boot! Any thoughts about the Pearl and my situation?


Thanks for your help!


----------



## acksnay




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Aksnay, If you see a crease, an actual hard angle, then get behind the fabric and heat it with hair dryer, so that it is warm to the touch, for about 5 minutes. Rub the area, but only touch the back of the fabric. It appears possible to me that the kids may have marred or scuffed the fabric, and there's no fix for that.



You really nailed that one. The kids must have rubbed a bit of the magic dust off my screen. There aren't any hard creases on it. :::sigh::: Now I'll just *have* to upgrade in 2 years when laser front projection hits the market.







Thanks for the speedy reply Mark!


----------



## jazjon

It seems Stewert is "top of the line"


What do you really get though for the extra expense? (way over $1k)


I'm Looking at Elite CineTension, EluneVision, and High Power (way under $1k)


Here are my HT setup pj specs/details
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...95#post8685595


----------



## m Robinson




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Chris Rein* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Good stuff here Mark! I have a Studiotek130 (110") and have been debating the Sony Pearl (VW50). The room is a dedicated room, total light control with dark walls. Only downside is the min throw of the 110" is 14 feet and I would need to mount it approx 16 to 17 feet (19 is max) and fear that it won't be bright enough. I guess I would have to run it in high lamp mode as well, which bothers me as I am replacing a DWIN TV3e that keeps blowing through bulbs about 2 times a year. I am barely getting 500 hours out of the darn things to boot! Any thoughts about the Pearl and my situation?
> 
> 
> Thanks for your help!




I think that the throw distance is good, and it will be bright enough initially. With a new bulb you should have just under 600 ansi lumens. Thats about 21.67 Fl on the screen and if the bulb goes down to half as bright, you have above 10 FL. In a room with good light control that's a very nice picture. There are other projectors which are brighter of course. If you have a chance to look at some projectors, see if you can get the folks to zoom it up to your width etc. and see how the contrast and brightness work for you.


----------



## m Robinson

Hello Jon,

What we offer is an appropriate selection of housings, so that you can put your electrically operated screen in a variety of ceilings and have it work well aesthetically. You have a tough situation with a high ceiling in your room. We have wall mountable screen cases, but we don't do wood cosmetic valances as some of our competitors do. We have a great selection of fabrics which are integrated to our mounting systems with a great deal of attention to detail. We stand behind our product in a forthright manner. We keep good records and retained screen material samples, and you can get one of our units re-screened in the factory if you decide to change your projection strategy etc. We have a policy of continuous improvement and we service some of the most demanding and technically proficient customers in the world of projection. So we offer value for your dollar. Only you can decide if your plans and expectations for your theater warrant the extra expense of our approach to this business. Thanks for your interest!


----------



## WOLVERNOLE

Thanks Mark for your expertise with Stewart. OK, so as others, I am looking to the VW-50 (Pearl). Unlike others, a reasonable screen in my room would be only about 84" diagonal. The distance from the screen to the lens would be about 15'. I have good darkening ability (not cave-like, but close) with medium-blue walls. Sitting at about 13'. What kind of sharpness should I be able to expect, and would you still go with a SST screen (made for Pearl) at that size and distance? Thanks to all here for great info and insight !


----------



## millerwill

Mark: I'm beginning to think that I can in fact fit the Optoma HD-81 into my room, so the Firehawk is back to the top of my list for a screen! (In considering the Pearl, the Dalite HighPower was at the top of the list.) I've seen several comments that the new G3 version of the FH is well-suited for the HD-81. Does the G3 have the same gain as the G2 (which is listed as 1.25, but which I seen it reported to actually be ~1.1, or even 1.0), or does the G3 have higher gain? And the G3 is not the same as the SST Firehawk, is it? I haven't seen any official info on the G3 or SST on the Stewart website yet, so I'm a bit confused about them.


----------



## Jason Turk

By the way I just did an install of a Firehawk G3 with a 1080p projector (Pearl to be exact). I have to say the G3 is a HUGE improvement in performance over the previous generation of Firehawks (not that they were bad, but the G3 is amazing). It did not have the muddy look that one usually gets from gray fabrics. Kudos to Don and Mark for that!


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jason Turk* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> By the way I just did an install of a Firehawk G3 with a 1080p projector (Pearl to be exact). I have to say the G3 is a HUGE improvement in performance over the previous generation of Firehawks (not that they were bad, but the G3 is amazing). It did not have the muddy look that one usually gets from gray fabrics. Kudos to Don and Mark for that!



Great to hear, Jason. Do you have any indication as to what its gain is? And how did it do with the Pearl?


----------



## Jason Turk

I was extremely suprised with how good the combo looked. This was a room with less than perfect light control, and it faired extremely well. Better than I remembered the Firehawk doing (and I had one). I believe it is a 1.2 gain, but Mark should be able to confirm.


----------



## millerwill

Jason, Re the Firehawk, I was looking on the Stewart website about how it's mounted on the wall. If the vertical mounting brackets are screwed flat to the wall, do you know how far out the screen materal is from the wall? (The screen will cover a window, so want to know it the material will clear the window frame, or whether I will need to put some spacer between the bracket and wall.) TIA


----------



## jazjon

As far as throw distance goes for firehawk............



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *millerwill* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> And second, you should be sure that the distance from the lens of the pj to the screen is at least 1.6 X SW (SW = screen width), to prevent hot-spotting with the Firehawk. You should have a great pic!



another person said...............



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *nathan_h* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I've had both a real Firehawk (older formulation), and a screen similar to the Grayhawk, and I preferred the Firehawk. But if you cannot ceiling mount the projector, or have critical viewers sitting off to the sides, or have a throw of less than 2 screen widths, the Firehawk is not ideal. Otherwise, especially with the new formulation, I cannot think of why you would not want the Firehawk. (Note that I used a Firehawk with less than the recommended throw and still liked it better than anything else I had seen.)




I'm ready to go for the FireHawk with my new Panisonic ax100.


When you say 1.6 x SW, is it still ok if I'm a couple inches off?


I want to go with a 119" Firehawk.

The exact distance from lens to the screen will be 162 inches

The 119" screen SW is 104"


104" x 1.6 = 166.4


Is coming up 4 inches short "close enough" ? I dont want hot spotting.


If not, Should I go with a 110" instead?


My viewing distance will be 13.5 feet. (dim lights, off off for movies only)


Also, more newbie first time setup questions:


I assume I mount the screen exactly in line with the TOP of the screen right?


Is it best to AIM the whole projector to fit the screen or just use the easier built in lense shift joystick?


Also, I mostly watch HD 16:9 HD XviD AVI's or h.264 MP4's. Would it be best to go with an even smaller screen to reduce artifacts being noticeable?


I'm looking forward to a sweet firehawk g2 experience! (edit: g3 I mean)


----------



## weatherby

Link to G3 material on Stewart website:
http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/eng.../firehawk.html


----------



## m Robinson

Jason, Thanks for the kind words. Your opinion means a lot to us!


Wolvernole, What you have described is a good fit for Firehawk SST. Thank you for considering Stewart Filmscreen.


Bill Miller, We're happy to be "contending" again for your screen order. The Snapper Deluxe frame, with EZmount, places the rear of the screen material at about 5/8 ths of an inch from the wall plane. So a normal modern window casing may fit, but a classic window stool would not, you could block it pretty easily.


The forward gain of Firehawk G3 is 1.25, Firehawk SST is 1.1.


The SST is directed at shorter throw uses, and has a bit wider viewing cone for folks with some ambient light, but a desire for wider seating or closer seating.


JazJon, A few inches of throw will not make a huge difference, in general the longer throw does help Firehawk screens appear more uniform from center to edge and will tame hot-spot issues. If you've looked at the screen personally and found hot-spot to be a big issue at your set-up parameters, we've got Grayhawk RS and Studiotek at the ready, but then you've got new challenges, damping cross-reflected light and getting better control of ambient light. That's a pretty big screen, and locks you into very bright projectors, so you might consider going down to the 110" with a view toward lamp life etc. But I wouldn't down size for resolution sake. The screen will last many years, and the resolutions of content and projectors are rising. Some types of artifacts which we're seeing now are emphasized more by over lighting screens, than by enlarging screens. And many artifacts look terrible no matter what the screen size is.


As far as mounting the screen, I recommend the following:


If your projection location choice is limited and inflexible, by all means mount it first, and see where your image is workable. The Panasonic is quite flexible in this regard, but mocking up is time well spent. Once you determine you are in the area and the zoom is workable, do some basic geometry, projecting the planned image centerline, both ways, from projector location and back from the screen centerline, to be sure there isn't some dimension you've overlooked. It can be difficult in furnished rooms or rooms with adjoining spaces which make measurment more complex.

Get the screen blocked out and see if your projector mount choice is lined up with the top edge of the image area, that is the most common location. Get the projector centered on the image width, then use the "joystick" shift to fine tune the alignment.



Ed W. Thanks!


regards,


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Bill Miller, We're happy to be "contending" again for your screen order. The Snapper Deluxe frame, with EZmount, places the rear of the screen material at about 5/8 ths of an inch from the wall plane. So a normal modern window casing may fit, but a classic window stool would not, you could block it pretty easily.
> 
> 
> The forward gain of Firehawk G3 is 1.25, Firehawk SST is 1.1.
> 
> 
> As far as mounting the screen, I recommend the following:
> 
> 
> If your projection location choice is limited and inflexible, by all means mount it first, and see where your image is workable. The Panasonic is quite flexible in this regard, but mocking up is time well spent. Once you determine you are in the area and the zoom is workable, do some basic geometry, projecting the planned image centerline, both ways, from projector location and back from the screen centerline, to be sure there isn't some dimension you've overlooked. It can be difficult in furnished rooms or rooms with adjoining spaces which make measurment more complex.
> 
> Get the screen blocked out and see if your projector mount choice is lined up with the top edge of the image area, that is the most common location. Get the projector centered on the image width, then use the "joystick" shift to fine tune the alignment.



Mark, Thanks much for your infinite patience with my, and others novice questions! The G3 does sound like an ideal screen for the Optoma HD-81. But as you probably know, it is quite inflexible wrt placement (having no lens shift and a large vertical offset), so your suggestions about careful thought re placement are extra relevant. The long throw ratio of the HD-81, 1.85 - 2.22, matchs up well with the FH's performance.


The Firehawk frame I'm leaning toward is the the Luxus Delux*, with the 'Standard Mount' as described on pg 4 of its Users Manual. No dimensions are given, though, so I was curious how far from the wall the screen material would be if the vertical brackets are mounted flat against the wall. (The window ledge sticks out ~ 2" from the wall; it's a 80 year old house with old-fashion wooden window frames.)


*The 3" light-absorbing border of this screen will come in very handy with the HD-81 in case there is any slight keystoning due to not being able to achieve the full offset that it requires.


----------



## rombullterrier

To the people at Stewart:


I recently purchased a 2.35:1 ST 130 luxus deluxe just under 120" through Dave at AVS. Thank you for making such a fine product; I am enjoying it hour after hour. (And yes, the wide frame looks good and is very helpful in setting up the pj; go for it.)


----------



## m Robinson

Bill, If you cover a window with the screen material, you will need a highly opaque additional shade or maybe even a piece of masonite and gaff tape or similar. Firehawk of any type is not completely opaque, and even a mini blind is not enough to avoid lighting through the material, especially when direct sunlight hits the window. We do have utterly opaque fabrics, Ultramatte 130, Ultramatte 150, Snomatte 100, Grayhawk, Graymatte and some others if you need that opacity.


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Bill, If you cover a window with the screen material, you will need a highly opaque additional shade or maybe even a piece of masonite and gaff tape or similar. Firehawk of any type is not completely opaque, and even a mini blind is not enough to avoid lighting through the material, especially when direct sunlight hits the window. We do have utterly opaque fabrics, Ultramatte 130, Ultramatte 150, Snomatte 100, Grayhawk, Graymatte and some others if you need that opacity.



Thanks for the reminder, Mark. I will in fact remove the miniblinds from that window so that the screen can go as close to the wall as possible, and probably tape a couple of layers of cardboard inside the window frame (with a white layer to the outside). The room (17x14, 8.3 ceiling) that my wife has turned over to me is at the back of the house, and fortunately no direct sunlight comes from that side. So I think this will not be a problem.


BUT, my walls are light-colored (one reason I want the FH material); does enough light penetrate the FH to be reflected from the wall to be backside of the screen, degrading the image?


----------



## rombullterrier

Bill: I mounted my screen over a window in an older home with good results. The window is covered with an opaque roman shade behind the screen. I spaced out the screen from the wall behind it with two 2x4's on each side to clear the window frame and used the standard tab mounts for the frame. It was a piece of cake, and none of the mounting is visible.


----------



## millerwill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rombullterrier* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Bill: I mounted my screen over a window in an older home with good results. The window is covered with an opaque roman shade behind the screen. I spaced out the screen from the wall behind it with two 2x4's on each side to clear the window frame and used the standard tab mounts for the frame. It was a piece of cake, and none of the mounting is visible.



Thanks much--sounds good! I was certainly thinking of the 2x4 spacers as you described to put behind the to vertical brackets if necessary. Can you say how far out from the wall your screen surface is? (The '2' of the 2x4 is actually 1.75" I presume.)


----------



## rombullterrier

I'm at the office now, but it's basically 3 and 1/2" plus whatever the mounting tabs add, which is very little. This gives the screen kind of a floating effect that I really like. I also hid my speaker cables along the underside of the front of the screen.


In addition to the window frame, I had to deal with wainscoting and handled that by using shorter top spacers mounted into studs, with the second layer of 2x4's mounted to the first layer and extending lower. I think you will have no problem adapting to your situation on the fly. The only hard part is hanging the screen once the screen material is in place, which takes two people. I did the rest by myself. I really recommend the Stewart wide frame with the velour; it is a nice looking piece. Good luck!


----------



## millerwill

Thanks much, rombullterrier--very helpful.


----------



## thomaco

Hi Mark,


On the Stewart web site, and in most postings I've seen about it, the FireHawk SST talks about being designed for the Sony VPL-VW50 and the G3 being for 1080p projectors. Aside from their differences in gain and viewing cones, is there any difference in the performance of these two fabrics? Do they have the same ambient light rejection abilities? Do they have the same colour reproduction fidelity?


I am deciding between getting a cheap 720p projector now and waiting a couple of years for a high-end 1080p projector, or to get one of the high-end projectors now. In either case I would consider getting a good quality screen now.


Thanks.


Richard


----------



## BLS

I second thomoco's question. I previously had an Electrohome 8500LC Ultra Plus firing it's electrons on a home made 45" X 80" Goo Screen. Things have changed since then for me.


I am now looking hard at the Sony Ruby, Pearl or new JVC HD unit coming out next year. I will use the best fixed screen possible. I definitely want a 1080p projector, so one important deciding factor will be how much light control will I have. Hopefully this install will be in the basement where I can accomplish any and all modifications I want and still keep my Wife happy.


The Studiotek 130 seems to get the top honors with reveiwers but it may be to bright for these Lcos units.


The new JVC is supposed to have a much improved contrast ratio so we'll see what screen works best.


----------



## m Robinson

The Firehawk SST and G3 are pretty similar in ability to reject ambient light, with a slight nod, going to the G3 formulation.


Sony Engineers specifically wanted a fabric which would be suitable for the very close viewing distances allowable now with fine pixel structure and lack of 'screen door effect", and the great behavior of the SXRD in the dark state, and the fabric needed to be versatile in placement options. So less brilliant diffusing pigments are used, and you can move very close to the SST fabric, without being able to detect any "sparklies". These diffusion pigments also widen the viewing cone a few degrees, and lower the gain a little over a tenth. By widening the cone a little bit, hot-spotting is reduced and this enables Pearl or Ruby users to shorten throw distance and net more lumen output. And along with that, a customer is not "dead in the water" as regards contrast, if some cross-reflected light, or reasonable ambient light remains in the viewing environment.


Since the Pearl will pass 1080P 24 as a multiple of 24, and has incredible lack of noise in the dark state, Sony looks forward to a broader market in which HT enthusiasts can sit closer to a given screen width if necessary, without artifacts overhauling the content. The original Firehawk, and the G3, are more suitable for long throw applications, so Sony asked for something tuned to their products.


These projectors also look great on our other fabrics, and on some competing fabrics. For people with great light control, Studiotek and Grayhawk RS are amazing performers. The decision was taken, however, to develop a fabric which would be more versatile in regard to placement of the theater experience in a variety of architectural constraints. In other words, Sony plans on broadening the market a bit for themselves, as other manufacturers have. The SST works in a lot of environments. We are also very comfortable with the performance of other Stewart fabrics with the projector, as more controlled applications are considered.


By the way, I've tested other projectors with Firehawk SST and found some pretty good synergy. But I'm not the right person to come to for projector recommendations. It is a good time to be shopping for a projector, no question about it.


----------



## BLS

Thank you for the input. When checking prices I see the screens are priced per diagonal screen size. When I had the 45" X 80" the only way I knew how to measure the diagonal size was with a tape measure. I beleive it was around 100".


What is the formula to compute a 16:9 screen to diagonal? My room size was approximately 15' wide X 20" deep. I liked the 45" X 80" and I'll probably stay close to that size.


----------



## mdrew

Mark,


I'm currently working with Jason (avs) on a couple new toys. One of which is a new 2.35 screen. Could you take a minute to recommend one for my application please? I've read through this entire topic and I've gone from being confused, to thinking I got it, back to a state of confusion again.


Room dimensions are 12' X 16' and the walls / ceiling are painted a dark garnet in an eggshell finish. I can make it dark as I wish, but we tend to have the soffet lights on dim or the blackout shade up on the window. A few times each week we make it dark for movie watching.


The projector is a 900 AU and it's 11.5' away from the screen wall. This can be moved to 12' if necessary.


Main seating is right under the projector (just my luck).


My DIY screen is 45 X 80. I'm still pondering the 2.35 screen size. It will most likely be around 8' wide. The reason for the uncertainty is that 16.9 images are simply too much, too big for me at 45 X 80, but 2.35 images could be a tad larger.


Another consideration is that I will be buying a 1080P projector eventually as more of them hit the streets and their prices start to come down, so I don't want to buy a screen that locks me into one particular projector if that makes sense.


HDTV is not available here if that plays into this. I've ordered a VP50, so whatever SD/TV and SD/DVD conversion it spits out will be as good as it gets.


----------



## ctviggen




> Quote:
> What is the formula to compute a 16:9 screen to diagonal?



I like to set up a triangle and use this. The angle between the width and the hypotenuse is arctangent (9/16) or .511856 radians (about 29 degrees). The hypotenuse is the width times the cosine of that angle or the height times the sine of that angle. Another way is to set up ratios. The length of the hypotenuse is sqrt(W^2 + H^2). Using W=16 and H=9, the hypotenuse is 18.3576 (HY). Then, knowing W1 or H1, you can find HY1 by HY1/HY = W1/W = H1/H. Fun with geometry!


----------



## nowandthen




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BLS* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Thank you for the input. When checking prices I see the screens are priced per diagonal screen size. When I had the 45" X 80" the only way I knew how to measure the diagonal size was with a tape measure. I beleive it was around 100".
> 
> 
> What is the formula to compute a 16:9 screen to diagonal? My room size was approximately 15' wide X 20" deep. I liked the 45" X 80" and I'll probably stay close to that size.



X squared + Y squared = Z squared. Square root of Z = your diagonal dimension.


This works for 4:3, 16:9 or any other ratio as long as x is at a right angle to Y. Which should always be true for movie screens, otherwise you have other problems










In your case X = 45, y = 80


so


X squared = 45 x45 = 2025

Y squared = 80 x 80 = 6400

X squared + Y squared = 2025 + 6400 = 8425

Use the square root button on your calculator. Sq root of 8425 = 91.79"

(windows scientific calculator, enter 8425 then check the "Inv" box then press the x^2 button).


Todd


----------



## thomaco

Hi Mark,


Thanks for your detailed answer. There are no local dealers who know anything about Stewart screens, they only say "they can get one if I want one". Your help is invaluable.


You say that the SST is designed to allow people to sit close to the screen. Is there any rough indication of how close is recommended for SST vs G3 (e.g. a certain multiple of screen width)?


You also say that G3 is designed for long throws. You in the past have indicated that a projector should be at least 1.6x the screen width from the G3. Is much greater than 1.6x a benefit for the G3, or is there not much difference past that distance?


Thanks.


Richard


----------



## Brad/Viper-Fan




BLS said:


> What is the formula to compute a 16:9 screen to diagonal?
> 
> 
> 
> Width/.87275=Diagonal


----------



## jazjon

I just finalized my FireHawk order through Jason/AVS. It should ship later this week. I'm excited to test out my Panny ax100. I'm looking forward to seeing a fantastic image up on my wall next week. I'll post my results asap. = )


As far as mounting the projector, I want the center of the lense, lined up with the top center of the screen right? Should I try to aim the whole projector to the screen or just use a bit of the lense shift? If max quality = no lense shift, I'll go out of my way to mount it correctly. Since I have 20' ceilings, I cant use a ceiling mount. I plan to build a nice modern looking wood/metal post 15"-ish deep shelf to set it on. (up high, against the back wall)


I'll then learn how to calibrate my PJ through the AVIA DVD. (any other suggestions for a fist time setup?)


----------



## yj99t04

Since MRobinson is being so considerate of answering everyone's specific setup questions and recommending a screen, I guess I'll ask him also. I am going to order a new Pearl projector, and want to get a screen that "can do it all". I have a shelf made for my current projector thats about 1 foot below the 9 feet ceiling. I want a 110" diagonal screen that will be about 12 feet from the front of the projector, but the screen will be up higher on the wall than normal. I have a TV mounted below the screen area for regular watching. The room is painted white right now, and who knows when it will be painted a darker color. I want a screen that has a good picture with a little light in the room for watching football and races, but also look good at night when the lights are all off for a movie. I have seating that encompases about 150 degrees from the screen surface. I appreciate the time you are putting in to answer everyones questions.


----------



## pcarey

I have just received my Stewart AT screen (thanks Jason) and it came with a product called the Cinema Sonic Processor to be used with the center channel to slightly enhance certain frequencies that are impeded when the speaker is behind the screen. I won't be able to use mine for a few weeks and I just wondered if anyone was using the CSP. If not why not!


Thanks


Piers


----------



## m Robinson

M. Drew,

Sorry for the tardy reply. Jason will steer you right. The screen will not lock you in. Just decide for yourself, which image format do you want to support at largest screen area? More and more people are electing to display 2.35-2.40 at the largest screen area, because that is how it should be. You already know this as you posted.


How are you filling the widescreen area? If you are buying a great scaler like the DVDO, first off, buy a screen which is 2.40:1 and the scaler will fill it when the content is that size. If you are using an anamorphic, find a way to move it for 1.78 or skip that and just let your excellent scaler re-size 1.78 and 1.85 to fit your height and leave the lens in. Then since you have a frame height around four feet, make some simple black panel masks, which hang on the frame, move them manually. Put the masks in the closet with the dining table leaves, when you go widescreen. You will have a fantastic theatre space.




Richard,


Yes there is additional benefit in image uniformity gained by going to longer throws, with the Firehawk fabrics. I would say nominally 1.5 is a minimum and benefit continues until at least 2.5:1 throw distance.


JazJon, Thanks for ordering from us! In terms of vertical placement, use a stepladder, prior to deciding shelf height. The projector is flexible enough so that if you mount the lens so that it is on a perpendicular line from the top of the image area, or slightly below that, you should be very happy with the results.


YJ99t04,


What you have described is a very challenging environment. The 150 degree viewing area, indicates a need for a fabric with pretty wide viewing cone, and that operates at cross-purposes to a fabric having ability to reject ambient light. So you should choose to control one or the other. I think that controlling the ambient and cross reflected light, then going with a white screen would offer the highest performance in image quality, especially with a 110" screen. If you cannot darken the room and absorb ambient light, then try the Firehawk G3, I think 110" might be too dim with SST. But then you have to live with folks on the outer ends of your seating arrangement seeing center to edge or edge-to-edge brightness differences.


----------



## mdrew

Thank you Mark.


Along with the screen and VP-50 I've ordered, I have a Prismatic 1400M lens coming. I will be masking the sides as you mentioned and keeping a CIH.


I was wondering more specifically which material Stewart has that would be best for my application. Although it can be light controlled, I prefer to not be in total darkness. I knock over my good scotch too often when it's that dark.plus digging them lost junior mints out the couch the next week can be disgusting. So keeping this in mind, should I stick with the grey, or go white? If it's grey, which one?


----------



## jazjon

Could someone help me calculate the viewing angle of my new StewArt FireHawk? (on order) I'm trying to figure out how wide my couch can/should be.

http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/eng.../firehawk.html 

Gain: 1.25

Half Gain .625 @ 28°


I might go with a longer single row of Home Theater Seating setup then I originally planned.


The longest length of the seating config I pick would be around 160"


IOIOOOIOI


The viewing distance to the screen is 13'

(Throw Distance is 14'


The 119" FireHawk is 104" wide and would be centered in the middle of what ever seating arangment I choose.


Would the viewing angle be "good" or "good enough" for the seats on the far ends?

If not I might just go with a 4 seat setup then. IOOOIOI (126" wide)


It's also possible the end seats of the IOIOOOIOI might be turned into single swivle IOI seats and brough forward a bit. (making the two single end views only 9 or 10 feet)

.....IOOOI

IOI..........IOI


I'm trying to leave enough room for a very small square dinning room table in a long skinny open loft condo.


Id like to make sure I think about everything before ordering too many or not enough seats. I plan to 2D all this out but I just need to confirm the viewing angle first.


----------



## kansuba

Mark:


I have read most of your postings and I am trying to make a final decision between the Firehawk G3 and Studiotek 130.


I have a dedicated media room (20x20) with burgundy walls, ceiling, and the carpet. There is a door across from the screen which leads into a gameroom with windows. During the day, there is a possiblilty for some ambient light when the doors open.


I am planning to purchase Sony VPL-VW50(Pearl). Please recommend a screen and the optimal screen size for this room. I would also like to know the optimal distance to fix the projector mount.


Thanks & Regards!


----------



## jazjon

Does anyone know what my maximum seats/couch width on the back wall would be with the viewing distance/angle specs below?



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jazjon* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Could someone help me calculate the viewing angle of my new StewArt FireHawk? (on order) I'm trying to figure out how wide my couch can/should be.
> 
> http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/eng.../firehawk.html
> 
> Gain: 1.25
> 
> Half Gain .625 @ 28°
> 
> 
> I might go with a longer single row of Home Theater Seating setup then I originally planned.
> 
> 
> The longest length of the seating config I pick would be around 160"
> 
> 
> IOIOOOIOI
> 
> 
> The viewing distance to the screen is 13'
> 
> (Throw Distance is 14'
> 
> 
> The 119" FireHawk is 104" wide and would be centered in the middle of what ever seating arangment I choose.
> 
> 
> Would the viewing angle be "good" or "good enough" for the seats on the far ends?
> 
> If not I might just go with a 4 seat setup then. IOOOIOI (126" wide)
> 
> 
> It's also possible the end seats of the IOIOOOIOI might be turned into single swivle IOI seats and brough forward a bit. (making the two single end views only 9 or 10 feet)
> 
> .....IOOOI
> 
> IOI..........IOI
> 
> 
> I'm trying to leave enough room for a very small square dinning room table in a long skinny open loft condo.
> 
> 
> Id like to make sure I think about everything before ordering too many or not enough seats. I plan to 2D all this out but I just need to confirm the viewing angle first.


----------



## m Robinson

Jaz Jon,

At 160 inches seating width, I think there would be a slight dimming to the outboard seats. But it should be subtle enough to not be very distracting.



Kansuba,

Your description indicates that you could go up to a 106" diagonal screen, which I feel is a conservative size limit for that projector, over the life of the bulb. Selection of a brighter projector could get you a larger screen size, and your room dimensions would support that choice.


A door opposite the screen is terrible. Any screen will respond very poorly to ambient light coming from the direction of the projected light. So you need to control that illumination source with whatever means you can. Try to locate the lens of that particular projector at about 11.5-12 feet from the screen. But please consult the throw distance chart and test what you plan, prior to permanent mount.


An additional note, not directed at anyone specifically. Please don't ask for projector recommendations, here, or in PM. I encourage folks to seek out Stewart Dealers, (our host, AVS is one by the way) they will walk you through our Screen Assistant program which asks many more questions, does required calculations and gets you an optimum selection for your situation. Some times I feel like we're blowing by a lot of important stuff here in this thread, with the Q. & A. Some posters clearly need more attention than I'm able to provide, and our Dealers are trained to handle that. Thanks!


Regards,


----------



## jazjon




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Jaz Jon,
> 
> At 160 inches seating width, I think there would be a slight dimming to the outboard seats. But it should be subtle enough to not be very distracting.



Excellent / Perfect, thanks. My 126" or 144" wide couch configuration will be right on the money then for great viewing. (cant wait for my firehawk to arrive next week!)


----------



## thomaco

Hi Mark,


One thing I haven't been able to find on your web site, is the full size of your electric screens. How wide is the border? How much extra width is there at the top and bottom of the screen for the tab tensioning system? How wide is the bar at the bottom of the screen? How tall is the border at the bottom of the screen?


Thanks.


Richard


----------



## m Robinson

Richard, The dimensions for the overall screen enclosure, black borders and so on, will vary depending on image size. Most electrically operated screens have a minimum of 5" added to each side, which includes tab-guy and overscan border. From the bottom of the batten below the screen, to the image area lower border is about 3.5". These are minimums and will increase as image height and width increase. If you give me a specific size, I'll calculate all that. Paul Kutcher at Visual Fidelity in AUS, [email protected] , is at your service as well, and can get you any infomation you request, on any of our products.


regards,


----------



## thomaco

Hi Mark,


I'm looking at a small screen, either 160cm (63") or 180cm (71") wide, in a 16:9 format. I would prefer the 180cm wide size, but that will be determined on the additional room required for the tab-guy and overscan border and bottom bar.


Thanks again.


Richard


----------



## brianlvi3

Hello to everyone,

I have a Model A Luxus 82 inch electric screen with ST130 material. I had it boxed up for a while and just rehung it yesterday. It has wrinkles all over but mostly at the bottom, kind of wavey. It has been hung almost 24 hours and it looks the same. Anyone know anything I can try to get them out.

Thanks much,

Brian


----------



## thomaco

I'm trying to figure out how to use the half gain specification to determine seating arrangements. I'm interested in the FireHawk screens, which have a half gain at 33 or 28 degrees. Does half gain correspond to the point at which most people start observing a noticeable dimming of one part of the screen? Should you aim for seating that is within the half gain "viewing cone" or aim for a viewing cone narrower than the one half gain indicates?


To determine the viewing cone should you define a viewing cone based on the centre of the screen, or from the far edges of the screen? E.g. Should I measure a 33 degree angle both left and right from the centre of the screen? Or, should I measure a 33 degree angle from the right-hand side of the screen and use that to determine the furtherest position on the left, and vice versa?


Thanks.


Richard


----------



## m Robinson

Half gain does indicate a measure of perceived brightness loss. It is a great idea to keep the seating within the specified viewing cone. Unfortunately, sometimes that does not work for the room. In those cases, we have other fabrics besides contrast enhanced Firehawks. But then you need to excercise more control over sources of ambient light, and projected light which is cross reflected into the viewing area.


The Firehawk fabric has pretty quick fall off, by far the most rapid in our catalog of offerings. It is designed to work to provide contrast in circumstances where other fabrics cannot. If you are faced with a wide seating plan, and have good control of stray light, choose Studiotek or Grayhawk, which have much wider viewing cones.


----------



## royalswin

Mark--


Thanks for being so kind as to answer some questions. If I may, I have a couple of my own.


I currently have a 110" Grayhawk microperf. I am thinking about getting a new projector--namely, the Pearl. The projector will be about 15 feet from the screen.


Three questions:


1. Will the combination be too dark/have no punch?

2. Whether or not the answer to 1 is yes, which 110" screen would you recommendation for the Pearl, assuming complete control of ambient light (i.e. I have a dedicated theater)?

3. Same question as 2, but assume I also want to watch some sports in the theater with a bit of light on. Is your answer still the same?


Thanks so much in advance for your help.


Drew


----------



## faterikcartman




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *thomaco* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I'm trying to figure out how to use the half gain specification to determine seating arrangements. I'm interested in the FireHawk screens, which have a half gain at 33 or 28 degrees. Does half gain correspond to the point at which most people start observing a noticeable dimming of one part of the screen? Should you aim for seating that is within the half gain "viewing cone" or aim for a viewing cone narrower than the one half gain indicates?
> 
> 
> To determine the viewing cone should you define a viewing cone based on the centre of the screen, or from the far edges of the screen? E.g. Should I measure a 33 degree angle both left and right from the centre of the screen? Or, should I measure a 33 degree angle from the right-hand side of the screen and use that to determine the furtherest position on the left, and vice versa?
> 
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> 
> Richard



I don't know about you, but Mr. Robinson's answer was less than exact for me.


Given the ambiguousness of the answer, and my experience with a firehawk sample, I'm guessing that at the "halfgain" angle the image is perceived to be HALF as bright. Thus, the drop off will begin before that angle is reached.


This, however, is just my guess based on my limited experience.


----------



## thomaco

I'm still trying to figure out how to make use of the half gain specification. I'm under the impresssion that half gain means that when sitting at that angle from the screen the image will be half as bright. What I don't know is how noticeable that is to the normal viewer. I know that our ability to perceive brightness isn't linear; so how noticeable is half gain?


I would also like to know how you use the half gain angle specification to determine seating arrangements. If it is from the centre of the screen then it is easy to calculate seating layout. If it is from the far side of the screen then the FireHawk fabric has an extremely narrow viewing cone.


For example, with my room layout I'm looking at a screen that is 1.7m wide and seating that is about 3.5m from the screen. With the SST having a half gain at 33 degrees I calculate that seating could either be 4.55m wide (if calculated from the centre of the screen) or 2.85m wide (if calculated from the far side of the screen). Which of these calculations is "correct"? Using the same formula then the G3 seating would be either 3.72m or 2.02m wide.


Thanks again for any guidance.


Richard


----------



## GetGray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> The Firehawk SST and G3 are pretty similar in ability to reject ambient light, with a slight nod, going to the G3 formulation.



Mark:


As a current 110" 16:9 Luxus? Firehawk owner I have been very pleased with the Stewart product. In particular I've been a fan of the FH. My room normally has very good light control. Not a bat cave, but no windows or stray room light either. Even though I don't "need" the ambient rejection abilities of the FH all the time, For those times when a little ambient will be around I really like it's flexibility a lot. I had an opportunity to go to one of John Scheurman's Integrity Home Theater projector demos a while back and we played with a ST130, FH, and a GHRS. The GHRS was very nice with the bright PJ's but even with a negative (or is it 1.0) gain, I recall it being easier to wash with a little ambient. COrrect me if I remembered incorrectly.


That said, I'm getting ready to order a new Steward fixed, curved screen. My pockets aren't deep enough for the full blown Cinecurve, but I can swing the fixed version. I am concerned about the fabric selection and hoped you might give me some input.


I have an IscoIII lens, and an Infocus 777 3-chip DLP (720) projector. I had originally planned on getting another FH. I like my 777 a lot and will probably keep it a good while, but I want to plan ahead when I get this new screen. I don't want to feel compelled to replace it whenever I change to 1080. I presume one of the new fabric formulations will work well for that plan, serving 720 or 1080 fine?


One of my concerns is how the FH viewing angle will behave with the curved frame. Right now, the mild hotspot produced on my 110" isn't something that bothers me at all. I do plan on a 2.35 screen of the same height (~54") so now it will be significantly wider. Logic tells me the curve would help alleviate the FH hotspotting at the edges, but I don't have a feel for how much, or for that matter, if that's the case. My seating will be 4 seats, about 8' wide total. One row for main viewing. Seating distance about 12-14'


I considered a GHRS with it's 180deg cone, but I've leaned toward the FH for it's ambient rejection capabilities. I hate to get a unity or negative gain screen if one day I have to go back to a "dim" projector. Right now that's not a problem.


I like the curve for it's pincushion correction properties, but to be honest, I just love the way they look. Very cool










I do not plan on a AT screen at this time.


Given this input, do you have a specific fabric recommendation? Please let me know if you need some parameter I didn't include.


Thanks very much for the help.


Best, Scott


----------



## jazjon

I'm very happy with my new 119" flat fixed screen firehawk. It was so easy to put together. The engineering, build quality, and packing are all A+


I'm new to the PJ world. I didnt realize that low end projectors have a focus issue.

(if you focus the top left, the bottom right is slightly out of focus)

(if you focus the bottom right, the top left is slightly out of focus)

I was told this is normal even in $11,000 projectors with out fancy lense corrections.


Check out the responses to my post in this link:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...29#post8911029 


So yeah.......

I have the Panny AX100 (720p 2000 lumens, 6000:1 contrast) was only $1999

I can live with an ever so slightly out of focus edge for that price, but I'm curious to learn more for the furture.


Would a curved screen help fix the slight edge focus issue? What are some of the technical benifits of curved vs flat?


----------



## faterikcartman




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> That said, I'm getting ready to order a new Steward fixed, curved screen. My pockets aren't deep enough for the full blown Cinecurve, but I can swing the fixed version.



Does Stewart actually make a retractable Cinecurve? If so, any ideas what an 11' wide 2.35:1 model would run?


----------



## GetGray

No, the "Cinecurve" has a automated, also curved CH masking system built in. Very nice, I saw it last year at CEDIA. I believe it lists for about $17k in the size I was looking at. They have changed the line a little adding more options so I don't know how pricing has changed. There is no retractable curved unit though.


----------



## Stew M

I am fortunate to have enjoyed greatly a JVC G15 and an (original) Greyhawk screen combo for over 5 years, bought at AVS of course .


The screen is custom electric 16:9AR

Diag Width Ht Image Size

127 110.9 62.4 6922 sq inches

The PJ is mounted in a cabinet, height is approx at the top of the screen, about 13' (156") away.


I really want to get the new JVC DLA-RS1 1080p (ready to pull trigger on powerbuy) and move to HD via satellite (probably switch to DISH), and when things settle mid-2007 start buying HD-DVD or BluRayDVD's. For now, the upconversion of DVD's to 1080 will be a nice bump in quality.


This setup will also probably last us 5 years, lots of viewing.

Viewing distance for 4-5 people varies from 117" to 134". (I'm near center, love the 1:1 ratio for good involvement in the movie)


So, my concern is about light output. The room is a library, two small windows on the right, door on the left, usually quite dark ... but a) late summer sun gives some light leaks on the right, and b) my wife likes to do projects with a small lo-voltage light which casts ambient onto the floor and cabinets. These provide some washout of color and shadows (blacks turn to mid-gray) with my present G15-Greyhawk combo, which reduces enjoyment a lot (for me).


[I thought about getting my wife a small headlamp for Christmas! But on second thought, might send the wrong message.]


A fellow AVS-er on the PJ forum sent me this: at 700 lumens spec with the grayhawk screen you'd only get 14ftL with a new bulb, and within the first several hundred hours that would likely drop in half to about 7ftL. That is doable IF YOU HAVE TOTAL LIGHT CONTROL but even then depends on your tastes. If you had the Firehawk with a gain closer to 1.3 (as opposed to Grayhawk gain of 0.95) then you'd at least have 20ftL to start and 10ftL after the bulb aged. That still may be challenging without total light control.



So ..... with the JVC RS1 and my existing greyhawk, will this light situation be improved .... worse .... or about the same?


Given the light occasionally coming from the right, would a FH G3 or ST130 really be improvement, or just a different problem? I hate to muck with success or get a minor improvement for that kind of money.


I could live with similar brightness and shadow detail, but would really like more "pop" to accompany the move to 1080p, for the psychological impact of viewing the new media. And I don't really wanna wait a year for the next round of brighter 1080p projectors (at potentially higher prices).


All advice and viewpoints are welcome, in this important, long-term choice for us.

Thanks in advance.


Stew M


----------



## weatherby

I defiantely think you would have a better (brighter) picture with a FireHawk instead of a GrawHawk. You would have to decide if it were worth the expense of a new screen. I'm in a similar situation and I'm thinking maybe the Optoma HD81 may be a brighter projector. Not sure if there offset would work for you. It does for me as I have 12' ceilings. A 127" screen is probably pushing it for either of these two projectors without a High Gain screen....


----------



## Tom Bley

Does anyone know whats wrong with Stewart's website? I click on the tabs across the top and get nothing.


----------



## longbow




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Tom Bley* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Does anyone know whats wrong with Stewart's website? I click on the tabs across the top and get nothing.



Try:

http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/


----------



## Tom Bley




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *longbow* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Try:
> 
> http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/



Nope. Does it work for you? I get the opening screen and then click to enter and then click on anyone of the tabs at the top and no page loads.


----------



## clrv

They have just changed over website and are still in the process of updating it.


----------



## Tom Bley




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *clrv* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> They have just changed over website and are still in the process of updating it.



I understand. I noticed the new layout but, it's been this way for a few days now. If it wasn't ready to go they should have left the old site up. I've been wanting to look at some of the different screen materials. Oh well.


----------



## clrv

Here use this it will get you some basic info.

http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/sfc..._materials.htm


----------



## Tom Bley




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *clrv* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Here use this it will get you some basic info.
> 
> http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/sfc..._materials.htm



Thank you,


Tom


----------



## JayP

Stew,


I have had a G15 for 6 years and want to upgrade to the RS1 too. I have a 100" wide 16:9 FireHawk Microperf I bought for better contrast 2.5 years ago. Throw distance is 22.5 ft., not wide-angled room, cave-like and with dark walls


I want to have a brighter image with the new set up. Apparently, contrast is not an issue with the RSI, so I can sacrifice a high contrast screen for a brighter one.


I am considering to change to the Ultramate 150 Microperf. But this is only my first preliminary impression.


Question to m Robinson: How difficult and expensive is it to change my old Firehawk material for the Ultramate 150 Microperf in my fixed screen?


Regards,

Jay


----------



## noethis




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *clrv* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Here use this it will get you some basic info.



Good resource!


----------



## keyser

Well since nne LCOS-D-ILA´s main drawbacks is low ANSI contrast, and a grey screen is mostly for increasing ANSI contrast, won´t the firehawk be a nice fit?


It´s still a ? how good the ASNI is on the JVC.


----------



## Fredrik Rasmussen

My viewing cone is just too little with the FireHawk G1. I'm thinking about purchasing the Studiotek 130 G3 material instead and use on my Luxus Deluxe 92" Screenwall frame.


I have come to understand that I'm sensitive to the half gain angle spec. Now when looking at the spec for ST130 there are different values on the Stewart website, 30 degrees and 40 degrees with half gain.


Which one is it and is there a history with improvement on this?


If I'm looking for ultimate fidelity is there one with wider viewing cone?


----------



## jerm7861

I am thinking about purchasing a Luxus Model A ElectriScreen which will drop through a suspended ceiling. My issue is I have a maximum of about 94" inches for the screen to drop down. Does anyone have an idea the maximum screen size (16x9) I could get for that maximum opening width?


Thanks...


-jeremy


----------



## DanFrancis

With 94" maximum drop, your limitation will more likely be budget rather than size:


with the regular 12" drop (black area over the image) and the usual 1" batten (probably larger at this width) you're looking at an image size of roughly 80" by 142" or just over 6 feet tall and almost 12 feet wide- that's a big picture. A screen of that size would probably retail for more than 5k, probably in the 6-7k retail range (my Screen Assistant software isn't up-to-date.)


Now if you're talking about 94" wide, then the screen would probably be in the 3-4k range, with an image size of roughly 92" diagonal.


Dan


----------



## jerm7861

Yes I apologize, I meant that I have 94" of width for the screen to fit in, it was pretty late when I was writing that email! I was hoping I could get something larger than 92" but it looks like thats going to be my max. Maybe the wife would let me do a little modification to the soffit that is restricting my size...










-jeremy


----------



## thomaco

Hi Jeremy,


In the specs I received from the Australian Stewart distributor they indicate that the black panel on each side (including the tab tensioning system) has to be a minimum of 127mm wide (that is 5" on each side). From the diagrams it seems that the bottom batten has to extend at least 1" past the bottom edge of the screen.


So, with 94" of width available, my calculations are that your viewable screen width would be 94 - (5*2) - (1*2) = 82". If you are fitting this into a soffit, remember that the case will be wider than the screen material and batten. You'll have to contact a Stewart dealer for exact sizes.


Richard


PS These statements are based on my interpretation of diagrams. I make no guarantee that they are perfectly accurate. (On the other hand I was only 2mm off on my own screen size calculations).


----------



## jerm7861

Awesome, thanks for the info! I have already gotten the case dimensions so I should be all set. One more question for everyone, I am thinking about having the Firehawk G3 microperfed. Does anyone have any positive or negative experiences doing this? I was going to place the speaker almost 5 feet behind the screen due to a challenging room layout. Any issues with this?


Thanks...


-jeremy


----------



## DanFrancis

Both of my Stewart screens are Microperfed, I have no problems at all with them. Stewart now adjusts the angle of orientation of the perforations depending on the projector used and the screen size/projection distance (called Microperf X2). So when you finally pull the trigger on the screen- make sure you use a reputable Stewart dealer to get the most diligent service.


As far as having the speaker 5 feet from the screen....well, there's a good side and a bad side to that: the inherent comb-filtering that happens when a speaker is placed behind an AT screen will begin at a much lower frequency than normal (distance from speaker to screen corresponds to specific wavelengths, the farther the distance, the lower frequencies are affected) BUT! by doing this, the sound that comes through the screen will be much less localizable (not sure if that's a real word) because of the natural dispersion patern of the speaker. So caveat emptor. Without question, contact Stewart and talk to one of their screen specialists.


Dan


----------



## jerm7861

I have read a little about the downsides of perf'd screens but can you explain a little more about this to me...in more laymens terms? I am not much of an audio buff...I just want my home theater to look and sound as good as it costs...


----------



## SimpleTheater




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jerm7861* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I have read a little about the downsides of perf'd screens but can you explain a little more about this to me...in more laymens terms? I am not much of an audio buff...I just want my home theater to look and sound as good as it costs...



I think the decision to get a perf'd screen has a lot to do with the size of the image you want to project. If you have a small screen, say 60" wide or less, you'll have plenty of room to put your speakers above or below your screen.


A friend of mine has an 80" wide screen and only about 3 ft between the bottom of the screen and his floor. So he puts his center speaker below the screen (almost on the floor), but his side speakers are about 3 ft higher (tower speakers) and when the sound moves across the screen you can actually hear the 'acoustic image' shift. It's annoying and ruins the suspended disbelief you're supposed to have during a movie.


In laymans terms - the real negatives of perf'd screens are image distortions and high end frequency drop off. Stewart and Screen Research have all but eliminated this problem. Stewarts "randomized" perforated holes take care of the image issues most perf screens have, and their outboard equalizer deals with the high end dropoff. Screen Research is a woven screen, so the fabric actually lets the sound through and the weave pattern does not create image problems.


I've heard people say they can still see problems in both screens, but those people are very rare. I wouldn't even consider buying an acoustically transparent screen from any other companies.


--SimpleTheater


----------



## diggumsmax

Finally got my Stewart 110" Firehawk G3 mounted last night (Thanks Jason for the great deal and great service) and I have to say I am very impressed with this screen. Much better than my elitescreens tab tension electric screen, especially with ambient light. I really didn't want to come in to work today because I wanted to play with my new toys but thats life. I'm using the screen with a Infocus IN76 projector sitting exactly fifteen feet away from the screen. Absolutly no hotspotting at all.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *SimpleTheater* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I think the decision to get a perf'd screen has a lot to do with the size of the image you want to project. If you have a small screen, say 60" wide or less, you'll have plenty of room to put your speakers above or below your screen.
> 
> 
> A friend of mine has an 80" wide screen and only about 3 ft between the bottom of the screen and his floor. So he puts his center speaker below the screen (almost on the floor), but his side speakers are about 3 ft higher (tower speakers) and when the sound moves across the screen you can actually hear the 'acoustic image' shift. It's annoying and ruins the suspended disbelief you're supposed to have during a movie.
> 
> 
> --SimpleTheater



The best is to have left and right channels that have a wide sweet spot so that you don't need a center channel. The sound images completely naturally on the screen, and with perfect pans as well, not a "dot" of sound below, behind, or above the screen. You aslo get the best image since you don't have to use a perf screen.


----------



## Rosano

Hi Mark....I would like to thank you and Stewart for your participation here.....the info in this thread is priceless.


Here is my current situation. I have a Luxus screen 96x54 with the original Firehawk. the room has total light control....walls and ceilings are very dark burgundy with a dark brown carpet. PJ is ceiling mounted.Room is 24x13x8ft.


I have just recently upgraded to a Marantz VP11-S1. The picture on the Firehawk looks gorgeous however I'm always looking for that "extra" little room for improvement. The projector has gobs of contrast so it doesn't need the help of the screen. I am seriously considering the Studioteck....I would expect to see something with even more punch and even better color and a brighter image.


What would be your opinion on this....have you folks tried this combo?


Thanks


----------



## SimpleTheater




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> The best is to have left and right channels that have a wide sweet spot so that you don't need a center channel. The sound images completely naturally on the screen, and with perfect pans as well, not a "dot" of sound below, behind, or above the screen. You aslo get the best image since you don't have to use a perf screen.



Maybe I misunderstood your post, but are you recommending NOT using a center channel?


If so, how do you re-mix the center channel to get to your L/R channels.


I'm being as polite as possible because this sounds like insanity to me. Even if you could get the dialogue to image properly, it would only be true for the person sitting in the exact middle of the two speakers - what about everyone else?


I'll stick with my perf screen, thank you very much.


----------



## Fredrik Rasmussen




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Fredrik Rasmussen* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> My viewing cone is just too little with the FireHawk G1. I'm thinking about purchasing the Studiotek 130 G3 material instead and use on my Luxus Deluxe 92" Screenwall frame.
> 
> 
> I have come to understand that I'm sensitive to the half gain angle spec. Now when looking at the spec for ST130 there are different values on the Stewart website, 30 degrees and 40 degrees with half gain.
> 
> 
> Which one is it and is there a history with improvement on this?
> 
> 
> If I'm looking for ultimate fidelity is there one with wider viewing cone?



Today when I checked the Stewart site on ST130 G3, the page quote 75 degrees @half gain. They also adjusted Firehawk G3 to 30 degrees @half gain.


I had the chance to compare the ST130 G3 and Firehawk G3 and the former is alot more wide area viewing so their new numbers seem to add up


----------



## mdputnam

Well, it looks like Stewart's new web site is mostly working. I just have one rant.... It's a great advertisement but, where is all the documentation you used to have for each model? Take a look at Dalites site, click on a model and you have the following documents:


Product Information

Parts List

Installation

Specification Sheet

Pricing Sheet

CAD Drawing

Brochure


You guys just have a two page info sheet under each model. Come on Stewart, I don't want to go running to my dealer every time I want to look at an owners manual or install instruction. Your documentation never was the most consistent, but it was better than non-existent. You need to make a consistent set of documentation for each product, place it under a proper configuration management system (to keep it up to date), and make it easily accessible from the web site.


----------



## JhonS

Hello


I'm planning to buy Sharp XV-Z21000, and want 100" diagonal 16:9 screen

What will be best screen for me ? Its not a dedicated theatre but i will be watching movies at night only.

I'm leaning towards Stewart ultramatte 150 or Studiotek 130


any suggestions??


Thanks,


Jhon


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *SimpleTheater* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Maybe I misunderstood your post, but are you recommending NOT using a center channel?
> 
> 
> If so, how do you re-mix the center channel to get to your L/R channels.
> 
> 
> I'm being as polite as possible because this sounds like insanity to me. Even if you could get the dialogue to image properly, it would only be true for the person sitting in the exact middle of the two speakers - what about everyone else?
> 
> 
> I'll stick with my perf screen, thank you very much.



It's called phantom center, or if using a reciever, it automatically directs the signals to the L&R when you omit the CC. If you read my post I said you would have to use speakers with a wide sweet spot. So, no you would NOT have to sit in the middle of the two speakers, you can sit off axis and the dialog is still locked to the middle of the screen. Real insanity! You can stick with your inferior perfed video and sound, that's fine by me... THAT's insanity.


----------



## Mikenificent1

Anyone know where to see the new Firehawk SST in action in NYC?


----------



## clrv




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> It's called phantom center, or if using a reciever, it automatically directs the signals to the L&R when you omit the CC. If you read my post I said you would have to use speakers with a wide sweet spot. So, no you would NOT have to sit in the middle of the two speakers, you can sit off axis and the dialog is still locked to the middle of the screen. Real insanity! You can stick with your inferior perfed video and sound, that's fine by me... THAT's insanity.




It is still a bad ideal to do this unless you are not very critical about your listening.


----------



## SimpleTheater




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikenificent1* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> It's called phantom center, or if using a reciever, it automatically directs the signals to the L&R when you omit the CC. If you read my post I said you would have to use speakers with a wide sweet spot. So, no you would NOT have to sit in the middle of the two speakers, you can sit off axis and the dialog is still locked to the middle of the screen. Real insanity! You can stick with your inferior perfed video and sound, that's fine by me... THAT's insanity.



I read your post - but still can't believe someone (unless forced to) would opt for a digitally created "phantom" center channel over the real thing. You can EQ a center channel with a Stewart perf screen to near perfection, but your phantom center will always be inferior - and inferior by a large margin.


IMO - your gain in video isn't worth the acoustic loss.


----------



## oliverlim

Need some advice on my screen selection. I am currently using a Hitachi TX-200 LCD but will be going for a JVC RS-1 or a Sony Pearl in Feb. So I am getting a new screen with this in mind. I need a Ceiling motorise model. Note that I have a plasma behind the drop screen so the material has to be almost opaque (20cm away).


I am sitting about 9 feet from the screen. Projector will be about 10 to 10.5 feet from the screen ceiling mounted. Probably looking at a 82"model unless there is a 85"or something smaller then 92" is possible. Bottom of screen is likely to be about 90-100cm from the ground. Ceiling height is 2.55m. There is no ambient light when movie watching although I like to watch sports with some lights on. The room is more or less painted with biege colour. I am working on installing dark brown curtains on both side walls. They will be drawn to cover from the front to about the middle of the side walls. The front wall is already covered with dark brown curtains. Will work some dark velvet into about the first 4 feets infront of the screen. I cant do much about the light choc coloured walls on the back or that the rest of the ceiling is white. The back half of the side walls after the curtains will also be light beige in colour.


What would be the best screen in my case? the Firehawk G3? Can we ask for a size other then 82"or 92"


Thanks

Oliver


----------



## jdinsac

Is it possible to adjust the "drop"? I need to have less than the 12"

it comes with if at all possible. Can it be reduced & if so, how? Where

is the adjustment done? I'm aware of the tab tensioning, but would like

to shorten it up , even if only by a few inches.

Thank You!


----------



## DanFrancis

Oliver,


Yes, Stewart can build you a screen in any size you'd like- it takes longer for delivery so you'll want to order it soon. Both screens I have are 72" by 40.5" which is 84" diag. When ordering the screen, the question should be posed to you whether the screen will be mounted in front of a window (does it need opaque material backing?)- in your case, say yes.

As far as the particular screen material is concerned: if the wall opposite the screen is lightly colored, there's not much that even a gray screen can do to prevent a loss in ANSI contrast- because whatever light comes from the screen will reflect right back to it, and "wash-out" the image to some degree. A gray screen WILL improve things if the side walls are lighter, because the reflections would be coming from a more acute angle.

Ultimately, you're going to want to consult with a Stewart screen specialist regarding the particular screen/room/projector combination to determine what your best course of action will be.


jdinsac,

On the left( I think ) side of the screen- or wherever the motor is mounted- there are adjustements for the stops of the screen: they're inteded to fine-tune the screen's movements after installation. Now a couple inches here or there aren't a huge deal, but these are NOT intended to reduce the drop by half, but rather to make sure that the batten doesn't strike something when in the down postition. When ordering the screen from Stewart, the amount of drop can be specified (standard is 12")- and can be as much or as little as the application requires (I think the minimum is 6"). The tab-tensioning is designed to be used in the full-drop position to prevent waves in the screen (the screen substrate will stretch because of uneven force in the vertical vs horizontal axes. So: caveat emptor- you can adjust drop, but be aware of the possiblity of waves. Your "best" option is to remove the motor/screen from the case and send it to Stewart for modificaion.


I hope this helps both of you- and if I've given outdated or mis-information, I hope that Mark pops-up and corrects me. But to the best of my knowledge, this is accurate info for Stewart screens.


Dan


----------



## oliverlim




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DanFrancis* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Oliver,
> 
> 
> 
> As far as the particular screen material is concerned: if the wall opposite the screen is lightly colored, there's not much that even a gray screen can do to prevent a loss in ANSI contrast- because whatever light comes from the screen will reflect right back to it, and "wash-out" the image to some degree. A gray screen WILL improve things if the side walls are lighter, because the reflections would be coming from a more acute angle.
> 
> 
> 
> Dan



Thanks Dan. In order of importance, which wall influence the Ansi contrast more? back wall, ceiling then side wall in this order? I always thought that the back wall does the least as it is furthers away from the screen. Also If a grey screen like FH helps with light reflections that are not in the direction of the projector, Does that mean that we can get away with darkening only the portion at the back wall that is directly facing the screen?


Oliver


----------



## Toe

I know the luxus deluxe is 3.25 inch frame and the luxus is 1.5 inch frame (right?), but what are the other differences? Do they both taper right down to the screen material?


----------



## TheLion

I have a 10 feet wide Screenwall Luxus Deluxe with the Studiotek 130 material. I installed this new screen 4 weeks ago and I still see vertical streaks in bright areas (depending on the viewing angle, but they are all over the screen, vertical streaks with about 10 inches space between them). First I thought that this was due to transportation and that the screen will "settle" pretty soon. But now, after 4 weeks and no improvement I'm beginning to doubt it...


Has anybody around here experiences with this nasty issue? Thank you.


----------



## DanFrancis

Oliver,


FH is excellent at rejecting amient light for 2 reasons: the first is the titanium color of the screen material, the second-more imortant factor is the 1.25 gain optical coating. That higher-gain means that as the viewer (or light source for that matter) moves away from 90 degress from the screen, the brightness drops rather severely (see Stewart's webside for the gain-angle graphs). So in your situation, the most "problematic" wall is probably the back wall (if your projector is of the light-cannon type). Your second-most problematic surface is going to be your ceiling: darkening the shade of that by say 2 shades will make a drastic improvement.


Toe


The Luxus frame is a 1.5" square and does NOT taper towards the screen- only the 3.25" wide Luxus Deluxe frame tapers toward the screen.


TheLion


Did you attatch the screen material to the frame according to the instuctions? I ask because it seems to me that you attatched the top and bottom snaps, and then the sides.

But don't fret! The problem is solvable: take the screen off the wall, remove the skin (screen material) starting at the top-left corner snap and work in a counter-clockwise manner. Then (in case the room is cool -under 70 degrees farenheit) make sure you have a hair dryer with you (to WARM the screen material). To do this; hold the hair dryer about 1 foot from the screen (on the floor) at the warm-NOT HOT- setting and work over the screen in a back-and-forth motion. You should start to notice that the screen is getting softer. Then, after you've softened the screen a little, reattatch the screen starting agian at the top left corner, and snap them in a counter-clockwise manner. You MAY notice some puckering as you snap the snaps around the screen- that SHOULD work itself out, but if you're having trouble getting the screen to stretch to reach the snaps (probably at the end of the 3rd side and the 4th side)- you can again soften the screen with the hair dryer, and that should help you get the screen snapped.

After this process, you should notice that the screen doesn't show the "streaks". If it's an issue of the screen being a little dirty (the foam wasn't in the tube holding the skin, or the paper that protects the skin wasn't in there because it's a used screen, then you can wipe down the screen with a very mild detergent/water solution (warm). 1 part detergent to 10 parts water.


I hope this helps 'yall.


Dan


----------



## TheLion




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DanFrancis* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Oliver,
> 
> 
> FH is excellent at rejecting amient light for 2 reasons: the first is the titanium color of the screen material, the second-more imortant factor is the 1.25 gain optical coating. That higher-gain means that as the viewer (or light source for that matter) moves away from 90 degress from the screen, the brightness drops rather severely (see Stewart's webside for the gain-angle graphs). So in your situation, the most "problematic" wall is probably the back wall (if your projector is of the light-cannon type). Your second-most problematic surface is going to be your ceiling: darkening the shade of that by say 2 shades will make a drastic improvement.
> 
> 
> Toe
> 
> 
> The Luxus frame is a 1.5" square and does NOT taper towards the screen- only the 3.25" wide Luxus Deluxe frame tapers toward the screen.
> 
> 
> TheLion
> 
> 
> Did you attatch the screen material to the frame according to the instuctions? I ask because it seems to me that you attatched the top and bottom snaps, and then the sides.
> 
> But don't fret! The problem is solvable: take the screen off the wall, remove the skin (screen material) starting at the top-left corner snap and work in a counter-clockwise manner. Then (in case the room is cool -under 70 degrees farenheit) make sure you have a hair dryer with you (to WARM the screen material). To do this; hold the hair dryer about 1 foot from the screen (on the floor) at the warm-NOT HOT- setting and work over the screen in a back-and-forth motion. You should start to notice that the screen is getting softer. Then, after you've softened the screen a little, reattatch the screen starting agian at the top left corner, and snap them in a counter-clockwise manner. You MAY notice some puckering as you snap the snaps around the screen- that SHOULD work itself out, but if you're having trouble getting the screen to stretch to reach the snaps (probably at the end of the 3rd side and the 4th side)- you can again soften the screen with the hair dryer, and that should help you get the screen snapped.
> 
> After this process, you should notice that the screen doesn't show the "streaks". If it's an issue of the screen being a little dirty (the foam wasn't in the tube holding the skin, or the paper that protects the skin wasn't in there because it's a used screen, then you can wipe down the screen with a very mild detergent/water solution (warm). 1 part detergent to 10 parts water.
> 
> 
> I hope this helps 'yall.
> 
> 
> Dan



Dan,


thank you very much for the advice.


But actually I did install it by attaching the sides first - after that the top and finally the bottom. Does going through your procedure still promise any success?


The issue sure isn't "dirt related" - the screen is brand new, foam and paper where both in the tube protecting the skin and the streaks are actually much *brighter* than the rest of the screen - therefor anything but dirty...


Dan,


about another subject and I'm sure this has been asked a several times before:


Does Stewart plan to introduce a real high gain (~2.8) screen material solution comparable and in direct competition to the Dalite High Power skin? I saw the HP the other day and I just fell in love with it. If Stewart would offer such a solution (enabling large screen sizes with todays modest light output digital mainstream projectors like my 1080p 1-chip DLP) I (and MANY others for that matter) would exchange my Studiotek skin (even if it was streakfree







) in a heartbeat. Why is it that Stewart doesn't touch this (booming!) part of the market?


----------



## DanFrancis

Follow the corner-start-counterclockwise method like I stated. I think your streaks might actually be waves in the screen caused by uneven tension. The spacing of your streaks seems like it corresponds to the positioning of the snaps along the edge of the screen- meaning that your screen is tight at the snaps but bowing away from the frame between the snaps. (that's my guess anyway)


-Stewart has had a very high gain material (called Silver 3D) that's available though the commercial branch that has a gain of 2.8-3. BUT, I have to say that higher gain is going to promote hotspotting with home theater projectors (because the lenses have too short of a throw- the screen was designed for REAL theater projectors with a very long throw). If it's light-output you're after with a consumer grade projector: get the right size screen, not a higher gain for the size you want. If you're still interested in Silver 3D, contact Stewart and talk to them about your application (room/screen/projector). It all works together as a system, and needs to be viewed as such- you can't just pick screen A, projector B, and have the room color C and expect life to be perfect.


----------



## TheLion




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DanFrancis* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Follow the corner-start-counterclockwise method like I stated. I think your streaks might actually be waves in the screen caused by uneven tension. The spacing of your streaks seems like it corresponds to the positioning of the snaps along the edge of the screen- meaning that your screen is tight at the snaps but bowing away from the frame between the snaps. (that's my guess anyway)
> 
> 
> -Stewart has had a very high gain material (called Silver 3D) that's available though the commercial branch that has a gain of 2.8-3. BUT, I have to say that higher gain is going to promote hotspotting with home theater projectors (because the lenses have too short of a throw- the screen was designed for REAL theater projectors with a very long throw). If it's light-output you're after with a consumer grade projector: get the right size screen, not a higher gain for the size you want. If you're still interested in Silver 3D, contact Stewart and talk to them about your application (room/screen/projector). It all works together as a system, and needs to be viewed as such- you can't just pick screen A, projector B, and have the room color C and expect life to be perfect.



"starting agian at the top left corner, and snap them in a counter-clockwise manner" stupid question - is it the top left corner standing behind/at the back or at the front of the screen - if this does matter at all...


And what "does the new Studiotek G3 skin do"? How is it different from the previous version?


Thank you Dan for you help.


----------



## DanFrancis

the exact corner doesn't matter, really. But You do start from the corner and work your way around.


Firehawk G3 is 1.25 gain, and has a finer structure to its optical coating for 1080P projectors.


Dan


----------



## TheLion




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DanFrancis* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> the exact corner doesn't matter, really. But You do start from the corner and work your way around.
> 
> 
> Firehawk G3 is 1.25 gain, and has a finer structure to its optical coating for 1080P projectors.
> 
> 
> Dan



Dan,


thank you very much for the information.


I will try your hair dryer method tomorrow. I hope this helps.


About G3 - I was refering to Studiotek 130 G3 and not the new Firehawk. I never saw some official announcement from Stewart about a new Studiotek revision but posts like this:



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Fredrik Rasmussen* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Today when I checked the Stewart site on ST130 G3, the page quote 75 degrees @half gain. They also adjusted Firehawk G3 to 30 degrees @half gain.
> 
> 
> I had the chance to compare the ST130 G3 and Firehawk G3 and the former is alot more wide area viewing so their new numbers seem to add up



suggest that there is something new out.


Dan, please allow me to ask a question that will make me sound like a complete newbie: I have a 1080p DLP, ceiling mounted, with the center of the lense at the same height as the upper border of my Studiotek screen - therefor a pretty common configuration. I sit at about 1.5x screen width. Line-of-sight/eye level is slightly above the lower edge of the screen - so I'm sitting quite low in relation to the screen.

Well, problem is I see a very obvious loss of brightness from the top to the bottom of the screen. The upper part of the screen (light from the projector is hitting there at a 90° angle) is as bright and vibrant as one can wish. But (perceived) brightness is declining steadily from there down to the lower part which is really dim in comparison. I didn't see anything like that with my former (much cheaper) screen - although installation/angles where slightly different. I was buying the Studiotek under the impression that the viewing cone is exceptionally wide in both horizontal and vertical directions and installation/placement was quite fool proof... But I take it that this actually has nothing to do with the viewing cone as the part of the screen I'm looking at at an 90° angle is actually the dimmest.


Obviously this question may sound quite naive but would you care to explain what is going on and how to improve things? Is the Studiotek retro- or angular- reflective? *And most importantly: What is the optimal setup (projector/seating/screen position) for getting the best performance/brightness uniformity the Studiotek has to offer. How can I achieve it's peak performance?* Thank you very much for your time.


----------



## DanFrancis

OK, let's start with the easy question: the G3 versions of Stewart's screens contain a finer optical coating than before to reduce what's known as "sparklies" A phenomenon where you'll see the light from the projector reflect off of one specific element of the optical coating. (think a single grain of salt reflecting light back at you). Now here's the fun part: we've had CRT projectors displaying 1080P in the original Studiotek material for years- without the issue of sparklies....interesting.


Now, on to your brightness uniformity issue: it sounds like the screen you had before was closer to a unity-gain (that would reflect light almost perfectly evenly in all directions, but would appear to have less "punch" than a screen with 1.3 gain (like your curent screen).

So, when you changed to the Studiotek- you increased gain (and size?) and by doing so, changed the manner in which the reflected light is dispersed into your room. A screen with a gain greater than 1 is going to reflect light more intensely perpendicular to the screen, and then less intensely as you move away from the perpendicular (in ALL directions). It seems to me that what has happened when you changed the screen, what was a perfectly fine viewing position with the previous screen has move to outside the optimal VERTICAL viewing angle with the ST130 (your head is too low).

The way I see it, you've got a couple options: the first is to raise the seating by placing it on a riser. Second; you could lower the screen and projector (each the same amount). Optimally, you'd like your head (when it's in the normal viewing position) to be about 30% up from the bottom of the screen. Check this by breaking-out the trusty ladder, project a full-white screen, and watch the screen as you walk up the ladder- notice where the screen appears brighter and where it turns dimmer. Remember that as you reach the top of the screen, that the bottom of the screen will look the same; so that can give you an idea of where you'd like to have your head.


In a perfect world, the projector is aimed at dead-center of the screen (with no lens shift) and the viewer's head would be located between the bottom and 33% up from the bottom. At that point you would see no (or very little) brightness uniformity issues (also depends greatly on the optics of the projector, and how much zoom you've used).


Now, I have to ask some questions of you:

Since this is a brand-new screen, did you purchase it from an authorized Stewart dealer?


If so, did they offer installation?-was it refused?


Did your dealer give you any guidance during this process, or did you just call them up and say "I want a Studiotek 130 in XXXsize with ___frame..."?


please don't be offended that I'm asking you these questions, I'm just trying to figure-out if it was the DIY spirit or an inattentive dealer that contributed to your current issues.

If possible, could you post some pictures of the installation? Some wide-angle shots that have the screen and seats, and seats and projector in them would give me a better idea of what's going-on, and perhaps allow me to give you some better advice.


I hope this is helping you.


Dan


----------



## TheLion




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DanFrancis* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> OK, let's start with the easy question: the G3 versions of Stewart's screens contain a finer optical coating than before to reduce what's known as "sparklies" A phenomenon where you'll see the light from the projector reflect off of one specific element of the optical coating. (think a single grain of salt reflecting light back at you). Now here's the fun part: we've had CRT projectors displaying 1080P in the original Studiotek material for years- without the issue of sparklies....interesting.
> 
> 
> Now, on to your brightness uniformity issue: it sounds like the screen you had before was closer to a unity-gain (that would reflect light almost perfectly evenly in all directions, but would appear to have less "punch" than a screen with 1.3 gain (like your curent screen).
> 
> So, when you changed to the Studiotek- you increased gain (and size?) and by doing so, changed the manner in which the reflected light is dispersed into your room. A screen with a gain greater than 1 is going to reflect light more intensely perpendicular to the screen, and then less intensely as you move away from the perpendicular (in ALL directions). It seems to me that what has happened when you changed the screen, what was a perfectly fine viewing position with the previous screen has move to outside the optimal VERTICAL viewing angle with the ST130 (your head is too low).
> 
> The way I see it, you've got a couple options: the first is to raise the seating by placing it on a riser. Second; you could lower the screen and projector (each the same amount). Optimally, you'd like your head (when it's in the normal viewing position) to be about 30% up from the bottom of the screen. Check this by breaking-out the trusty ladder, project a full-white screen, and watch the screen as you walk up the ladder- notice where the screen appears brighter and where it turns dimmer. Remember that as you reach the top of the screen, that the bottom of the screen will look the same; so that can give you an idea of where you'd like to have your head.
> 
> 
> In a perfect world, the projector is aimed at dead-center of the screen (with no lens shift) and the viewer's head would be located between the bottom and 33% up from the bottom. At that point you would see no (or very little) brightness uniformity issues (also depends greatly on the optics of the projector, and how much zoom you've used).
> 
> 
> Now, I have to ask some questions of you:
> 
> Since this is a brand-new screen, did you purchase it from an authorized Stewart dealer?
> 
> 
> If so, did they offer installation?-was it refused?
> 
> 
> Did your dealer give you any guidance during this process, or did you just call them up and say "I want a Studiotek 130 in XXXsize with ___frame..."?
> 
> 
> please don't be offended that I'm asking you these questions, I'm just trying to figure-out if it was the DIY spirit or an inattentive dealer that contributed to your current issues.
> 
> If possible, could you post some pictures of the installation? Some wide-angle shots that have the screen and seats, and seats and projector in them would give me a better idea of what's going-on, and perhaps allow me to give you some better advice.
> 
> 
> I hope this is helping you.
> 
> 
> Dan



Dan,


thank you very much for your reply.


About the dealer: Sure, I bought it from an authorized dealer. Problem is/was: At the time I bought it I've just sold my old projector and was building my new room. So the screen came first. I did demo alot of different materials but decided very quickly that Studiotek was the right choice for me. I use it in a "bat cave", black painted walls and ceiling, floor with a dark carpet and I sure enjoy the increased "snap" and punch in the picture compared to gray materials like the Firehawk. I generally prefer projectors with very good black level so no help needed in that department. Studiotek is just the natural choice for me.

And it was certainly my DIY spirit and not the "fault" of the dealer. I guess my screen is "defect" - as strange as this may sound.


Some data about me system: Screen is a Stewart Luxues Deluxe Screenwall, 10 feet wide, Studiotek.

I'm sitting 15 feet away, eye level slightly above bottom of the screen. Projector is a Sharp Z20000 1080p DLP. Ceiling mounted. 19 feet from the screen. Center of the lens aligned with the top of the screen (zero lensshift/offset).


I think that's a VERY common setup. I fully understand that brightness uniformity will not be perfect in my case BUT I really think that something is awfully wrong here. I don't have a brightness uniformity problem - I have ZERO uniformity. It is a gradient from bright at the top of the screen to really dim at the bottom. The difference is really quite striking. I will try to move things around and see if there is any improvement. BUT I think the Studiotek should give me much better uniformity at the common angles I have in my setup. I saw alot of Studiotek setups (some with much more adventurous angles than mine) and none showed isses like the one I'm seeing.


----------



## TheLion

Little update: Mr. Mark Robinson from Stewart Filmscreen Corp has kindly offered to take care of my problem.


----------



## schrep

I've read through this thread and still am a little unsure about which of these screens is better for the following setup:


Epson Pro Cinema 810 Projector (traded for a AX-100u because of more flexible lens shift)

92" 16x9 Screen (wanted smaller screen for brightness)

13' seating distance

13-14' throw range


This is in a shared living room/kitchen - so performance in ambient light and viewing angle (so can be viewed from kitchen) are important. I know those are often counter goals so I'd put the emphasis on the ambient light rejection.


My local deal simply said "get the SST only if you have a Pearl" which seemed kinda silly. Any pointers as to which is a better screen for my application?


Thanks!


Mike


----------



## Waterbeast

I am upgrading my current system to Runco's VX-22d(~2500ANSI). The viewing width of my screen is going to be 175.75" after taking the frame in to account. Runco's site says they recommended picture size widths of 80"-180" on a 16:9 screen and the Max width is 300" for the VX-22d. I am at the top end of what they recommend but I am going with a 2.35 Stewart microperf screen so I should have less over all screen area than a 16:9 screen of the same width.


My question is:


What is the best screen material to match up with the size and PJ being used? Still looking at the FireHawk G3 Microperf that has a 1.25gain or would it be better to go with a Ultramatte 150/200 giving a 1.5/2.0 gain white screen? The set up is in a dedicated room and I have 100% light control. At times the lights are on in the room while watching sporting events or during parties.The lights are dimmable. Right now I am at a 18' throw but could go all the way back to 27' if needed and would that be advised? I hear that may help me not get the hotspots in the screen. I am going with the cinawide with autoscope options as well so that can shorten things some on the throw. Any suggestions?


Thanks,

Waterbeast


----------



## dllawson

I am looking at a Stewart lx100hghb Grayhawk motorized screen, but don't know what model this is on the Stewart website. Does anyone know about this screen. I assume it's a grayhawk RS material, but what model of electric screen is it?


Thanks, Dan


----------



## ClaudeD

Quite a number of years ago, just BEFORE Grayhawk and Firehawk arrived for LCD projectors, I installed a Sony VPL-VW10HT (1000/700 Lumens) projector with a Stewart 110" Diagonal Microperfed screen.


I got moire, but by defocussing somewhat, it worked well enough. In any case, my life was involved in other things (starting a business, selling a business), and I didn't use the system very much. I've just finished some construction at the house, bought a couple of 1080p RPTVs, and my mind wandered to "is it worth it to upgrade the projector, or do I have to upgrade both the projector and the screen, and isn't that just starting over?"


So, to my understanding, moire occurs because there is too much "similarity" between the perforations and the pixels projected. Since the Sony is a 1366x768 (IIRC) projector, would a new 1080 projector make things right (i.e., no moire). Is the StudioTek 130 a suitable material for an SXRD projector (I'm a fan of Sony, for better or worse).


I have probably omitted something important, but would be appreciative of any help that you can provide.


Claude


----------



## cameronl

hi, I've just moved overseas - and because of it my stewart luxus firehawk was in a boat container for 3 months.


I've examined my screen and it is fairly well creased/rippled on the surface. Is there anything I can do? I've had it in the down position for a couple of days and it hasn't seemed to make much of a difference.


Please help










thanks


CaM


----------



## jmf

*Screen questions for high lens shift set-up*


Hi everyone. I've been lurking for awhile on the boards and I think I've learned a lot but now I'm ready to buy my projector and screen and need your advice.


I will be watching HD sports, DVD's and HDTV all in fairly equal proportion. The room can be pretty well light controlled but it's cave-like at all (fairly light colored walls.) Also, I don't want total darkness when watching my Steelers (next year sadly.)


Right now I am leaning towards the Panasonic 1000 more than anything because of the unique amount of lens shift that it offers. As you'll se below, I think I need a lot of it.



Here are the distances:


There will be one line of seats (a couch actually) where the viewers will be 10'2" from the screen.

They'll be at normal height (say eyes at 36").

The projector will be 10'6" from screen in a shelf-like cutout in a soffit.

The height of the shelf is 9'3".

This will be a motorized screen.


So here are my quesitons:



1. How big should my screen be? I like to sit in the middle of a theater so the super immersive experience is not for me.


2. What screens should I consider? I am definitely considering Stewart. Which Stewart should I get?


3. How high should I put the bottom of my screen?



Thanks in advance for your help. This forum is an amazing source of information and help.


Jonas


----------



## brianlvi3

I had a Stewart electric screen that had been rolled up wrong and all kinds wrinkles were in it. What they suggested at Stewart was to leave in ALL the way down, I mean past the way you had it for viewing. I used a hair drier on the back, be careful not to make it too hot. After about 2 weeks or so I rolled it up for about a week. No more wrinkles or creases.


----------



## Audiophiliac

Installed 3 pieces of Starglas (69" wide) in a church today. Hung them from a 24' ceiling. It turned out decent. They are using some cheap projectors to show VGA from a PC so the image wasnt stunning, but in a fully lit room, the picture was just as bright as a plasma would have been. Awesome stuff! Heavy...but worth it.


----------



## cameronl

thanks for the reply. It does seem to be getting better over time.


I'll try the hairdryer from behind the screen










CaM


----------



## Jmouse007

I am in the market for a 92" motorized screen to go with a Sony Pearl. I have looked at a number of options and keep coming back to the Stewart Firehawk SST. That said, I have looked at three different motorized SST's at three different locations (two Best Buy Magnolia locations and one large independent store) and I noticed the same problem with these screens at every one of these locations; every screen had the infamous "ladder marks" effects (horizontal lines/imprints/dents running across the entire length of the screen at very regular/specific intervals). None of the sales people at any of the locations had a good explanation other than saying it was inherent in the design (the dents being caused when the screen is rolled and stored out of sight when not in use).


My room location dictates a retractable screen as opposed to a fixed screen. As much as I would love to own a 92" 16/9 tab tensioned Firehawk SST, I can not see spending thousands of dollars more for this screen over a competitor just to end up with a ladder mark problem. Don't get me wrong, the screen material is beautiful and a perfect match for the Sony Pearl BUT for that kind of money/premium price, the screen should be perfectly smooth whether or not the screen is retracted/stored for any length of time.


By the way, every salesman said they would contact Stewart, find out what the explanation for the problem was and get back to me... So far, no one has contacted me with an answer to the mysterious SST "ladder marks" and if it is an ongoing problem with the Firehawk motorized/retractable screens.


I am therefore open to suggestions/alternatives for the Sony Pearl, thanks in advance.


----------



## KorCar1

I'm planning on going with a Stewart 123" screen for my new theater. The PJ will be the Panny AE1000U. My room has black carpet, front wall, and ceiling, and dark plum colored walls. (All flat paint) No windows in the room, and all lights are on dimmers. The first row of seating is at 13.5'. The farthest back I can mount the PJ is around 21', but I would prefer to mount it at around 17'. (Ceiling mount). Now, with all that information in mind, what would be the best screen type and PJ mounting distance? I'm leaning toward the Ultramatte 200, since my PJ could use the extra fL help, but I'm worried about hot-spotting. Should I worry about that or not? How far back should I mount the PJ? Should I go with the 150 instead? Help! This is my first theater, and I want to do it right. TIA


----------



## jlanzy

ST130/ULTRAMATTE150/ULTRAMATTE200- which would be best for the JVC RS1, total light control, 14w x 19 x 8 dark gray room, scope 122x52 fixed deluxe luxus,with panamorph anamorphic lens u380 on motorized mount, projector lens level to top of sceen at 17 ft from screen, seating is 14 ft from screen. (did I miss anything?)

thanks in advance for any opinions,

joe


----------



## Jmouse007

I am still waiting for someone to answer my post. It is surprising that no one from Stewart is willing to address the ladder problems I mentioned. Does that mean that the ladder problem is common with their electric screens so they are unwilling to talk about it? Like I said previously, for that kind of money there shouldn't be ANY problems like this.


----------



## DanFrancis

There's a multitude of possible reasons for what you saw. Temperature, period of time being rolled-up vs down (especially on new screens), too much adhesive on the spindle bobbin, drop adjustment not being set properly, etc.


So you haven't purchased the screen? You've only seen these at Magnolias and 1 independent? were they all Firehawk SSTs? or were there other screen materials in the 92" size?


Ultimately, it sounds to me like the instructions for the screen install weren't followed exactly- I seem to remember something about leaving the screen down overnight after the screen is first installed (to reduce the smell of the substrate, as well as let the material "settle").


If you're really concerned about Stewart's product quality (generally considered to be the best in the industry), then you can reach them at 1-800-762-4999 or at 1-310-784-5300.


Dan


P.S. I DON'T work for Stewart.


----------



## SimpleTheater




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jmouse007* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I am still waiting for someone to answer my post. It is surprising that no one from Stewart is willing to address the ladder problems I mentioned. Does that mean that the ladder problem is common with their electric screens so they are unwilling to talk about it? Like I said previously, for that kind of money there shouldn't be ANY problems like this.



Have you called Stewart? This site is not run by Stewart.


Maybe you absolutely require a motorized screen, but you are going to take a small hit on video quality. Fixed screens provide the best image - especially as the years pass - but fixed screens have a big problem, they're fixed.


----------



## Jmouse007

Two different Magnolia stores that have the problem have called Stewart, mentioned the problem and asked them to get back to them with an answer... That was over two weeks ago. Still no answer from Stewart. I guess they are afraid to tell them that the problem is normal. I even asked the Stewart rep that answers questions on this Stewart thread and he hasn't ever responded either. $4000 screen and they are unwilling to respond to a very real problem. NOR good for business or potential customers.


As for video quality re an electric retractible screen I know but like you said, a wall is FIXED and I can not go that rout.


----------



## bebop86

hey- I currently have a screen research 10' wide screen- i am using the Meridian MF-1 PJ- I feel I need a higher gain screen to add Punch to the pic- Would the new G3 firehawk be a good combo with the meridian(My room is light controlled-


----------



## m Robinson

Stewart Responding....


Stewart Filmscreen has proprietary roller tubes extruded from aluminum with a step integrated into the tube which exactly matches the thickness of the screen fabric and adhesive used to attach the fabric. We still get an ocasional ladder line, which is usually in the first wrap only, in the black-drop, and not in the image area. We inspect every incoming load of tubes with dental impression plastic, to measure that the step dimension is not drifting. Even still, we get laddering lines here and there, and we believe them to be temperature and use related. The more a roller screen is used, the better it will look. The screens which are problematic for us, are units mounted in poorly insulated ceiling spaces, and units which are seldom used.


As a percentage, we provide less than 30% of our product in roller configurations, and the compromises inherent in making and using a roller, factor in to this. What we encourage for customers who have to have a roller screen is to use the screen as much as possible. Leave it down overnight when you can, and if you have a second home which is used infrequently, leave it down if possible, especially if the home is not air conditioned when it's closed for a season.


We replace units for ladder lines, a few per year, but we're on this issue very closely as company policy.


I have a roller in my family room, it is used about three nights per week. I have ususally one line in the black, and one very faint line right at the top of the image, right as we lower it, and it flattens out to undetectable in about 15 minutes time.


I think that in general you will find that Stewart Filmscreen rollers are as good or better quality than any functional alternative in the market, and we support them to a degree which is the envy of the industry. What goes on in showrooms is largely beyond our control and sadly, not necessarily optimum.


I apologize for not participating much here lately, the P.M. and other modes of contact sort of snowballed on me, and I had to focus on other projects.


Regards,


Mark


----------



## Jmouse007

Thank you for taking the time to answer my post I greatly appreciate it. That said, both of the Magnolia stores in Portsmouth and Manchester, NH at Best Buy stores have retracting Firehawk SST display screens with ladder lines on their screens, not just one or two but between 5 and 6 and they are VERY prominent. Employees from both stores called Stewart weeks ago looking for answers and have not received a call back. I know because they were going to call me with the answer to the lines as soon as Stewart responded to their queries. Needless to say, at the time it had an impact on my thinking about purchasing a Stewart Screen. You may want to contact them. By the way, your answers proved very helpful. Thanks again


----------



## steebo777




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ClaudeD* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Quite a number of years ago, just BEFORE Grayhawk and Firehawk arrived for LCD projectors, I installed a Sony VPL-VW10HT (1000/700 Lumens) projector with a Stewart 110" Diagonal Microperfed screen.
> 
> 
> I got moire, but by defocussing somewhat, it worked well enough. In any case, my life was involved in other things (starting a business, selling a business), and I didn't use the system very much. I've just finished some construction at the house, bought a couple of 1080p RPTVs, and my mind wandered to "is it worth it to upgrade the projector, or do I have to upgrade both the projector and the screen, and isn't that just starting over?"
> 
> 
> So, to my understanding, moire occurs because there is too much "similarity" between the perforations and the pixels projected. Since the Sony is a 1366x768 (IIRC) projector, would a new 1080 projector make things right (i.e., no moire). Is the StudioTek 130 a suitable material for an SXRD projector (I'm a fan of Sony, for better or worse).
> 
> 
> I have probably omitted something important, but would be appreciative of any help that you can provide.
> 
> 
> Claude



Just sent you a PM about this.


----------



## keyser

Have stewart made the finish on the ultramatte150 smoother like they did with the newer versions of the firehawk and studiotech?


I put a sample of the original Firehawk on my 1.0 gain white Da-Lite and I noticed sparklies from 14 feet back. I got 2 friends that don´t know diddly about home theater to check out the sample, and said nothing to them beforhand. I asked them if they saw a difference between the small sample and the screen. They both said it looked the same, except for the brighter sparklie bits on the firehawk.


Maybe it´s because I have a a bright pic(25ftl maybe), but to all 3 of us the screen was terribly obvious. The only screen with gain above 1 that I haven´t noticed sparklies is the high power and silverstar(which has "sheen"), but it was very little with the ST130.


----------



## m Robinson

Hello Keyser,


When you compare a true matte screen to most gain screens you'll be able to detect the mechanism by which the gain is raised, to certain degree, based upon viewing distance, axial positioning, and the quality of the fabric, for the most part.


As has been pointed out numerous times here, and in other sources, one of the greatest attributes of a matte screen surface is the total smooth surface, free of artifact, which gives the very smooth continuous high resolution image.


The matte types of products also offer very wide viewing cones and super white point accuracy when they are formulated correctly.


Since you have (possibly, probably) 25 foot Lamberts coming off your screen surface, fantastic, you've avoided one of the possible problems of a matte screen, which is difficulty in reproducing convincing energy at the top of the dynamic range. This of course is very easy to manage with screen size and projector brightness, so it's really not a big deal.


The most critical installation factor with the use of matte surfaces is the need to tightly control all ambient and cross reflected light within the viewing area. The same "Lambertian" mechanism which gives the matte family of products their wonderful off axis viewing capability, makes them very receptive to any reflected light, which plummets contrast ratio in the venue. Light control is beneficial with gain screen too, especially since digital projectors still struggle a bit with the rendition of black, when compared with CRT projectors. But we're nearly done with that thankfully.


In our experience, most installations in the home are sized at 84" and above, with the most common sizes being, 100 inch diagonal and 110 inch diagonal. Very many of the leading projectors, new out of the box, prior to any calibration, or lamp degradation, are capable of some portion of 1000 claimed Lumens, but in reality, produce somewhere between 500 and 750 when new, in believable color space and gray scale calibration.


So knowing that the enthusiast has little interest in constant lamp replacement, we by necessity enter the harrowing confines of the need to use a "gain" screen.

AAAHHHHHHHhhhhhhhhh............it's going to be o.k.


So we engineer an optical surface which doesn't make light, it steers light, away from the outer edges of the viewing area, more toward the source of the light. There is a trade-off, as usual for that activity. Some of the trade is beneficial, less light spilling on side walls, ceiling and floor, results in less degradation of contrast ratio by reflected light returning to the screen surface and lightening black performance. Also beneficial, improved brightness at the top of the dynamic range.


If we do a poor job, there are penalties for using a gain screen. Sparklies is one. Color shift is another. It is also possible to have the screen become distractingly "visible", it pops out at the viewer in solid color fields, and white fields, or reveals fixed texture or grain, when content is panned across the surface. Narrow viewing cones and hotspotting is another common problem with gain screens. Long throws aid with this, but the prevalence of visible hotspotting is the bane of a poorly engineered or specified gain screen.


But it's possible to carefully make a compromise and skillfully produce a gain surface which will remain invisible to the viewer, but will enhance and complement the available projectors, provided the room is matched to the fabric capabilities, and the viewing distance is reasonable. At the higher gain values, it's much more difficult to make a screen which remains integrated with the content and doesn't emerge as described above.


Ultramatte 150 is a fabric which is formulated for large venues, it still has a pretty decent viewing cone, and the surface is very fine. It is designed for large scale Professional Cinema display where brighteness is specified to be 13 to 24 foot Lamberts. If it is used in a hyper illuminated state, where it is over 30 foot Lamberts, there would be some solarizing or sparkling evident in bright white, or panned sunlit sky shots etc. At that point the screen separates from the content etc.


We're offering a good variety of fabric options for front projection, between the gain of .7 Graymatte, up into .95 Grayhawk RS, then Snomatte 1.0 Matte White, the Firehawk SST at 1.1 gain, then Firehawk G-3 at 1.25 gain, then Studiotek 130, 1.3 gain, Ultramatte 130 also 1.3 Larger format, slightly narrower viewing cone, then Ultramatte 150 at 1.5 gain, then Ultramatte 200 at 2.0 gain. Each of these fabrics can be correctly matched to an environment, to an image scale, and with a projector, to disappear, and create an image at the optimum performance capabitly of the room and projector. What you get is totally dependent on how skilfully we assess the room, the size the projector, and match a fabric to those factors.


The Firehawk fabric has been revised several times now, based upon customer feedback and our observations. Sparklies have definitely been reduced. The Ultramatte product family has been available from Stewart since the 60's and has been revised many times. Studiotek 130 has recently undergone further revision. Grayhawk RS has been revised, in a major way a few years back and is now getting a finer textured optical coating. We're always working on our products, but using the right product is the most important part of the process.


----------



## IanK

We just moved and I am setting up a new HT and need to get a new screen. Since I last looked into this, Stewart has added several new screen fabrics and I need some help making the choice. I realize this topic has come up multiple times lately, but to me, there are still some important questions that i am unclear about.


1) Of the three grey fabrics, Greyhawk RS, Firehawk 3, and FH SST, which is best at ambient light rejection?


2) of those same three, which is best at enhancing perceived black levels and contrast?


While the biggest difference between these materials is the gain, these other factors are also important to me and i have not seen these discussed here. If i just missed it, if someone could direct me to correct thread i would appreciate it.


Lastly,i think it reflects very well on Stewart that Mr Robinson takes the time to participate in this forum.

thanks so much,


Ian


----------



## Brad/Viper-Fan




m Robinson said:


> "We're offering a good variety of fabric options for front projection, between the gain of .7 Graymatte, up into .95 Grayhawk RS, then Snomatte 1.0 Matte White, the Firehawk SST at 1.1 gain, then Firehawk G-3 at 1.25 gain, then Studiotek 130, 1.3 gain, Ultramatte 130 also 1.3 Larger format, slightly narrower viewing cone, then Ultramatte 150 at 1.5 gain, then Ultramatte 200 at 2.0 gain. Each of these fabrics can be correctly matched to an environment, to an image scale, and with a projector, to disappear, and create an image at the optimum performance capabitly of the room and projector. What you get is totally dependent on how skilfully we assess the room, the size the projector, and match a fabric to those factors."
> 
> 
> 
> Mark,
> 
> I am about to order a ST130 THX Micro Perf 1.78-1 drop down screen. Will you confirm if this is the correct fabric choice for the following room:
> 
> 
> -12ft wide with medium brown (milk chocolate) color walls
> 
> - 8ft ceiling (dark chocolate)
> 
> - carpet floor dark brown
> 
> - Screen (49"x 87") drops in front of black velvet curtains on the 12ft wide wall
> 
> - Projector is the new JVC RS1
> 
> - No ambient light
> 
> 
> With this white screen, are these colors dark enough to stop cross reflected light from returning to the screen?
> 
> 
> In general, does cross reflected light return the color of the room to the white screen? Ex. if the room is a shade of red or green or yellow or brown etc. will the screen be tinted that shade?
> 
> 
> With the 10% light loss due to Micro Perf, would you recommend using the Ultramatte 150 to get back that light loss?
> 
> 
> Thanks for your help Mark, your posts are very informative.


----------



## m Robinson

Ian,


Graymatte and Grayhawk do not reject ambient light to the degree that either Firehawk SST or Firehawk G-3 do. But they have wider viewing cones and better color uniformity. In rawest terms Firehawk G-3 rejects ambient light more effectively, when ambient light is higher. Some folks percieve this as being at too high a price with regard to the portrayal of white, especially when there is not very much ambient light, or when lumens are scarce. But Firehawk fabrics can make some environments usable which otherwise are not. They also really complement projectors with limited sequential contrast performance.


To answer which fabric is the best for percieved black level? That answer is as usual, room dependent. If the room is mostly dark, with some close coupled walls cross reflecting, but no stray light, and there is a powerful projector compared to image size, then Grayhawk is gray enough. If there are cross reflected and some ambient sources of light, then one of the Firehawk fabrics will be more satisfying. The question is not as simple as stated. The question should include room factors.


Brad,


I agree with your choice. I have seen colors in projection environments, wash back to the screen. But when I've seen it, the surfaces creating the effect were glossy and the projectors were really short throw. If the colors are muted, which is to say closer to black than to white, and low gloss, you should be fine.

Are you using a roller so that you can listen to multichannel audio only without the screen? Cause otherwise, you are describing a nice dedicated room.


And, thank you both for the nice comments,


regards,


Mark R.


----------



## craigsze

Hi Mark, Thanks for all the information you provide.

I'm installing a Sony VPL-VW50 projector in a 14'x14' room and am looking for a 100" screen - microperf and drop down. The walls are chocolate brown, the ceiling is a deep red and the room is light controlled. I'm leaning toward the SST screen primarily because it was designed for this projector but didn't know if the short throw (10.5-11'), the need for microperf and the close seating arrangements would dictate a better option.

Thanks again,

Craig


----------



## Brad/Viper-Fan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Brad,
> 
> 
> I agree with your choice. I have seen colors in projection environments, wash back to the screen. But when I've seen it, the surfaces creating the effect were glossy and the projectors were really short throw. If the colors are muted, which is to say closer to black than to white, and low gloss, you should be fine.
> 
> Are you using a roller so that you can listen to multichannel audio only without the screen? Cause otherwise, you are describing a nice dedicated room.
> 
> 
> And, thank you both for the nice comments,
> 
> 
> regards,
> 
> 
> Mark R.




Thanks Mark, for the confirmation and the detailed explanation!







My walls will be flat not glossy and I need the roller because the screen will be in front of a window.

With the Micro-Perf screen does the speaker need to be a full 12inches behind the screen minimum?


----------



## IanK

Mark,

thanks for the quick reply.

Our new HT is going in our family room, unfortunately, rather than a dedicated room. We will have light colored walls and some degree of ambient light around most of the time. Thus, based on your comments, it sounds like Firehawk is the way to go for us.

thanks again for your help

Ian


----------



## pcarey

Brad - I will let Mark give the official answer but I use a stewart AT fixed screen and my speakers are 8" behind. Seems to work fine for me. My original design was 4" because I hadn't properly considering it. I used a piece of paper and ultra loud volumes to test movement of air and distance and 4" was definitely not enough but 8" seemed OK.


Piers


----------



## drcarr

i just recieved my panasonic ax100u and need to get a screen to match. everyone seems to be recommending stewart.

dedicated room with no ambiant light. tan walls/white ceiling, 18' throw, 15-17' seating, and must be an electric drop screen. ~120" screen.

any recommendations as to which stewart screen to buy? model and material?

thanks!


----------



## m Robinson

Hello,


Craig sze, Since you are perforating, and will lose 10% of the screen gain as a consequence, and you have taken nice steps to control cross refected light, I'd be tempted to steer you toward Studiotek 130. It also deals with shorter throw better than either Firehawk fabric. So over the life of the bulb, and as a consequence of calibration, I believe the theatre would be more punchy and satisfying with Studiotek.


Brad V-F, and Piers, The best sound obtained in anechoic testing with our Micro-perfed fabrics is with the drivers at 12" and if you can do a ten degree toe in, that helps too. And by the way, competing products also benefit measurably from that set-up. 8" is not quite as uniform, a bit more comb filtering, but not as much comb filtering as close coupled at 2 inches, but try the toe in Piers. Also, however, comb filtering looks way worse on paper than it sounds to your ears. Your ears very easily average the effect. If you auditioned two systems, one with "comb" filtering and one without, you'd hear it, no question. But what you would hear would be the non filtered one would be a bit louder, and would have more unrestricted upper mids and treble. The worse effect of comb filtering is that some seats are affected differently in the venue. So you might develop a favorite seat acoustically, which might not be your favorite seat visually. But lots of folks when they hear the difference in sound between the presence of our perf and the sound when the screen goes up, feel that a slight volume adjustment is the actual effect.



Ian,

Yep, when the ambient light is not controllable, the Firehawk is the weapon of choice.



dr. Carr,

That is a large screen, here is what I would do, at minimum get the ceiling painted black, or have it upholstered with dark fabric, forming a sort of proscenium above the screen fabric, extending four feet out from the screen into the venue. Use a Studiotek to retain brightness over the life of the bulb. You could go for Firehawk, but you might be underwhelmed as the bulb goes down. You would have better blacks, but that's on the big side image wise.


The Visionary screen is fantastic if your joists are parallel to the screen surface. Your dealer can explain the other options.


----------



## krfuquamd

Mark,


Is it too soon to get your input on stewart screen choice to go with a JVC RS1? I am awaiting delivery of this projector and need to choose a screen to go with it. The RS1 will be ceiling mounted( 9' ceiling ) about 14.5 feet from the screen in a 14' wide by 20' long light controlled room. Dark burgundy walls, dark navy blue ceiling, dark carpet. 2 rows of seating, 4 berk 090's in each row at 13 and 19 feet. I'd like the largest 16 by 9 screen my projector and room will handle without having concern for brightness. I am also concerned about making sure those sitting in the outer recliners have an adequate picture to look at as well. I have been thinking about minimum 8' wide and would go 9'wide if I could. It seems the Studiotek 130 might be the choice but wanted your input if you don't mind. Thanks.


krfuquamd


P.S. What is the turnaround time generally on screen orders these days from time of order until delivery to customer?


----------



## Toe

Just received my ST130 94" diag today from AVS (thanks Jason







)and just want to say I am extremely impressed so far! Came just in the nick of time as I am going out of town soon. I dont have a projector at the moment, so my satisfaction is from the build quality, screen quality, and the amazing packing job! I have owned 4 other screens which were a Severtsen (nice screen) and 3 Caradas. This Stewart is the best packed screen of all of them. The Severtsen came packed very nice as well, but Carada needs to take a que from Stewart and Severtsen and place their screen material in a protective tube (Stewart) or a seperate box (Severtsen). This makes all the difference in the world. My Stewart is completely wrinkle free right off the bat, as was the Severtsen since no frame members were pressing against it. The Carada has no protection for the screen material, and as a result comes out with quite a few creases/wrinkles that still are not fully out after a few weeks (atleast in my experience with the 3 I had) being stretched on the frame.


Thats all I got for now. Cant wait to fire up my RS1 on it!


----------



## ClaudeD

I have a micro-perfed Stewart 110" 16:9 electric screen with the 130 material. I purchased it some years ago, right before GrayHawk and other similar materials became available. My Sony VPL-VW10 has significant moire with the screen material.

*First Question:* Do you think that a VPL-VW50 (at 1080p) would have less moire effect than the VW10 (at 768p)?


I just can't get a budget from my wife that allows replacing the screen material AND the projector.

*Second Question:* How feasible (i.e., costly) would it be to get the material replaced in an electric roll-down screen of 110" size?


Thanks in advance.


----------



## GetGray

Mark:


Glad you've had some time to participate. I have an old question I'd still appreciate some input with. It's main issue revolves around a using one of your curved screens I know you are busy so I'll try to be concise:


I'll try to give you the info to assist me:


1. As a current 110" 16:9 Firehawk owner I have been very pleased with the Stewart product. In particular I've been a fan of the FH. My FH is about 2 years old, I think it s second generation, not sure how to tell.


2. Throw is about 1.8x. At this throw, and with my PJ, any hotspotting hasn't bothered me.


3. PJ. I use a Infocus 777 3 chip DLP. After having a bright PJ I can't see changing. I run a ND filter on it and when the bulb ages some more, I'll remove it, so I'll always have a fairly bright PJ I hope. Happy to change bulbs as necessary. When/if 3 chip 1080 DLP or an equal bright unit comes out, I'll change. Till then, top of the line 720 is working fine for me.


BUT, as I ask about material below, note that I do fully expect to move to 1080 before I'm ready to change screens. I'd like this to be my last screen.


3. Room: Good light control. "Normal" multifunction room generally being designed with priorities toward the HT purpose. It is not a bat cave, but it has no light from uncontrolled sources either.


I'm finishing this room (as soon as I can get my CineSlide anamorphic lens transport wrapped up ( www.cineslide.com ))







that is. So, as I finish it, I can add black fabric/treatment on the walls, and ceiling close to the screen as you have recommended to others, don't know about the floor, probably not.


Even though I don't "need" the ambient rejection abilities of the FH all the time, for those times when a little ambient will be around I have really liked it's flexibility a lot. Once in a while the wife likes to sit under a very small beam focused dimmed halogen and knit while watching her HDTV shows. That's it for ambient other than cross reflected light. There have been times when the kids wanted low lights on so they could play while watching. I can/will be able to have any light directed away from the screen but I can see times when there would be some ambient albeit controlled.


4. My screen will be 2.35, and one of your curved models. I like the curve for its pincushion correction properties, but to be honest, I just love the way they look. Very cool










I plan to use one that is approximately the same height as my 110" 16:9, so that puts the 2.35 screen size in the 126" range IIRC.


I do not plan on a AT screen at this time.


5. I will use my IscoIII and move the lens in and out of place, so I'd like a curve that is a happy medium between lens on and lens not on. But the curve radius is another topic.


With that background I would be grateful for some input on fabric selection.


Screen material:


One thing that hasn't been discussed much with curved screens is the curves effect on hotspotting. Logic tells me it will help in that regard. On the other hand, I'd expect a 126" wide 2.35 screen to have a detrimental effect on hotspotting.


I had originally planned on getting another Firehawk but I'm concerned about issues from both the width/throw, and the curve.


One of my concerns is how the FH viewing angle will behave with the curved frame. Right now, the mild hotspot produced on my 110" isn't something that bothers me at all. As I said, logic tells me the curve would help alleviate the FH hotspotting at the edges, but I don't have a feel for how much, or for that matter, if that's the case. My seating will be 4 seats, about 8' wide total. One row for main viewing. Seating distance about 12-14'


I considered a GHRS with it's 180deg cone, but I've leaned toward the FH for it's ambient rejection capabilities. I hate to get a unity or negative gain screen if one day I have to go back to a "dim" projector. Right now that's not a problem.


Can you give me some input on fabric selection? Which of the new FH's might work best, or should I reconsider using a GH ST130, etc.?


How will the curve come into play for viewing issues other than geometry?


Thanks,

Scott


----------



## craigsze

Mark, Thank you for steering me towards the Studiotek 130. It sounds like the right screen choice for me with either the Sony VPL-VW50 or the new JVC.


Regarding Microperf, I'm being told by my AV guy who says that his Stewart rep told him that Stewart microperf's each screen differently based upon the characteristics of the projector. What works well today with my projector might produce a moire effect if I change projectors in the future. Is that true? Thanks.


----------



## m Robinson

KR,

It is a few days to early to ask this question.

I have not personally measured the RS-1/HD-1 projector yet. Somewhat reliable sources tell me to expect about 700 calibrated Ansi Lumens. So since you have done a nice job of managing light within your theater space, the Studiotek is a great choice.


I'm fairly certain that a 110" diagonal, (8 feet wide) would be a great compromize size in that room, with that projector, at that distance. Any wider, would tend to crowd the left and right speakers into the corners, and you would run a risk of dimming to a less desirable level, over the life of the bulb.


Claude, Your present projector is one of the most prone to moire with our Micro-Perf. The VW-50, with its finer pixel structure, does not moire at the 110" size and it basically doesn't moire at any size we've tested. So your present screen should work with that projector, and I wouldn't go bigger with the Sony, unless the room was really well treated for cross reflected light. We do re-screen existing roller screens quite frequently. We retain build records back to the fifties. We do prefer that the screen be returned to the plant for the re-screen process, but you will save a lot, as compared to a new screen. But the screen you have should work nicely.


Scott,


You have done a lot of research and I see nothing in your post which is at odds with my opinions. A curve does help with hotspotting, as does lengthening throw distance. Your described seating is all in the the sweet spot for gain.


Since you've lived with the Firehawk, and have come to terms with it's benefits and compromizes, the only input I might offer would be that the SST version, has a bit wider viewing cone, and you've got the light. The three chip projectors, don't have the same contrast ratios as the single chip projectors, and either FH helps with that. The Grayhawk RS is worth study, it offers a much wider viewing cone, but it doesn't allow the reading lamp etc. without more washout. But it does work phenomenally with the three chip DLP projectors in light controlled environments.


Craigsze,


The LCOS and SXRD based projectors are minimally impacted by moire interaction with Stewart Microperf. We do realize that many folks change projectors more often than screens. So what we're doing now is rotating the perfs to the acceptance band of the 1080P DLP projectors, which is pretty consistent and wide, within nominal Home Theater size ranges. We do anticipate different upgrade paths, and we are willing to work with folks over a period of time, when issues come up. I'm not going to respond to a bunch of hypothetical inquiries, but our customer service commitment is pretty solid.


Thank you all for your patronage, and interest in Stewart Filmscreen products!!


----------



## ClaudeD

Mark,


Thanks so much for the reassuring information. Now to go work on my wife


----------



## hoko222

Mark,


I am building a dedicated Home theater, and have decided on a screen size and a projector (Sony Pearl) and I am still not sure if I need to go with a Stewart Stewart Studiotek 130 or the UltraMatte 150. I have a 17'6 by 17 room and the walls and floor will be all dark. The room will be totally light controlled. I think I iwll be OK with the ST, but the UM may give me a bit more brightness. What do you think?


mike


----------



## rolandlim

Hi Mark,


I am using a 100" 16:9 Luxus Deluxe with Firehawk G2 screen. I have recently upgraded my projector to an Epson EMP TW-1000 (same as the Cinema Pro 1080 in US) 1080p projector. I am wondering if I should upgrade the screen material to Firehawk G3. Since according to Stewart's marketing material, the Firehawk G3 is said to be designed for 1080p projectors.


Would I see a significant improvement over the Firehawk G2? Thanks!


Regards,


Roland Lim


----------



## krfuquamd

Mark,


Thanks for your response. I just ordered a 100" wide Ultramatte 150 for use with my RS1. On your website they mention an opaque backing as an option with the 150. What is that and is it needed?


I'm hoping the extra gain over the Studiotek 130 will come in handy with this size screen and that the decreased half gain and slightly decreased viewing angle will not be a problem.


krfuquamd


----------



## jlanzy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *krfuquamd* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Mark,
> 
> 
> Thanks for your response. I just ordered a 100" wide Ultramatte 150 for use with my RS1. On your website they mention an opaque backing as an option with the 150. What is that and is it needed?
> 
> 
> I'm hoping the extra gain over the Studiotek 130 will come in handy with this size screen and that the decreased half gain and slightly decreased viewing angle will not be a problem.
> 
> 
> krfuquamd



KR,


Let us know how that works out for you. My room is almost same as yours, 19x14 with very dark gray walls/carpet and total light control. I use the Ultramatte150 87x49 deluxe luxus for my Sony G70 8" CRT and sitting at 13 ft from screen and it is gorgeous. I want to go to CIH with a scope screen of 52x122 for 2.35 movies and it appears the RS1 is the closest to CRT black levels and hopefully 'dimensionality without rainbows and dithering of single DLP.

I am strongly inclined to go with the Ultramatte150 for the slight extra gain for that screen size, but considering the Ultramatte200 also, since we only have 2 seats at 13-14ft from screen so the view cone should not be an issue, and might be better as the bulb ages ,I think.

joe


----------



## m Robinson

Mike/ Hoko, No mention of the screen size, so it's difficult to make a recommendation.


Roland Lim, What is your seating distance? The recent change in optical coating is designed so that IF people choose to sit closer, they would be less likely to detect screen surface texture, prior to detecting a signature of the pixel structure of the projector. So unless you're really tight to the screen, closer than 1.25 :1 you probably wouldn't notice a difference.


KRF, Did you order a roller screen which goes in front of a possible light source? With UM-150 we have the option of adding an opaque inner layer to supress light from these sorts of sources. We do not uniformly do this however, because most UM-150 goes into larger venue fixed and perforated installations, and the black layer is not desirable when we perforate, cause it doesn't look as clean, the light goes right through the holes anyway. But in churches and universities, the multipurpose environment roller screens benefit very much from an opaque inner layer. But for a home theater, this feature is of limited utility. Thanks for the order!!


Joe, that's a nice big screen, you will benefit from some gain. We'll shortly see how that projector meshes with various fabrics at that scale. I don't have the RS1 here yet, but I do have intent to test it as soon as possible. See Jason's review which has some measurements!


thanks so much to all of you for considering and using Stewart Filmscreen products!


----------



## hoko222

I want 110" and I think that will be perfect for the room. I cant believe i forgot to mention that.


Mike


----------



## hoko222

110" Diagonal, but you probably new that.


mike


----------



## rolandlim




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Roland Lim, What is your seating distance? The recent change in optical coating is designed so that IF people choose to sit closer, they would be less likely to detect screen surface texture, prior to detecting a signature of the pixel structure of the projector. So unless you're really tight to the screen, closer than 1.25 :1 you probably wouldn't notice a difference.



Mark,


I sit about 12 to 13 feet from the screen. I guess won't see much difference with the Firehawk G3 then?


Roland


----------



## m Robinson

Mike At 110 inch diagonal, it will be beautiful, a sound design with the Studiotek.


Roland, Yes at that viewing distance, you are probably not seeing much of a signature of the existing fabric.


thanks Gents!


----------



## jlanzy

I don't have the RS1 here yet, but I do have intent to test it as soon as possible. See Jason's review which has some measurements!


thanks so much to all of you for considering and using Stewart Filmscreen products!


__________________

Mark Robinson

Director of Manufacturing

Stewart Filmscreen


Will you post on the forum your results with the RS1? I hope you do as this will help in deciding for many of us.


thanks,

joe


----------



## Commex

Hey all


Would the Ultramatte 200 with a custom frame be suitable for a setup like this:


Lot of Ambient Light, Mostly sunlight, Yellow wall good enough but looking for better ambient light preformance


PT-AX100U on Normal with Dynamic Iris Off

14' throw distance -- 145" Screen 1:78, around 40deg viewing angle at most.


----------



## funlvr1965

can anyone tell me if ultramatte 200 can be used with dlp/lcos projectors? Ive been told that its not recommended because the uniformity is not that good can someone from Stewart screens chime in before I make a bad choice in screen material?


----------



## TheLion

Mark,


which factors have an influence on the visibilty of sparklies with my Studiothek 130 G3 screen?


Right now I sit ~ 1.5 screen width from a 10 feet wide Screenwall Luxus Deluxe. The projector (Sharp Z20000 1080p DLP) is ~19 feet from the screen, and ~ 1.5 feet above eye level. I placed the screen so that my eye level is at ~1/3 screen height.


Problem is that I just received my Studiothek replacement screen/skin (THANK YOU VERY MUCH AGAIN FOR YOUR HELP!), which I assume is your latest generation (it has a finer structure than my previous one), installed it and been really distracted by the visible structure (sparklies) in bright and solid color fields.


What can I do to reduce or better yet avoid it completely? The screen clearly separates from the content with my current placement.


On another matter: Has the "real world" gain factor (measured right @ 1.3 during ISF calibration with my previous screen) of the Studiothek 130 changed with the latest revision? Are all other performance attributes exactly the same? I ask because


a) I have the suspicion that my brightness level changed slightly with the new revision of the Studiothek and


b) I had my setup ISF calibrated with the previous screen (pre G3 generation) ISF and now I wonder if it's still 100% accurate?


Thank you for your time.


----------



## sunil30022




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> The Firehawk SST and G3 are pretty similar in ability to reject ambient light, with a slight nod, going to the G3 formulation.
> 
> 
> Sony Engineers specifically wanted a fabric which would be suitable for the very close viewing distances allowable now with fine pixel structure and lack of 'screen door effect", and the great behavior of the SXRD in the dark state, and the fabric needed to be versatile in placement options. So less brilliant diffusing pigments are used, and you can move very close to the SST fabric, without being able to detect any "sparklies". These diffusion pigments also widen the viewing cone a few degrees, and lower the gain a little over a tenth. By widening the cone a little bit, hot-spotting is reduced and this enables Pearl or Ruby users to shorten throw distance and net more lumen output. And along with that, a customer is not "dead in the water" as regards contrast, if some cross-reflected light, or reasonable ambient light remains in the viewing environment.
> 
> 
> Since the Pearl will pass 1080P 24 as a multiple of 24, and has incredible lack of noise in the dark state, Sony looks forward to a broader market in which HT enthusiasts can sit closer to a given screen width if necessary, without artifacts overhauling the content. The original Firehawk, and the G3, are more suitable for long throw applications, so Sony asked for something tuned to their products.
> 
> 
> These projectors also look great on our other fabrics, and on some competing fabrics. For people with great light control, Studiotek and Grayhawk RS are amazing performers. The decision was taken, however, to develop a fabric which would be more versatile in regard to placement of the theater experience in a variety of architectural constraints. In other words, Sony plans on broadening the market a bit for themselves, as other manufacturers have. The SST works in a lot of environments. We are also very comfortable with the performance of other Stewart fabrics with the projector, as more controlled applications are considered.
> 
> 
> By the way, I've tested other projectors with Firehawk SST and found some pretty good synergy. But I'm not the right person to come to for projector recommendations. It is a good time to be shopping for a projector, no question about it.



Mark ,

Which screen would you reccomend that I purchase for my HT. The projector I will be using will be the Sony vpl vw100[pearl] in a dedicated home theater [dimensions 18Lx 14W x10H] with complete control of ambient light. Also the projector has relatively low light output[800 lumens] Should I be looking at a screen with a higher gain?I am planning on a 92 inch screen.


Thanks................................SB


----------



## sunil30022




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *sunil30022* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Mark ,
> 
> Which screen would you reccomend that I purchase for my HT. The projector I will be using will be the Sony vpl vw100[pearl] in a dedicated home theater [dimensions 18Lx 14W x10H] with complete control of ambient light. Also the projector has relatively low light output[800 lumens] Should I be looking at a screen with a higher gain?I am planning on a 92 inch screen.
> 
> 
> Thanks................................SB



Also any thoughts on the colorof the walls......Thanks


----------



## uberanalyst

Need help selecting a Stewart micro-perfed screen (speakers behind screen):


JVC RS-1 projector arriving soon (on pre-buy), to be used in completely light-controlled "bat-cave" dedicated room with black ceiling, dark walls, etc.


20 foot throw with projector lens-shift permitting it to be ceiling hung roughly aligned to top edge of screen.


First row of 3 seats 11 feet back, 2nd row of 3 seats behind that.


I've been thinking of a 114 inch WIDE 16:9 screen, which puts it into the danger zone of getting enough light output for the RS-1. (For the past 5 years, I've used an JVC G-15 LCOS projector on a 10-foot wide (120 inch) matt painted wall, so this is actually a reduced screen size for me.). I love the immersive effect of large screen LCOS projection.


I'm guessing that the Studiotek 130 with 1.3 screen gain won't be sufficiently bright, so would a Ultramatte 150 or 200 work better? Will I encounter hot spotting with a 20 foot throw? Sparklies?


(I could move the projector mount closer to the screen to increase the lumen output of the RS-1 about 20%, but this would increase the potential for hot spotting, right? I might also be able to reduce the lens shift if I keep the projector near the back of room with a 20 foot throw.)


Your thoughts?

- Dave


----------



## cameronl

hi, I have a luxus model A screen with the 12v trigger and a xantech cc12.


Does anyone out there have this combination and if so - how did you get the cc12 to trigger the 12v?


thanks for your time.


CaM


----------



## rlhjr34




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *funlvr1965* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> can anyone tell me if ultramatte 200 can be used with dlp/lcos projectors? Ive been told that its not recommended because the uniformity is not that good can someone from Stewart screens chime in before I make a bad choice in screen material?



Hi there,


Did you ever get any information on this? I'm considering the same material for my DLP. I'm looking at doing a 144 wide 2.35 screen and can't use the HP material Tryg reviewed. Is the Stewart material Angular Reflective?


----------



## Jason Turk

The main problem to the UM200 is the sheen to it. I have installed digital projectors on this and you can "see" the material. Not a big deal for some, but for others it may be.


----------



## rlhjr34

Is the sheen noticeable even on a 1080p setup? Is it something that is noticeable from a lot of viewing distances or....?


----------



## Cain




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jason Turk* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> The main problem to the UM200 is the sheen to it. I have installed digital projectors on this and you can "see" the material. Not a big deal for some, but for others it may be.



Hi Jason, you may know I have a Stewart "Platinum" curved screen like Alan has. I can definitely see the screen material, and it has always bugged me, when I get new material I want to be 100% sure I don't see the screen any longer.


How about the Ultramatte 150, does it show itself like UM200 ???


----------



## Jason Turk

The UM150 is smooth as silk. The Platinum is actually not as bad as the UM200.


----------



## Cain

Thx Jason.


----------



## Jason Turk

Welcome.


----------



## jlanzy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jason Turk* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> The UM150 is smooth as silk. .




I currently have the stewart ultramatte 150, 87"wide 1.78 for my G70, and it is beautiful. I probably will be getting the JVC RS1 for a 122" scope, 92x52 1.78 CIH setup. Would the Studitek 130 offer any advantage over the ultramatte150 in a total light control room? I'd like to try to get close to CRT black levels since I watch a lot of 'dark' movies.

joe


----------



## Jason Turk

Your black levels will be ever so slight better on a ST130, but my personal opinion is that unless you want to change the size of your screen, I would just use what you have.


----------



## krfuquamd

Just got my Stewart UM150 on the wall in the HT. While I have no personal experience to speak from, in terms of comparison, I can vouch for the excellent build quality of the Stewart screen and the fact that it looks da*n good just hanging there on the wall!! Piece of cake to put up as well, with help.


That having been said, Jason, the screen is very lonely and requires the presence of its mate, a new RS1, asap!


----------



## jlanzy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Turk

The UM150 is smooth as silk. .






I currently have the stewart ultramatte 150, 87"wide 1.78 for my G70, and it is beautiful. I probably will be getting the JVC RS1 for a 122" scope, 92x52 1.78 CIH setup. Would the Studitek 130 offer any advantage over the ultramatte150 in a total light control room? I'd like to try to get close to CRT black levels since I watch a lot of 'dark' movies.

joe


_________________



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jason Turk* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Your black levels will be ever so slight better on a ST130, but my personal opinion is that unless you want to change the size of your screen, I would just use what you have.




I will be increasing the screen to a 92x52 1.78, and use the U380 with RS1 for scope material to 122x52. Projector lens 17' to screen, 2 seats 13' to screen.


Am I correct to understand that the Firehawk G3 with 1.25gain and the SST with 1.1 gain will continue to lower black levels from the ST130, total light control, dk gray walls/ceiling,

as well as lower peak whites?

joe


----------



## IanK

Hi All

Does anybody have experience using an X10 or insteon switched outlet to directly control a stewart electriscreen? I am ordering a new screen and would rather not have to pay for a STI (and run a seperate wire for it) if i can just use the X10 equipment i have. i have heard some people say it works, but i wanted to confirm before i ordered.

thanks

Ian


----------



## sunil30022

Can somebody advise me reg best screen to use with a a Sony vpl vw100[Pearl] projector in a dedicated HT 18ft x 14ft. Throw distance 16 ft. I plan to go with a 92" diagonal screen . Have complete contol of ambient light. First row of seats 10ft from screen and back row seats 15ft from screen. I understand that Firehawk SST was specifically designed for the Sony vpl vw50[Ruby]. Am not sure ifit will work with Sony Pearl .Also is there a big advantage to a perforated screen..........Thanks SB


----------



## knmlee

Hi,


Just upgraded to a 1080p projector (Mits HC5000) and now notice sparklies on my 92" Grayhawk. The projector is about 12.5' back from the screen (ceiling mounted) and that is also the main seating distance. The image does not seem quite as bright with this projector. My screen is about two years old so I don't know if it is the Grayhawk RS model or not. The logo just says Grayhawk.


Question: Would I benefit from the new Firehawk G3 material that is supposed to be designed for 1080p? I do have some ambient light to deal with wouldn't mind a bit brighter image with this new projector.


Thanks in advance for any suggestions.


Mark


----------



## Mad Chemist




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jmouse007* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I am in the market for a 92" motorized screen to go with a Sony Pearl. I have looked at a number of options and keep coming back to the Stewart Firehawk SST. That said, I have looked at three different motorized SST's at three different locations (two Best Buy Magnolia locations and one large independent store) and I noticed the same problem with these screens at every one of these locations; every screen had the infamous "ladder marks" effects (horizontal lines/imprints/dents running across the entire length of the screen at very regular/specific intervals). None of the sales people at any of the locations had a good explanation other than saying it was inherent in the design (the dents being caused when the screen is rolled and stored out of sight when not in use).
> 
> 
> My room location dictates a retractable screen as opposed to a fixed screen. As much as I would love to own a 92" 16/9 tab tensioned Firehawk SST, I can not see spending thousands of dollars more for this screen over a competitor just to end up with a ladder mark problem. Don't get me wrong, the screen material is beautiful and a perfect match for the Sony Pearl BUT for that kind of money/premium price, the screen should be perfectly smooth whether or not the screen is retracted/stored for any length of time.
> 
> 
> By the way, every salesman said they would contact Stewart, find out what the explanation for the problem was and get back to me... So far, no one has contacted me with an answer to the mysterious SST "ladder marks" and if it is an ongoing problem with the Firehawk motorized/retractable screens.
> 
> 
> I am therefore open to suggestions/alternatives for the Sony Pearl, thanks in advance.



I'm in the market for an electric screen and saw the same thing on a Stewart Screen at The Great Indoors. Are the ladder marks exclusive to the Firehawk, other Stewart screens, or all tensioned electrics? This is the only retractable tensioned screen I have seen in person.


----------



## Rutgar

What is the difference between the Greyhawk, and Greyhawk RS? I have a 100" 16x9 Greyhawk, manual retractable. But I have no idea it's specs. Is the gain .95 on both? And does anyone know how well this screen will do with the new JVC RS-1 (I have one on order)?


----------



## oliverlim




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Rutgar* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> What is the difference between the Greyhawk, and Greyhawk RS? I have a 100" 16x9 Greyhawk, manual retractable. But I have no idea it's specs. Is the gain .95 on both? And does anyone know how well this screen will do with the new JVC RS-1 (I have one on order)?




I am looking for the answer to exactly this same question ! 


Also is there a black backing on the steward screen? Or it is slightly translucent and a bright enough projector will pass some light through it?


Oliver


----------



## Rutgar




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *oliverlim* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I am looking for the answer to exactly this same question !
> 
> 
> Also is there a black backing on the steward screen? Or it is slightly translucent and a bright enough projector will pass some light through it?
> 
> 
> Oliver



My Greyhawk has a black backing. But I believe it depends on the model of screen you buy.


I've yet to find out the answer to my original question. Does the Stewart rep not participate in this forum anymore? I even emailed Stewart with this question, with no response.


----------



## gulliBELL




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mad Chemist* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I'm in the market for an electric screen and saw the same thing on a Stewart Screen at The Great Indoors. Are the ladder marks exclusive to the Firehawk, other Stewart screens, or all tensioned electrics? This is the only retractable tensioned screen I have seen in person.



My understanding is that the electric screens are susceptible to laddering only when the screen either is kept NOT in the full up or full down position. Exact top masking is required, or screen mounting position adjusted, to ensure that the full down position aligns correctly with the projected image.


----------



## gulliBELL




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Rutgar* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> My Greyhawk has a black backing. But I believe it depends on the model of screen you buy.



My understanding is that the black backing is a factory option to prevent light passing from the back of the screen to the front, e.g. when the screen is installed covering a window. The black backing is not otherwise required.


----------



## gulliBELL




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *IanK* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Hi All
> 
> Does anybody have experience using an X10 or insteon switched outlet to directly control a stewart electriscreen? I am ordering a new screen and would rather not have to pay for a STI (and run a seperate wire for it) if i can just use the X10 equipment i have.



My understanding is that you will need a change-over relay to activate the screen (the Stewart electric screens have a 4-wire cable, common, ground, up and down), and you will need a simple relay to sense the 12v trigger state from the projector to send the trigger status to the change over relay (i.e. the change-over relay sensing logic is "voltage free" hence the need to change the 12v trigger status from the projector to a simple on/off switch position via the relay).


In all likelihood the STI is a cheaper and easier option (they're about $275). The STI will just sense the 12v trigger state from your projector without the need for other electrics.


Edit: In addition, for a CBUS home automation installation of the electric screen, you will need an analogue input unit to get the 12v relay status on to the CBUS. The parts alone for this (12v relay, analogue input unit, change-over relay), plus the cost of the electrician to install, will probably come close to $800. Hence much cheaper to go with the STI option.


----------



## Jmouse007




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mad Chemist* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I'm in the market for an electric screen and saw the same thing on a Stewart Screen at The Great Indoors. Are the ladder marks exclusive to the Firehawk, other Stewart screens, or all tensioned electrics? This is the only retractable tensioned screen I have seen in person.



Just an update; after doing tons of research and talking to lots of people on this forum I decided upon a 100" Firehawk SST eletricscreen. Conclusion: the very best screen and material to use with our short-throw Sony Pearl and in our lightly ambient situation with cream walls. It arrived on Friday (the screen was exceptionally well packaged against damage) and (Lord willing) I will be getting it installed this week. As for ladder tracks I will let you know if I end up with them or not but after talking with Stewart, I think things will work out ok.


I will provide a follow up after it is installed.


----------



## howardlee2

jmouse,


i ended up ordering a 106" firehawk g3 thru integrity home theater to pair with a vw50. this was after talking to stewart rep (who rec your setup!) and then this guy from integrity who worked 5 years @ stewart. i also will set up at the shorter end of the throw range and that along with a slightly higher screen gain should keep my picture as good as with a 100". seating will be 5 american leather holden units side by side approx 13' from the screen. it will be several weeks before my setup occurs. (as construction is still finishing) one of my new concerns is echoing in my room. although i realize the room is empty, it is REALLY bad and i am not sure how much damping the furniture/ rugs wll give me. i am getting a denon 4306 to be paired with snell speakers in a 7:1 config that if i can rid the room of echoes should really rock.


----------



## Jmouse007

Final follow up on my Sony Pearl and Stewart Firehawk SST Lexus Model A Electriscreen home theater project. By the grace of God and the exceptional advice from numerous AVS forum members and Stewart, everything is FINALLY done; the screen is up, the projector has been ceiling mounted, the new Def Tec speakers and OPPO981 HD DVD player are all in place, the cables are managed/hidden and everything is working exceptionally well. As for the Stewart SST screen; NO ladder tracks, no defects and it, along with the picture it produces are gorgeous! Best investment we have ever made. The SST material works wonderfully well with the Sony Pearl and other 1080p short throw PJ's. No hot spotting, NO sparklies, NO screen door effect, just a VERY fine, even picture. If you would like to see how the theater turned out you can look here:

* http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=838097 *


Here are three "Screen Shots" FYI:





























If anyone is thinking about buying a Stewart SST (or other Stewart screen better suited to your theater space) screen to go with your Sony Pearl or 1080p PJ, all I can say is: "Go for it!" Yes the Stewart SST screen is more expensive than the competition but it is worth EVERY penny. It produces exceptional blacks and the contrast is tremendous. One more thing, the after purchase customer support from Stewart has been outstanding. They have provided extraordinary customer support, answering every technical and nooB question I have asked with the result that the finished project turned out perfect... thanks Mark and everyone at Stewart.


----------



## ricvieira

Hi All,


I just finished my 3-month marriage with the VUTEC Silverstar. I used it with my Ruby and, although I loved how bright it was, I could not get over the sparkling created on bright white scenes - after much debate I decided to return it to the vendor and I'm now shopping for a new screen.


My room is set up to project on a 16:9 110 diagonal fixed screen placed at 12' 6 from the projector lens. Based on this configuration, I can expect between 5 to 10 Foot Lamberts on a Matte White Screen (1x gain), depending on how I configure the projector iris. The calculations are displayed here: http://members.cox.net/ricvieira/Hom...2%20of%202.htm 


The viewing position is between 100 to 112 from the screen. At the closest viewing distance, the screen occupies 51.2 degrees of the viewer's horizontal field of vision. I know many will say that a smaller screen size would be a better match, but I really like the sense of immersion with the 110 screen.


I can make the room pitch black. The screen wall is painted dark purple, and the side walls are painted light purple with a white door on the left side. The carpet is light brown - and the ceiling is white, but it is shaped as an inverted V with the lowest part connected to the screen wall (therefore, it does not reflect the screen light). In my humble opinion, there is minimal reflected light in the room, but please check the setup at: http://members.cox.net/ricvieira/Hom...reen/index.htm 


I have given special consideration to the Stewart screens below:


Stewart Studiotek 130 - although not very bright, it has a fantastic 160 degree viewing cone, with a 75 degree half gain angle - and these are very desirable features in my small room setup. Nevertheless, I read that you need to have dark walls / floor / ceiling to make the best of this screen - see room description above


Stewart FireHawk G3 - this seems to be the screen Stewart recommends for most home theater setups. My concern is that my setup has the projector a little bit closer than the minimum throw distance (96 screen width x 1.6 = 154 minimum throw distance, my setup has the projector at 150 throw distance), so I'm concerned about light fallout at the edges of the screen.


Stewart FireHawk SST - the minimum throw distance is not an issue with my setup, but it is the least bright screen in this group.


I'm open to looking into any other Stewart screens - and I would really appreciate any feedback that help me make an educated decision.


Thanks in advance,


Ricardo Vieira


----------



## m Robinson

Ricardo,


You're sitting a bit close and you've selected the maximum size screen that I would consider for that projector. It will start pretty well, but as the lamp ages you'll be dimming. When you sit that close, most gain screens are going to sparkle a bit here and there with bright material. If you are adamant about keeping that size, you would probably be happiest with Studiotek, with the projector at as short a throw as you can manage.


regards,


----------



## nathan_h

Wow, I guess I'm crazy considering a Ultramatte 2.0 screen, 120 inches WIDE 2.35:1 (equivalent to 138inch diag 16x9 screen for brightness purposes, since I'll be using the projector's ZOOM to fill the screen) with a Pearl. From my calculations, it should be about as bright as my matte white 92inch diag 16:9 screen, given that the gain with the larger screen is doubled. I would be sitting about 10 feet from the screen. The projector would be about 13 feet from the screen. Which sounds like I would see problems with the image, even if the brightness was adequate.


Of course, the price, even used, when shipping such a large beast is problematic -- ie, it is already busting my budget by 50%, so that may be another way that fate is telling me something.


----------



## pcarey




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *howardlee2* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> jmouse,
> 
> 
> i am getting a denon 4306 to be paired with snell speakers in a 7:1 config that if i can rid the room of echoes should really rock.



Off topic but check out the room construction threads for some great advice about room treatments. You can DIY some good absorbing panels or talk to "bpape" who could certainly help with acoustical design and supply.


----------



## steinfoot

Hi, I am new to the "fancy screen" arena. I have been living with my blackout cloth DIY screen, but now Im curious about upgrading to a Da-lite or even a spendy Stewart Filmscreen.


My concern..

Currently I have a panasonic AE900, but next year I plan on upgrading to whatever the current hot 1080p projector is, mostly wanting better contrast.


so can I buy a screen now that will not only be good for the ae900 but also work perfectly with my next projector? or am I better off waiting to get a new screen after I choose a 1080p projector. I have a living room setup that is not a batcave, but I usually only watch at night.


thanks!


----------



## hoko222

Mark,


I ordered the Stewart Studiotek Lexus Deluxe fixed frame 110" from Tryg. I am either going to buy the Sony Pearl or wait for the next sony model, VW60. Lets say I buy the pearl, how far should I place the plojector from the screen?


mike


----------



## m Robinson

Hoko,


Thanks for purchasing from us! With the Pearl, it's a given that you need to consider mounting the projector at the short end of the available zoom if possible. The lens will provide more light at the short end versus the long end bya significant percentage. I do not recall the lens specifications, but the information will be in the manual, and is probably available here or elsewhere on line.


Steinfoot,

I have an AE900 in my family room, and we've got an AE700 here in Engineering which we use for viewing CAD drawing large scale. That family of projectors were a hot as a pistol when introduced. Progress has followed and the black level performance of these projectors is pretty poor by current standards. Your viewing environment drives the choice of screen surface as much or more than the projector specifications. So if you're not planning to change light management in the viewing area, then a contrast enhancing screen would still help, down the road with your next projector. It is probable that a new projector would have better contrast ratio performance without question, but that can easily be offset by a lousy room. So try to commit to making the room more damped in cross reflection, or you can use a Firehawk or similar product to help with that if room modification is not going into the plan.


----------



## jluloff

Mark Robinson


I have a 110" Stewart G3 which was highly recommended by the folks doing my home theater even tho I was thinking of going with the Studiotek 130 instead (they talk me out of it). I went with the Sony Pearl which is mounted about 11'7" from the screen. My seating is about 10'5" for 1st row and 16' for the second row.


Would the Studiotek been the better option? Also my home theater has redish colored walls and black ceiling with no windows so its very dark and has total light control.


The picture looks good to me but again nothing to compare to and starting to second guess weather the other screen would provide an even better picture for my setup.


----------



## oldschool JAWA

I am about to pull the trigger on the Panasonic pt-ae1000u 1080P projector and was looking into buying a screen as well. I currently have the pt-ae900u and was shooting onto the wall, then we bought a house and I am shooting onto a white sheet for now, yes it does suck! After doing some research I am thinking of paring the pt-ae1000u with the studiotek 130: luxus screen wall. Just wondering if this would be a great fit before plumping the cash down? Here are my room condtiions and setup:

Room 14x12

Projector celing mounted 13 to 14 feet back from where screen would be, mounted around 5 feet above seats. Ceiling is normal cieling height for most houses

dark room, light controlled at all times

light walls for now, going to paint blue later on

wanting to go with 123' screen


----------



## nathan_h

Is there a difference between Videomatte 200 and Ultramatte 200?


----------



## Pete




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *nathan_h* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Is there a difference between Videomatte 200 and Ultramatte 200?



Yes...Ultramatte 200 has a gain of 2.0 whereas Videomatte 200 has a gain of 1.8


----------



## nathan_h

Any difference in terms of color balance, hotspotting or sparklie propensity?


----------



## flamaest

Do I have a Stewart Firehawk screen with defects?



Does anyone who has a Stewart Firehawk, possible a year or more old, have issues with seeing little specs of brightness in the image, depending on the seating position? These seem to be points of light, or specs, which only show up in bright scenes. Sometimes I see one spec, and other times I see two specs. They are always in the same location.


If I turn the projector off and turn the room lights on, I cannot see the light specs, even close up?


This is bugging me and I am very concerned because I spent about 4k on this HD Electric screen and I can't stand watching it now.


Someone from Stewart I met at CES said they might consider swapping out the screens.. They said something about this being a known defect and some people just never notice it, so it mostly goes unreported.


Please advise..


Thanks,

Fabian.


----------



## nathan_h

I had one of the original Firehawk screens (before the G2, G3, SST, etc. formulations) and I saw these specs on occasion. My thinking was that these occasional sparklies were (an unintended but unavoidable) part of the formulation.


----------



## m Robinson

Flamaest, P.M. me with your serial # information. We've worked very hard to minimize blazing sparkles coming out of our screens. IF you've got one or two that keep poking out at you. Put up a white field, find the irritating sparkle, walk up to the screen, locate it, and mute it down by touching it lightly with a #2 pencil. Let's see how old it is and so forth. We've replaced some units for this problem, but it's been 2 years now. I'll work with you.


----------



## tat

I will soon be getting the JVC projector and would like to have a new screen to replace my old Grayhawk. I use a 110" 16X9 screen in a light controlled room with dark walls. The projector will be ceiling mounted (lined at the top of the screen) at about 15'. My viewing distance is usually about 1.5X to 1.25X. I was considering getting the Studiotek 130 - but my concerns are 1. sparklies and 2. black levels. Are the sparklies reported by some, a result of an older screen material or how the projector is mounted. Would I be better off with another material. Any help will be appreciated.


Tawn


----------



## nathan_h

I've never heard of sparklies on a Studiotek screen. Perhaps someone can elaborate. Assuming you can get good brightness and have a light controlled dark room, the Studiotek should be an ideal match for a high quality projector like the JVC.


----------



## edfowler

Would a RS-1 produce sufficient lumens to light up a 126" x 72" StudioTek 130?


I am getting the screen next week with the plan of upgrading to a digital in the near future. Right now I am using a G70 crt with a Draper 1.6 (or 1.8, can't remember) gain screen that is only 93" x 52". I can get 9.5fl off of this screen with the G70 but I have toned it down to about 7.5fl because I prefer black blacks.


I had a st130 in the past, but traded it for the Draper to get more punch with the crt. I'm thinking that the st130 will give better color if I have a higher lumen projector.


I guess my real question is, how many lumens will I need to get 8-10fl off of a 126 x 72 st130?


thanks


ed


----------



## edfowler

OH, I may do a CH setup and only have 126 x 52 maximum to light up if that makes a difference.


thanks


ed


----------



## nathan_h

Unless you are using an anamorphic lense, you need to figure brightness for your 2.35:1 area based on a larger 16x9 area of the same width, even though you are only using a portion of it for your cinemascope images. Projector central (dot com) has some good calculators that let you input projector type, screen size, gain, and distance from projector to screen. The output of the calculator only works when the manufacturer tells the truth about their unit's lumens, so remember to take that into account.


----------



## edfowler

thanks


ed


----------



## edfowler

cool calculator!


11fl with that screen size. I could probably live with that just fine.


THis next weekend I'll get to see an RS1 at Cliff's house and see if I want to start selling plasma for this thing.


thanks again Nathan


ed


----------



## NORLL

I was hoping I could get some input in this thread;


I have just bought a second-hand Stewart Ultramatte 200 screen. It works quite well, but I have one issue that I would like to ask you about.


There are some spots on the screen. They are of various sizes and shapes (a few inches wide\\high) and they are visible only from certain angles. At first I thought that they might be some fat-stains, but carefully cleaning the fabric did not effect it in any way. At a closer inspection it looks like to "gain structure" is a bit different on these spots (there is less sparkle on these spots). It can sometimes be a bit annoying when watching a movie as some of these spots stand out a bit when viewed from certain angles. They seem to be a bit darker that the rest of the fabric. This is usually only visible in bright daylight scenes with large areas of the same color (like a bright skyline).


I can clearly see all of the spots when I view the screen from about 90 degrees (in ordinary daylight). Luckily I do not watch movies at this angle (hehe), but some are also visible from normal viewing angles. Moving the viewing position a little to the side or up\\down hides some of them. My point is that some of them are visible from certain angles, but invisible from other angles.


Have any of you heard of this before? Do you have any tips for me that I can try? Perhaps it can be remedied somehow...


BTW. I use the screen in a DIY torus setup.


----------



## m Robinson

Norll, it sounds to me like your screen surface is scuffed. When the fabric is abraded, it will appear darker off axis, cause the portion of the optical coating most near the surface is usually damaged first and that part is the little fragments which are directing light off axis. There is enough coating deeper, to keep the screen looking more uniform on axis. So I'm afraid that the problem is not possible to remedy. Any treatment will probably make the area more visible.


Regards,


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> So I'm afraid that the problem is not possible to remedy.



Although, NORLL, now that you own a Stewart Screen (and frame), an authorized dealer can order you replacement fabric for your frame -- which is perhaps half the price of ordering a new screen. Not ideal, perhaps, but a "remedy" of sorts.


----------



## ronk10

Am I crazy to be thinking about using a StudioTek 130 in a non-batcave?


Ok here's the scenario,

JVC RS1, 120" screen. Projector mounted on rear wall. 13.8' from lens to screen surface. 17' ceiling. Carpet on flooring, walls are painted a darker shade of yellow.

The side walls are no where near the screen. Room is basically 15'x21'

viewing will be in the 15' dimension.


I was pretty much consigned to using a firehawk. With concerns of hotspotting being so close. While the screen is acceptable I'd rather do white. Why?


In finding a dealer with a RS1 setup, I also found to picture on the 1.3 gain white screen they had setup to be just great! I mean, it was alive.

Here's the thing, This particular room they had it setup in was designed to look like a typical living room. light colored carpet, white ceiling, and a light beige paint on the walls. With all the lights turned out, I didn't see washing out of the color or blacks. The picture was still quite good and watchable with the lights turned up to what I would call, 'fine steak house dining illuminance'


I don't plan to use the projector in daylight hours. I'll have a nice big plasma behind it. I don't have a wife and/or kids running around turning on lights,opening doors,ruining my life etc,










What do you guys think? Should I still bite the bullet and go Firehawk?


----------



## ronk10











Nobody loves me.


----------



## merv43

how much would a 92" 16x9 deluxe fixed frame firehawk screen in perfect condition be worth? I am thinking of selling mine so I can purchase a one a bit bigger.


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ronk10* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> What do you guys think? Should I still bite the bullet and go Firehawk?



I'd go with a firehawk, but you should try a screen sample of each and see what you think.



-----


merv43: For a current formulation screen in good condition (ie, G3 or SST) the price appears to be about 50-60% of MSRP. For earlier formulations, or in not perfect shape, it's a bit less. Check our videogon, ebay, and the listings here at AVS for a robust view.


----------



## ronk10

Alright, so I spent a good amount of time with the RS1 using a 1.3 gain white screen today.

I watched a lot of star wars, space scenes etc. Indeed I will need a Firehawk. While it was completely watchable with a white screen, the blacks just aren't there.


So now it's a decision between the SST and G3. I've only seen the SST, as no one around here has a g3 on display.


I will probably talk with Stewart this coming week, but does anyone have any experience with both types of Firehawk?


----------



## merv43




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ronk10* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Alright, so I spent a good amount of time with the RS1 using a 1.3 gain white screen today.
> 
> I watched a lot of star wars, space scenes etc. Indeed I will need a Firehawk. While it was completely watchable with a white screen, the blacks just aren't there.
> 
> 
> So now it's a decision between the SST and G3. I've only seen the SST, as no one around here has a g3 on display.
> 
> 
> I will probably talk with Stewart this coming week, but does anyone have any experience with both types of Firehawk?



Please let me know what you find out, I am considering replacing my 92" firehawk that is three years old with a new 106" G3. I am currently using a sony vpl-hs51 but will likely upgrade later this year to an rs1 or what ever may come out between now and November.


----------



## trailblazer

I am using a Firehawk G3 100 inch screen with an EPSON 1080 PRO and the picture quality is excellent. Blacks are black and colors are brilliant. Get lots of detail in shadowy backgrounds. Not a cheap screen, but you can't beat the picture quality.


----------



## thebland

Mark,


I am upgrading parts of my system and going to a scope screen. I have a Sony Qualia 004 front projector (1080P). I need a microperf. and this time the screen is to be 14 ft wide (current screen is 10 ft wide 16:9).


I have been very pleased with my Stewart Electrimask. It has functioned perfectly since I bought it.


My room is 100% light controlled

*3 questions:*


1. Studio Tek or a Firehawk. My room is 95% movies only - little sports with lights on. Are the black levels 'better' with the Firehawk relative to a white screen? Wich would you recommend?


2. Cinecurve or or flat screen. What are the disadvantages of and indications for a curved screen?


3. I am looking at the Vistascope. Is it a 2.40 native screen or a 2.35. The website is unclear. Also, is the BRIC system an option or part of the screen price?


All the best and hope you are enjoying the holiday weekend!


Jeff


----------



## mikeaitch

By chance, does anybody know how much it would cost to ship from Chicago to the UK? I'm looking to buy a 2nd hand ST130 but don't know how heavy it would be (it's 100 inches diag)


Also could I purchase a replacement shipping box for safetyfrom Stewart as the current owner doesn't have the original?


----------



## ronk10




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *merv43* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Please let me know what you find out, I am considering replacing my 92" firehawk that is three years old with a new 106" G3. I am currently using a sony vpl-hs51 but will likely upgrade later this year to an rs1 or what ever may come out between now and November.




From doing my research, the short answer is:


Use an SST if you're going with a throw distance that is on the short end of the projector's capabilities, IE 13-14.5 ft @ 110" - 120"


Use the G3 on longer throws.


----------



## Glenn Baumann




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mikeaitch* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> By chance, does anybody know how much it would cost to ship from Chicago to the UK? I'm looking to buy a 2nd hand ST130 but don't know how heavy it would be (it's 100 inches diag)
> 
> 
> Also could I purchase a replacement shipping box for safetyfrom Stewart as the current owner doesn't have the original?





mikeaitch,


I dont know if your ST130 purchase is a done deal or not, but I do happen to have a new / never used and never taken out of the factory box Stewart Studiotek 130 MICROPERF screen in a 47" X 89" (100" diagonal size) that I would be willing to sell and ship if you or anyone might be interested!



...Glenn


----------



## m Robinson

Mikeaitch, Is the screen which needs to be packaged a snap screen or a roller? Either way, factory packaging materials are available through a quote processed through a Stewart Dealer. Rollers are more complicated because the batten must be imobilized in the case prior to shipment.


Jeff M.

1. In a well treated room, with a projector with excellent ANSI contrast performance, Studiotek is difficult to improve upon. The problem is that not enough rooms are controlled enough to where cross reflected light does not have a significant impact on net room contrast performance. I have not been in your theater, so you've got to judge that. The color rendition of Studiotek is preferred by many critical viewers, and the viewing cone is marvelous.


If you do plan to do the sports viewing with some ambient light, the Firehawk can do it, the Studiotek will wash out much more, per given amount of light leakage.


The Qualia projector also is aided significantly by a contrast enhancing screen. So as long as you have the Qualia, the Firehawk is good to have.


2. Curved versus Flat..

Curved screems were developed to correct for the very real artifact of pincushion distortion from anamorphic lenses. Along the way people also noticed that the curve has some small benefit in overcoming center to edge brightness uniformity problems, and the curve will help a little bit with net contrast, by directing more light toward viewing position as opposed to near-field walls. A well designed curved screen also has an appealing aesthetic in the viewing area. The curve needs to be carefully specified to avoid overcorrection, and Stewart undercorrects a bit to avoid over cropping the 16:9 are when the lens is not in use.


The throw distance is the key factor in the application of curvature. The better quality lenses will impart very little pincushion when longer throws are possible. Short throw use of anamorphics dictates that testing be undertaken and derivation of the curve is possible by measuring the rised required at the vertical edges, to reduce the projected image height to match the center. Not all lenses are equal in this regard. Some are actually asymetrical, and can shift the image centerline etc.



3. The Vistascope is the flat screen version of the constant height masking system. The BRIC control is standard for Vistascope and is integrated into the price. The Vistascope units are engineered to order with your room contraints considered. We prefer to provide a wide open image area in the ratio of 2.40:1 and sometimes wider. That ratio, and the independent motors for each mask, allow the user to perfectly matte any "normal" 2.35 content, regardless of mastering anomalies which can move stuff from side to side a few pixels etc. We will build what your room will allow, and sometimes that's 2.35 wide open because of width constraints.


For people who really need flexibility, we build a 2.40 native 4-Way system, which will allow you to do some cool stuff like go big with the lens in native 2.40 etc. or re-size for content that doesn't look great or doesn't scale well, so you can pull the lens, bring in the sides, then deploy a top and bottom, so you are fully matted at 2.35 or whatever, without the lens, cause you know sometimes the story is better than the transfer, and that can be used to get the subtitles back etc. That rig, partnered with great scaler gives you pretty much endless ways of showing films.


----------



## thebland

Mark,


Thanks for the detailed response. I appreciate it!


One question though, do you recommend gray screens for all digitals in 100% light controlled rooms? Or at what contrast ratio would you recommend a white screen over a gray hawk?


My Qualia CR is about 1800:1 (calibrated). I was thinking of trying a white screen, but I see you are recommending the Firehawk rather than a Studio Tek for my projector. Correct?. I may keep my Qualia at least another 2-3 years.


----------



## mikeaitch

Thanks for the info!


Is the ST130 hte best screen vs the newer formulas, 95% light control in my room, dark wall and ceiling?


----------



## mojung

I have ordered a Firehawk G3 135" from a dealer in Bangkok. They got a Firehawk G2 135" in their stock as well. So is there any difference in package, frame or screen itself that I can make sure that what I will get is a G3 model. I am afraid that they might swap the screen and give me a G2 instead which I will never know. Thanks for your help.


----------



## Kent Headrick

I currently have a 5 year old stewart grayhawk microperf screen that is 12 ft wide. I am considering upgrading my projector to a sim2 HT5000 . My current projector is a christie s4 with 1280x1024 chips in it. It does not moire with my current projector.

Will it moire with the HT5000?


- kent


----------



## Audioplus93

Anyone know anything about a Sharp XS100M 100" diagonal pop-up theater console? Looks like a Stewart AVS100V mechanism. Manufactured in the '90s. Looks like a 1.5 gain, non tab tensioned screen? Since it's a straight hang from upright pole assembly to roller assembly on bottom, it can be adjusted for variable aspect ratio.

Thanks, Dan C


----------



## NORLL

I have a question for you guys;


I have constructed a 2,37:1 torus screen about 9 feet wide (it has 6,5" horizontal rise). Today I have a Stewart Screen Ultramatte 200 fabric mounted on the frame. When properly calibrated, this setup does not hotspot, but to get this result I need to use my Sony VPL-VW50 with the iris closed at the minimum position. This still gives med a nice and bright picture. I am almost satisfied, but the screen that I got second hand has a few spots on it (se earlier post).


I am therefor on the lookout for a new screen material from Stewart to use on the same torus frame. If I decide to buy something I was hoping for a material with less gain than the Ultramatte 200. It might be to bright for a future projector without iris control.


What do you guys think of using the StudioTek 130 on a torus frame? Will this give problems with crossreflections?


----------



## JoshuaL

Mark (or anyone else) -


Just finished reading through the thread, great stuff. I'm finishing my home theater soon and need to select an appropriate screen material for use with my Sanyo Z4. I'm basically between the standard StudioTek 130 and the UltraMatte 150. (Of course, if you think one of the grey screens is a viable option I'd be willing to listen!)


The calculator at projector central implies that I may not have enough brightness (for either screen material), but calculating by hand shows I'd be OK (with either material) given 500 lumens output, but I'm not sure how much to adjust the lumens for a given zoom (see below). So, my main concern is enough brightness. Here's my relevant info:


Projector: Sanyo Z4, ceiling mounted

Throw distance: 14' (adjustable; this is the optimal distance for me)

Estimated screen size: 123" diag. (Zoom would be 1.77x at 14')

Distance to first row: 13' (18 degrees max viewing angle)

Distance to second row: 19' (12 degrees max viewing angle)

Light control: nearly total (no ambient light, walls non-glossy dark blue, drop ceiling non-reflective white tiles)


I'll probably be upgrading to a 1080p projector next year, but for now the Z4 is it. Thanks for any help!


----------



## Jason Turk

If I may, go with the Firehawk G3. Yes, a 123" diag. screen is relatively large. But, there are 2 factors that come into play which lead me to mention the Firehawk G3. First off, the white ceiling. Thought the rest of the room is dark, once an image is shown onto a white screen, it will tend to reflect onto the ceiling enough to cause the image to wash out a bit. Secondly, the Z4 is an older projector where contrast wasn't as high as current models. The Firehawk G3 will greatly help that, and give you a richer, deeper looking image.


Just my 2 cents.


----------



## KaushikC




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Glenn Baumann* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> mikeaitch,
> 
> 
> I dont know if your ST130 purchase is a done deal or not, but I do happen to have a new / never used and never taken out of the factory box Stewart Studiotek 130 MICROPERF screen in a 47" X 89" (100" diagonal size) that I would be willing to sell and ship if you or anyone might be interested!
> 
> 
> 
> ...Glenn




Hi Glenn:


I recently bought an Epson 810 and am looking for an electric screen. Is the screen you mentioned above electric and is so whats the price ?


Thanks

Kaushik


----------



## JoshuaL




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jason Turk* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> If I may, go with the Firehawk G3.



Interesting, thanks. I have something to think about.







I may try to get some samples before proceeding!


----------



## shaft420

I just bought a used Firehwak communicator from someone locally. How good is this screen compared to a new screen around the 500.00 range. I am concerned screen technology may have come a long way since this screen was new. I am also interested in buying a projector that would work well with this used Firehawk.


Would I be better off eating the cost of the used Firehwak that I bought and buy the projector with a packaged screen such as the Elite? My budget is around 3000 for the projector (could be slightly more if needed) and around 500 for the screen which I already bought, but can buy another if better quality can be achieved.


Thanks for your help in advance. I am very confused if I made a bad deicision on buying this older Firehawk. Please comment on whether or not I should keep this screen, and which projector to match it to, or should I start over and buy the screen with the projector?


----------



## nathan_h

The original Firehawk was a great screen, took the industry by storm, and in some ways still betters the competition. I had one and loved it. That said, the newer formulations are better. But are not available in your price range. At all.


The Firehawk is designed for ceiling mounted projectors in a situation where ambient light, or simply light colored walls and ceilings, may be present. The screen can also help projectors with lower contrast ratios have more punch.


Since you're just starting out, you may not have a dedicated dark room. In that case, the Firehawk you have may give you better results that any other screen you might try in your price range. Try it, and see what you think.


If I could replace my matte white screen with a Firehawk, I'd do it in a heartbeat. For perhaps the next year, I'll be watching my projector in our living room, which is not horrible, but could certainly use the directionality of the Firehawk. My old one was a fixed wall screen, but since moving about 1.5 years ago, I need a retractile one -- but a new retractible screen greatly exceeds my budget.


----------



## m Robinson




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kent Headrick* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I currently have a 5 year old stewart grayhawk microperf screen that is 12 ft wide. I am considering upgrading my projector to a sim2 HT5000 . My current projector is a christie s4 with 1280x1024 chips in it. It does not moire with my current projector.
> 
> Will it moire with the HT5000?
> 
> 
> - kent



I am waiting for access to an HT5000 and expect it here within a couple weeks.

I have tested several other projectors with that chip set, and there is very slight moire at that image width, correctable with 14 degree rotation. PM me with your serial # and let me see what we can work out.


----------



## Brad/Viper-Fan

Mark,


I intend to order a ST130 40"x95" Microperf X2 for my JVC RS-1 projector.


I will have seating at 10Ft.


Will the perfs be visible at this distance? If so, what distance will they disappear?


Thanks,


Brad


----------



## cwpomeroy

Hopefully I'm not going off-topic but i didn't want to start yet another "which screen" thread.


I'm looking at the RS-1 for a walkout basement non-dedicated room. The room has light brown walls and a white ceiling. There are three half height windows with wooden blinds and I'm willing to hang blackout drapes that i can pull across them. So I can control the outside light - BUT the wife will simply NOT go for painting the walls or ceiling.


I have a recommendation to go with the Vutec 103 VuEasy Screen-Brightwhite. However, I've been reading about the use of other screens when you can't have the room painted dark.


I'll be sitting about 15 feet from the screen and can mount the projector anywhere from 10-20 feet from the screen.


Please recommend a screen and at distance to mount the projector.


Thanks!!!!


----------



## R Harkness

QUESTION: REGARDING STEWART FILMSCREEN ADVICE ON FIREHAWK SCREEN AND 2:35:1 CONSTANT IMAGE HEIGHT SET-UP:


I'm possibly interested in the Firehawk screen for a projection set-up with the JVC RS1. Distance is

about 13.5 to 14' from a 108" to 111" wide 2:35:1 screen.


A quote from a review of the Firehhawk says:

*"The Firehawk G3 projector screen surface, because of the roll off angle, also works best with projectors mounted further back. They recommend at least 1.6 times screen width. So, if you have a 100" screen, you are going to want the projector at least 11.3 feet back, or preferably, a bit further."*


For someone contemplating a constant image height setup like me, do I calculate the recommended distance for the firehawk using the width of the unexpanded image (i.g. the 1:78:1 width) or the width of the widescreen image _with_ the image expanded? (If it's calculated from the fullly expanded CinemaScope image with lens in place, that obviously makes it harder to achieve the needed distance from the Firehawk screen).


Thanks.


----------



## nathan_h

Are you using projector zoom, or an anamorphic lens, to achieve "constant height"? If a zoom, then you'd calculate from the full width of the widest image -- making things tough.


----------



## R Harkness

No, I wish to use an anamorphic lens. But, I can't really think of a reason that would change the recommendations for the throw distance on the Firehawk. The more I think of it, it would seem I'd be calculating the correct distance for the Firehawk based on the full scope width of whatever 2:35:1 screen I buy, whether I use anamorphic lens or zoom method.


Can anyone confirm?


Thanks.


----------



## GetGray

My take on it is this: The screen dosen't "know" how the light got to it. The "spec" was based on the angle of light hitting the screen and really has nothing to do with the relative screen height. So, I'd say to meet the intentions of the spec, one would need to consider the projected image width (when stretched to 2.37:1 in this case) as the referene width to calculate the throw ratio required to be in the proper range. No?


That said, I love the firehawk's overall performance in varying conditions so I am looking a a curved 2.37 to address the viewing angle mentioned. A curved firehawk should: a) make that throw requrement smaller and assist with any perceived hotspotting, b) assist in any pincushion from a Isco lens at shorter throws, c) look cool


----------



## lktanx

Does anyone have the discrete IR codes for the Stewart Bric control system? Thanks.


----------



## stevelavey

To Mark Robinson and others:


I am finally taking the plunge and building the home theater in my basement. I have a room 24 x 13 and am just getting to the framing next week. I built a simple 123 diagonal (107 x 60) blackout cloth frame to see how big it looked and man, it looked great.


However, I am looking at getting a JVC RS1 (700 lumens) when I finish and wonder if in this "no ambient light"room, can it light up a 123 diag if I get the Studiotek 130 in a 123 diag size? Otherwise I will have to look at the 110.


Any help from all you experienced folks would be helpful


----------



## ronk10




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *stevelavey* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> To Mark Robinson and others:
> 
> 
> I am finally taking the plunge and building the home theater in my basement. I have a room 24 x 13 and am just getting to the framing next week. I built a simple 123 diagonal (107 x 60) blackout cloth frame to see how big it looked and man, it looked great.
> 
> 
> However, I am looking at getting a JVC RS1 (700 lumens) when I finish and wonder if in this "no ambient light"room, can it light up a 123 diag if I get the Studiotek 130 in a 123 diag size? Otherwise I will have to look at the 110.
> 
> 
> Any help from all you experienced folks would be helpful




I've seen the RS1 projected onto a 120" 1.3 gain white screen before.

Cannot be sure of the manufacturer. I'm thinking screen research, but I could be wrong..


Anyway, it looked bright enough to me. I liked it and would have bought the screen myself if I had a light controlled room to put it in.


----------



## thebland




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *lktanx* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Does anyone have the discrete IR codes for the Stewart Bric control system? Thanks.



IS the BRIC RS-232 capable?


----------



## m Robinson

The discreet IR codes are not published. The RS-232 capability is totally functional and is published in the manual. Later today, I should have some time for further posting.


Mark R.


----------



## Chewbacco

This whole thread is such an interesting read and learning experience. I've read all 18 pages and thanks to all for you have helped me decide what I'll need. Mark your patience and input is amazing!!

My room is small 14.5x10. it's totally light controlled and my projector(Sammy H710) and I are 13.5 back from my 92" screen. I'll be upgrading my screen to 100" which is all the larger I can go in my small space, and from what I've read the Studio Tek 130 will fit the bill. I've got samples coming but I'm 98% sure this is the way I'll go.

Thanks to all!!

Warren


----------



## m Robinson




m Robinson said:


> "The discreet IR codes are not published. The RS-232 capability is totally functional and is published in the manual. Later today, I should have some time for further posting. "
> 
> 
> This turned out not to be correct. The IR codes are available on our website. Use
> 
> the link above here on AVS or go to Stewartfilm.com then go as follows:
> 
> 
> HiModels/control systems/BRIC/BRIC codes That's what I was told anyway. If you have further difficulty, please call Scott Kimber at (800)762-4999, and he will help you get to the codes, via the web page.
> 
> 
> The RS 232 interface is reliable and done every day.
> 
> 
> Stevelavey, 123" is a pretty good sized screen. Some of our customers have gone that route using Studiotek combined with that projector and projectors of similar light output. No re-screens with higher gain materials coming in, but I do wonder how things will go as bulbs dim. Your placement of the projector should be weighted towards the best light output over the range of the zoom, there have been threads about that. The Studiotek will work great at any throw within most common HT zoom lenses. Your light control has got to be pretty tight for
> 
> sure.
> 
> 
> Warren, thanks for the nice comments. We certainly appreciate all of the interest that people have in our products.
> 
> 
> Mark r.


----------



## cam

Has anyone upgraded their screen from FireHawk to FireHawk G3 ? Is there a big difference ?


My previous projector was Sharp 11000, and I upgraded to 21000 late last year to take advantage of its 1080 native resolution.


Lately I found the projected image to the FireHawk screen a bit dimmed, if I change to high brightness mode, then the black is no longer black enough, would changing to FireHawk G3 help ?


Thx.


----------



## nathan_h

Probably not. It has less gain, which might help with blacks, but it has less gain, which means overall less brightness. The main difference would be with regard to screen texture, sparklies, etc, being more absent in the newer formulation versus the older formulation.


----------



## NORLL

Is the StudioTek 130 (non-perforated) air tight? I am thinking of using this fabric for a slightly curved torus. I need it to be air tight because I have a fan creating vacuum to create the right torus shape...


----------



## m Robinson

Yes, the fabric will hold the seal necessary for a Torus type installation.


----------



## NORLL




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Yes, the fabric will hold the seal necessary for a Torus type installation.



Thank you for you answer. Do you think there will be any problems with cross-refelctions in such a setup? Usually a gain of 1.8 and above is recommended for torus screens, but those numbers are from the good old CRT-projector days. A gain og 1.8 or above might be to much for todays digital projectors. I use a Ultramatte 200 today and need to use the projector with minimum light output (iris closed and lamp in eco mode).


----------



## nathan_h

Does anyone know if the Stewart Ultramatte (150, 200) screens are angular reflective or retro reflective? And I see that Ultramatte 200 is "color corrected" for CRT projection. What would that manifest as, if used with a SXRD projector?


----------



## cam




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *nathan_h* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Probably not. It has less gain, which might help with blacks, but it has less gain, which means overall less brightness. The main difference would be with regard to screen texture, sparklies, etc, being more absent in the newer formulation versus the older formulation.



Over the weekend I re-adjusted the setting, and found that I don't need to use the high brightness mode, just by tuning up the brightness value while staying in the high contrast mode, and I can obtain a decent picture.


----------



## flamaest




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Flamaest, P.M. me with your serial # information. We've worked very hard to minimize blazing sparkles coming out of our screens. IF you've got one or two that keep poking out at you. Put up a white field, find the irritating sparkle, walk up to the screen, locate it, and mute it down by touching it lightly with a #2 pencil. Let's see how old it is and so forth. We've replaced some units for this problem, but it's been 2 years now. I'll work with you.



Mark, I sent you a PM.


Thanks again,

Fabian.


----------



## QueueCumber




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pcarey* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I have just received my Stewart AT screen (thanks Jason) and it came with a product called the Cinema Sonic Processor to be used with the center channel to slightly enhance certain frequencies that are impeded when the speaker is behind the screen. I won't be able to use mine for a few weeks and I just wondered if anyone was using the CSP. If not why not!
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> Piers



I too am curious about the CSP with Microperf screens, and whether or not it would be noticable if I use it or if I don't use it in my particular situation where the center channel would be the only speaker behind the screen? My right and left mains wouldn't be behind the screen.


If it would be noticable, what other devices are available on the market to compensate (specific products please) for the sloping dB loss?


The reason why the CSP is a problem for me is because it has no on/off/bypass feature, so it would always be on when in use, even when the screen is not recessed into the ceiling. That is a problem for me because I listen to a lot of surround music as well as watch movies.


Thanks.


----------



## Kent Headrick




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *QueueCumber* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I too am curious about the CSP with Microperf screens, and whether or not it would be noticable if I use it or if I don't use it in my particular situation where the center channel would be the only speaker behind the screen? My right and left mains wouldn't be behind the screen.
> 
> 
> If it would be noticable, what other devices are available on the market to compensate (specific products please) for the sloping dB loss?
> 
> 
> The reason why the CSP is a problem for me is because it has no on/off/bypass feature, so it would always be on when in use, even when the screen is not recessed into the ceiling. That is a problem for me because I listen to a lot of surround music as well as watch movies.
> 
> 
> Thanks.



I got a CSP with my stewart screen from about 6 years ago. I tried it but did not use it. It produced a a (slight) hum in my center channel. I used a digital EQ from Rane instead, which I needed anyway for room correction. They may have improved the CSP since then, I don't know. The rane eq is fully programable and has memories so you could use a setting for your screen and no screen situations. The down side to the rane is it is not cheap, it adds latency, and really needs to be driven with balanced levels to be quiet. Also it is a pro audio product so the software assumes you know all about eq, phase, etc. You really need measuring equipment to set it up (spectrum or time domain analyzer, such the ETF acoustic SW).

As to how much difference the the screen/ no screen is, it is noticeable, but I would not call it dramatic. You'll need to hear it for yourself as to whether you can live it without any compensation.


- Kent


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *nathan_h* /forum/post/11233517
> 
> 
> Does anyone know if the Stewart Ultramatte (150, 200) screens are angular reflective or retro reflective? And I see that Ultramatte 200 is "color corrected" for CRT projection. What would that manifest as, if used with a SXRD projector?



Hmmm. I even sent this question to Stewart and didn't get an answer. Really, no one knows if the Ultramatte 200 is:


1) angular or retro reflective?


2) color corrected for CRT projection in a way that means an SXRD projector's color temp and decoder (already calibrated) would be wrong?


----------



## m Robinson

Hello Posters,

Nathan H.

All Ultramatte Fabrics are Matte screens with angular reflective elements in the optical coating. There are also highly diffusive and Lambertian behaving matte elements in the optical coating. This means that the viewing cone is centered upon the incident angle of projected light, but reasonably wide. The viewing cones for the Ultramatte range do compare pretty favorably with other gain modified screens. They are not entirely Lambertian like a true matte unity gain fabric, but they are not specular or mirror like.


The notion that a screen fabric is color corrected means that the color performance is monitored and modified so that color shift, a common artifact of poorly engineered gain surfaces, is controlled and managed so that a calibrated projector can achieve D-6500 with the surface, and there is not some weird uncorrectable skew to the color.


----------



## nathan_h

Thanks! That makes it sound like the Ultramatte 200 could work for me. I've got a ceiling mounted projector, to the angular aspects work well.


Although I think I understand the concept better now, I'm still a little confused about why the "color correction" is called out for the Ultramatte but not several other Stewart screen fabrics -- since it sounds like it would be a characteristic one would want most of the time. Is the reason it's specifically called out on the Ultramatte 200 simply that one expects lower gain screens (especially from Stewart) to be neutral in their impact on color, but that it's a more rare achievement with such a positive gain screen?


----------



## PEH

I was recently reviewing the settings for my Sony G50 and found one that referred to the screen. It was check boxes for Matte or Bead. I have a Stewart StudioTek 130 I suspect it is a matte type screen rather than bead but I am not sure. If someone out there knows please advise.


----------



## gulliBELL

Just a note for Mark Robinson. My new LX090 came with quite a bit of black overspray on the lower battern and tab-tension string, perhaps mine slipped through the QC checks prior to shipping? In any event, the screen presents a stunning picture so I'm happy to live with it as is. And a suggestion. If either mounting point on the screen case could have a "jack screw" type mechanism to allow precision adjustment of horizontal after installation would be a handy feature.


----------



## mwesson

Does anyone know exactly what the effect of not having 12 inches between the speaker and a microperfed screen would be?


I've read the paper on the stewart website and note the "comb filtering" that could occur. How much of an effect would that really (practically) make in an average home theater? Would it really be noticable? Assuming the speakers were only 3 inches behind the screen.


Thanks in advance. Highly informative thread...


----------



## Twinsen

I have recently found someone selling a Stewart screen locally for a very attractive price. It is a homemade Stewart Videomatte 2000 on a 7.5 x 10' wrapped around wood. I was trying to do a little research on this last night, but the only thing I could really find info on was the Firehawk, Greyhawk, and StudioTek 130. How does the Videomatte 2000 compare to these? I will be using it with a Panasonic AE500U. I currently only project against a standard eggshell white painted wall. I used to use blackout cloth, but the size was too small after I upgraded to my own home.


Thanks in advance!


----------



## Twinsen

Geez, I'm glad I didn't depend on you guys' input on this screen! Went ahead and bought it anyway, and it turned out to be a decent screen, just have to stretch it back out due to wrinkles and re-staple it.


----------



## danstone

Please forgive me if this has been asked and answered before, but I tried searching and could not locate an answer for this question:


What is the recommended minimum seating distance from the latest Stewart Microperf screens in order for the perfs not to be visible?


Thanks in advance,


Dan


----------



## ronk10




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *danstone* /forum/post/11606955
> 
> 
> Please forgive me if this has been asked and answered before, but I tried searching and could not locate an answer for this question:
> 
> 
> What is the recommended minimum seating distance from the latest Stewart Microperf screens in order for the perfs not to be visible?
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> 
> 
> Dan




Depends on how good your vision is. With contacts or glasses I'm around 20/15 and can see the perfs at 12 ft. But not at 14 ft.


----------



## dpc2

I am now the proud and happy owner of a second hand 110" Studiotek skin. I can't wait to start using it, but therein lies the problem...I bought the skin only and don't have a frame. Has anyone built a DIY frame for a Luxus skin? I'm thinking about a velveteen covered frame using 1x4 boards, but wanted to know if there are any particular cautions (amount of tension required when mounting? mouting methodology?).


The local Stewart office (Singapore) said they don't sell frames separately.


Many Thanks!


Dave


----------



## Iamjcl

I'm coming off of my last video room (I moved) which involved a Sony Ruby rear-projected on a Stewart 1.0 gain RP material.


I am now putting together a "normal" front-projection setup, in a semi-dedicated room (don't like caves), based around a Sony black pearl / VPW-60 and a 16:9, 110" diag. surface.


I have the option at this point to go microperf or not, and I wonder what peoples opinions are regarding it.


It also seems like the firehawk / grayhawk material may do well for more casual viewing, even if most of it is done with lights out. Wall / ceiling colors are not white, but are muted / earth-tone. Its no cave.


- Thanks for any input - its been awhile since I've reviewed screen choices, and even longer since looking at front projection -vs- rear.


- Chris


----------



## video_bit_bucket

I am in the market for a 56x133 screen to use for both 16x9 and scope viewing. I have a Infocus 777 which from what I have read generally is 1,300 - 1,400 FL calibrated, which should give me 650 FL at bulb EOL. I have the ability to do full light control but since this is a family REC room much of the time there will be some lights on. The walls are going gray, the ceiling will be velvet for the first 4 feet or so, screen goes up to the ceiling.


From what I have read if I go for full light control viewing then the Greyhawk would be good, but I dont have the bulb at EOL to drive that.


So given the need for a little gain and the given that there will be some lights on most of the time Seems that the best choice would be the Firehawk G3.


Anyone disagree?


Or agree?


----------



## video_bit_bucket

Anyone have an opinion on the question below?





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *video_bit_bucket* /forum/post/11851785
> 
> 
> I am in the market for a 56x133 screen to use for both 16x9 and scope viewing. I have a Infocus 777 which from what I have read generally is 1,300 - 1,400 FL calibrated, which should give me 650 FL at bulb EOL. I have the ability to do full light control but since this is a family REC room much of the time there will be some lights on. The walls are going gray, the ceiling will be velvet for the first 4 feet or so, screen goes up to the ceiling.
> 
> 
> From what I have read if I go for full light control viewing then the Greyhawk would be good, but I dont have the bulb at EOL to drive that.
> 
> 
> So given the need for a little gain and the given that there will be some lights on most of the time Seems that the best choice would be the Firehawk G3.
> 
> 
> Anyone disagree?
> 
> 
> Or agree?


----------



## GetGray

My opinion is with that PJ the FH is a great choice, very versatile, particulary with any ambient. About anything else will wash out badly with ambient. My only concern (see posts in this thread and reply from M. Robinsion) is hotspotting at that width. It will depend somewhat on the throw. Presuming stock lens options, I think it will be OK, but I've considered a curved screen for hotspotting reduction with the FH. May not be necessary. I love my 110" FH, just don't know how a 120+ will behave. HTH.


----------



## JlgLaw




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *video_bit_bucket* /forum/post/11851785
> 
> 
> I am in the market for a 56x133 screen to use for both 16x9 and scope viewing. I have a Infocus 777 which from what I have read generally is 1,300 - 1,400 FL calibrated, which should give me 650 FL at bulb EOL. I have the ability to do full light control but since this is a family REC room much of the time there will be some lights on. The walls are going gray, the ceiling will be velvet for the first 4 feet or so, screen goes up to the ceiling.
> 
> 
> From what I have read if I go for full light control viewing then the Greyhawk would be good, but I dont have the bulb at EOL to drive that.
> 
> 
> So given the need for a little gain and the given that there will be some lights on most of the time Seems that the best choice would be the Firehawk G3.
> 
> 
> Anyone disagree?
> 
> 
> Or agree?




I like your FH choice as well. I've seen it in an environment "similar" to what you describe and it looked great. (One note: I assume you are referring to a fixed screen, because the FH in an Electriscreen is limited to 118" in width.) (Just clarifying that "screen goes up to the ceiling" doesn't mean "into" the ceiling.)


Jim


----------



## video_bit_bucket

Yes it would be fixed. Thanks for the feedback.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *JlgLaw* /forum/post/11939196
> 
> 
> I like your FH choice as well. I've seen it in an environment "similar" to what you describe and it looked great. (One note: I assume you are referring to a fixed screen, because the FH in an Electriscreen is limited to 118" in width.) (Just clarifying that "screen goes up to the ceiling" doesn't mean "into" the ceiling.)
> 
> 
> Jim


----------



## nathan_h

Hmmm... Something sounds odd about what you describe. I can see where if you are using horizontal lens shift, you'll end up with the brightest seat being on the opposite side of the screen from where the projector is. Other than that, the rest seems suspicious. How can the UM200 be created for the "best accuracy," but have different compensation than their "most accurate" ST130? Or have trouble with a ceiling mounted projector -- which is where one SHOULD mount a projector for use with an angular-reflective screen like the UM200?


----------



## greg2124

I have a JVC-RS1 currently mounted on the ceiling 13ft. away from the screen. Looking at either a draper 110'' Onyx or Stewart Studiotek 130. Ambient light is completly controlled and the room is small. Am having a hard time justifying spending the extra money for the Stewart 130 is it really worth it. Thanks if anyone can help me out.


----------



## sketch2099

Help!


A friend of a friend just offered to sell me his 2 year old Stewart Firehawk (1.35 gain) for 900, but I don't know if this will be a good screen for my AX200. I have the projector 16' back in a regular living room w/ white walls and some ambient light during the day. Anyone think I should move on this? or is it a bad choice for this type of projector?


----------



## AbMagFab

Projector: Sony VPL-VW60

Screen size: 110" diagonal 16x9

Distance: 13-14' from projector lens (about half the capable zoom)

Room: Dark, controlled light, dark walls/ceiling

Seating: 11' from screen, about 40 degrees wide


I'd like as much brightness as possible, in case I want to watch with my 15W wall sconces, or even my overhead lights, but I also want as good/true a picture as possible. I'll get the setup ISF calibrated


According the the projection calculator, I'd get 10fL with the ST 130 1.3, and 12fL with the UM 150 1.5.


I also dislike the sparklies with some front (and many rear) projection screens.


- Is the +2 fL going to make any significant difference?

- Is there any difference between the ST and UM in terms of ambient room light?

- Is the narrower cone going to make any significant difference for my setup (11' from screen, 10' wide seating)?

- Anything else significant to choose one over the other (ST130 v UM150)?


Thanks!

-Mark


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *greg2124* /forum/post/11992123
> 
> 
> I have a JVC-RS1 currently mounted on the ceiling 13ft. away from the screen. Looking at either a draper 110'' Onyx or Stewart Studiotek 130. Ambient light is completly controlled and the room is small. Am having a hard time justifying spending the extra money for the Stewart 130 is it really worth it. Thanks if anyone can help me out.



I recommend you get a sample of each either from your dealer or directly from the manufacturer -- and take a look.


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *sketch2099* /forum/post/11998697
> 
> 
> Help!
> 
> 
> A friend of a friend just offered to sell me his 2 year old Stewart Firehawk (1.35 gain) for 900, but I don't know if this will be a good screen for my AX200. I have the projector 16' back in a regular living room w/ white walls and some ambient light during the day. Anyone think I should move on this? or is it a bad choice for this type of projector?



The Firehawk is the best screen out there, imo, for your kind of room. This is especially true if the projector is ceiling mounted.


Some people would say to try a Hi Power Dalite screen. I've used both and prefer the Firehawk.


Of course, nothing will look great in a room with white walls and ambient light. It's like listening to a stereo system set up in the kitchen, while the dishwasher is running. You can hear the music, but it's far from the ideal.


----------



## LJG

This may have been answered in the thread but is the Lexus Screenwall Electrimask horizontal limited to maximum of 96" width as the website states?


----------



## AbMagFab

Where can we get some material samples? I shot an e-mail to Stewart, but they never responded.


----------



## nathan_h

Same thing happened to me. I asked for a brochure and samples. The brochure arrived in a week, the samples took 5 or 6 weeks. I asked about the reason: They indicated they like to send large samples -- and they wait until they have some large scraps to send out. This was several years ago, but I'd guess maybe they do the same thing, now.


----------



## c722

I'm planning for a 10ft wide screen, living room setup (so ambient light inevitable ). I can ceiling mount the PJ abt 1.9x behind, but I'll be sitting 1.2x. Does it work ? Or I'm better off with GH ?


Thanks !


----------



## nathan_h

I would choose Firehawk in that situation.


----------



## AbMagFab

- Sony VW60

- 14' distance from projector to screen

- Dedicated "batcave", dark walls and ceiling, but with white trim and beige carpet

- I can control ambient light (other than the trim/carpet reflection) completely, but sometimes might like to turn on 15W wall sconces or 40W overhead cans (over the seats, black baffles)


If the overall picture quality of the ST130 is significantly better than the FHG3in a dark room, then I want the ST130. Otherwise, the FHG3 gives me a little more flexibility, and better blacks, right?


I want the best picture, but if the ST130 will get washed out by the backlight on my remote, I should probably go with the FHG3.


Which should I choose?!?! I need to make a decision by COB Tuesday 11/6.


----------



## daron73m

Heres the scoop:


22' x 14' Its a greatroom, so kitchen is open next to it. Have window coverings on all windows which keep it moderatly dark but still get a little bit of light, definitly no batcave. Just bought the AE 2000 placing it at approx 13-14' ceiling mounted. Sitting at about 17 to 18' from screen. Probably will go with the 110" screen, seems like the 123" might be to big for the panny...from what i hear...correct me if i am wrong.


So Im stuck between the Firehawk SST vs the G3?


thanks for all your insights!!


----------



## nathan_h

Firehawk G3 should be ieal. As near as I can tell, the SST really is formulated specifically for Sony LCOS / SXRD.


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/12134546
> 
> 
> - Sony VW60
> 
> - 14' distance from projector to screen
> 
> - Dedicated "batcave", dark walls and ceiling, but with white trim and beige carpet
> 
> - I can control ambient light (other than the trim/carpet reflection) completely, but sometimes might like to turn on 15W wall sconces or 40W overhead cans (over the seats, black baffles)
> 
> 
> If the overall picture quality of the ST130 is significantly better than the FHG3in a dark room, then I want the ST130. Otherwise, the FHG3 gives me a little more flexibility, and better blacks, right?
> 
> 
> I want the best picture, but if the ST130 will get washed out by the backlight on my remote, I should probably go with the FHG3.
> 
> 
> Which should I choose?!?! I need to make a decision by COB Tuesday 11/6.



FH will be more forgiving of lights on in the room. ST will look best when all lights are off. But if you like watching with some lights on, I saw go for the FH.


----------



## mkerdman

Do the Stewart Visionary Electriscreen's still have problems with "tractor-feed" markings on the left & right edges when they roll up and down?


I one a few years ago and loved the screen but had "tractor-feed" marking problems with (2) different Electriscreen's.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *daron73m* /forum/post/12166505
> 
> 
> Heres the scoop:
> 
> 
> 22' x 14' Its a greatroom, so kitchen is open next to it. Have window coverings on all windows which keep it moderatly dark but still get a little bit of light, definitly no batcave. Just bought the AE 2000 placing it at approx 13-14' ceiling mounted. Sitting at about 17 to 18' from screen. Probably will go with the 110" screen, seems like the 123" might be to big for the panny...from what i hear...correct me if i am wrong.
> 
> 
> So Im stuck between the Firehawk SST vs the G3?
> 
> 
> thanks for all your insights!!



Definitely FHG3. Main difference between the two is the SST has a lower gain and is for a shorter throw (

(Both are designed for 1080p's. The SST was around prior to the G3's, but now they all are 1080p ready.)


----------



## daron73m

Ok pulled the trigger on the FHG3 114". It recommends a 1.6 throw which would place projector (panny 2000) at 15 foot. Problem is I had all my electrical put in at 14 1 in ceiling. If I mount projector to where all cords line up perfect that will put the lens at 13' range. How will that effect the picture and where would you guys hang it ?


thanks

daron


----------



## nathan_h

You'll loose some of the intended gain and directionality of the reflection/image.


----------



## dmcleod

I am curious from the other Stewart owners as to the approximate turnaround time of your order.


The reason I am asking is that I am still waiting for my screen that was ordered on Sept 10, 2007. I received word that it finally left the factory today.


What I find incredulous about dealing with Stewart is that it appears to be like pulling teeth to get any kind of status from them ... my dealer was faxed the completion papers a couple weeks ago that the order would be shipped on 11/13 .... now I find out today that it did not ship until today 11/20.


I am very unhappy because I have now had to cancel 2 appointments with the person who performs calibration/setup (he lives in another city) and will have to wait another few weeks for setup to be completed.


This is my first screen from Stewart ... it may be my last if this is any indication of the service provided.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *daron73m* /forum/post/12260354
> 
> 
> Ok pulled the trigger on the FHG3 114". It recommends a 1.6 throw which would place projector (panny 2000) at 15 foot. Problem is I had all my electrical put in at 14 1 in ceiling. If I mount projector to where all cords line up perfect that will put the lens at 13' range. How will that effect the picture and where would you guys hang it ?
> 
> 
> thanks
> 
> daron



Well, you changed some of the metrics from your original post (bigger screen primarily). You'll probably get a little bit of hot-spotting when you're close than the 1.6, but you're right at the edge, so you should be okay.


Also make sure you're not zooming too much on the projector. At that distance and size, you'd be close to maxing out projectors like the Sony VW60. You'll start to see some optical issues if you push the edge of the zoom (you might not care about them, though).


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dmcleod* /forum/post/12272576
> 
> 
> I am curious from the other Stewart owners as to the approximate turnaround time of your order.
> 
> 
> The reason I am asking is that I am still waiting for my screen that was ordered on Sept 10, 2007. I received word that it finally left the factory today.
> 
> 
> What I find incredulous about dealing with Stewart is that it appears to be like pulling teeth to get any kind of status from them ... my dealer was faxed the completion papers a couple weeks ago that the order would be shipped on 11/13 .... now I find out today that it did not ship until today 11/20.
> 
> 
> I am very unhappy because I have now had to cancel 2 appointments with the person who performs calibration/setup (he lives in another city) and will have to wait another few weeks for setup to be completed.
> 
> 
> This is my first screen from Stewart ... it may be my last if this is any indication of the service provided.



You should specify which screen you bought. I ordered mine (FHG3) on Tuesday, and had it that Thursday (I paid through the nose for overnight shipping - my wife and daughter were going out of town, so it was perfect for setting everything up). Some Stewart screens are Quik-Ship, meaning they have standard sizes pre-cut (or something like that) and can ship within 24 hours. But the worst case should be 1.5-2 weeks for screens like the ST130.


Were you dealing with an authorized distributor, or directly with Stewart?


----------



## dmcleod




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/12273441
> 
> 
> You should specify which screen you bought. I ordered mine (FHG3) on Tuesday, and had it that Thursday (I paid through the nose for overnight shipping - my wife and daughter were going out of town, so it was perfect for setting everything up). Some Stewart screens are Quik-Ship, meaning they have standard sizes pre-cut (or something like that) and can ship within 24 hours. But the worst case should be 1.5-2 weeks for screens like the ST130.
> 
> 
> Were you dealing with an authorized distributor, or directly with Stewart?



ST130

2.35 AR

Fixed screen with vertical masking

110.5 inches wide (one of the standard sizes)

T stands


I realize everything is custom made ... however, it is not like the screen arrives assembled.


I was dealing with an authorized dealer in Canada.


----------



## Charles R

I'm wondering if anyone has upgraded their first generation FireHawk for the current edition (G3). If so have they seen a performance increase via the smoother surface?


I have a 110" FireHawk with a plenty bright 1080p projector mounted above the screen at roughly 2 times its width. My seating distance is roughly 1.5 times its width. I'm looking for better focus and or performance. Will the new screen materials be an upgrade?


Without any ambient light and dark walls should I stay with the FireHawk or perhaps switch to the StudioTek 130?


----------



## Ludvig_S

There is surprisingly little talk about the manual pull down screen Communicator.


Do the tab-tension really work very well on the manual screen? How does the screen flatness hold up over time?


Do they stay flat over the years or are the manual pull-down forces creating waves after some time even if it is tensioned?


----------



## Perfectionist2

I own a 110" StudioTek that is about 12 years old. It is an electric drop down with tabs. When I look closely, especially at a uniform white field, I can see mild waves.


----------



## Ludvig_S




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Perfectionist2* /forum/post/12411113
> 
> 
> I own a 110" StudioTek that is about 12 years old. It is an electric drop down with tabs. When I look closely, especially at a uniform white field, I can see mild waves.



That was not what I wanted to hear ..


The manual version would probably be even worse since you put asymmetrical forces on the screen every time it's pulld down.


Any other that have experiences of the tab screen and especially the manual version?


----------



## ACMEinNY




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dmcleod* /forum/post/12272576
> 
> 
> This is my first screen from Stewart ... it may be my last if this is any indication of the service provided.



My experiences with Stewart were quite poor. My AV guys primarily sell Stewart and were very very keen on me getting a Stewart Screen. However, despite their web site saying:

" You are never restricted or limited to "off-the-shelf" styles or sizes, so let your imagination soar ... if it is imaginable, we can build it."


They were unwilling to do _any_ custom work to solve my problem. They also dragged their feet at every attempt to get answers out of them by my guys. In the end, I bought a Draper screen (which my AV guys are not thrilled about but decided was the right solution after two weeks of no progress from Stewart). It is yet to be seen how the Draper will work out.


So, Stewart may have nice products but I really wouldn't expect much from their customer service unless, perhaps, you are famous or doing a high publicity venue.


----------



## GetGray

That is a very unusual experience with Stewart. I've seen them bend over backwards, fix thigs they aeren't really resonsible for and go out of their way to provide customized soluitons. I recommend them without reservation.


----------



## Perfectionist2

Right after I purchased my screen in the mid 1990's, my dealer went out of business. I ran the screen up and down over the years but didn't buy a projector until a few years ago.


When the projector was installed, we discovered that the bottom black mask was uneven. It was higher in the right lower corner than the left. This makes the picture look slightly tilted.


Since it had been so many years and my dealer was defunct, there was nothing I could do about it. Same with the waves.


Inspite of these problems, I still like the StudeoTek and would probably buy it again. I don't really blame Stewart - I assume they would have fixed it if my dealer had asked but I didn't appreciate these problems until years after it was installed because I never had a projector until recently.


----------



## GetGray

Never hurts to ask. Especially if you still have the docs.


----------



## ACMEinNY




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray* /forum/post/12419388
> 
> 
> That is a very unusual experience with Stewart. I've seen them bend over backwards, fix thigs they aeren't really resonsible for and go out of their way to provide customized soluitons. I recommend them without reservation.



I don't know why your experience is so different than mine. My AV guys were used to having better experience with Stewart as well which is why they fought so hard to use Stewart until eventually realizing Stewart wasn't willing to work with us. This was after talking to several people at Stewart. All I can say is that this is my experience and perhaps they hate my AV guys or the Stewart culture is changing.


My draper arrived today. Slightly mangled in shipping so they are sending me a replacement which is about 10 days out


----------



## jva8125

you can absolutely order sizes in between.


----------



## Phil Olson

I currently have a G15 shining on a GrayHawk Microperf 12'x5'. Calibrated lumens are about 800 new bulb which means 600 equivalent due to 4x3 panels, (throwing away 1/4 of panel to get 16:9). An ISCO 2 does the expansion.


I've ordered an RS2 which also has 600 Lumens so the image should be equivalent with a much better low end. Since I have a bat cave I would like to upgrade to a Studiotek130 Microperf x2, same size.


The choice is just to order the flat screen upgrade or to get a curved screen. How much more is the curved screen? How much difference will it make?


Throw will be 21', projector will be near top of screen, perhaps as much as a foot below. Seating 12' back, first row, 16' back, second row. Although I have an ISCO 2 I may upgrade to an ISCO 3. Will that make a difference?


Finally, how much color fidelity will I loose if I go with the Ultramatte 2? What are other downsides vs ST130? WIll it work for my throw and screen size?


Thanks!


----------



## nathan_h

Your dealer can probably give you exact numbers, but in my shopping I have found the cost of upgrading the screen material, but keeping the old frame is about 50% the cost of a whole new screen+frame.


So if you want to upgrade to a curved screen (which by most accounts is ideal when using an anamorphic lens) it would mean getting both a new frame and a new screen. So figure on that upgrade costing at least double just replacing the material of your current screen.


---


I'll be curious to hear the thoughts others have about color fidelity of the UM2. This is what I have in a box, waiting to be hung, right now.


----------



## Steve Bruzonsky

I want to get a Cine-V screen. Does the screen come standard with its sides covered, like shown on the website, or is covering the sides extra?


I also saw on the website that an "aperture mount" is optional. Any idea what an aperture mount is?


----------



## GetGray

Std is with sides. Apperture mount is for mounting into an opening you supply, like your own screen wall. Pretty sure.


----------



## Yongkiatk

Hello:


I'm thinking about purchasing a 92" Firehawk fixed screen. I live in Thailand, my question is would it be possible to obtain sample of the screen material from Stewart?


Yong


----------



## nathan_h

Contact the Singapore office (address on the web site). I should think they could work something out.


----------



## Itrade

I purchased a new firehawk from an authorized dealer a few years ago. I went with an expensive screen as an investment -- figuring that I would upgrade my projector every few years but that a high end screen was worth it since it would last. I just replaced my Yamaha DLP projector with a new Marantz 15s1 (thanks to AVS). While the Marantz is great, all of a sudden I have a problem with sparkles on the screen -- in particularly the one in the middle of the screen is hard to live with. I never had this problem with the Yamaha and I thought that the Firehawk is recommended for the Marantz. It's a disaster. Help!


----------



## nathan_h

Which version of the Firehawk was it? The first iteration, while great in most ways, did sometimes have a few sparklies in some setups under some conditions. I had one and found the tradeoff worthwhile.


That said, I seem to recall at the time hearing about the "eraser" trick, where one could use a pencil eraser and VERY CAREFULLY rub out one or two sparklies that were the most annoying. I DO NOT RECOMMEND THIS as I think the possibility of visible damage to the surface is far greater a problem than an occasional sparklie. But that was one method some owners resorted to.


That said, there was a time around the release of the second iteration where some dealers were able to work with Stewart and get a replacement for people that purchased the original Firehawk within a few months of the revised Firehawk coming out. I'd guess that window is long gone, since we are now on version 3 of the Firehawk, not including the one developed "for the Sony SXRD" projectors, which some call version 4.


----------



## CHADW

I have an 18' x 32' room and have settled on an RS2 with its CIH lens (Panamorph I think). I have just enough room to fit a 61" x 147" Cine-W between my built in columns (speaker cabs). I'm thinking of putting the pj back about 2/3 of the room length to be more or less over the back row of seats as it won't throw quite far enough to mount in the back wall. Room is completely light controlled.


What Stewart screen material should I use for this application?


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Itrade* /forum/post/12948089
> 
> 
> I purchased a new firehawk from an authorized dealer a few years ago. I went with an expensive screen as an investment -- figuring that I would upgrade my projector every few years but that a high end screen was worth it since it would last. I just replaced my Yamaha DLP projector with a new Marantz 15s1 (thanks to AVS). While the Marantz is great, all of a sudden I have a problem with sparkles on the screen -- in particularly the one in the middle of the screen is hard to live with. I never had this problem with the Yamaha and I thought that the Firehawk is recommended for the Marantz. It's a disaster. Help!



So when someone says "sparklies", it usually means (to me) an HDMI cable problem. HDMI sparklies are the equivalent of macroblacking, in that a problem with the digital signal on the HDMI cable will first present itself as little sparklies. They usually aren't in fixed positions though. Maybe the new projector needs a better cable/signal? Is it an especially long run?


The second thing would be some sort of messed up pixel in the projector. Have you tried throwing pointing the projector differently to see if the sparklies move with the projector, or stay fixed on the screen? This would address if it's a cable/projector/source problem or a screen problem.


All that said, I think the older FH's had some minimal sparkle problems. Someone above mentioned the eraser trick. If you conclude it's a physical issue with the screen, I'd call Stewart and see what they have to say. Maybe they'd give you a good deal on a FHG3 upgrade.


----------



## breadvan

Could anyone advise if Pany AE2000U and Studioteck 130 would be a good match watching movie mainly at night in a light controlled room, with light colour wallpapered walls left and right (black front wall), projector to be ceiling mounted and approx 12 feet away from a 82" (diag) screen?


Thanks.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *breadvan* /forum/post/12973599
> 
> 
> Could anyone advise if Pany AE2000U and Studioteck 130 would be a good match watching movie mainly at night in a light controlled room, with light colour wallpapered walls left and right (black front wall), projector to be ceiling mounted and approx 12 feet away from a 82" (diag) screen?
> 
> 
> Thanks.



The ST130 is a great screen, but if you have light walls nearby, the reflection is going to have some wash-out effect on the screen.


I loved the ST130, but even in my completely light controlled room with dark walls, if I had any light (like the door open, or a couple of 10W sconces), the screen had noticable washout. I think this is mostly due to the very wide viewing angle, so any light has a visual reflection to the viewers.


I ended up with the FHG3 for a few reasons:

- The narrower viewing angle helped a lot with any ambient light

- The grey color helped with ambient light

- The grey color made blacks look blacker (to me), and whites didn't seem to be impacted (I know that had to be, but I think the eye adjusts to whites better than blacks)


For example, right now I'm watching with 2 40W cans on, and the door open, and there is only minimal washout on the screen - it's extremely watchable and bright and even. With the ST130, it was annoying to me how much it washed out with any light.


Anyway, if you plan to always watch in the dark, and the light walls are pretty far away from the screen, the ST130 might be great for you. Otherwise I'd recommend the FHG3.


Did you talk to Stewart? I called them and they were very helpful. You should also check out the showrooms, as they seem to always have a FHG3 up, so at least you can see if you like/hate it.


----------



## nathan_h

+1


Another vote for the FH in a room that doesn't have dark walls and might have a small amount of ambient light.


(full disclosure: i've lived with both a firehawk and a ultramatte, and currently use an ultramatte in a pitch black -- no light, all black walls and ceiling -- room; if i didn't have a black dedicated room, i'd use a firehawk)


----------



## breadvan

Thanks for the very informative comment AbMagFab.


I guess I have to work on the walls then with cloth or what not, since I have already committed to the ST130 purchase. Any other comment most appreciated.


----------



## breadvan

By the way can anyone advise me whether there is any optimal angle the PJ should be projecting from using ST130?


----------



## reaper

Hey guys... I should have asked this before ordering the Firehawk G3 but I am curious what you think of this situation. I have a 100" G3 on the way. My projector is a Sony VPL-HS51. I think the measurements are about


1. Screen to head is 10 feet

2. Person in the side chair is about 2.75ft over

3. Projector is about 11ft back from screen


Some pics:

http://reaper.us/assets/images/db_im...eater_0071.jpg 
http://reaper.us/assets/images/db_im...eater_0081.jpg 
http://reaper.us/assets/images/db_im...eater_0011.jpg 


Am I going to have a problem with hot spotting since I am so close?


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *reaper* /forum/post/12979887
> 
> 
> Hey guys... I should have asked this before ordering the Firehawk G3 but I am curious what you think of this situation. I have a 100" G3 on the way. My projector is a Sony VPL-HS51. I think the measurements are about
> 
> 
> 1. Screen to head is 10 feet
> 
> 2. Person in the side chair is about 2.75ft over
> 
> 3. Projector is about 11ft back from screen
> 
> 
> Some pics:
> 
> http://reaper.us/assets/images/db_im...eater_0071.jpg
> http://reaper.us/assets/images/db_im...eater_0081.jpg
> http://reaper.us/assets/images/db_im...eater_0011.jpg
> 
> 
> Am I going to have a problem with hot spotting since I am so close?



Are you sure the PJ can even zoom to 100" at 11 feet?


With the FHG3, I wouldn't worry too much about hotspotting (although it's a valid concern). I'd be more concerned about optical effects at such a high zoom, like some slight curving at the edges, and maybe noticable brightness loss as you move to the edges (although the eye quickly compensates for this if it's not huge).


Is there any way to move it a foot or two farther back? Like behind that soffet and down? You'd get better performance overall.


(And are those Paradigm 40's? Do you like them? Why not the 100's or 60's?)


----------



## reaper

I tested the projector and it can zoom an image that big.


The brightness issues at the edges are what I am concerned about. If someone is sitting in the front row on the right or left seat, is the image going to look vastly brighter on some portions of the screen? Will it sill be an enjoyable image?


I may be able to move the projector back but I'd prefer not to as I hope to eventually add a second row there. If the projector was there, people would be hitting their heads on it as they went to their seats.


Yes, those are 40s. Why not the 100s or 60s? The 40s are the absolute best speakers in the line if you are going to use an external sub, IMHO. The cabinet size is perfect for producing mid to low-mid range. Gun bullets and drums are incredible from the speakers. The sub handles the bass just fine and I can't localize it. I think the 60s or 80s would appeal more to a 2 channel purist. I am not that person. Love my sub. Love my crisp, perfect mid range. The 40s are the best speaker for surround sound with an external sub that i auditioned in that price range. And believe me... I listened to a LOT of speakers. Just my opinion.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *reaper* /forum/post/12980103
> 
> 
> The brightness issues at the edges are what I am concerned about. If someone is sitting in the front row on the right or left seat, is the image going to look vastly brighter on some portions of the screen? Will it sill be an enjoyable image?
> 
> 
> I may be able to move the projector back but I'd prefer not to as I hope to eventually add a second row there. If the projector was there, people would be hitting their heads on it as they went to their seats.



I wouldn't worry about off-axis brightness, especially at a couple feet, just dimming around the screen (sort of the correlary to hotspotting). The nice thing is the FHG3's narrower viewing angle means it's focusing light more.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *reaper* /forum/post/12980103
> 
> 
> Yes, those are 40s. Why not the 100s or 60s? The 40s are the absolute best speakers in the line if you are going to use an external sub, IMHO. The cabinet size is perfect for producing mid to low-mid range. Gun bullets and drums are incredible from the speakers. The sub handles the bass just fine and I can't localize it. I think the 60s or 80s would appeal more to a 2 channel purist. I am not that person. Love my sub. Love my crisp, perfect mid range. The 40s are the best speaker for surround sound with an external sub that i auditioned in that price range. And believe me... I listened to a LOT of speakers. Just my opinion.



Is that the 590 or 690 center? And what sub did you pair them with?


I'm considering the 100's, just to give me a little more oomf up front, paired with a 690, but I need wall-mounted surrounds, so going with those. I'm planning to get a SVS PB13-Ultra to go with it all. Are you saying the 100's actually had worse midrange to you?


----------



## reaper




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/12980181
> 
> 
> I wouldn't worry about off-axis brightness, especially at a couple feet, just dimming around the screen (sort of the correlary to hotspotting). The nice thing is the FHG3's narrower viewing angle means it's focusing light more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is that the 590 or 690 center? And what sub did you pair them with?
> 
> 
> I'm considering the 100's, just to give me a little more oomf up front, paired with a 690, but I need wall-mounted surrounds, so going with those. I'm planning to get a SVS PB13-Ultra to go with it all. Are you saying the 100's actually had worse midrange to you?



So, you don't think the viewing angles will cause any problems for me. Is this information based on your experience with the firehawk G3? Do you own one? A "narrow viewing angle" scares me a bit since those side seats may be at a somewhat high viewing angle? 25 degrees off the center axis or so. I don't really know what I am talking about though.










My 40s are V2. At the time, they only offered one reference level center. It was simply called the CC. I thought the 60s and 80s had worse midrange for sure. I didn't spend much time with the 100s as they need significantly more power to drive them and I think they are a bit of a waste. If you have a sub, you don't need what the 100s bring to the table. The 40s are more than capable of 80Hz and above.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *reaper* /forum/post/12980306
> 
> 
> So, you don't think the viewing angles will cause any problems for me. Is this information based on your experience with the firehawk G3? Do you own one? A "narrow viewing angle" scares me a bit since those side seats may be at a somewhat high viewing angle? 25 degrees off the center axis or so. I don't really know what I am talking about though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My 40s are V2. At the time, they only offered one reference level center. It was simply called the CC. I thought the 60s and 80s had worse midrange for sure. I didn't spend much time with the 100s as they need significantly more power to drive them and I think they are a bit of a waste. If you have a sub, you don't need what the 100s bring to the table. The 40s are more than capable of 80Hz and above.



Yes, I have a 110" FHG3, with a Sony VW60 (Black Pearl). The seats are about 10-feet away from the screen, and about 11-feet wide from edge-to-edge. My projector is about 13-feet from the screen, ceiling mounted on a soffet, so just below the screen top.


My side seats have no appreciable loss of viewing brightness, and even people lying on the floor or standing in the door (on the side of the room) get a pretty good picture. I think the narrower viewing angle actually helps with this, as the focus of light is better (perhaps more even) at any viewing angle?


In any case, this is from personal experience in my room. The FHG3 is very bright and even at 60-degrees (side-to-side) and more. (And it's an amazing performer with ambient light - I'm in here right now, working on my computer, with overhead lights on, and the picture looks great.)


----------



## reaper

Awesome.. your setup doesn't sound THAT much different than mine. I am starting to feel better. I also discussed the problem with my dealer and he said that if I had a problem, they could swap the material for SST if I wanted. So, I guess I am covered. It sounds like it's going to work and even if it doesn't, I am cool for a return. I am feeling better now.


----------



## Itrade

AbMagFab


Thanks for your comments.


Well its not the the cables -- the problem exists with both component and HDMI and the component is not new cabling. Also, we moved the projector and the sparkies are on the same part of the screen even if you shift the picture. So its the screen rather than a projector pixel problem. Believe me if it was the projector AVS and Dan Miller at Marantz would have heard from me already.


I emailed Stewart today to see if I could find someone to talk to and they have not responded. Does anyone have a good contact person at Stewart since they have not responded to my first attempt to contact them?


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Itrade* /forum/post/12983432
> 
> 
> AbMagFab
> 
> 
> Thanks for your comments.
> 
> 
> Well its not the the cables -- the problem exists with both component and HDMI and the component is not new cabling. Also, we moved the projector and the sparkies are on the same part of the screen even if you shift the picture. So its the screen rather than a projector pixel problem. Believe me if it was the projector AVS and Dan Miller at Marantz would have heard from me already.
> 
> 
> I emailed Stewart today to see if I could find someone to talk to and they have not responded. Does anyone have a good contact person at Stewart since they have not responded to my first attempt to contact them?



Did you try calling the contact numbers on their website? That's what I did when I had some questions, and they were really helpful.


----------



## CHADW




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *CHADW* /forum/post/12966141
> 
> 
> I have an 18' x 32' room and have settled on an RS2 with its CIH lens (Panamorph I think). I have just enough room to fit a 61" x 147" Cine-W between my built in columns (speaker cabs). I'm thinking of putting the pj back about 2/3 of the room length to be more or less over the back row of seats as it won't throw quite far enough to mount in the back wall. Room is completely light controlled.
> 
> 
> What Stewart screen material should I use for this application?



Bueller?


Pretty please?


----------



## Yeek

Hi Mark Robinson and anybody who can help,


I recently had the pleasure of taking over an 8 year old Stewart Luxus Deluxe frame with a Studiotek130 screen. However, the screen looks to me to be a little yellowish. Is the Studiotek130 supposed to be pure brilliant white or is the very slight tinge of yellow (consistently across the screen) the norm?


Hmmmm....if it is supposed to be pure brilliant white, is there anyway I can treat the screen's jaundice apart from the manual's simple cleaning suggestion?


Thanks and cheers!


Yeek


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Yeek* /forum/post/13042111
> 
> 
> Hi Mark Robinson and anybody who can help,
> 
> 
> I recently had the pleasure of taking over an 8 year old Stewart Luxus Deluxe frame with a Studiotek130 screen. However, the screen looks to me to be a little yellowish. Is the Studiotek130 supposed to be pure brilliant white or is the very slight tinge of yellow (consistently across the screen) the norm?
> 
> 
> Hmmmm....if it is supposed to be pure brilliant white, is there anyway I can treat the screen's jaundice apart from the manual's simple cleaning suggestion?
> 
> 
> Thanks and cheers!
> 
> 
> Yeek



Everyone views colors differently, but it's supposed to be brilliant white. That being said, you could be seeing coloration from whatever is around the screen - like the walls, ceiling, carpet, etc. Have you seen the same coloration in multiiple environments (i.e. have you moved the screen)?


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *CHADW* /forum/post/12966141
> 
> 
> I have an 18' x 32' room and have settled on an RS2 with its CIH lens (Panamorph I think). I have just enough room to fit a 61" x 147" Cine-W between my built in columns (speaker cabs). I'm thinking of putting the pj back about 2/3 of the room length to be more or less over the back row of seats as it won't throw quite far enough to mount in the back wall. Room is completely light controlled.
> 
> 
> What Stewart screen material should I use for this application?



If the RS2 is that JVC D-ILA model, then I think the FHG3 is the preferred material. You get better contrast, and it also can handle ambient and room light better (like if you want to watch with the lights on, although sounds like that's not an issue for you).


The alternative would be the ST130, where you get slightly truer colors (really only visible to a color-meter), but not as good contrasts.


----------



## Yeek




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/13042776
> 
> 
> Everyone views colors differently, but it's supposed to be brilliant white. That being said, you could be seeing coloration from whatever is around the screen - like the walls, ceiling, carpet, etc. Have you seen the same coloration in multiiple environments (i.e. have you moved the screen)?



Hmmm...the yellowish color is visible in normal lighted condition, i.e. just looking at the blank screen under sunlight and/or room lights without any projected image. It might have discoloured after so many years (8 years from date of manufacture).


Anyone knows of any way to "un-yellow" or "bleach" it back to its original brilliant white? I don't think the stewart cleaning kit will be able to do the job.


Thanks.


Yeek


----------



## yellohj

I have:

FHG3 110"

with a PT-AE1000U ceiling mounted 17 ft from the screen

With 2 rows of seating in a 14'x22'x8' room with blue and black colors.


Watched the Superbowl with lights on (moderate dimmed) and picture was great.


I love my FHG3!


----------



## reaper

I got my new 100" FireHawk screen with the Luxus Deluxe Frame. So, I thought I'd take a moment to post some thoughts. As mentioned before, I am using a Sony VPL-HS51. I sit about 10 ft back from a 100" screen now.


I got a little carried away yesterday since it was my first day with the screen. I got up at 4 in the morning and watched an entire movie, National Treasure, before work. Diane Kruger made for some very nice evaluation material







. I have to report that on a solid screen (all a single color) I can notice a dropoff in brightness near the edges of the screen as expected. However, in normal content of a movie, I rarley notice it and *never* care about it. It's not that big of a deal to me at all and totally worth the benefits this screen brings to the table vs my old 92" Digital Goo screen.


Once per week, I have a gaming event with other adult gamers. We all connect through Xbox Live and play one of many games. Last night happened to be the gaming night. So, I enjoyed the screen for another three and a half hours. So, I was able to get about 6 hours of face time with the screen yesterday. I stay up too late every Wednesday night







.


I have to say that I am very pleased! It is definitely brighter than my old screen despite the fact that it is almost 20% bigger. I love the size increase. I didn't know if it would "feel" that much larger to me, but I can certainly tell the difference. I don't know that I would want to go much larger than where I am now. Sitting 10 feet back from a 100" screen is a great experience. It fills a lot of my field of vision. I also hung it slightly higher than the old screen as well, so it has a more cinematic feel. The ambient light rejection is superior to the old screen. I can have a number of lights up quite bright in the room and still enjoy the image.


Overall... it's superb! Better ambient light performance, bigger, brighter, beautiful frame. I love it.


----------



## AbMagFab

You'll always want bigger... I'm about 10' from a 110" FHG3, love it, and I'm already trying to figure out how to go bigger.


I'll probably do a 2.35:1 next, same height though.


----------



## reaper




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/13044513
> 
> 
> You'll always want bigger... I'm about 10' from a 110" FHG3, love it, and I'm already trying to figure out how to go bigger.
> 
> 
> I'll probably do a 2.35:1 next, same height though.



Maybe some day... but I think I am going to be happy for a long time. I will be upgrading the projector next... when quality 1080p units are in the $1500 range and the bulb on my HS51 blows.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *reaper* /forum/post/13045705
> 
> 
> Maybe some day... but I think I am going to be happy for a long time. I will be upgrading the projector next... when quality 1080p units are in the $1500 range and the bulb on my HS51 blows.



Hey, I heard the bulb on the HS51 already blows! *duh duh dum*


----------



## CHADW




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/13042780
> 
> 
> If the RS2 is that JVC D-ILA model, then I think the FHG3 is the preferred material. You get better contrast, and it also can handle ambient and room light better (like if you want to watch with the lights on, although sounds like that's not an issue for you).
> 
> 
> The alternative would be the ST130, where you get slightly truer colors (really only visible to a color-meter), but not as good contrasts.



Thanks for the response!


----------



## Carey P




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/13044513
> 
> 
> You'll always want bigger... I'm about 10' from a 110" FHG3, love it, and I'm already trying to figure out how to go bigger.
> 
> 
> I'll probably do a 2.35:1 next, same height though.



When you go wider, think about how far out your seating goes as well as how close. I found that when I used my Panasonic AE2000U (19ft throw) with a FHG3 2.40:1 127" wide screen, I got noticeable dropoffs to the sides and way too much contrast for this projector. First row at 12ft, second row at 18ft. This is when using a UH380 HE lens.


I also didn't care for the almost saturated looking speckly whites the screen produced, where you could notice you were watching a screen. Plus a sparkly showing up here and there. Since I really didn't have any ambient light issues, I decided to change the screen material to an ST130 G3 and am very glad I did. I now get a smooth bright picture end to end with no blown out highlights and the contrast is still superb. More 3D-like too. Too bad I couldn't get some credit for the exchange, but I guess it was my bad.


I was worried about the black bars on the sides (when in 16:9 mode) being much brighter than the FHG3, but found this was hardly the case. I guess I have no pressing need for side masking as I thought.


----------



## daron73m

The time has come to wipe my screen but am terrified of wiping it with the wrong thing. Its FHg3.


d.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Carey P* /forum/post/13048260
> 
> 
> When you go wider, think about how far out your seating goes as well as how close. I found that when I used my Panasonic AE2000U (19ft throw) with a FHG3 2.40:1 127" wide screen, I got noticeable dropoffs to the sides and way too much contrast for this projector. First row at 12ft, second row at 18ft. This is when using a UH380 HE lens.
> 
> 
> I also didn't care for the almost saturated looking speckly whites the screen produced, where you could notice you were watching a screen. Plus a sparkly showing up here and there. Since I really didn't have any ambient light issues, I decided to change the screen material to an ST130 G3 and am very glad I did. I now get a smooth bright picture end to end with no blown out highlights and the contrast is still superb. More 3D-like too. Too bad I couldn't get some credit for the exchange, but I guess it was my bad.
> 
> 
> I was worried about the black bars on the sides (when in 16:9 mode) being much brighter than the FHG3, but found this was hardly the case. I guess I have no pressing need for side masking as I thought.




Unless I have it backwards, I would think with the FHG3, more than with the ST130, since the focus is greater with the FH that you'd see less drop off at the edges? But again, maybe I have this backwards.


In any case, I tested by zooming the picture to fill the width, and although it was off my screen, the edges looked great to me on full white, full black, and full blue - no visible dropoff (although it's a little hard to tell with the off-screen).


----------



## Carey P




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/13052961
> 
> 
> Unless I have it backwards, I would think with the FHG3, more than with the ST130, since the focus is greater with the FH that you'd see less drop off at the edges? But again, maybe I have this backwards.
> 
> 
> In any case, I tested by zooming the picture to fill the width, and although it was off my screen, the edges looked great to me on full white, full black, and full blue - no visible dropoff (although it's a little hard to tell with the off-screen).



That's cool. I was only talking about when you get wide enough that the half-gain cone angle is smaller than the seating arrangement or the angle from your front row center to the edge of the screen. It also is more apparent when the projector brightness vs. screen gain are just borderline. I'm sure it could be lived with easily if the projector is plenty bright to overcome these issues.


Also, in my case, the 1.2 gain vs. 1.3 gain with over twice the 1/2-gain viewing cone really makes the image a lot brighter - for the Panasonic anyway.


I'm not sure what you meant by focus, since the screen does not focus anything. So, I guess you are referring to the sharper viewing cone and if so, you would have it backwards. But as I said, if your screen is small enough and you sit well within that cone, everything is just fine. You really have to have more screen area to the sides to see the effect. Zooming won't help if the picture goes off the sides of the screen. You won't know until you actually buy a new screen or make the calculations to predict what might happen.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Carey P* /forum/post/13053231
> 
> 
> That's cool. I was only talking about when you get wide enough that the half-gain cone angle is smaller than the seating arrangement or the angle from your front row center to the edge of the screen. It also is more apparent when the projector brightness vs. screen gain are just borderline. I'm sure it could be lived with easily if the projector is plenty bright to overcome these issues.
> 
> 
> Also, in my case, the 1.2 gain vs. 1.3 gain with over twice the 1/2-gain viewing cone really makes the image a lot brighter - for the Panasonic anyway.
> 
> 
> I'm not sure what you meant by focus, since the screen does not focus anything. So, I guess you are referring to the sharper viewing cone and if so, you would have it backwards. But as I said, if your screen is small enough and you sit well within that cone, everything is just fine. You really have to have more screen area to the sides to see the effect. Zooming won't help if the picture goes off the sides of the screen. You won't know until you actually buy a new screen or make the calculations to predict what might happen.



I would be getting the cinevurve anyway, which pretty much eliminates what you're talking about, doesn't it? The whole point of the screen curve is to focus the light back?


And I thought the screen does focus the light back at the viewer (the screen gain / viewing cone is the measurement of that, right)?


----------



## Marc Rumsey




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *daron73m* /forum/post/13052104
> 
> 
> The time has come to wipe my screen but am terrified of wiping it with the wrong thing. Its FHg3.
> 
> 
> d.



A solution of 10 parts water to 1 part Simple Green works pretty well.


I would only wipe the area with the offending mark (not the whole screen), and be gentle...


Good luck!


----------



## Marc Rumsey




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *yellohj* /forum/post/13044328
> 
> 
> I have:
> 
> FHG3 110"
> 
> with a PT-AE1000U ceiling mounted 17 ft from the screen
> 
> With 2 rows of seating in a 14'x22'x8' room with blue and black colors.
> 
> 
> Watched the Superbowl with lights on (moderate dimmed) and picture was great.
> 
> 
> I love my FHG3!



Yeah, it's a great fabric for ambient light.


Kinda makes you feel sorry for the people at other Super Bowl parties, all huddled around their 42" plasmas...


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Marc Rumsey* /forum/post/13054166
> 
> 
> Yeah, it's a great fabric for ambient light.
> 
> 
> Kinda makes you feel sorry for the people at other Super Bowl parties, all huddled around their 42" plasmas...



Funny you say that - I have a 110" FHG3. I went to a neighbor's house, and in their HT they have a 60" Mits RP. It was so tiny, it was barely watchable from a distance (the seats went up to 18-feet or so from the screen.


Then I came back to watch the end in my HT - so much better!


A HT isn't a HT if you don't have a FP system... IMO...


----------



## Carey P




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/13053687
> 
> 
> I would be getting the cinevurve anyway, which pretty much eliminates what you're talking about, doesn't it? The whole point of the screen curve is to focus the light back?



That would certainly be the way to go if you must use that screen because of ambient light or contrast issues. I would have done that myself if I could spare no expense, but I also have no more room to fit the larger frame depth required. Alas, the ST130 works great, flat as it is.

I think the main purpose of the cinecurve is to help with the inherent fall-off incurred from the HE lens in the first place.


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/13053687
> 
> 
> And I thought the screen does focus the light back at the viewer (the screen gain / viewing cone is the measurement of that, right)?



I suppose you could look at it that way. The brightness falls off from center as you move off to a wider angle. How fast it does this is the main issue anyway.


----------



## Marc Rumsey




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/13055099
> 
> 
> Funny you say that - I have a 110" FHG3. I went to a neighbor's house, and in their HT they have a 60" Mits RP. It was so tiny, it was barely watchable from a distance (the seats went up to 18-feet or so from the screen.
> 
> 
> Then I came back to watch the end in my HT - so much better!
> 
> 
> A HT isn't a HT if you don't have a FP system... IMO...




You said it!










FP seems to gain steam every year as more and more people come to realize this.


And the prices these days don't hurt any...


----------



## daron73m




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Marc Rumsey* /forum/post/13054129
> 
> 
> A solution of 10 parts water to 1 part Simple Green works pretty well.
> 
> 
> I would only wipe the area with the offending mark (not the whole screen), and be gentle...
> 
> 
> Good luck!



I actually dont have a mark on it, but what do you use to wipe the dust off the entire screen that builds up on it?


----------



## specs68

Hopefully someone can give me some guidance here.

*First some details -*


The system I'm replacing:

Sharp s55u pj (approx 10 y.o!)

Stewart 84" 4:3 Luxus frame. I don't know what the exact screen material is, but it's white, not gray.


My new pj will be a Sony VW60, ceiling mounted about 12 feet from the screen. The main seating area is about 11 feet in front of the screen, but there are a couple seats off to the side. HT is well blacked out. I'd like to be able to turn on more than a 60w lamp though when watching TV.

*My questions:*


1) I'm torn between a 82" 16:9 screen, which is going to give me a smaller 4:3 picture than I now have and a 92" 16:9 screen, which I'm afraid may be too wide for the seating distance. Any opinions on which way to go here?


2) I'm looking at the Firehawk G3 and Ultramatte 150 material. Any preference on which will give me a better picture given my conditions? Or should I be considering different material?


----------



## Marc Rumsey




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *daron73m* /forum/post/13060950
> 
> 
> I actually dont have a mark on it, but what do you use to wipe the dust off the entire screen that builds up on it?



Use a soft dry cotton cloth. And again, be gentle with it.


----------



## Marc Rumsey




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *specs68* /forum/post/13062306
> 
> 
> Hopefully someone can give me some guidance here.
> 
> *First some details -*
> 
> 
> The system I'm replacing:
> 
> Sharp s55u pj (approx 10 y.o!)
> 
> Stewart 84" 4:3 Luxus frame. I don't know what the exact screen material is, but it's white, not gray.
> 
> 
> My new pj will be a Sony VW60, ceiling mounted about 12 feet from the screen. The main seating area is about 11 feet in front of the screen, but there are a couple seats off to the side. HT is well blacked out. I'd like to be able to turn on more than a 60w lamp though when watching TV.
> 
> *My questions:*
> 
> 
> 1) I'm torn between a 82" 16:9 screen, which is going to give me a smaller 4:3 picture than I now have and a 92" 16:9 screen, which I'm afraid may be too wide for the seating distance. Any opinions on which way to go here?
> 
> 
> 2) I'm looking at the Firehawk G3 and Ultramatte 150 material. Any preference on which will give me a better picture given my conditions? Or should I be considering different material?



Wow - It sure looks like you've gotten pretty good mileage out of your projector!










For a 16:9 screen, the rule of thumb is that you want your primary seating to be 1.5x to 2x the screen width from the screen. So for an 11' (132") seating distance, your screen width should be between 66" and 88". This translates to between 76" diagonal and 101" diagonal, respectively.


A 92" diagonal screen would work just fine, and may even be a tad small depending on your personal preference.


As far as screen material, the Firehawk G3 will be a good choice given you will have ambient light, especially if that light will be washing across the screen. It will help you maintain your black level and contrast, and still give you positive gain for a brightness boost.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *specs68* /forum/post/13062306
> 
> 
> Hopefully someone can give me some guidance here.
> 
> *First some details -*
> 
> 
> The system I'm replacing:
> 
> Sharp s55u pj (approx 10 y.o!)
> 
> Stewart 84" 4:3 Luxus frame. I don't know what the exact screen material is, but it's white, not gray.
> 
> 
> My new pj will be a Sony VW60, ceiling mounted about 12 feet from the screen. The main seating area is about 11 feet in front of the screen, but there are a couple seats off to the side. HT is well blacked out. I'd like to be able to turn on more than a 60w lamp though when watching TV.
> 
> *My questions:*
> 
> 
> 1) I'm torn between a 82" 16:9 screen, which is going to give me a smaller 4:3 picture than I now have and a 92" 16:9 screen, which I'm afraid may be too wide for the seating distance. Any opinions on which way to go here?
> 
> 
> 2) I'm looking at the Firehawk G3 and Ultramatte 150 material. Any preference on which will give me a better picture given my conditions? Or should I be considering different material?



- Go as big as your wall and room can handle. At that distance, THX would say you could go as large as 110" or bigger.


- FHG3 is your best bet, both for the best match to the projector, and your ambient light desires (I have the VW60 and FHG3, and love them both; the FHG3 is extremely tolerant of ambient light like overhead lights, leaving the door open, etc.).


----------



## specs68

Thanks for the thoughts on screen size and material. I'm going to go with the 93" FHG3.


A couple more questions:


1) How difficult is it to install a 93" Luxus Delux screen? Is it something I could do myself? Or would I need to enlist a friend to help? Or is it best to leave to an installer? I'd say I have an intermediate "handy" ability. I guess the concern I'd have is accidentally creasing the material.


2) How do you dismantle a Luxus screen without creasing the material?


----------



## Carey P




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *specs68* /forum/post/13068643
> 
> 
> Thanks for the thoughts on screen size and material. I'm going to go with the 93" FHG3.
> 
> 
> A couple more questions:
> 
> 
> 1) How difficult is it to install a 93" Luxus Delux screen? Is it something I could do myself? Or would I need to enlist a friend to help? Or is it best to leave to an installer? I'd say I have an intermediate "handy" ability. I guess the concern I'd have is accidentally creasing the material.
> 
> 
> 2) How do you dismantle a Luxus screen without creasing the material?



You should be able to do this easily yourself (unhless you have a friend who can help). It's very lightweight and once put together (on the floor) can be easily lifted with two hands from the top and placed into the brackets on the wall. The brackets are on each end of a vertical wood brace which is screwed to the wall (you may have only 2 of these). The mating angle brackets are slipped into the frame top and bottom rails before the corners are screwed together (You will get instructions).


The trick is getting the measurements on the wall to mount the brackets so that the screen is level and centered horizontally. Then to match that with the brackets you have in the frame which are screwed in tight. So if you are off only slightly, the holes will not line up. You will see what I mean. It may take serveral trials to finally get it right. Don't get too anxious and take your time. You can re-adjust the brackets in the frame and retighten until they finally match up. It will be worth it in the end, as the screws will go in and enter the threads easily and it will be easy to remove in the future.


The screen material comes in a large tube rolled horizontally. You unroll it on the floor in front of the wall that it mounts on. Unroll it so it faces up. It will have a foam and paper backing to protect against the floor. You can build the frame around the perimeter. Just make sure you don't step on the material while making the frame, though this should be a problem with such a small screen unless you are very short.










Note the labels that say 'top' and 'bottom' and make sure you construct the frame bottom and top to match! This is important for the proper angle of reflectance for a ceiling mounted projector.


You connect the snaps starting at the top corner and across the top, then stand up the frame (support the side ends of the frame against a couple of chair arms or something so it doesn't fall over) and complete the snaps on the sides and bottom. The material stretches easily and any wrinkles will work themselves out when your done. Try not to trip and fall through the frame at this point.










When you mount the frame to the wall brackets, try to sit the lower brackets of the frame onto the brackets on the wall first, then push the top frame brackets into the top wall brackets - all frame brackets are to the "inside" of the wall brackets. The screw threads go into the frame brackets through a clear hole which in the wall brackets. Don't overtighten any of the frame bracket screws or the main screws that mount to the wall brackets. I found that Stewart is using a soft aluminum and course threads and they are very easy to strip. I've stripped two of them now. Had to ask for a replacement the first time.


Store the screen material tube with all paper and foam rolled up inside. To dismantle in the future, just lay the screen back down face up onto the rolled out backing. Might want to take a picture of it to remember how it looked. Go around and unsnap all the snaps. Pick up the frame and put aside. Roll up the material very carefully so that you don't make wrinkles that might cause permanent creases. Put back in the tube.


----------



## Marc Rumsey




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *specs68* /forum/post/13068643
> 
> 
> Thanks for the thoughts on screen size and material. I'm going to go with the 93" FHG3.
> 
> 
> A couple more questions:
> 
> 
> 1) How difficult is it to install a 93" Luxus Delux screen? Is it something I could do myself? Or would I need to enlist a friend to help? Or is it best to leave to an installer? I'd say I have an intermediate "handy" ability. I guess the concern I'd have is accidentally creasing the material.
> 
> 
> 2) How do you dismantle a Luxus screen without creasing the material?



It is not too dificult to assemble, but it would be bes as a 2-person job. The screen doesn't weigh much, but it's big and you will need help hanging it. And it helps to have someone hold the frame while you snap in the fabric.


It usually takes Jason and I about 15-20 minutes, but we've done a bazillion of them.










I'd say allow yourself a couple of hours if you've never done one before.


You'll need:

A stud finder

A level

A drill with philips bit

A wrench to tighten frame/bracket bolts

Some heavy duty phillips screws

Strong fingers (for snaps)










You first slide in the EZ mount brackets, then assemble the frame (leave EZ mount brackets somewhat loose). Leave the fabric safe in its tube for now.


Next find (2) studs to mount to. They don't have to be centered, as the brackets give some leeway. They should be studs that will eventually covered by the screen, but they should be as close to the left and right edges as possible.


Hold the assembled frame to the wall at the actual height and the general left-right location that you want. Slide one of the top brackets over to your selected stud and screw through the bracket into the stud with a heavy duty screw. Throw your level on top of the frame and screw through the other top bracket into your other selected stud, making sure you are level. Once it's level, you can slide frame on the brackets to center the screen.


Next slide the bottom brackets into place and drive in the bottom screws. All of the screws should stick out about 1/2" or so. You may have to adjust this. You don't want them to poke the fabric, but you do want to be able to snag the bracket.


Once you have it centered, etc., carefully take it off of the wall (you don't want the loose brackets to move). Then tighten the brackets so they stay in the right place. Note: Do not overtighten - the frame is aluminum and will strip easily. You should now have (4) screws sticking out of the wall.


Next, with the frame on the floor, have one person hold the frame steady while the other snaps in all the top snaps of the fabric as they slowly unroll it. The fabric will have a label indicating which end is the top. Make sure this lines up with the top of the frame so all your snaps line up properly. Once all the top snaps are in, finish snapping in the rest of 'em.


Now for the hard part...


With everything assembled, you have to get the brackets lined up with the screws that are now sticking out of the wall. This may take a bit of trial and error to get all the screws into the brackets.


It's almost like hanging a giant picture.


This probably sounds more complicated than it is, but I hope this helps you out.










As far as dismanling a screen, your best bet is to roll the material back onto a tube (sort of the reverse of what's described above). Once the new screen is all set, you can roll your old material onto the tube that comes with the new screen.


----------



## nathan_h

+1


I've hung a Stewart Luxus screen on my own AND with help, and given the choice I'd definitely NOT do it alone again. Did it work as a solo project? Sure. Was the chance of messing up considerable higher? Yep.


----------



## Marc Rumsey

Hey Carey P - Sorry to post over you. I was called away for lunch in the middle of posting, and didn't realize you had already replied by the time I finished my post.


----------



## Marc Rumsey




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *nathan_h* /forum/post/13069770
> 
> 
> +1
> 
> 
> I've hung a Stewart Luxus screen on my own AND with help, and given the choice I'd definitely NOT do it alone again. Did it work as a solo project? Sure. Was the chance of messing up considerable higher? Yep.



I agree. It is certainly possible to do alone, but much easier to do with 2 people.


Plus when you mess up, there's someone there to hear the stream of profanity.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *specs68* /forum/post/13068643
> 
> 
> Thanks for the thoughts on screen size and material. I'm going to go with the 93" FHG3.
> 
> 
> A couple more questions:
> 
> 
> 1) How difficult is it to install a 93" Luxus Delux screen? Is it something I could do myself? Or would I need to enlist a friend to help? Or is it best to leave to an installer? I'd say I have an intermediate "handy" ability. I guess the concern I'd have is accidentally creasing the material.
> 
> 
> 2) How do you dismantle a Luxus screen without creasing the material?



1) I hung my 110" Luxus Deluxe myself, and it was pretty easy. You need a big space to set it up. First the frame, then snapping the screen into place. I did the frame in another room, moved it, and then used just the frame to position the hangers on the wall. I leaned the frame against the wall, turned on the projector (no input, big blue screen), and did a rough sizing and location based on that. Then I found studs that would evenly distribute the hangers, put the top hangers on, hung it loosely (without the screen), located the bottom hangers and screwed them in place loosely, then took the whole thing down. Then I snapped the screen in, leaving the protective cover on, tightened all the hangers, hung it (was a little tricky getting it into all six hangers with the screen in), then removed the protective cover.


2) Same way you assembled it, I assume. Just unsnap and roll it up. I kept the protective cover just in case, so I could roll it up with the cushiony cover.



If you have two people, it would be a snap (no pun intended). I actually didn't want two people, so I couldn't blame anyone else if they smudged the screen material, or sweat on it, or whatever.


----------



## SJHT

Anyone ever replace the material on your Stewart screen? I have an electric drop down model (Model A Electriscreen). Seems crazy to through out the unit and purchase a new one, but maybe that is the only way to go? SJ


----------



## Carey P




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *SJHT* /forum/post/13075073
> 
> 
> Anyone ever replace the material on your Stewart screen? I have an electric drop down model (Model A Electriscreen). Seems crazy to through out the unit and purchase a new one, but maybe that is the only way to go? SJ



I've replaced the material on my fixed frame screen which saved me over 50% of a new screen. I doubt the electric drop-down is a simple snap-on type. Probably more involved and expensive to replace, I don't know. Marc probably knows better.


----------



## reaper

100" Stewart FireHawk G3


Thought you guys might enjoy a couple pictures.


----------



## Marc Rumsey

For a Model A Electriscreen, the entire screen would have to be packed up and sent back to Stewart. They would then re-screen it for you at the factory.


If you don't have your original packaging, they can send you replacement packaging (about $80 to $100 if I recall correctly).


You would also need your serial number to get a quote.


----------



## specs68

I pulled my old screen down yesterday and am ready to roll it up. What is the correct way... with the screen material on the inside or outside. I'm thinking the screen material should be on the outside but don't want to screw it up. Thanks.


----------



## AbMagFab

Lay the screen flat, face up.

Put the protective material on top.

Roll it up.


----------



## Carey P




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *specs68* /forum/post/13086575
> 
> 
> I pulled my old screen down yesterday and am ready to roll it up. What is the correct way... with the screen material on the inside or outside. I'm thinking the screen material should be on the outside but don't want to screw it up. Thanks.



If you have the paper and foam: Foam goes on the floor first, then paper at either end overhanging beyond the length of the foam. Then the screen lays on top of that face up. Roll from one end carefully, not to make creases as you roll. It may help to have someone tug it slightly at opposite end to keep taught as you roll.


----------



## nathan_h

Like the two folks above, you want to viewable side facing up when you roll it up. In my opinion, on TOP of the viewable side you also want the butcher paper. I had a screen where that layer of paper on top of the viewable side was missing and there are some some discolorations where the snaps were touching the screen surface. A layer of paper on the screen surface would have prevented that.


----------



## cal87

I just switched to the Firehawk G3. A quick question on calibration. For the brightness setting, I could not see any of the black bars on any setting using GetGray. Is this normal, or what am I missing? I just left it on the settings for my old screen.


----------



## Theron2

hi guys

i have a question cause i´m not sure which fabric to choose


my PJ will be the Sony VW60, anamorphic lens Isco III for 2,35:1 projection on a curved screen cause of the pincushion


screen size will be aprox. 40*92 (roughly, will decide when i got both parts, then order the screen)


ambient light can be controlled to 100%


i would like to know your suggestions which material to choose, grayhawk (0.95 gain) Firehawk (1.35 gain) or Studiotek (1.3 gain)


thx in advance










Edit: the rest of the room (walls, ceiling) is pretty much all black, so no reflection light

PJ is not ceiling mounted, it is pretty much @ the screen center in every direction


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *cal87* /forum/post/13099884
> 
> 
> I just switched to the Firehawk G3. A quick question on calibration. For the brightness setting, I could not see any of the black bars on any setting using GetGray. Is this normal, or what am I missing? I just left it on the settings for my old screen.



Though it would be odd for there to be a big change, approach the calibration from a clean slate. What you want to see in terms of blacker-than-black, etc., is the same end result you would want to see with any other screen.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Theron2* /forum/post/13101670
> 
> 
> hi guys
> 
> i have a question cause i´m not sure which fabric to choose
> 
> 
> my PJ will be the Sony VW60, lens Isco III and i want a curved screen cause of the pincushion
> 
> 
> screen size will be aprox. 40*92 (roughly, will decide when i got both parts, then order the screen)
> 
> 
> ambient light can be controlled to about 90%
> 
> 
> i would like to know your suggestions which material to choose, grayhawk (0.95 gain Firehawk (1.35 gain) or Studiotek (1.3 gain)
> 
> 
> thx in advance



I'd definitely go with the Firehawk, since you have some ambient light. I'm assuming that since you have some ambient light you probably also don't have very dark ceiling, floor, and walls, which is another reason to go with the Firehawk.


Mitigating factors will be how wide the seating area is (very wide is not very good) and whether the projector is ceiling mounted (ideally, yes).


----------



## Theron2

i just edited the 1. post,PJ is not ceiling mounted, the ambient light would be through the window covers but minimal, but i might install a perfect dark solution, the walls and ceiling are very dark almost black, so lets assume i have 100% light control and completley dark walls, what should i go for with the VW60?


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Theron2* /forum/post/13101670
> 
> 
> hi guys
> 
> i have a question cause i´m not sure which fabric to choose
> 
> 
> my PJ will be the Sony VW60, lens Isco III and i want a curved screen cause of the pincushion
> 
> 
> screen size will be aprox. 40*92 (roughly, will decide when i got both parts, then order the screen)
> 
> 
> ambient light can be controlled to about 90%
> 
> 
> i would like to know your suggestions which material to choose, grayhawk (0.95 gain Firehawk (1.35 gain) or Studiotek (1.3 gain)
> 
> 
> thx in advance
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: the rest of the room (walls, ceiling) is pretty much all black btw so no reflection light
> 
> PF is not ceiling mounted, it is pretty much @ the screen center in every direction



I have the VW60 as well. I'm at 110" screen with the projector at about 12' away, ceiling mounted.


You don't need a curved screen at that size, the VW60 will do just fine. Not until you get a lot wider (like 120") and 2.35:1 do you need to consider a curved screen.


And you should get the FHG3. Good match for the projector (improved contrast/blacks), and works really well with some ambient light.


----------



## Theron2

i edited my post a 2nd time lol, it wasn´t really obvious but i want a 2,35:1 setup with an anamorphic lens and a curved screen because of the lens-introduced pincussion

lets assume i have a completly dark room


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Theron2* /forum/post/13102090
> 
> 
> i edited my post a 2nd time lol, it wasn´t really obvious but i want a 2,35:1 setup with an anamorphic lens and a curved screen because of the lens-introduced pincussion
> 
> lets assume i have a completly dark room



Again, at that width, I don't think you really need to worry about pincushion effects. At 92", that's well within the edges of what the lens can handle, even at a high zoom (short throw).


----------



## Marc Rumsey

I would agree - a curved screen for your application is not necessary. Unless you want it purely for aesthetic reasons - they do look cool- I'd stick with a flat screen. The slight pincushion (probably around 1/4" or so) can just be overscanned onto the frame.


Firehawk G3 would be the best material for your room, assuming your lens to screen distance is at least 1.6x the screen width. This would be about 12'-3" for your 92" width screen.


If you have a shorter throw than this, you may start to see hot spotting with the FireHawk G3. For short throws down to 1.4x screen width, you would need something like the Firehawk SST or GrayHawk.


----------



## nathan_h

At what point does pincushion and chromatic abberation become a problem? I've got a Sony Pearl at 14' back from a 120inch WIDE 2.35:1 screen, and I'm using the zoom method because it is a flat screen and I cannot stand pincushion and fringing, etc.


----------



## Theron2

thx for the info


----------



## jeffy1021

I replaced my Sanyo Z5 with the Z2000 and currently have a 84" Graywolf II screen. The black levels and ambient light rejection are good, however, the texture on the screen can be distracting at times.


Here are some details about my room:


Ambient light controlled

10' wide

6.5' screen height

13.5' seating distance

13' throw distance

4' projection height

projector is shelf mounted 2.5' from the center of the screen


I've skimmed through this thread and it seems that the Firehawk G3 would be a good choice. I was thinking 92" would be a good size. The only concern I have is the viewing angle. I know that ceiling mounting is better for angular reflective screens. Is this something I should be concerned about? Is there anything else I need to consider?


Thanks in advance.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jeffy1021* /forum/post/13116513
> 
> 
> I replaced my Sanyo Z5 with the Z2000 and currently have a 84" Graywolf II screen. The black levels and ambient light rejection are good, however, the texture on the screen can be distracting at times.
> 
> 
> Here are some details about my room:
> 
> 
> Ambient light controlled
> 
> 10' wide
> 
> 6.5' screen height
> 
> 13.5' seating distance
> 
> 13' throw distance
> 
> 4' projection height
> 
> projector is shelf mounted 2.5' from the center of the screen
> 
> 
> I've skimmed through this thread and it seems that the Firehawk G3 would be a good choice. I was thinking 92" would be a good size. The only concern I have is the viewing angle. I know that ceiling mounting is better for angular reflective screens. Is this something I should be concerned about? Is there anything else I need to consider?
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance.



Not sure what you mean by 6.5' screen height?


The only issue in what you describe would be the projector location, as you mention. You could get some hotspotting. Also, you say 2.5' from the center of the screen - I assume you mean vertically, and not horizontally?


Other than that, I'd say you could go wtih a bigger screen that 92" diagonal. At all those distances, I would say 100" or 110".


----------



## jeffy1021

Thanks for the response.


6.5' is the distance to the top of the screen.


The projector is also offset horizontally by about 2-2.5' from the screen center. However, this arrangement will change when I move, but I'm looking for a screen that will last me indefinitely.


Also, thanks for the recommendation about going 100" - 110". I'll definitely look into that.


----------



## Carey P




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jeffy1021* /forum/post/13116513
> 
> 
> I replaced my Sanyo Z5 with the Z2000 and currently have a 84" Graywolf II screen. The black levels and ambient light rejection are good, however, the texture on the screen can be distracting at times.



The Firehawk G3 texture was distracting to me too, that was a main reason I switched to the ST130 G3.


----------



## AbMagFab

The G3? Are you sure? They significantly improved the G3.


For what it's worth, I have a FHG3 and the screen disappears. And I prefer it over the ST for improved blacks/contrast, and tolerance to ambient light.


Not sure how you'll handle the horizontal offset.


----------



## jeffy1021




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Carey P* /forum/post/13118560
> 
> 
> The Firehawk G3 texture was distracting to me too, that was a main reason I switched to the ST130 G3.



Thanks for the reply.


I've seen a sample of the FH G3 and it's definitely better than the GWII I currently have in terms of texture. I do use my projector for some TV watching with ambient light, so I think I would be better off with the FH G3?


----------



## Carey P




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/13118819
> 
> 
> The G3? Are you sure? They significantly improved the G3.



Yes, it was only in the whitest highlights, but enough to bother me. I've heard this from others too, so it's not just me. A sparkly sort of effect, due to the higher percentage of reflective layers used. Maybe just a matter of tolerance and how close you sit to the screen. I don't know.


----------



## jeffy1021




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/13118819
> 
> 
> The G3? Are you sure? They significantly improved the G3.
> 
> 
> For what it's worth, I have a FHG3 and the screen disappears. And I prefer it over the ST for improved blacks/contrast, and tolerance to ambient light.
> 
> 
> Not sure how you'll handle the horizontal offset.



How big is your screen and how far away do you sit? Also, what is your projection distance?


With my current setup, the screen is slightly brighter depending on where I sit due to the horizontal offset. My setup with definitely change once I move so I've just been dealing with it for the time being knowing that this problem will go away later.


----------



## nathan_h

One poster was talking about the Optoma Graywolf, and another about the Stewart Firehawk G3. Two very different screens. I tried a Graywolf for a week and found the screen pattern more distracting than anything I have seen from Stewart.


----------



## cortega

Hi there, I'd like some help re the screen material I need. Tried a couple of local dealers and received different answers.


I'd like an electric (Model A?) 2.35 aspect ratio screen 126" wide x 54" tall. I have the JVC RS2 projector (600 Ansi lumens). My room is not dedicated, but ambient light is 100% controlled, and I've managed to convince my wife to have dark walls and ceiling







The ceiling is 7' 10" high, and the projector will be mounted on the ceiling. The room is 23' long (sitting around 16-20') by 18' wide.


I've always heard wonders about the Studiotek130 as the reference screen for this type of 1080p projectors. However the local dealer tells me that Studiotek has size limitations and cannot use it on a 126" x 54" screen. Is this right?


The material that was suggested to me by my local dealer is Ultramatte130, with halfgain at 42 degrees vs 68 in the Studiotek130. Another dealer suggested the FirehawkG3 but I guess this would work better when there is ambient light.


Any views on the size limitation of the Studiotek130 or the right material for my set up will be highly appreciated since I have to order it very soon...


----------



## Steve Dodds

It's not the Studiotek. It's the Model A. You can't go wider than 122".

http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/VISIONARY.htm 


I'm not sure that you can get a 2.35 electric screen either.


----------



## cortega

Thank you Steve,


you are right that in Stewart's webpage it seems that the "Visionary" is the one that can not exceed 122". However in the "Model A" page I have not seen those limitations.


I also got a quote from Stewart for a "Luxus Model A 'Classic' Electriscreen" for a 126" wide screen in the 2.36 aspect ratio. However it was with the Ultramatte130 material, thus my question on the Studiotek130...


----------



## benitoj

Cortega,


Since you are going to ceiling mount your screen, the model should not be an issue. The Model A and Model A Classic are very similar. Although if you are going to go with the Model A Classic, i would highly suggest you use the Dr. Brackets, it makes installs a lot easier.


If you want to use Studiotek 130 G3 you are going to be limited to an image size of 50.25" x 118". Because of the height of the image (assuming you go with the standard 12" of blackdrop) Stewart might be able to customize the screen and shorten the side masking by 1" on each side to give you two additional inches on the image width....but that will be something totally custom.


If you have to go with the image size of 53.5" x 126", Ultramatte 130 will be your best option. Firehawk G3 and Studiotek 130 G3 both have the same limitations.


Please keep in mind that this is the case for retractable screens only. Fixed screens allow you to have a larger image size with FHG3 and ST13G3 because less material is required to get a certain image size.


-benito


----------



## Theron2

hey guys i´d like to ask what´s the difference between the Firehawk G3 and SST?

i think i know the SST is somehow optimized for D-Ila PJs like Sony VW60, if that´s correct in what way are they optimized? smoother texture different gain...

what´s the difference between them and Grayhawk which also claims to be optimized for D-Ilas or am i mixing something up here?


thx in advance


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Theron2* /forum/post/13169475
> 
> 
> hey guys i´d like to ask what´s the difference between the Firehawk G3 and SST?
> 
> i think i know the SST is somehow optimized for D-Ila PJs like Sony VW60, if that´s correct in what way are they optimized? smoother texture different gain...
> 
> what´s the difference between them and Grayhawk which also claims to be optimized for D-Ilas or am i mixing something up here?
> 
> 
> thx in advance



I think the SST is designed for shorter throws, but you give up a little as well, I think in gain.


If you're projector will be 12' or more back (depending on screen size), you want the FHG3. I think the Greyhawk is an older version, but it never seems to be recommended anymore.


----------



## cortega

Benito,


thank you for your informative reply. Obviously I wasn't aware of these size limitations. Do you happen to know the rationale of a limit on the height of the Studiotek130, and why this doesn't apply to the Ultramatte130?


In your view, is the Ultramatte130 also good for the new digital 1080p projectors like my JVC RS2?


Thanks!


----------



## Kensmith48

Where can I find what the MSRP are for the Stewart screens? I'm a newb at this & thinking of making the jump with the purchase of a JVC R2 projector. I've been looking at the Stewart screens but can't find any info on prices. The nearest dealer is 100+ miles away so any info is appreciated. I'm not looking for any special prices, just ballpark figures or links to msrp.


----------



## Jason Turk

Check out www.stewartfilmscreen.com . They don't have pricing there, but figured out what you are thinking and let me know. I'd be happy to get them to you.


----------



## Kensmith48

Jason,

I 'm interested in the Luxus Deluxe Screenwall (fixed screen). I'm not sure what material to go with but I have it narrowed down to either Studiotek 130 G3 or Grayhawk RS G3. The JVC RS2 projector will be 12 ft. from the wall and be ceiling mounted. The ceiling is only 7 ft. high. I have total control over the light. I have 1 small window in my basement theater which has all light blocked out.

I was thinking of a 100" diagonal screen but I'm not sure what size will work best.


Thanks for any info,

Ken


----------



## Jason Turk

There is a special on the 100" (posted on a sticky). But in a nutshell, I would HIGHLY recommend the ST130G3. Though Grayhawk RS is one of the best and most neutral gray screens on the market, I think that the ST130G3 will really bring out the vibrancy and punch that the RS2 is capable of. Of course if there was ambient light that might change, but you said it was controlled.


----------



## Kensmith48

Jason,

I should add that I've been doing some research on gain, black level, contrast, etc. My walls are a dark green (satin finish) but the suspended ceiling is a light beige. Based on this do you still recommend the ST130G3?

Thanks,

Ken


----------



## Jason Turk

Ideally darker is better. But if it were me, I'd still go ST130G3. With that setup you could go either way, with pros and cons to each. But the RS2 just does better on the ST130G3. Plus as projectors get better and better, it will be even more so the case.


Of course this is my own opinion.


----------



## Hibo

I have a 100 inch w Luxus Deluxe ultramatt 150, thats about 5 yrs old. Does stewart provide replacements of other materials .. like a ST130?


thanks


----------



## nathan_h

"provide"?


A dealer can order you a new screen for your existing frame if you give them the serial number (so they can make sure the new screen is sized correctly, and probably to prevent people from buying just the material on its own). From my recollection, the price of new screen material, ready to mount, is about 50% of the cost of a whole new screen (frame and material) of the same size.


----------



## Jason Turk

Nathan is 100% correct. For fixed frames, get your serial number to your dealer and they can get you a quote. As well, it is usually about 50% of the full replacment cost (unless you have microperf and then it is a larger percentage).


Electric models can too be rescreened, but they are more complex so ultimately Stewart has to have the screen shipped back to them first, and they will do it and send it back.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jason Turk* /forum/post/13203564
> 
> 
> Nathan is 100% correct. For fixed frames, get your serial number to your dealer and they can get you a quote. As well, it is usually about 50% of the full replacment cost (unless you have microperf and then it is a larger percentage).
> 
> 
> Electric models can too be rescreened, but they are more complex so ultimately Stewart has to have the screen shipped back to them first, and they will do it and send it back.



Not that I plan to any time soon, but where is the serial number? Is it on the original order, does my dealer have it, or (I hope not), somewhere on the back of the screen (Luxus Deluxe Screenwall)?


----------



## Carey P




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/13206133
> 
> 
> Not that I plan to any time soon, but where is the serial number? Is it on the original order, does my dealer have it, or (I hope not), somewhere on the back of the screen (Luxus Deluxe Screenwall)?



It's on the original box, packing slip and on the back of the frame bottom center.


----------



## Hibo

Thanks for the help guys, I'll be back at the house on Wednesday and look for the serial number.


Thanks again

hibo


----------



## abl1207

I am thinking about the panasonic ae2000 and had a couple of questions:


Do you think that the projector is bright enough to drive a 135 inch screen. My room is 24 by 20 with 9 ft ceilings and controlled light. I have the Panasoinc ae900 on a 120 inch da-light screen.


Why 2.4:1 vs 16:9


Do you think that the Stewart screen is worth the premium


Did you look at any other projectors like the JVC RS1 or JVC RS2


----------



## Carey P




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *abl1207* /forum/post/13271033
> 
> 
> I am thinking about the panasonic ae2000 and had a couple of questions:
> 
> 
> Do you think that the projector is bright enough to drive a 135 inch screen. My room is 24 by 20 with 9 ft ceilings and controlled light. I have the Panasoinc ae900 on a 120 inch da-light screen.
> 
> 
> Why 2.4:1 vs 16:9
> 
> 
> Do you think that the Stewart screen is worth the premium
> 
> 
> Did you look at any other projectors like the JVC RS1 or JVC RS2



Question is what does 135" stand for? Diagonal or width? Are you referring to 16:9 or 2.4:1?


I have the same size room with 8 ft ceilings. Dark and light controlled, with AE2000 19 ft back close to ceiling. I have a 2.4:1 screen that is 138" diagonal but I measure in width, as do most 2.4:1 owners. So that's 127" width when watching 2.4:1 material. 53" x 95" for 16:9 material. Why 2.4:1? Most BD films are in 2.4:1, and besides the dramatic look and feel of a real theater, I get maximum screen for my 7 ft ceiling.


Note, I use a UH380 HE lens for the 2.4:1. This reduces the light output by 30% compared to 16:9 image, but I'm still very happy with the image I get using a Stewart ST 130 G3. It works better than the Firehawk G3 did for me with the same size frame. I use Normal mode always.


The StudioTek 130 G3 is completely uniform in brightness, color and texture. You can't see it at all when watching a film. There is no sense of a screen being there, which gives the images a more 3D appearance, besides the great CR of the projector. My front row is at 12 ft and I have 4 seats across.


----------



## breadvan

Can serial number on the case tell you anything about the screen itself? I am curious to find out whether the serial # can identify my 130 to be of the G3 variant or not. Thanks.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *TS45* /forum/post/13288253
> 
> 
> I have screen samples of the Studio Tech 130 and Firehawk G3, the Studiotech whites are great, can the Firehawk whites be improved by calibrating color temperature of projectors, to the point of making you not "notice" the darker screen material of the Firehawk?
> 
> 
> Our room will never be 100% Bat Cave dark, it is a combination family room / HT.
> 
> 
> Looking at the two side by side, the differences are as predicted, however if I were to choose, at this point the Firehawk G3 would work best. We have not updated our projector as yet, this will be a 1080p when that happens.



You're eyes adjust for white better than black. That is, when you see "white" on the FHG3 (without the ST130 next to it), your eyes make it look pure-white to you.


Blacks are different, and your eyes will not adjust black if it's greyish.


In a room with ambient light, the FHG3 is definitely the right choice (and it's a great choice even in total darkness). Whites will look really white, with no additional calibration, and even better, blacks and contrast will look amazing (due to the grey screen). If you have a VW60/200 or RS1/2, that only adds to the benefits the FHG3 will bring.


----------



## TS45

I have screen samples of the Studio Tech 130 and Firehawk G3, the Studiotech whites are great, can the Firehawk whites be improved by calibrating color temperature of projectors, to the point of making you not "notice" the darker screen material of the Firehawk?


Our room will never be 100% Bat Cave dark, it is a combination family room / HT.


Looking at the two side by side, the differences are as predicted, however if I were to choose, at this point the Firehawk G3 would work best. We have not updated our projector as yet, this will be a 1080p when that happens.


----------



## TS45

Thanks for the info, that is what I was hoping to hear. It seems your eyes can adjust pretty well to different conditions.


The literature recommends a distance of at least 1.60x the screen width for the G3, so this helps keep a tighter beam of light from the projector?


We will do 92" diag 16x9 max, projector distance 15.5' from lens to screen, make sense for the G3.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *TS45* /forum/post/13288347
> 
> 
> Thanks for the info, that is what I was hoping to hear. It seems your eyes can adjust pretty well to different conditions.
> 
> 
> The literature recommends a distance of at least 1.60x the screen width for the G3, so this helps keep a tighter beam of light from the projector?
> 
> 
> We will do 92" diag 16x9 max, projector distance 15.5' from lens to screen, make sense for the G3.



The viewing distance is more about avoiding hot-spotting. The FH has a higher gain that the ST, which means narrower viewing cone, which means greater chance of hotspotting if sitting too close.


In practice, the viewing cone is very wide (I see a great picture when standing at 135 degrees or greater). And I sit about 10-11' from a 110" diag screen with no hotspotting at all.


You'll be great!


----------



## Carey P




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/13288730
> 
> 
> The viewing distance is more about avoiding hot-spotting. The FH has a higher gain that the ST, which means narrower viewing cone, which means greater chance of hotspotting if sitting too close...



Not higher gain, but more gain material to compensate for darker gray base makes the tighter cone. The ST130 has higher gain overall.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Carey P* /forum/post/13288870
> 
> 
> Not higher gain, but more gain material to compensate for darker gray base makes the tighter cone. The ST130 has higher gain overall.



The FHG3 has higher gain (material), which is then reduced by the gray screen. If the FHG3 were white, it would have a significantly higher gain than the ST.


My point was simply that the side effects of the higher gain (material) on the FH are the narrower viewing cone and higher chance of hotspotting with shorter throws.


----------



## Pete

There shouldn't be any noticeable hot spotting if the viewer is not sitting in the angle of reflection. In other words, if the projector is on the ceiling, hot spotting -- if there is any -- would be noticeable when lying on the floor.


----------



## Carey P

This might be a good time to revisit the "Gain and Roll Off" section of this article here:

http://www.projectorreviews.com/proj...hawk/index.php


----------



## TS45

I will have the projector stand mount approx. 80" high, hope this is high enough.


Great feedback from all, thanks so much! Will read up on the link.


----------



## disillus

I just received my 123" diagonal ST130 screen. The installers installed it today. I noticed a small crease near the right side that is vertical, straight and goes from the bottom to the top.


Is this something that will work itself out over time? Would it affect my picture quality? It's pretty thin, but I'm sure it covers a couple of pixels from my 1080p projector. I'm wondering when, or if, I should ask for a replacement.


Thanks for any help!


----------



## Marc Rumsey

I would give it a couple of days to see if it goes away.


If not, contact your dealer and they will have Stewart send you a replacement fabric. You will need the serial number of the screen (usually on the bottom or backside of the frame).


----------



## queendvd2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jason Turk* /forum/post/13196556
> 
> 
> Ideally darker is better. But if it were me, I'd still go ST130G3. With that setup you could go either way, with pros and cons to each. But the RS2 just does better on the ST130G3. Plus as projectors get better and better, it will be even more so the case.
> 
> 
> Of course this is my own opinion.



I'm thinking of going with the Marantz VP15S1, mounted at around 16' back (or less), in a yet to be painted room (14x20) but probably maroon walls with white trim and most likely black front wall. Other than that, no ambient light issues. Jason, would you recommend the FH or the ST (110")?


On a separate note, I've been talking to various dealers and I can't seem to get a firm opinion on the microperf screen. One dealer is adamantly opposed to using the perf screens, saying I am compromising video and audio (and also says I should RUN from a dealer who says otherwise) while another says the advancements in technology would make it difficult for me to even tell. Both are very reputable dealers but obviously with very different opinions. I'd love to hear your thoughts on the issue.


Just in case you need to know the speakers, looking at the B&W CT7s that are coming out if I go with the perf screen or the 804S for the regular screen. Thanks!


----------



## TS45

Just received our 92" Firehawk G3 Luxus Deluxe screen and installed, really really nice.


Thank you for the input, we are happy campers.


Our local retailer LOOK & LISTEN were most helpful providing their knowledge and screen samples, and installation tips, thanks!


----------



## queendvd2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *queendvd2* /forum/post/13404979
> 
> 
> I'm thinking of going with the Marantz VP15S1, mounted at around 16' back (or less), in a yet to be painted room (14x20) but probably maroon walls with white trim and most likely black front wall. Other than that, no ambient light issues. Jason, would you recommend the FH or the ST (110")?
> 
> 
> On a separate note, I've been talking to various dealers and I can't seem to get a firm opinion on the microperf screen. One dealer is adamantly opposed to using the perf screens, saying I am compromising video and audio (and also says I should RUN from a dealer who says otherwise) while another says the advancements in technology would make it difficult for me to even tell. Both are very reputable dealers but obviously with very different opinions. I'd love to hear your thoughts on the issue.
> 
> 
> Just in case you need to know the speakers, looking at the B&W CT7s that are coming out if I go with the perf screen or the 804S for the regular screen. Thanks!



Didn't mean to just isolate Jason for his comments. Would also love to hear from others regarding the 'perf or not to perf' issue.


----------



## Marc Rumsey

With Microperf X2, there are 3 main considerations in my opinion:


1) Your seating distance.

I can see (or at least sense) the perfs at about 10 feet from a microperf X2 ST130 screen. People with better eyes may be able to see them at greater distances. For me, once I get beyond 10 feet or so, I can't see them and they don't affect my viewing experience.


2) Your screen gain.

The higher the gain, the more noticeable the perfs due to the greater contrast between screen and "hole". If you get an UltraMatte200 screen, the perfs are more noticeable than with a ST130 screen. But as your seating distance increases, again this becomes moot.


3) Speaker distance (speaker face to screen).

Your speakers should be 12+ inches behind the screen for best audio results. Stewart also supplies their Cinemasonic audio processors as needed for each speaker that is behind the screen.


If your seating and speaker distances are OK, the microperf screens work very well.


----------



## queendvd2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Marc Rumsey* /forum/post/13410547
> 
> 
> With Microperf X2, there are 3 main considerations in my opinion:
> 
> 
> 1) Your seating distance.
> 
> I can see (or at least sense) the perfs at about 10 feet from a microperf X2 ST130 screen. People with better eyes may be able to see them at greater distances. For me, once I get beyond 10 feet or so, I can't see them and they don't affect my viewing experience.
> 
> 
> 2) Your screen gain.
> 
> The higher the gain, the more noticeable the perfs due to the greater contrast between screen and "hole". If you get an UltraMatte200 screen, the perfs are more noticeable than with a ST130 screen. But as your seating distance increases, again this becomes moot.
> 
> 
> 3) Speaker distance (speaker face to screen).
> 
> Your speakers should be 12+ inches behind the screen for best audio results. Stewart also supplies their Cinemasonic audio processors as needed for each speaker that is behind the screen.
> 
> 
> If your seating and speaker distances are OK, the microperf screens work very well.



Thanks for the reply Mark. I think I should be ok based on your criteria:


1) First row at 12'.


2) Will go with either a FH (1.25) or ST (1.3) so I suppose if all else equal then choose the FH for the lower gain.


3) I have a recessed rectangular cavity that is 24" deep that we will potentially be hiding the speakers in.


Should I be concerned that one of our potential dealers made such a blanket statement (running from any dealer that recommends microperf) without really knowing the exact logistics at hand?


----------



## Marc Rumsey

I'm not sure what this dealer's experience level is with microperf screens, so it's tough to say. We've installed many, many Stewart microperfed screens and they do an excellent job both for audio and for video as long as you follow the guidelines I mentioned earlier. Perhaps they do not follow these guidelines?


And of course, every room has different physical requirements, everyone has a different budget in mind, and everyone has different preferences, so what is "ideal" for one person may not work (or be desirable) for another.


One more thing: I would recommend getting a free sample swatch of perfed fabric from Stewart so you can see if the perfs are an issue for you at your seating distance.


----------



## queendvd2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Marc Rumsey* /forum/post/13417852
> 
> 
> I'm not sure what this dealer's experience level is with microperf screens, so it's tough to say. We've installed many, many Stewart microperfed screens and they do an excellent job both for audio and for video as long as you follow the guidelines I mentioned earlier. Perhaps they do not follow these guidelines?
> 
> 
> And of course, every room has different physical requirements, everyone has a different budget in mind, and everyone has different preferences, so what is "ideal" for one person may not work (or be desirable) for another.
> 
> 
> One more thing: I would recommend getting a free sample swatch of perfed fabric from Stewart so you can see if the perfs are an issue for you at your seating distance.



Thanks for the info about the free sample. I was unaware that you could get one. As far as the dealer, they're pretty reputable but according to him, in the past 7 years he's only put in a handful of perf screens, and that was only when no other viable alternative existed. Whereas, another dealer I am considering is a strong advocate of the perfs. I suppose my desired set-up will indeed influence which dealer I choose. Thanks again Marc. I appreciate the feedback, especially since you've successfully installed quite a few.


----------



## queendvd2

One other quick follow-up question to Marc, Jason or anyone else who has experience with both - how do you compare the Stewart microperf screens to the SMX woven ones? I read literature from both sites and naturally they have all sorts of tests/graphs indicating that their technology is the best. But I'm looking for a hands-on unbiased opinion.


----------



## AVSRichard

Generally speaking, Stewart is better on the video side and SmX is better on the audio side. The advantage Stewart has is higher gain which normally solves more problems for home theater than having your audio behind a screen.


Stewart's microperf is the smallest in the industry however, aside from weaves.


I guess it really depends. SmX came out partly to compete against the higher priced Screen Research AT screens. It does compete against Stewart but again, I'm not sure apples to apples really figures in here.


Richard


----------



## queendvd2

Thanks Richard. If you had to choose between the following, costs aside, which would you choose for the best video/audio experience:


1) A Stewart 110" FH microperf, placing B&W CT 7.3 and two SW12 subs behind the scrceen, flanked with a CT 7.3 on each side (not behind but hiding behind GOM fabric)


2) Regular Stewart 110" FH, with the center and two subs below the screen behind GOM fabric and a CT 7.3 on each side hiding behind GOM fabric


Not sure whether this matters at all, but projector will likely be either a Marantz VP15S1 or a SIM2 Domino D80E.


----------



## AVSRichard

Well two different technical things.


On the one hand, the AT screen will give you a cleaner theater look, and the experience of having your venter channel behind the screen is differetn. Well, not different if you go to a lot of commercial theaters but from having a center speaker behind the screen takes a little getting used to. And after you're used to it, most people don't want it any way but that. We're so used to hearing audio from below or above the on screen action.


There is no wrong answer for not having it behind your screen. It works in hundreds of thousands of theaters fine.


If money were no object though, all things considered, I'd go for the AT solution.


Both projectors would be great. I've seen them both on an AT screen.


Richard


----------



## Tikkenator2

I posted this in a separate thread as well, but was hoping to get a response from someone at AVS.


I currently have a dedicated home theater room with complete light control. The ceiling and walls are white, the carpet beige, and the screen area is flanked by espresso (very, very dark brown) velvet curtains. The Sony Black Pearl projector (which I purchased from AVS) is at a throw distance of 15 feet and is on a shelf 5 feet high, behind the seating area. The seating distance from the screen is 11.5 feet. I have been enjoying Blu-ray and HD DVD movies on my white textured wall for several months, but can't help but think a screen would be significantly better. I am not sure whether or not to go with a white screen (Stewart studiotek 130) since I have complete light control, or consider a grey screen, such as the Stewart Firehawk, due to the white ceiling and white side walls. I plan on a 16:9, 100" diagonal screen size. Please comment on whether or not the Black Pearl would provide and adequately bright picture at this screen size and throw distance taking into account the gain of the recommended screen. Any insight/recommendations would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## queendvd2

Tikk, I too am in the same boat trying to decide between the FH and ST. Per Marc's suggestion, I requested samples from Stewart. Didn't realize the FH was so gray. I also emailed Stewart directly looking for clarification between the two. Here is the response I received:


Yes the FireHawk G3 is a high contrast material which is why it is so

gray... it is the best material to use in high ambient light lit

rooms... StudioTek 130 is also a great material and was designed for

use

in completely controlled light environments... both materials are great

however they do have their differences and the best way to determine

which is the best material for your application is to determine what

type of environment it will be used in and what you (the viewer) are

looking for out of your screen... what you're comparing here is

contrast

vs. brightness and ultimately the best way to decide is to figure out

which will you benefit the most from... in a highly lit room a FireHawk

will always win over a StudioTek... the high contrast of this material

will allow you to bring in ambient light without washing out the

image... yes your whites will not as white as they would be on a white

screen but you will have deeper black levels and a great image on your

screen... if you have a controlled dark environment with dark walls,

floors and ceiling then a StudioTek would work best... the high

contrast

would not be needed as there would be no ambient light competing with

the projector and you can keep your whites bright...


----------



## Jet Jockey

Hi just thought I'd share my latest acquisition. I'm now officially part of the Stewart clan...


Ordered: Stewart Luxus model with Studio Tek 130 G3 material in a 16:9 format, 96 inch diagonal. Can’t go any wider than 96 inches because of main speaker placement within the HT.


Looking forward to installing it and viewing HD material on it!


----------



## Marc Rumsey




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Tikkenator2* /forum/post/13481076
> 
> 
> I posted this in a separate thread as well, but was hoping to get a response from someone at AVS.
> 
> 
> I currently have a dedicated home theater room with complete light control. The ceiling and walls are white, the carpet beige, and the screen area is flanked by espresso (very, very dark brown) velvet curtains. The Sony Black Pearl projector (which I purchased from AVS) is at a throw distance of 15 feet and is on a shelf 5 feet high, behind the seating area. The seating distance from the screen is 11.5 feet. I have been enjoying Blu-ray and HD DVD movies on my white textured wall for several months, but can't help but think a screen would be significantly better. I am not sure whether or not to go with a white screen (Stewart studiotek 130) since I have complete light control, or consider a grey screen, such as the Stewart Firehawk, due to the white ceiling and white side walls. I plan on a 16:9, 100" diagonal screen size. Please comment on whether or not the Black Pearl would provide and adequately bright picture at this screen size and throw distance taking into account the gain of the recommended screen. Any insight/recommendations would be greatly appreciated.



In your case you can really go either way. The white walls/ceiling will effectively create ambient light due to reflection. But, you have a light controlled room so other ambient light isn't an issue.


Myself, I would prefer a white screen such as StudioTek130 in your scenario, as the Sony projector has very good black level, and the reflected light will be relatively minor. The white screen will give you more vibrant color than a gray screen. If having the absolute best black level is your primary goal, then the FireHawk might be a better choice.


Either way, you're in for a huge improvement compared to your wall.


----------



## Marc Rumsey




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jet Jockey* /forum/post/13494603
> 
> 
> Hi just thought I'd share my latest acquisition. I'm now officially part of the Stewart clan...
> 
> 
> Ordered: Stewart Luxus model with Studio Tek 130 G3 material in a 16:9 format, 96 inch diagonal. Can't go any wider than 96 inches because of main speaker placement within the HT.
> 
> 
> Looking forward to installing it and viewing HD material on it!



Congrats on your new toy - You will not be disappointed!


----------



## Jet Jockey




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Marc Rumsey* /forum/post/13499137
> 
> 
> Congrats on your new toy - You will not be disappointed!




Thank you!


Just in... I just ordered a Runco RS900 to go with it!


Can't finish the HT renovations fast enough.


----------



## juzmister

How much space do I need between the Stewart acoustically transparent Microperf and the in wall speakers?


----------



## queendvd2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *juzmister* /forum/post/13503020
> 
> 
> How much space do I need between the Stewart acoustically transparent Microperf and the in wall speakers?



I'll let Jason or Marc confirm, but my potential dealer told me that you need at least 12" for it to work effectively.


----------



## juzmister

I've only got 5cm between the centre speaker and the screen...


----------



## queendvd2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Marc Rumsey* /forum/post/13499107
> 
> 
> In your case you can really go either way. The white walls/ceiling will effectively create ambient light due to reflection. But, you have a light controlled room so other ambient light isn't an issue.
> 
> 
> Myself, I would prefer a white screen such as StudioTek130 in your scenario, as the Sony projector has very good black level, and the reflected light will be relatively minor. The white screen will give you more vibrant color than a gray screen. If having the absolute best black level is your primary goal, then the FireHawk might be a better choice.



Marc, I've got a similar set-up but most likely will have maroon walls and going with a SIM2 Domino D80E (good black levels?). Dealer has suggested FH but I'm thinking ST might be the better choice. Plus, mostly movie watching and not much gaming or sports. Would you choose ST in this instance?


----------



## charleskau

Anyone see black waves at the top of the screen where it connects to the frame? I see these mostly when the screen is panning.


----------



## Marc Rumsey




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *juzmister* /forum/post/13503020
> 
> 
> How much space do I need between the Stewart acoustically transparent Microperf and the in wall speakers?



Ideally you want at least 12". Less than that and you will lose more high frequency information.


----------



## Marc Rumsey




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *queendvd2* /forum/post/13517680
> 
> 
> Marc, I've got a similar set-up but most likely will have maroon walls and going with a SIM2 Domino D80E (good black levels?). Dealer has suggested FH but I'm thinking ST might be the better choice. Plus, mostly movie watching and not much gaming or sports. Would you choose ST in this instance?



The D80E has great black levels, so it really doesn't need help in this area. If you had an older LCD, I might suggest FHG3 fabric, but for your D80E in a dark-walled room, I think you will be ultimately happier with the ST130G3 fabric.


If you want to have your lights on while watching, this would sway me back towards FHG3...


----------



## Marc Rumsey




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *charleskau* /forum/post/13589877
> 
> 
> Anyone see black waves at the top of the screen where it connects to the frame? I see these mostly when the screen is panning.



Try this:

Stand at one end of the screen with a flashlight. Hold the flashlight near the screen surface and shine it toward the opposite side of the screen. Does it look like the material itself is wavy?


If so, the most common cause is installing the fabric upside down. There is a top and a bottom to the fabric. You should see a label that says "top" near the snaps. Another possibility if the waviness is localized, is that one of the snaps needs to be moved slightly. They are position adjustable.


If the material itself is not wavy, it would follow that there is a defect in the optical coating. If this is the case, Stewart will replace your screen fabric under warranty if you are still in your warranty period. They will need your serial number.


----------



## Barcofan

Hi all,


I've decided to go for a Firehawk G3 to help combat my white walls/ceiling and imperfect light control but need some advice regarding optimal size. My setup is as follows:


JVC RS1

Throw distance: 10'9 (ceiling mounted)

Viewing distance: 11'6


I'm firing a 100" image onto a white wall at the moment which looks about right to me but I'm slightly worried if hotspotting would be an issue with the FHG3 at these sizes. If so, what's the biggest screen I could go for?


Thanks in advance for any advice.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Barcofan* /forum/post/13623586
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> 
> I've decided to go for a Firehawk G3 to help combat my white walls/ceiling and imperfect light control but need some advice regarding optimal size. My setup is as follows:
> 
> 
> JVC RS1
> 
> Throw distance: 10'9 (ceiling mounted)
> 
> Viewing distance: 11'6
> 
> 
> I'm firing a 100" image onto a white wall at the moment which looks about right to me but I'm slightly worried if hotspotting would be an issue with the FHG3 at these sizes. If so, what's the biggest screen I could go for?
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance for any advice.



That should be fine. I'm at about 12.5' throw with a 110" FHG3 screen.


----------



## Barcofan

Thanks for the reassurance!


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Barcofan* /forum/post/13624532
> 
> 
> Thanks for the reassurance!



No problem. I didn't say it, but I have zero hotspotting. I think the G3 has significantly improved hotspotting resiliance, especially if you're ceiling mounted. They had some other FH for short-throws, prior to the G3, but I think when I talked to Stewart they said that was basically obsolete when the FHG3 came out.


----------



## VT Skier

I have a Marantz VP-11S2 that will be mounted 17' from a 120" wide microperf screen with front row seats about 13' from screen in a dark basement room.


I was going with the FireHawk, but Stewart recommended UltraMatte 150. Having read all of your posts, I'm leaning toward StudioTek 130. Help would be appreciated.


----------



## Bunionbob

I just opened my Stuart Filmscreen 110" Studiotek 130 Deluxe box which was shipped to me from the company and I do notsee any wall mount bracket inside. All 4 frame assembly pieces (velvet covered) are in there but no wall mount brackets. Is this possible? It's the weekend and the company is closed till Monday. HELP!!!


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Bunionbob* /forum/post/13733411
> 
> 
> I just opened my Stuart Filmscreen 110" Studiotek 130 Deluxe box which was shipped to me from the company and I do notsee any wall mount bracket inside. All 4 frame assembly pieces (velvet covered) are in there but no wall mount brackets. Is this possible? It's the weekend and the company is closed till Monday. HELP!!!



The wall mounts are pieces that slide into the screen frame, and are basically flat brackets with a slight offset in the middle.


You sure you don't have them? They are one piece, you slide them into the frame and also screw them into the wall. It would be in a little plastic bag. Make sure you look deep inside everything, I think mine was taped to one end.


----------



## Hibo




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Bunionbob* /forum/post/13733411
> 
> 
> I just opened my Stuart Filmscreen 110" Studiotek 130 Deluxe box which was shipped to me from the company and I do notsee any wall mount bracket inside. All 4 frame assembly pieces (velvet covered) are in there but no wall mount brackets. Is this possible? It's the weekend and the company is closed till Monday. HELP!!!



There should have been one plastice bag with 6 (for a 110 frame) 2 inch by 4 inch adaptor plates with allen head bolts and square nuts that do the sliding in the horizontal frame tracks.


I wouldnt screw them into the wall though, most walls have walffles.. ha.. which will torque the screen.


Consider this: dont snap the fabric yet; purchase 3 1/4 by 2inch aluminum bar straps about 6 feet long; drill and tap two 1/4-20 holes in each for the slide mounts; and one more 3/8 inch hole at the top end of each bar - no tap. the big top hole will be about 4 inchs above and behind the screen; paint the Al your favorite black; now ( on day 2) mount a 6 feet long unistrut on your wall near the ceiling line. the screen will hange from the unistrut so you can offset it out from the wall for example clearance for speakers etc. ; Now bolt 3 unistruct T adaptors to the main channel, they will slide easily to locate your 3 SF mounts that you drilled the 3/8 hole into. ; fNow hange the frame with three 3/8 bolts and tweak it, center it, tilt it, level it and then take a picture of it to show everyone why your getting a divorice.


Now take it down and snap up the fabric; then hang the screen in about 2 minutes. Not done, you know the store where your ex wife got her black velvet sateen cloth, Joann's I think, get some to cover (as a valance) unistruct above the screen and maybe even hang some from the sides.


I have some pictures if you like.

Hibo


----------



## rsbeck

Questions;


What is the gain on Perforated Firehawk?


From what distance do the perfs become visible?


RS2 + Perforated Firehawk = good combo?


RS2 + Perforated Firehawk ---- 110" Diagonal Perforated Firehawk okay?


----------



## chichopf

I have a infocus In78 and It's at 9,63 feet; The seating It's at the same distance. I cannot move the projector. My former In72 was at the same distance.


My hccv it's small now (the In78 have short throw), and don't improve much the contrast agains my bare wall.


My room have white walls and ceilings.


Can I use a Stewart firehawk G3?


What Is the best screen size?; I really loves big screens but my room is small; A fixed 88" is too much?


I have headaches choosing the right screen; I'm projecting in the wall, but the clear walls kill my contrast.


Thanks.


----------



## nathan_h

Probably worth telling us what kind of room it is: Light controlled? Bright wall color? Ceiling color?


And what your habits are: Watch with some lights on? Total darkness?


Finally, if SIZE is your primary question, then this calculator will tell you what sizes will work with your distance and exact projector model. Remember to measure from the front of the lens, and try not to push the extreme of the range options.

http://www.projectorcentral.com/proj...ulator-pro.cfm


----------



## chichopf




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *nathan_h* /forum/post/13793016
> 
> 
> Probably worth telling us what kind of room it is: Light controlled? Bright wall color? Ceiling color?
> 
> 
> And what your habits are: Watch with some lights on? Total darkness?
> 
> 
> Finally, if SIZE is your primary question, then this calculator will tell you what sizes will work with your distance and exact projector model. Remember to measure from the front of the lens, and try not to push the extreme of the range options.
> 
> http://www.projectorcentral.com/proj...ulator-pro.cfm



Hi;


Yes, It's light controled at night and almost at day (the blinds work very well), matte white walls and ceilings (wife is wife and this is unnegotiable).


I like watch sports with some ligh at day and movies at night.


This is a last year picture with my 72"hccv and the infocus In72 (now in the kids room; supermario galaxy is better in big screen):

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/l.../DSC001952.jpg 


Now, the in78 is in ceiling.


I'm projecting 86,62" diagonal screen in the bare wall; It's at the extreme of zoon, but this dosen't bothers me;


inches feet meters

INPUTS

Screen Width 75,50 6,29 1,918 Screen Gain 1,10

Projector Lumens 800


OUTPUTS

Screen Height 42,47 3,54 1,079 Image Brightness 39,5 foot-lamberts

Screen Diagonal 86,62 7,22 2,200

Projection Distance, short throw 115,52 9,63 2,934

Projection Distance, long throw 146,47 12,21 3,720

Screen Offset 6,62 0,55 0,168

Min. recommended viewing distance 100,42 8,37 2,551


USING CEILING MOUNT SP-CEIL-UNIV

Minimum screen to ceiling distance 12,21 1,02 0,310







I think that the firehawk suits my needs, but I'm worried about the short throw to the screen.



Thank you very much.


----------



## nathan_h

In the Stewart world, I think the Firehawk SST is your best bet. Great for short throws, great for mild ambient light (which due to your light walls will be a problem even at night), great image. Don't worry about it saying it's for a Sony projector.


----------



## chichopf




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *nathan_h* /forum/post/13795629
> 
> 
> In the Stewart world, I think the Firehawk SST is your best bet. Great for short throws, great for mild ambient light (which due to your light walls will be a problem even at night), great image. Don't worry about it saying it's for a Sony projector.




what's are the downsides of the sst?


I ask because I really don't see much excitement about the sst, excepting sony owners.


I can make the screen smaller to comply the 1,6:1 factor if the g3 outperforms the sst.


I think try to get some samples here in Europe.


Thanks nathan


----------



## nathan_h

Samples are a great idea. The SST has a little less gain. Not a big deal, imo.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *chichopf* /forum/post/13796979
> 
> 
> what's are the downsides of the sst?
> 
> 
> I ask because I really don't see much excitement about the sst, excepting sony owners.
> 
> 
> I can make the screen smaller to comply the 1,6:1 factor if the g3 outperforms the sst.
> 
> 
> I think try to get some samples here in Europe.
> 
> 
> Thanks nathan



For what it's worth, when I called Stewart about this exact thing, they said the SST was designed before the G3, because the older FireHawk's could hotspot on short throws. They said the SST is mostly obsolete now with the FH G3, since the hotspotting has been significantly reduced, especially with ceiling mounts.


I'd call them, and I'd recommend the FHG3.


----------



## Marc Rumsey




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rsbeck* /forum/post/13780605
> 
> 
> Questions;
> 
> 
> What is the gain on Perforated Firehawk?
> 
> 
> From what distance do the perfs become visible?
> 
> 
> RS2 + Perforated Firehawk = good combo?
> 
> 
> RS2 + Perforated Firehawk ---- 110" Diagonal Perforated Firehawk okay?



You lose about 10% of your gain with a perfed screen, so it would be in the neighborhood of 1.1 gain.


I can barely see the perfs at about 10', but if you're more eagle-eyed, you may be able to see them at a little greater distance. I would suggest getting a piece of sample fabric to test this.


The RS2 works well with the FireHawk, especially if you are trying to combat some ambient light. If you don't have ambient light issues though, I might suggest ST130 fabric instead of FireHawk.


----------



## Marc Rumsey




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *chichopf* /forum/post/13796979
> 
> 
> what's are the downsides of the sst?
> 
> 
> I ask because I really don't see much excitement about the sst, excepting sony owners.
> 
> 
> I can make the screen smaller to comply the 1,6:1 factor if the g3 outperforms the sst.
> 
> 
> I think try to get some samples here in Europe.
> 
> 
> Thanks nathan



The SST was specifically designed with the Sony in mind (which is why you see so many Sony owners that use it), and for very short throws (1.4x minimum). SST actually stands for Sony/Stewart Theater.


Regular FireHawk G3 will have hot spotting at less than 1.6x throw. If you're at 1.6x or greater, go with the FireHawk G3, as it is a better performer.


----------



## Franin

Hi I would like to know where I can buy a Stewart screen online? I can't seem to find anyone that will ship internationally.


thanks

franin


----------



## cinemike

I just got a Stewart motorized with the IR option and am having it ceiling-mounted. The only reason I went with IR is that I figured it would give me the most control with my learning remote (Harmony One). I also got the IR option but was suprised to see it come with this external Somfy black control box (I'm new to this world of motorized screens). Where is the best to located this external unit? My installer is thinking of installing it in the attic, but i noticed there is a spare fuse, which leads me to believe I would need to have easy access to it...and it would be a pain for me to access the attic. Could it be mounted to the back of the Stewart screen? Since I have a fireplace mantle that is 7" deep, the Stewart screen is mounted 8" away from the wall...so I thought the black Somfy box could be ceiling-mounted too and behind the Stewart screen...more or less hidden and out of the way, but accessible in case something breaks. Any immediate thoughts on a cleaner install would be appreciated as the installers are coming today to complete the installation!


----------



## rsbeck




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Marc Rumsey* /forum/post/13799670
> 
> 
> I can barely see the perfs at about 10'



At what distance do the perfs on a perf'd Firehawk become invisible?



> Quote:
> The RS2 works well with the FireHawk, especially if you are trying to combat some ambient light. If you don't have ambient light issues though, I might suggest ST130 fabric instead of FireHawk.



Does the RS2 put out enough light to properly illuminate a 110" perf'd Firehawk?


----------



## Marc Rumsey

For me, they disappear between 10' and 11'. Your mileage may vary.


A 110" perfed screen with FHG3 would work well with the RS2. You will get around 14 ft-lamberts with this scenario.


----------



## rsbeck

Thank you.


----------



## Marc Rumsey

No problem!


----------



## chichopf




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/13799317
> 
> 
> For what it's worth, when I called Stewart about this exact thing, they said the SST was designed before the G3, because the older FireHawk's could hotspot on short throws. They said the SST is mostly obsolete now with the FH G3, since the hotspotting has been significantly reduced, especially with ceiling mounts.
> 
> 
> I'd call them, and I'd recommend the FHG3.



Thank you.


I have received this mail from stewart and he agree with you.


The setup is not ideal because you do not have enough throw distance (at least 1.6 x image width) for Firehawk. Also, because you do not have much brightness in your projector, Grayhawk may not have sufficient gain to render a bright and saturated image. Studiotek 130 is also not ideal since a white screen material really calls for a dedicated theater. The best solution is probably to reduce the image size and then go with Grayhawk or Firehawk depending on how small an image you are willing to accept.


Best Regards,


Ralf Sjolander

International Sales Engineer

Stewart Filmscreen Corp.
[email protected] 
www.stewartfilm.com 

PH.# +1-310-891-3182

FAX # +1-310-326-6870



This guy don't mention the sst at all and says that my infocus is not bright enough; this surprises me. I got 35 foot-lamberts with 88" diagonal.


Maybe It's time to buy sony. New long throw DLPs aren't for me.


----------



## Franin

i guess with no reply means that there is no retailer that will ship internationally.


----------



## chichopf




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Franin* /forum/post/13819930
> 
> 
> i guess with no reply means that there is no retailer that will ship internationally.



Hi;


This guy [email protected] , sells in ebay and ships to Europe.



Ask for a quote to Oz.


----------



## Franin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *chichopf* /forum/post/13819965
> 
> 
> Hi;
> 
> 
> This guy [email protected] , sells in ebay and ships to Europe.
> 
> 
> 
> Ask for a quote to Oz.



Thankyou very much appreciated.


----------



## Steve Dodds

I had mine shipped to my mail forwarder in the States, then shipped by them to me in Sydney.


Cost was $279 for shipping a 110" Luxus Deluxe with Velux in the original boxes.


----------



## chichopf

I take borrowed samples of firehak g3, sst and grayhawk and It's amazing how good are these screens, but if I put the firehawk sample in the middle of the screen, the image is a lot more bright that if i put the same sample in the corner; this is weird.


The firehawks are a little bluish; this is very noticeable if your watch a black and withe film.


The angle of vison of the grayhawk it's amazing, but the blacks of the firehawks are really the darkest.


All it's compromise:


Firehawks: narrow vision cone, better light resistance, light color shift and brigh unevenness, better blacks.


Grayhawk: very good angle, no color shift but less cross light tolerance and due this worst blacks in my setup.


I really have a problem: need angle and need fight cross light.


----------



## Carey P




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *chichopf* /forum/post/13871791
> 
> 
> I take borrowed samples of firehak g3, sst and grayhawk and It's amazing how good are these screens, but if I put the firehawk sample in the middle of the screen, the image is a lot more bright that if i put the same sample in the corner; this is weird.
> 
> 
> The firehawks are a little bluish; this is very noticeable if your watch a black and withe film.
> 
> 
> The angle of vison of the grayhawk it's amazing, but the blacks of the firehawks are really the darkest.
> 
> 
> All it's compromise:
> 
> 
> Firehawks: narrow vision cone, better light resistance, light color shift and brigh unevenness, better blacks.
> 
> 
> Grayhawk: very good angle, no color shift but less cross light tolerance and due this worst blacks in my setup.
> 
> 
> I really have a problem: need angle and need fight cross light.



Yes, what you found is true, though I'm not sure I ever noticed the blue shift on the Firehawk. I have had the older Grayhawk and it's very wide angle but not bright enough for me. I have had the Firehawk G3 but even with projector at 19ft I had noticeable dropoff to the sides when viewing at 12ft away from 10.5ft wide scope screen. Though the colors looked very good and great ambient light rejection.


Since I decided I didn't need the rejection as much as I needed uniform brightness in scope mode, I decided to switch to the ST130 G3 and keep lighting to a minimum. Also this screen is totally transparent as far as seeing any structure or sparklies as I did with the Firehawk G3. The picture just floats there.


----------



## Robert in Ill.

Hi all,


I am very close to finalizing my first home theater build. I am going to use a Sony VPL VW-60 projector that will be ceiling mounted 13 feet away from a Stewart 92" 16:9 screen.


The room side walls and ceiling are white (not negotiable due to WAF).


The screen will mostly be used for movies (I'm guessing about 70% of the time) with the rest of the time being for sports and video games.


For movies, lights will be almost always off, though some may be on in an adjacent room. For sports, I'd guess there will be a bit more ambient light. There are only three windows in the room and all will have black-out drapes and blinds.


The screen will need to be MicroPerf, as the center speaker will be behind the screen.


Which material would the group here suggest, FireHawk G3, GrayHawk RS G3, or something else?


Thanks!


Bob


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Robert in Ill.* /forum/post/13894579
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> 
> I am very close to finalizing my first home theater build. I am going to use a Sony VPL VW-60 projector that will be ceiling mounted 13 feet away from a Stewart 92" 16:9 screen.
> 
> 
> The room side walls and ceiling are white (not negotiable due to WAF).
> 
> 
> The screen will mostly be used for movies (I'm guessing about 70% of the time) with the rest of the time being for sports and video games.
> 
> 
> For movies, lights will be almost always off, though some may be on in an adjacent room. For sports, I'd guess there will be a bit more ambient light. There are only three windows in the room and all will have black-out drapes and blinds.
> 
> 
> The screen will need to be MicroPerf, as the center speaker will be behind the screen.
> 
> 
> Which material would the group here suggest, FireHawk G3, GrayHawk RS G3, or something else?
> 
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> 
> Bob



I have the same projector at the same distance, and I have a FHG3 and love it. I watch in total darkness, as well as with the lights on, and it always looks amazing.


----------



## Marc Rumsey




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Robert in Ill.* /forum/post/13894579
> 
> 
> 
> Which material would the group here suggest, FireHawk G3, GrayHawk RS G3, or something else?
> 
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> 
> Bob



Welcome to the forum!










Given your screen size/distance, you will have a 1.95x throw. This will work very well with FireHawk G3, which is what I'd suggest given your room.


----------



## rsbeck

What are the real differences between the Firehawk and GrayHawk assuming one has a bright enough projector like a Sim2 C3X1080 and some ambient light? I've head that one cannot get true whites with Firehawk, yada, yada, but I saw a 10.5' Wide Firehawk with a C3X 1080 and the whites looked fine. Does the GrayHawk screen give you the same thing as the Firehawk, but just more of it? More ability to retain black level and contrast and combat ambient light?


----------



## Marc Rumsey

The GrayHawk has lower gain (.92 vs. 1.25), but has a wider viewing cone (140 degrees vs. 60 degrees) than the FireHawk.


Also, the GrayHawk will work for shorter thorws than the FireHawk. You need to be at least 1.6x screen width for FHG3 (even more for older FH screens) to prevent hot-spotting, while the GrayHawk will work for throws down to 1.3x.


Typically, GrayHawk screens tend to work with best with brighter projectors and/or smaller screens.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rsbeck* /forum/post/13895496
> 
> 
> What are the real differences between the Firehawk and GrayHawk assuming one has a bright enough projector like a Sim2 C3X1080 and some ambient light? I've head that one cannot get true whites with Firehawk, yada, yada, but I saw a 10.5' Wide Firehawk with a C3X 1080 and the whites looked fine. Does the GrayHawk screen give you the same thing as the Firehawk, but just more of it? More ability to retain black level and contrast and combat ambient light?



Blacks are more important than whites. It turns out your eyes will figure out what "white" is, and adjust accordingly, so a gray screen (like the GH anf FH) work fine for whites. But your eyes apparantly don't do the same thing with blacks, and if blacks get washed out, your eyes always see that.


There are some interesting studies out there about this.


It is true, though, that for the most color-accurate reproduction, the ST130 is what you want. It's more sensitive to ambient light, but it's a heck of a nice screen.


For me, I wanted the better resilience to ambient light (I like to do work in my HT sometimes, eat in there, etc.), and the improved contrast of a gray screen, and the better gain, so I went with the FHG3 (no hotspotting at 13' from a 110" 16x9 screen). Also, the gray screen makes masking less of an issue in a dark room (since the black bands aren't very visible, compared to a white screen).


----------



## rsbeck

I'm thinking about going with a 9' wide (124" Diagonal) 16:9 perforated screen with a Sim2 C3X1080 projector in a Constant Width set-up with top and bottom motorized masking for 2.35:1. The projector will be about 18' from the screen. Walls, ceiling and carpet will be a medium warm neutral color -- still to be determined -- will be based on a compromise between aesthetics and light control (suggestions welcome!).


Assuming a Lamp setting at 850 Lumens and a gain of .83 from a perforated GrayHawk, I should achieve around 15.5 fL from the screen and I should be able to maintain that by increasing the lamp setting as the bulb ages.


Of course, I could achieve even higher fL with the Firehawk.


Which is better, more FL with the Firehawk or the wider viewing cone of the GrayHawk?


I assume I will get some stray light reflections due to the fact that I am not going black box and sometimes I like to watch sports with some ambient light.


Which screen deals with ambient light better -- helps retain black levels and contrast ratio -- Firehawk or GrayHawk?


----------



## Marc Rumsey




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rsbeck* /forum/post/13897594
> 
> 
> Which is better, more FL with the Firehawk or the wider viewing cone of the GrayHawk?
> 
> 
> I assume I will get some stray light reflections due to the fact that I am not going black box and sometimes I like to watch sports with some ambient light.
> 
> 
> Which screen deals with ambient light better -- helps retain black levels and contrast ratio -- Firehawk or GrayHawk?



The FireHawk would handle the ambient light a little better due to its narrower angle of reflection. The GrayHawk can wash out easier because of its relatively wide viewing cone.


For viewing, the narrow viewing cone will only be a problem if your seating is pretty "spread out" (wide sectionals close to the screen, etc.). With typical theater seating arrangements it is a non-issue.


I've done several C3X1080/FireHawk installs, and they look incredible!


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rsbeck* /forum/post/13897594
> 
> 
> Which screen deals with ambient light better -- helps retain black levels and contrast ratio -- Firehawk or GrayHawk?



FHG3, no question. And as long as your seating width/distance angle is around 60-degrees, give or take, you should have no off-axis issues.


----------



## rsbeck

Exactly what I needed to know -- thanks guys!


----------



## wackehj

I am close to finializing my HT selections in a mid 1990s vintage house that we recently moved into. The existing setup includes a 14 year old 4:3 60" rear projection TV built into a false wall in the media room. It will eventually be replaced with a 56" Samsung LED DLP, when the next one comes out. I just ordered a Denon AVR-3808CI from 6Ave. I haven't selected a Blu-Ray player yet, we just have HD satellite TV.


I bought a Dukane 8755G HD projector for my wife to use in her 5th grade class in Jan. The district was impressed with her work and brought her a new projector last Friday... The one I bought her for school is coming home to be used in the media room. New paint and carpet have been installed in the media room in the last week. Our plan is to install a 16:9 123" Stewart Luxus Model A drop down screen in front of the TV for movie night. The projector will be ceiling mounted. Our shutters work well, but this projector will be used at night so ambient light is not a problem. Projector Central's calculator shows 18 - 23 FL with a ST130 screen (1800-2200 lumens). My wife wanted the 123" screen because it covers the A/V cabinets on either side of the TV. I looked at the Firehawk screen, but its viewing cone is too tight for our seating arangement. Will ST130 work okay for this install or am I all wet? Thanks for your help!


----------



## meeleend

I'm pleased to report that with my imminent upgrade to a 1080p projector (no I haven't made final selection yet - 3 more are inbound for review), moving to the Firehawk G3 surface was just too tempting. So, bingo, as of a few weeks ago, the surface of my screen was replaced.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wackehj* /forum/post/13950441
> 
> 
> I am close to finializing my HT selections in a mid 1990s vintage house that we recently moved into. The existing setup includes a 14 year old 4:3 60" rear projection TV built into a false wall in the media room. It will eventually be replaced with a 56" Samsung LED DLP, when the next one comes out. I just ordered a Denon AVR-3808CI from 6Ave. I haven't selected a Blu-Ray player yet, we just have HD satellite TV.
> 
> 
> I bought a Dukane 8755G HD projector for my wife to use in her 5th grade class in Jan. The district was impressed with her work and brought her a new projector last Friday... The one I bought her for school is coming home to be used in the media room. New paint and carpet have been installed in the media room in the last week. Our plan is to install a 16:9 123" Stewart Luxus Model A drop down screen in front of the TV for movie night. The projector will be ceiling mounted. Our shutters work well, but this projector will be used at night so ambient light is not a problem. Projector Central's calculator shows 18 - 23 FL with a ST130 screen (1800-2200 lumens). My wife wanted the 123" screen because it covers the A/V cabinets on either side of the TV. I looked at the Firehawk screen, but its viewing cone is too tight for our seating arangement. Will ST130 work okay for this install or am I all wet? Thanks for your help!



1) In that room, the cone of the FHG3 is more than fine. What angle do you think you have from side-to-side on the sofa (or even the room)?


2) If you are keeping the speakers in the wall, you'll need a perf-screen, which will reduce the gain. You should redo the calcs to see what that means to you.


3) How close to the screen is the sofa? How wide is the room?


----------



## wackehj




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/13953161
> 
> 
> 1) In that room, the cone of the FHG3 is more than fine. What angle do you think you have from side-to-side on the sofa (or even the room)?
> 
> 
> 2) If you are keeping the speakers in the wall, you'll need a perf-screen, which will reduce the gain. You should redo the calcs to see what that means to you.
> 
> 
> 3) How close to the screen is the sofa? How wide is the room?



1) I am thinking that seating positions need to stay within the screen's viewing cone. FHG3 has a 60 degree viewing cone. The chair on the left is 40 degrees from the extreem right side of the screen (an 80 degree viewing cone is needed at the screen's worst viewing angle). I figured the ST130G3 viewing cone might be more applicable.


2) The cabinets are 98" wide and the in wall speakers are 123" apart so a 16:9 123" diagonal screen (107" image width) will cover them, but leave the in wall speakers exposed outside the screen area for good sound... Wait, now I see your point! The 107" image width doesn't include black material on the outside of the screen. A 110" dia screen with a 96" image width plus a couple of inches of black border will be a better fit if I want to cover the cabinets but don't want to cover the speakers. The 110" screen has a 114" wide case.


3) The seating position on the sofa is 13' from the screen and the room is 17.5' wide X 29.5' deep. For scale, the in wall sub to the lower left of the TV is 6"X9" (the TV is 4.5' wide). This is a BIG room. The front 1/2 of the room is going to be used for home theater and the back 1/2 is going to be used for a desk/home computer. Projector Central's calculator recommends a viewing distance of 11'-18' for the 110" screen.


Now getting 23-28 FL with the 110" screen. Any further feedback is appreciated!


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wackehj* /forum/post/13959717
> 
> 
> 1) I am thinking that seating positions need to stay within the screen's viewing cone. FHG3 has a 60 degree viewing cone. The chair on the left is 40 degrees from the extreem right side of the screen (an 80 degree viewing cone is needed at the screen's worst viewing angle). I figured the ST130G3 viewing cone might be more applicable.
> 
> 
> 2) The cabinets are 98" wide and the in wall speakers are 123" apart so a 16:9 123" diagonal screen (107" image width) will cover them, but leave the in wall speakers exposed outside the screen area for good sound... Wait, now I see your point! The 107" image width doesn't include black material on the outside of the screen. A 110" dia screen with a 96" image width plus a couple of inches of black border will be a better fit if I want to cover the cabinets but don't want to cover the speakers. The 110" screen has a 114" wide case.
> 
> 
> 3) The seating position on the sofa is 13' from the screen and the room is 17.5' wide X 29.5' deep. For scale, the in wall sub to the lower left of the TV is 6"X9" (the TV is 4.5' wide). This is a BIG room. The front 1/2 of the room is going to be used for home theater and the back 1/2 is going to be used for a desk/home computer. Projector Central's calculator recommends a viewing distance of 11'-18' for the 110" screen.
> 
> 
> Now getting 23-28 FL with the 110" screen. Any further feedback is appreciated!



I have a 110" FHG3 with the Luxus Deluxe frame (3"+ all around the screen), my seating is about 10.5' from the screen, and I have no appreciable/noticable image brightness/evenness issues. I'd be surprised if at 13' from a 110" screen you'd have any issues at all. I'm guessing the main seating is about 10' from left to right (head to head, not arm rests). That means straight on, you're far less than 60-degrees.


In any case, I went through a similar dilemma (ST130 v FHG3) in my dedicated HT, which has no windows, but I like to have the lights on once in a while, and the FHG3 is amazing. Great in total darkness, great with ambient light, and no noticable loss of gain from side-to-side. I have a VW60 located about 13' back.


----------



## nydennis

Been looking at screens for a bit. Still deciding between a Da-Lite or the Stewart. What Stewart screen would be the best bet for me?

I have the Panasonic Ae2000U atm, but may look at upgrading to the Epson 1080ub, or hold onto the 2000U until a newer series comes out.

My Projector is shelf mounted 19-20 feet from the screen. The back wall where the screen is is totally black. The windows in the room are tinted black, but I watch 98% of TV/Movies, etc at night. The side walls are lighter in color. The ceiling is a cathedral ceiling and is white. The only light that can sometimes be there is from behind the projector in the next room, but even then it is mostly dark at night.


All viewing is direct.


Which Stewart would be recommended? I was thinking Firehawk G3 screen 106 inch. Would a different screen be better for me?


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *nydennis* /forum/post/13986579
> 
> 
> Been looking at screens for a bit. Still deciding between a Da-Lite or the Stewart. What Stewart screen would be the best bet for me?
> 
> I have the Panasonic Ae2000U atm, but may look at upgrading to the Epson 1080ub, or hold onto the 2000U until a newer series comes out.
> 
> My Projector is shelf mounted 19-20 feet from the screen. The back wall where the screen is is totally black. The windows in the room are tinted black, but I watch 98% of TV/Movies, etc at night. The side walls are lighter in color. The ceiling is a cathedral ceiling and is white. The only light that can sometimes be there is from behind the projector in the next room, but even then it is mostly dark at night.
> 
> 
> All viewing is direct.
> 
> 
> Which Stewart would be recommended? I was thinking Firehawk G3 screen 106 inch. Would a different screen be better for me?



FHG3 is great, enhances contrast, and handles ambient light really well (and also reduces the need for masking 2.4:1 on a 16x9 since they gray isn't distracting).


ST130 is the reference screen, so if you can handle the white and try to eliminate ambient light, it's a great choice.


(I have a FHG3 in my dedicated, no windows HT mainly because of the enhanced contrast and so I can watch with the lights on once in a while.)


----------



## nydennis




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/13988834
> 
> 
> FHG3 is great, enhances contrast, and handles ambient light really well (and also reduces the need for masking 2.4:1 on a 16x9 since they gray isn't distracting).
> 
> 
> ST130 is the reference screen, so if you can handle the white and try to eliminate ambient light, it's a great choice.
> 
> 
> (I have a FHG3 in my dedicated, no windows HT mainly because of the enhanced contrast and so I can watch with the lights on once in a while.)




Darn, I didn't even consider the St130. Now that is something else for me to think about. Currently I'm using the Graywolf II and don't hate it, but I'm sure the FHG3 is in a totally different league then the Graywolf II


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *nydennis* /forum/post/13989037
> 
> 
> Darn, I didn't even consider the St130. Now that is something else for me to think about. Currently I'm using the Graywolf II and don't hate it, but I'm sure the FHG3 is in a totally different league then the Graywolf II



Yes, the FHG3 would be a big upgrade. Whatever made you go with gray the first time, if it still holds, would push you to the FHG3 this time.


----------



## nydennis




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/13990690
> 
> 
> Yes, the FHG3 would be a big upgrade. Whatever made you go with gray the first time, if it still holds, would push you to the FHG3 this time.



I went with the Graywolf II because it was cheap when I bought my first projector about two years ago. I just bought the cheapest at Costco because I wanted to make sure I was going to stick with projectors. Which I am sticking with now.


I'm going to find a few places around here and hopefully one of them has the Studiotek and the Firehawk on display.


My biggest concern is brightness! I'm wondering if maybe I'm better off staying with the 106 or go down to 100. I hate the thought of going down.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *nydennis* /forum/post/13990951
> 
> 
> I went with the Graywolf II because it was cheap when I bought my first projector about two years ago. I just bought the cheapest at Costco because I wanted to make sure I was going to stick with projectors. Which I am sticking with now.
> 
> 
> I'm going to find a few places around here and hopefully one of them has the Studiotek and the Firehawk on display.
> 
> 
> My biggest concern is brightness! I'm wondering if maybe I'm better off staying with the 106 or go down to 100. I hate the thought of going down.



106/100?


In terms of brightness, that's more a function of the projector. The FHG3 and ST130 both have the same gain, and are surprisingly bright. The FHG3 doesn't wash out when you have ambient light on, and remains very bright (the ST130 washes out quicker with ambient light).


Just for your comparison purposes, I have the VW60 at 13.5-feet on a 110" screen, with the bulb set on low (or energy saver or something like that), mainly for better contrast and the calibrations came out better that way. It's crazy bright - I never have had any brightness issues, and neither has my wife (which is probably more telling).


----------



## rsbeck

Anyone have any idea why Joe Kane endorses the GrayHawk and ST130, but not the Firehawk?


----------



## nydennis

I'm still thinking about the FHG3 and mainly because of the one thing you mentioned that when watching 2.4:1 on the 16x9 it will blend on the top and bottom better.


Only reason I was talking a smaller screen size was that I assumed if at 19 or 20 feet away that the projector would be zoomed out more and lose some brightness. I love the 106" I have now.


I guess comparing the brightness of a 1.8 gain graywolf II to the brightness of the FHG3 couldn't be made since they are in two different leagues.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *nydennis* /forum/post/13996189
> 
> 
> I'm still thinking about the FHG3 and mainly because of the one thing you mentioned that when watching 2.4:1 on the 16x9 it will blend on the top and bottom better.
> 
> 
> Only reason I was talking a smaller screen size was that I assumed if at 19 or 20 feet away that the projector would be zoomed out more and lose some brightness. I love the 106" I have now.
> 
> 
> I guess comparing the brightness of a 1.8 gain graywolf II to the brightness of the FHG3 couldn't be made since they are in two different leagues.



I like this calculator:
http://www.projectorcentral.com/Epso...ulator-pro.htm 


According to it, with the Epson, you'd have a whopping 22fL at 19' from a 110" screen, which is way more than enough for regular ambient light. You'd likely have it calibrated down a fair amount, but it's plenty bright.


The Panasonic would be close as well.


----------



## Steve Dodds

I have a Firehawk and a Graywolf. The Graywolf is brighter, but not obscenely so. The setup requirements are different though, with FH3 you want the PJ above the screen, with the Graywolf below.


In your room I'd choose the FH3 over the ST130.


----------



## rsamos

After a year and a half, I'm finally getting ready to pull the trigger and pick up a proper screen. I've got a VPL-VW50 that we've been watching on a piece of blackout cloth hanging on the wall all this time, and believe it or not the only reason it's still there is because it actually looks great. But I'm aware it can look better, and would also like a bit of gain in the screen to hopefully extend bulb life.


The seating is a couch, roughly the width of the 110" image we've been projecting - *maybe* a bit wider, but not by much set up roughly 12.5' from the screen.


What I'm unsure of, is which screen. The room only has marginal light control. Walls are 'midnight' blue (flat), the carpet and furniture are dark and there are blackout shades (flat black on the room side) covering the windows on the one side wall. The biggest problem is the white ceiling that I still can't convince my wife to let me paint black.


I've been leaning towards a Firehawk G3, but I've read in several places (yea ... on the Internet) that you wont realize the gain from an angular reflective screen unless your projector is ceiling mounted. Mine isn't. The projector is on a shelf on the wall behind the couch with the lens at 14' from the screen, 55" off the floor, almost right at center image.


Main questions I have -


- Will the FHG3 work well with a projector mounted at center image?

- Will there be too much drop off near the ends of that couch?

- I was thinking of dropping the image size down to 106" (again, in the name of bulb life). I'd rather not go smaller, but would if that made a significant difference.


Thanks -

/randy


ETA: Crap. Just read Steve's post above. Sounds like the FH isn't the screen for me. *sigh* - looks like I'm back to square 1.


----------



## nydennis

Things are never just easy 


My projector is nearly even with the screen. I have to see if I can raise it up a bit then to have the projector looking down more onto the screen.


----------



## rsamos




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *nydennis* /forum/post/14002457
> 
> 
> Things are never just easy
> 
> 
> My projector is nearly even with the screen. I have to see if I can raise it up a bit then to have the projector looking down more onto the screen.



Nope - they aren't.


Raising my projector up to the ceiling isn't really much of an option (low ceilings) so I suppose I need to sort out if I can be happy with a white screen like a ST130, or start researching another manufacturer and look for a retro-reflective screen. I suppose the ST130 is also angular reflective and if that's the problem it reads like it is, Stewart may not be doable in my environment.


Darn.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rsamos* /forum/post/14002553
> 
> 
> Nope - they aren't.
> 
> 
> Raising my projector up to the ceiling isn't really much of an option (low ceilings) so I suppose I need to sort out if I can be happy with a white screen like a ST130, or start researching another manufacturer and look for a retro-reflective screen. I suppose the ST130 is also angular reflective and if that's the problem it reads like it is, Stewart may not be doable in my environment.
> 
> 
> Darn.



I think Da-Lite has a bunch of retro-reflective screens.


I don't see why you can't ceiling mount the project though. How is it mounted right now?


----------



## rsamos




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/14003026
> 
> 
> I think Da-Lite has a bunch of retro-reflective screens.
> 
> 
> I don't see why you can't ceiling mount the project though. How is it mounted right now?



Well, I guess saying it wasn't an option is a bit of an overstatement.


The projector is sitting on a shelf on the back wall right now. The ceilings are low in the room (7.5'). Setting the screen up so that sitting height is around 30% up into the image places the top edge of a 106" screen about 8" below the ceiling. That's getting a bit tight to really gain much from ceiling mounting.


All that, and a personal (but not critically important) preference to not have to use the lens shift to center the image.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rsamos* /forum/post/14003099
> 
> 
> Well, I guess saying it wasn't an option is a bit of an overstatement.
> 
> 
> The projector is sitting on a shelf on the back wall right now. The ceilings are low in the room (7.5'). Setting the screen up so that sitting height is around 30% up into the image places the top edge of a 106" screen about 8" below the ceiling. That's getting a bit tight to really gain much from ceiling mounting.
> 
> 
> All that, and a personal (but not critically important) preference to not have to use the lens shift to center the image.




So it's very easy to ceiling mount it - at the back of the room, no one will hit their head.


Ceiling mounted for angular reflective usually means within 6-12 inches from the top of the screen (either above or below). You can easily make that happen.


I don't recall which projector you have, but there shouldn't be any issue lens shifting that small amount.


I would rather go with a Stewart screen and a small lens shift than some other screen and no lens shift. And I personally like angular reflective better anyway (I think I get a more even, if perhaps slightly less bright, image).


----------



## rsamos




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/14003178
> 
> 
> So it's very easy to ceiling mount it - at the back of the room, no one will hit their head.
> 
> 
> Ceiling mounted for angular reflective usually means within 6-12 inches from the top of the screen (either above or below). You can easily make that happen.
> 
> 
> I don't recall which projector you have, but there shouldn't be any issue lens shifting that small amount.
> 
> 
> I would rather go with a Stewart screen and a small lens shift than some other screen and no lens shift. And I personally like angular reflective better anyway (I think I get a more even, if perhaps slightly less bright, image).



If it will actually work (well) 6"-12" below the top of the screen, then sure - I could probably pull that off.


Guess I need to start looking at what's available for a ceiling mount - I'm using a VPL-VW50.


Thanks.


/randy


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rsamos* /forum/post/14003562
> 
> 
> If it will actually work (well) 6"-12" below the top of the screen, then sure - I could probably pull that off.
> 
> 
> Guess I need to start looking at what's available for a ceiling mount - I'm using a VPL-VW50.
> 
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> 
> /randy



I've got a VW60. If you call the AVS Store (the people that sponsor this forum), they can get you something for about $50 that's really solid (I don't recall the name of the mount, but it's great and what I use).


----------



## nydennis

I have cathedral ceilings in my room, and two ceiling fans. Makes it hard to get a ceiling mounted projector for that room. Also have zero access above the ceiling to run any sort of wiring and power. Which is the reason we did shelf mounting.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *nydennis* /forum/post/14005078
> 
> 
> I have cathedral ceilings in my room, and two ceiling fans. Makes it hard to get a ceiling mounted projector for that room. Also have zero access above the ceiling to run any sort of wiring and power. Which is the reason we did shelf mounting.



For the VW50 and VW60, the PJ can be anywhere within the screen plus an additional .15 X screen height above it (lens shift max).


The angular reflective screen material is where you start to lean towards not dead center. But pretty much anything above center and below .15 x screen height above is fine.


The poster I was responding to before has a 7.5' ceiling, which is easy to ceiling mount. That's clearly not the same situation as yours.


In your case, as long as your reasonably above center, angular reflective is fine. You don't have to ceiling mount, and no one said that I don't think.


That being said, ceiling mounting is generally preferable for a bunch of reasons, if you can manage it.


----------



## nydennis

wow glad, I remeasured. The Projector only sits 17' from the screen instead of the 19/20 that I thought. It also sits about 6 inches higher then the center of the screen.


----------



## nydennis

Thanks for your help AbMagfab


I'm going to be ordering the Firehawk in the next week.


----------



## Barcofan

Hi all, after much research I bought a 100" Firehawk SST from AVS and have been enjoying it for a few weeks now. I'm very impressed by its excellent contrast/ambient light rejecting abilities, but with my RS1 (ceiling mounted, low lamp mode, 450 hours on bulb) I can see the screen texture in the form of sparklies/sheen in bright scenes especially in the centre of the image where there is a little hotspotting. I'm sitting 11 ft away with a throw of 10 ft 9" (1.5 x screen width, so more than Stewart's recommendation of at least 1.4x). I can't increase the throw or viewing distance, which is why I went for the SST instead of the G3 (Stewart recommends minimum 1.6x screen width). Is the FHG3 any more/less sparkly than the SST at the same viewing distance?


----------



## SteveLgBch

I just got an Epson 1080 UB, and have it on a 2 foot high table next to my chair (the chair being the center) with some horizontal and vertical lens offset, about 12 feet back. My back wall is 14feet wide and ceiling angled 10 to 12 feet high. They are white. One side wall is used brick, the other light beige blinds covering on windows. I watch in the dark at night, and really don't care what happens during the day. I now watch on a white paper covered rear wall, and I've found with the Epson I love a 9 foot, or I guess 123" (16x9) diagonal picture. What's my best bet in material for a Stewart. I would like cheaper, but I know that a few months later, I always want the best and end up trading up. Thanks!


----------



## Marc Rumsey

If you don't care about day viewing and only watch after sundown, you could get away with StudioTek 130 (1.3 gain white fabric). Of course in the middle of summer, it's still light out at 9:30 at night, so you'd have to be watching later than this for best results. Firehawk G3 (1.25 gain gray fabric) will give you more flexibility if you need it.


----------



## ac388

I have an electric 92" Studiotek 130 screen n recently have a big problem. When the screen is fully retract inside the case, I found the black bar(at the bottom of the screen) was not fully flush into the case, in which the right side is hanging out 1 inch more than the left.


Rather than sending the whole piece back to the factory, is there any quick fix that I can do at home to make the 2 sides at even drop height again.


Thanks for anybody that can help me on this !!! S.O.S.


----------



## benitoj

ac,


I don't think i have ever heard of a screen being that off. 1/8" difference is not uncommon but 1" difference i just can't see happening.

As silly as it sounds, have you checked to make sure that the case is perfectly leveled? In many cases, people have the housing on an uneven surface or are comparing the difference to an uneven piece of molding or finish (cases in which the unit is recessed).


If everything looks good, i would suggest you tighten the tensioning cord on the right side and loosen the cord a bit on the left. roll the screen up and down a few times so that the cord can adjust. Can you please provide photos? Serial number?


-Benito


----------



## Marc Rumsey




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ac388* /forum/post/14114987
> 
> 
> I have an electric 92" Studiotek 130 screen n recently have a big problem. When the screen is fully retract inside the case, I found the black bar(at the bottom of the screen) was not fully flush into the case, in which the right side is hanging out 1 inch more than the left.
> 
> 
> Rather than sending the whole piece back to the factory, is there any quick fix that I can do at home to make the 2 sides at even drop height again.
> 
> 
> Thanks for anybody that can help me on this !!! S.O.S.



When the screen is deployed, is the batten bar at the bottom lined up properly with the bottom viewable edge of the screen (equidistant all the way accross)? In other words, did the fabric pull out of one end of the batten bar?


----------



## ac388

Thanks for your input n will try to adjust the cords tonight. The case is all level n I did check that before n after the installation.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *benitoj* /forum/post/14116866
> 
> 
> ac,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think i have ever heard of a screen being that off. 1/8" difference is not uncommon but 1" difference i just can't see happening.
> 
> As silly as it sounds, have you checked to make sure that the case is perfectly leveled? In many cases, people have the housing on an uneven surface or are comparing the difference to an uneven piece of molding or finish (cases in which the unit is recessed).
> 
> 
> If everything looks good, i would suggest you tighten the tensioning cord on the right side and loosen the cord a bit on the left. roll the screen up and down a few times so that the cord can adjust. Can you please provide photos? Serial number?
> 
> 
> -Benito


----------



## ac388

Upon checking the distance between the batten n the white viewing area, both sides were the same. The case is level. The height difference between left n right remains same at 1/2" to 1", no matter the screen is retracted or fully extended.





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Marc Rumsey* /forum/post/14118101
> 
> 
> When the screen is deployed, is the batten bar at the bottom lined up properly with the bottom viewable edge of the screen (equidistant all the way accross)? In other words, did the fabric pull out of one end of the batten bar?


----------



## JargonGR

The more I read the more confused I get!!! Here is my situation; I recently moved to a new house and the spot i am going to use in order to build a home theater is not a dedicated room. Instead it is part of our living room so this automatically means bright colored walls and ceiling (also 20 feet height). I mostly (99%) watch films at night so light are off and I will not be using my screen for anything else but movies. Yet, I have not bought the projector yet (and will have to wait some months) but the screen needs to get in place now to complete the living room.


Another important note is that the only proper spot for the projector has a distance of 6.5-7 meters from the screen (22 feet)


I am also going for a 130" (width) curved 2.35 screen (Cine-W) so what is left to choose is the material.


What screen fabric would give me the best in these room conditions and would also not limit my projector choices in the future (i.e. I should be able to change PJs often).


Please help me out before I choose something wrong.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *JargonGR* /forum/post/14138226
> 
> 
> The more I read the more confused I get!!! Here is my situation; I recently moved to a new house and the spot i am going to use in order to build a home theater is not a dedicated room. Instead it is part of our living room so this automatically means bright colored walls and ceiling (also 20 feet height). I mostly (99%) watch films at night so light are off and I will not be using my screen for anything else but movies. Yet, I have not bought the projector yet (and will have to wait some months) but the screen needs to get in place now to complete the living room.
> 
> 
> Another important note is that the only proper spot for the projector has a distance of 6.5-7 meters from the screen (22 feet)
> 
> 
> I am also going for a 130" (width) curved 2.35 screen (Cine-W) so what is left to choose is the material.
> 
> 
> What screen fabric would give me the best in these room conditions and would also not limit my projector choices in the future (i.e. I should be able to change PJs often).
> 
> 
> Please help me out before I choose something wrong.



FHG3, definitely (IMHO).


----------



## Woodshed

Getting my new screen tomorrow! Can't wait!!










100" 16x9 FHG3


Now I will get to stare at the box for a week and a half until my carpet gets put in!


----------



## Jason Turk




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Woodshed* /forum/post/14249274
> 
> 
> Getting my new screen tomorrow! Can't wait!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 100" 16x9 FHG3
> 
> 
> Now I will get to stare at the box for a week and a half until my carpet gets put in!



Forget the carpet...put up the screen!!!







Actually I wouldn't do that...carpet guys are not exactly careful when they are moving around stuff.


----------



## Woodshed




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jason Turk* /forum/post/14251112
> 
> 
> Forget the carpet...put up the screen!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually I wouldn't do that...carpet guys are not exactly careful when they are moving around stuff.



LOL, EXACTLY!!!


I want to put it up so badly, but my better judgement has prevailed............so far.










I would actually get the screw locations in place for the frame, but I don't want to worry about storing that huge frame for over a week!


----------



## Jason Turk

Yeah anytime there are workers in your house it is better to play it safe.


They do say patience is a virtue...


----------



## jumguf

Hi everybody


Recently I became the happy owner of a well-kept (and cheap) used 82" Model A Firehawk G2 , which is going to be set up in our refurbished living room, when it's done in a few months. This is quite a scoop, because here in Denmark a new Firehawk screen (same size and model) costs somewhere between 5100 and 5700 dollars







I believe, this is about twice as much as in the US?

Of course I almost can't wait to set it up (haven't gotten the projector yet, am considering a Sanyo Z2000), and until recently, I felt certain that the Firehawk would be the ultimate choice, based on my reading on different forums about its way of handling ambient light and white walls, etc. But now I've become aware of the potential hotspotting problem, which might turn out to spoil the party.

Trouble is, because of limited space, my longest possible throw distance is extremely short (8,7 feet for an 82" screen, projector mounted on low ceiling (7,6 feet), which gives me a throw distance of a little more than 1.4. I havent seen hotspotting on a Firehawk (or any other screen) with my own eyes, so I guess I'm just hoping that someone could tell me, it wont look like total ****










I read somewhere on this thread (I believe it was a Stewart representative), that regarding hotspotting, they have plenty of happy FH owners at 1.5 throw. Do I have any chance of becoming a happy owner at 1.4, or will I just be plain disappointed and have to get another screen?


Awaiting the worst

Josef


----------



## nathan_h

I had an original forumulation Firehawk at 1.4x and it was not a problem. The more recent formulations are better in most regards with things like sparklies and hotspotting, so I would not worry too much.


----------



## HiHoStevo




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *JargonGR* /forum/post/14138226
> 
> 
> The more I read the more confused I get!!! Here is my situation; I recently moved to a new house and the spot i am going to use in order to build a home theater is not a dedicated room. Instead it is part of our living room so this automatically means bright colored walls and ceiling (also 20 feet height). I mostly (99%) watch films at night so light are off and I will not be using my screen for anything else but movies. Yet, I have not bought the projector yet (and will have to wait some months) but the screen needs to get in place now to complete the living room.
> 
> 
> Another important note is that the only proper spot for the projector has a distance of 6.5-7 meters from the screen (22 feet)
> 
> 
> I am also going for a 130" (width) curved 2.35 screen (Cine-W) so what is left to choose is the material.
> 
> 
> What screen fabric would give me the best in these room conditions and would also not limit my projector choices in the future (i.e. I should be able to change PJs often).
> 
> 
> Please help me out before I choose something wrong.



I agree with Ab's recommendation of the FH-G3....


Even though you will be watching mostly at night... with the light walls and ceiling you want to minimize the contrast loss that they will cause.


I just finished a two day training course out at Stewart Filmscreen and was amazed at how much I did not know! I thought that after 10 years in this hobby I had a pretty sound base... (not one to debate with Tyrg perhaps...







), but now know I have just scratched the surface!


The most important thing to remember is that screens are "application driven." Each of the variables in your particular environment and projector need to be considered to give you the best result.


----------



## Hibo

I picked up a G3 fabric for two reasons, one of them was the reflective cone dissapates much faster than the G3. If you are sitting relatively close, at 8 feet, then friends on the side lines are going to be cheated out of some photons. Also, if i remember correctly, the sanyo does not have a lot of stones to push the FH, especially on the sidelines.

Hibo


----------



## jumguf




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *nathan_h* /forum/post/14338617
> 
> 
> I had an original forumulation Firehawk at 1.4x and it was not a problem. The more recent formulations are better in most regards with things like sparklies and hotspotting, so I would not worry too much.



Whew, thanx. That's just what I needed to hear









This is also going to be my first venture into home cinema, and it's been a couple of years underway, just checking everything out, reading the forums, watching demos, and ever so slowly tightening my finger around the trigger, so I'm really trying to get everything as right as humanly possible within my financial and physical limits.


One more question, by the way (slightly nerdy perhaps): Since I'm going to have a real short throw, that also means using some vertical lens shift. So the throw will be angled downward from above the top of the screen, and as far as I've read, the image will appear its best and brightest at the "opposite" angle, down toward the seating area (which is more or less directly below the PJ). Does the use of lens shift in this manner have a positive effect on hotspotting/general image quality, or would it be the same with the PJ directly in front of the screen with minimal lens shift?


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jumguf* /forum/post/14340859
> 
> 
> Whew, thanx. That's just what I needed to hear
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is also going to be my first venture into home cinema, and it's been a couple of years underway, just checking everything out, reading the forums, watching demos, and ever so slowly tightening my finger around the trigger, so I'm really trying to get everything as right as humanly possible within my financial and physical limits.
> 
> 
> One more question, by the way (slightly nerdy perhaps): Since I'm going to have a real short throw, that also means using some vertical lens shift. So the throw will be angled downward from above the top of the screen, and as far as I've read, the image will appear its best and brightest at the "opposite" angle, down toward the seating area (which is more or less directly below the PJ). Does the use of lens shift in this manner have a positive effect on hotspotting/general image quality, or would it be the same with the PJ directly in front of the screen with minimal lens shift?



The FH is angular reflective, so you get the best results with the project *not* in the center.


The rest of what you ask kind of depends on the projector you're using.


----------



## rsbeck

My understanding is that the FH works best with a longer throw, 1.8+


----------



## jumguf




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/14342249
> 
> 
> The FH is angular reflective, so you get the best results with the project *not* in the center.
> 
> 
> The rest of what you ask kind of depends on the projector you're using.



So apart from projector capabilities, you mean this setup should be ok regarding angles?


Thanks for the input, everyone!


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jumguf* /forum/post/14345160
> 
> 
> So apart from projector capabilities, you mean this setup should be ok regarding angles?
> 
> 
> Thanks for the input, everyone!



More than okay, it's desirable to have the projector towards the top of the FHG3 screen.


----------



## Jason Turk

Ideally the original Firehawk's were said to work best with 1.6x throw or longer. I believe the newer versions they recommend a bit more (1.8x if I recall). The SST version was designed for shorter throws in part, but, IMHO it does not work as well as G3 for the main purpose of it (ambient light rejection/lower black levels).


----------



## Woodshed




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Woodshed* /forum/post/14249274
> 
> 
> Getting my new screen tomorrow! Can't wait!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 100" 16x9 FHG3
> 
> 
> Now I will get to stare at the box for a week and a half until my carpet gets put in!



It is up!!!


What a thing of beauty!!


Now I just need a real projector.


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jason Turk* /forum/post/14349864
> 
> 
> Ideally the original Firehawk's were said to work best with 1.6x throw or longer. I believe the newer versions they recommend a bit more (1.8x if I recall). The SST version was designed for shorter throws in part, but, IMHO it does not work as well as G3 for the main purpose of it (ambient light rejection/lower black levels).



Interesting. Then my experience with an older FH may not apply to the new ones quite as much. For the OP with the short throw, perhaps the SST version would be a set of compromises to consider?


----------



## Jason Turk

Indeed. I think there are a couple things...with the reformulation the specs to minimize it changed, and I think they probably also found that raising it to 1.8 (or about) would just minimize potential install issues.


Now for me personally...I think the main con to the G3 (potential hotspotting) is worth the trade off for the SST (which presents less overall performance "enhancers".


----------



## chichopf

Hi,


I received a 87" grayhawk g3 and I have a problem; I sit at 9,6 ft and my in78 it's ceiling mounting ant the same distance.


The problem it's that I can see tiny bright dots, like stars. If I move my head a little, one disappear but I can see a new one.


There's something wrong with my screen?; I choose the grayhawk over the fire to avoid this issues.


Thanks


Edit to say that the Stewart's support in Europe is nonexistent; They don't answer to any of my mails.


----------



## Jason Turk

Do you mean Grayhawk RS? If so, what projector are you using?


----------



## chichopf




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jason Turk* /forum/post/14360031
> 
> 
> Do you mean Grayhawk RS? If so, what projector are you using?




Infocus in78 in eco mode; Yes is a new Grayhawk RS G3.


----------



## Jason Turk

What throw are you using for it? Feel free to PM and I can try and help...


----------



## chichopf

Zoom at the widest angle to reach an 87" screen projecting at 9,66'.


Thanks for your time.


----------



## Jason Turk

That might be the problem...that is a super short throw...~1.33x. Try and experiment...make the image as small as it will go (adjust the zoom)...do the sparklies disappear or no?


----------



## Woodshed




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jason Turk* /forum/post/14365859
> 
> 
> What throw are you using for it? Feel free to PM and I can try and help...



Hey Jason, I (stupidly) hung the screen before filling out the warrany card. Is there anywhere other than the frame or screen itself to find the Serial number? It isn't on any of my receipts, or my shipping document. Perhaps on the box?


Thanks


----------



## Jason Turk

Box should have it. Look for something like "SFA 08 XXXXXXX"...


----------



## Jason Turk

It might also start with TXXXXXXXX....they may have changed it this year.


It will not be SNDXXX....that is the part number.


----------



## chichopf




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jason Turk* /forum/post/14367247
> 
> 
> That might be the problem...that is a super short throw...~1.33x. Try and experiment...make the image as small as it will go (adjust the zoom)...do the sparklies disappear or no?



I'll try tonight, but the throw is 1.53 (6.3' wide screen, 9.6' projection distance)


Thanks again.


----------



## Woodshed




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jason Turk* /forum/post/14367510
> 
> 
> It might also start with TXXXXXXXX....they may have changed it this year.
> 
> 
> It will not be SNDXXX....that is the part number.



Cool, thanks. I knew about the SNDXXX, but not the other one. Checking tonight!


----------



## Jason Turk

Sounds good (to both).


----------



## chichopf




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jason Turk* /forum/post/14367247
> 
> 
> That might be the problem...that is a super short throw...~1.33x. Try and experiment...make the image as small as it will go (adjust the zoom)...do the sparklies disappear or no?




I have tried make the screen smaller as possible and nothing changes; the bright specks are the same, and 3-4 of then are really distracting in bright scenes.


This is weird; I really don't expected this of a negative gain screen.


I hope the answer or my dealer; Stewart don't say anything about my problem.


My seat it's roughly at 1,5 screen wide so I think that I not too close to the screen.


Any ideas?; perhaps the screen it's defective or the infocus it's too close at 9,7ft.? The projectorcentral calculator show about 32 foot lamberts in my setup.


Somebody have experimented this disturbing bright specks?


Thanks.


----------



## Jason Turk

I think there must have been a problem with that run of fabric then. You should not see what you are seeing. I would ask your dealer to start a warranty exchange.


----------



## rsamos

Ok - A couple months ago, I was all but ready to buy a screen. After finding out I had to ceiling mount the pj for a Firehawk, I was starting to waffle on it, but after a couple other members posted on the topic I think it's real doable. And now I'm really ready. I'd like to be ordering something by next week some time. All that's slowing me down now is the paralysis of analysis.


Now ... I'm still not positive I want a Firehawk, but the current room conditions point towards one. I have fairly good ambient light control except for a white ceiling. But the white ceiling is the only really large problem in the otherwise dark room.


I'm starting to wonder if I could cover the first 6 feet (or so) of the ceiling in some kind of black fabric and deal with the light problem that way. I think I'd rather have a white screen (StudioTek?) if at all reasonable.


I've written to Stewart and they're sending me samples of StudioTek 130, Firehawk G3 & Firehawk SST to try out. I suspect they'll probably be too small to learn everything I'd like, but hey - at least I get to see all three side by side.




A couple questions -


1: Is the StudioTek angular reflective also?


2: Right now my pj (VW50) is on a shelf. If I moved the shelf up so that the pj was *just* above the top of the screen, would there be enough lens shift leaving the pj right side up, or would I have to turn it upside down to get enough shift? (14' throw, 106" screen).


3: The Stewart mounts look like a serious pain. Would it be doable to use French cleats, using the brackets on the screen to hold the screen side of the cleat?


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> Ok - A couple months ago, I was all but ready to buy a screen. After finding out I had to ceiling mount the pj for a Firehawk, I was starting to waffle on it, but after a couple other members posted on the topic I think it's real doable. And now I'm really ready. I'd like to be ordering something by next week some time. All that's slowing me down now is the paralysis of analysis.



Who said you have to ceiling mount the pj? I have the Firehawk G3 and my projector is basically shelf mounted. It's the best screen I've ever used. I also use a DaLite HCCV screen and the Firehawk has no surface texture compared to the DaLite.


----------



## rsamos




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Craig Peer* /forum/post/14429575
> 
> 
> Who said you have to ceiling mount the pj? I have the Firehawk G3 and my projector is basically shelf mounted. It's the best screen I've ever used. I also use a DaLite HCCV screen and the Firehawk has no surface texture compared to the DaLite.



Hmmm. So far, pretty much everyone has said it needs to be ceiling mounted. Actually, more to the point, they are saying the pj should be near the top of the screen rather than near the center. I was never specifically clear on why, but I think it was to maximize the gain from the angular reflective surface. Right now the shelf my pj is on is behind my seat, about 6" over my head.


The shelf I have my pj on is a small one meant only to hold the pj. I can move that pretty easily if need be, hence my question on shift while the VW50 is right side up.


Good info on the texture though. One alternative I've been considering has been the DaLite. Thanks.


----------



## Daniel Hutnicki

Mounting a Stewart screen is easy. Well it easy if you have a couple of guys helping you lift a heavy case but its not different that mounting any other electric screen.


As for the screen material, the firehawk will work well although if your only issue is the ceiling , painting it or adding material to it would seem like a good answer. The St 130 would then be a good way to go. Honestly, even with the white ceiling, it wouldnt be the end of the world if you got the ST130, but it wont be as good if you had the dark ceilings. The firehawk will be more flexible of the two in terms of ambient light and wall colors


----------



## rsamos

Thanks for the response Daniel. Once again, I'm leaning towards the StudioTek. For now at least.


I wasn't thinking of mounting issues with an electric, but with a fixed screen. Looks like it's just four small tabs affixed to the rear of the screen frame and all four tabs need to just slip over screws/bolts that are already in (*exactly* the right) place on the wall.


That just looks like a pain to me, but I'm one to measure 3-4 times, and still end up cutting twice.


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> Hmmm. So far, pretty much everyone has said it needs to be ceiling mounted. Actually, more to the point, they are saying the pj should be near the top of the screen rather than near the center. I was never specifically clear on why, but I think it was to maximize the gain from the angular reflective surface. Right now the shelf my pj is on is behind my seat, about 6" over my head.



My projector is mounted a bit above the center of the screen. I haven't seen any negative effects myself.


----------



## rsamos




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Craig Peer* /forum/post/14432713
> 
> 
> My projector is mounted a bit above the center of the screen. I haven't seen any negative effects myself.



I haven't gotten the impression (or said) there would be problems with mounting the pj near center screen, just that you might not get all the gain the screen has to offer.


This thread:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...0#post12079550 

is a discussion about angular reflective vs. retro reflective screens.


Per that discussion, you may well have your pj in the right place. One early opinion in that thread is that you'll get maximum brightness at the center of the screen if the angle from the viewer to the center is the same as the angle from the pj to the center. In my setup, those are different in that my head is in the lower 1/3 of the screen, and the pj is pretty much center. My guess is that setup may bias the brightest part of the screen towards the bottom somewhere.


----------



## Superfly77

Hey guys


I have a studiotek 130 screen mounted in an electric retractable case ( luxus). Following a move to a new home, the bottom batton of the screen is not level but the case is. When the screen is fully extended ( as per the electric limit switches) it isn't quite level either. I think I need to fully extend the screen then wind it back up to get it straight. Is there any way I can do this?

Also, once I get it level, how do I tension the tab tension guide wires on the sides?

Thanks

S


----------



## flavio7

I'm looking for the photos of screen case, I need to see how the screen goes down. I want to put on the furniture, otherwise I have to attach on the celling. Does someone have some photos or can tell me where to find it?

Thanks

Flavio


----------



## Jmouse007




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *flavio7* /forum/post/14779962
> 
> 
> I'm looking for the photos of screen case, I need to see how the screen goes down. I want to put on the furniture, otherwise I have to attach on the celling. Does someone have some photos or can tell me where to find it?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Flavio




Just Go to the STEWART Film Screen Web site. They have pics of the Lexus Model A Electriscreen there.


We have a STEWART Firehawk SST Lexus Model A Electriscreen. The case is black and it is paired with a SONY Black Pearl VPL-VW60. It is an exceptional tab tensioned screen. Pricy, yes but for our application and with our pj it was perfect; no sparklies, beautiful picture, DEEP blacks, great whites and it is VERY quiet. Best investment we ever made. Everyone who sees it ooohss and ahhhss.


----------



## bendandthrow

I have a Stewart Grayhawk microperf 100" fixed screen which I bought second hand. I thought it was a bargain but I've just done some very last minute research and am now very worried that it is not suitable for my room.


The THX recommended viewing distance ifor a 100" screen is 3m (or 10'), and this is where I intended to view from.


Unfortunately I have just discovered a Microperf White Paper which says "As an example, in a conventional theatre, with a luminance level of 12 Foot Lamberts (nominal), the studio industry standard Stewart Cinema Screen will have the perforations vanish at a viewing distance of 15 feet whereas the *Stewart MicroPerf fabrics will vanish at a viewing distance of 12 feet*."


If I move my viewing position back 2' to 12' I will be just 1' from my rear wall, directly below my in-ceiling rear surrounds. I can do this but it is not ideal. Does anyone have any idea how visible these microperfs will be at 10' in a dark light controlled room? Will it completely ruin the experience. My PJ is the JVC HD1 which outputs at 1080p.


My other problem is that I intended to put my Centre speaker about 7" behind the screen, taking advantage of its acoustic transparency. Again unfortunately, the same White Paper says "The speakers behind the screen need to be *a minimum of 12 inches away from the rear surface* for the best performance. They found that if the speakers are closer to the fabric, comb filtering can occur but when installed to specification, minimal attenuation occurs permitting truly transparent audio"


Any idea how serious this comb filtering (whatever that is) will be in my set up? Will it significantly impair the intelligibility of the dialogue?


My builder is constructing my front stud wall in 2 days, so I need to confirm the design today or tomorrow. Specifically, should I give up on the idea of putting the Centre behind the screen and instead put it below? If I do this then I will get no benefit from the screen being acoustically transparent










I'm beginning to think my screen was not such a bargain after all - I hope someone can reassure me on both the above 2 points.


Thanks


----------



## bendandthrow

Another problem with my "bargain" screen is that the previous owner used a custom mounting system which is not suitable for me. I am not sure if what is still on the frame is original or not. Either way it is not obvious how to fix the screen to the wall mounts which I have just had delivered by Stewart (2 short planks with each with brackets at each end - £100 or $160! What a rip off!







)


See these photos


This is one of the 2 brackets on the top of the frame, each of which are 4.5" from their respective corner.








[/IMG]


Is this an original Stewart bracket, and if so, is that all there is to it? Should these also be on the bottom frame? All I have there is a bolt hole at each end in the same relative position as the 2 brackets on the top of the frame.


This shows my attempt to join this frame bracket to the wall bracket supplied by Stewart. It is not fully tightened hence why the end of the bolt is not protruding.








[/IMG]


Is this how it is supposed to work? If so, what are the 2 small holes shown in this next photo for?








[/IMG]


I guess this would work but it does not look very elegant and it does not match the pdf image supplied to me by my local Stewart agent, reproduced here. Both these seem to show the wall bracket attaching to the top side and underside of the top and bottom frames respectively. I don't see how this can be. Also these images suggest the brackets should attach to the frame 18" in from each corner. There is no obvious way of doing this on my frame.


From Front








[/IMG]


From Rear








[/IMG]


I have seen in this thread mention of some kind of rail on the frame for the wall brackets to fit into, but I can't see anything like that on my frame. I think it is about 5 years old, so that may explain it. Or am I missing something?


If I have missing parts will Stewart be able to supply replacements?


Any advice really appreciated, thanks


Eric


----------



## bendandthrow

Sorry







One more question


I have just read on the stewart site that the introduction of "digital projectors has created the need for some slight modifications in how we cut the material. To prevent a common artifact called 'moiré, the screen material is rotated, so the perforated grid does not interfere with the projector pixel grid."


My grayhawk is about 5 years old so is presumably the older generation. Will I have a noticable moire problem at a 10' viewing distance with my JVC HD1 D-ILA PJ?


I'm seriously thinking I should dump this screen, or at least the material, and go for a Studiotek or Firehawk screen without perforations. I can't believe I am only now becoming aware of these potential problems


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bendandthrow* /forum/post/14990123
> 
> 
> Sorry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One more question
> 
> 
> I have just read on the stewart site that the introduction of "digital projectors has created the need for some slight modifications in how we cut the material. To prevent a common artifact called 'moiré, the screen material is rotated, so the perforated grid does not interfere with the projector pixel grid."
> 
> 
> My grayhawk is about 5 years old so is presumably the older generation. Will I have a noticable moire problem at a 10' viewing distance with my JVC HD1 D-ILA PJ?
> 
> 
> I'm seriously thinking I should dump this screen, or at least the material, and go for a Studiotek or Firehawk screen without perforations. I can't believe I am only now becoming aware of these potential problems



Research ahead of time is your friend... Perhaps you could find someone else who will just buy on the Stewart name to take this off your hands?


The Luxus Deluxe frame I have looks nothing like what you posted. It has a steel frame with large brackets that slide in the back, and mount to studs (the covering is all black velvet).


I have a Sony VW60 (same LCoS technology as yours) and a FireHawk G3 (no perfs). I have a dedicated room, but I wanted to turn the lights on sometimes.


The perfs also reduce the brightness a fair amount, which I didn't want. I would never get perfs, instead I would build the wall big enough and put the speakers behind acoustically transparent fabric (or put the speakers in front). But that's just my opinion.


Anyway, not what you wanted to hear, but it's just one opinion.


----------



## bendandthrow




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/14990230
> 
> 
> Research ahead of time is your friend...



Never was a truer word spoken. The irony is I bought this 11m ago and its been in its box ever since, waiting for my room to be built. Which is is what is happening now. I only stumbled on the microperf issue by chance whilst looking for info on the mounting system. Two custom installers I have spoken to have failed to raise this issue with me, which is a little disappointing.


Anyway, I've decided to cancel my order for the inwall front speakers and to go for free standers, on either side and below, so that sorts the sound issue. I'm just hoping the picture will be OK, but if not I can always buy a Studiotek screen to replace the Grayhawk. Provided I can get the bloody thing onto the wall in the first place of course... I'm not sure about selling because I think I would have to pay a lot more for a similar quality screen, but I may look into that.


Thanks


----------



## contractk

need some help, new to projectors. Im looking at getting a Stewart Firehawk G3 100" second hand to go with my Epson 6500ub purchase. Would they be a good match in a room with ambient light, which will be controlled but I may have the pot lights on a bit for the kids. Probably mount the projector, ~10.5 feet away, ceiling mount on a bulk head so about 7 feet off the ground with love seats below. Thanks


----------



## butsu




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bendandthrow* /forum/post/14990123
> 
> 
> Sorry
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One more question
> 
> 
> I have just read on the stewart site that the introduction of "digital projectors has created the need for some slight modifications in how we cut the material. To prevent a common artifact called 'moiré, the screen material is rotated, so the perforated grid does not interfere with the projector pixel grid."
> 
> 
> My grayhawk is about 5 years old so is presumably the older generation. Will I have a noticable moire problem at a 10' viewing distance with my JVC HD1 D-ILA PJ?
> 
> 
> I'm seriously thinking I should dump this screen, or at least the material, and go for a Studiotek or Firehawk screen without perforations. I can't believe I am only now becoming aware of these potential problems



My opion,if money is no object for you.The curve cinemascope is another choice,by choose Stewart v-curve or Supernova.


----------



## Xyst

Question for the Screen guru's out there...


I'm putting a RS20 in my living room (white walls and ceilings) and am worried about the visibility of the screen. I'm considering the Stewart Firehawk, Da-Lite HCCV, and Elite CineGray but am curious, does the screen material disappear for a gray screen or do you tend to notice the material more so than a white screen? I keep reading stories about sparklies and hotspotting and it's got me a bit concerned.


I'm going to be ceiling mounting my projector 15' from a 92" motorized screen. The seating will be straight on (it's a love seat) and the viewer's eyes will be about 17' back from the screen.


Lastly, I've requested screen samples from the manufacturers, but can you really tell anything from them? It amazes me that it seems like so many people spend the money on a screen without ever seeing it first...maybe I'm weird like that!


Thanks so much y'all!

Andrew


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/15079447
> 
> 
> Question for the Screen guru's out there...
> 
> 
> I'm putting a RS20 in my living room (white walls and ceilings) and am worried about the visibility of the screen. I'm considering the Stewart Firehawk, Da-Lite HCCV, and Elite CineGray but am curious, does the screen material disappear for a gray screen or do you tend to notice the material more so than a white screen? I keep reading stories about sparklies and hotspotting and it's got me a bit concerned.
> 
> 
> I'm going to be ceiling mounting my projector 15' from a 92" motorized screen. The seating will be straight on (it's a love seat) and the viewer's eyes will be about 17' back from the screen.
> 
> 
> Lastly, I've requested screen samples from the manufacturers, but can you really tell anything from them? It amazes me that it seems like so many people spend the money on a screen without ever seeing it first...maybe I'm weird like that!
> 
> 
> Thanks so much y'all!
> 
> Andrew



#1 - Screen samples are mostly useless, but I did it too.


#2 - Best bet is to try some local Hi-Fi places, and see what they happen to have up in their theater rooms


#3 - You'll want a gray screen with that kind of ambient light (I like the FHG3)


#4 - That screen is way too small for a 17' viewing distance, you want to either sit closer (like 9-10') or get a much bigger screen.


#5 - The projector is too far away as well


----------



## Xyst




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/15079465
> 
> 
> #1 - Screen samples are mostly useless, but I did it too.
> 
> 
> #2 - Best bet is to try some local Hi-Fi places, and see what they happen to have up in their theater rooms
> 
> 
> #3 - You'll want a gray screen with that kind of ambient light (I like the FHG3)
> 
> 
> #4 - That screen is way too small for a 17' viewing distance, you want to either sit closer (like 9-10') or get a much bigger screen.
> 
> 
> #5 - The projector is too far away as well



Thanks Ab...I'm limited on screen size due to the room so I can't go really any larger than that. I measured out when I go to local theater that I actually prefer sitting at a distance that is about twice the diagonal measurement of the screen size. This was a VERY ball park measurement of me just walking off the distance to the screen and the width and doing some quick math. Given that experience, I don't think I'm going to be terribly far off my mark in terms of screen size.


Just trying to understand how to calculate proper projector distance...is there a magic formula for that or is it simply experience? Also, I'm assuming since for a fan of the FH you haven't had any of the aforementioned issues? That's good to hear!


Thanks!


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Xyst* /forum/post/15079604
> 
> 
> Thanks Ab...I'm limited on screen size due to the room so I can't go really any larger than that. I measured out when I go to local theater that I actually prefer sitting at a distance that is about twice the diagonal measurement of the screen size. This was a VERY ball park measurement of me just walking off the distance to the screen and the width and doing some quick math. Given that experience, I don't think I'm going to be terribly far off my mark in terms of screen size.
> 
> 
> Just trying to understand how to calculate proper projector distance...is there a magic formula for that or is it simply experience? Also, I'm assuming since for a fan of the FH you haven't had any of the aforementioned issues? That's good to hear!
> 
> 
> Thanks!



There are some formulas out there, here's one site that captures a bunch of them:
http://myhometheater.homestead.com/v...alculator.html 


From that, THX recommends around 10' from a 92" screen, and a maximum of 12' before you lose the ability to resolve 1080p (meaning it won't look any better than 720p if you're further).


Better than walking out the distance, wear some glasses in the theater (temporarily if you don't usually wear them). Note where the screen sides come to with respect to your field of vision in the glasses. Then, wearing the same glasses, sit at home with the screen corners marked out, and see how far you would be sitting to fill the same field of vision.


I think you'll be surprised at how close it will be (or how large the screen needs to be if you're further away).


In any case, 92" and 17' are just too far/small. Either move the seating closer, or get a bigger screen.


In terms of the FHG3, yes, those issues have been resolved. They were mostly issues with previous generations of the screen. Only if your projector is too close (not a problem you'll have) is there a chance you might see some hotspotting, so I wouldn't worry about it.


Hope this helps!


----------



## rodan1

I am planning on getting a Luxus A with a 12V trigger interface. Can somebody provide a link to a trigger cable that is suitable? The manual says it should be 22ga but I don't see that spec on product pages. Thanks.


----------



## marswill

I have a Stewart Luxus A FHG3 with the 12V trigger option. The screen comes with a right angle plug that plugs into the top of the screen. I bought a long mono audio extension cord with a 1/8" phone plug on one end (this interfaces with my Denon receiver). I cut the mono jack off of the other end of the cable and attached the supplied right angle plug. One such cable is the Radio Shack Model: 33-176. As very little current is required for the trigger, the size (gauge) of the wire is not very important and 22ga should be fine.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rodan1* /forum/post/15090517
> 
> 
> I am planning on getting a Luxus A with a 12V trigger interface. Can somebody provide a link to a trigger cable that is suitable? The manual says it should be 22ga but I don't see that spec on product pages. Thanks.



If you use regular Cat5, you can just double up the pairs. Rule-of-thumb for 5V/12V triggers are to use two solids for pins one and two (e.g. blue/green and red/brown), and then all the whites for the ground.


----------



## R Harkness

*Attention Stewart St 130 (hopefully G3) owners:*


I'm wondering if you ever view movies or sports with any light on at all.


I'm considering the ST 130 G3 material for my room, which will be totally light controlled with dark decor. By far the main purpose is to watch movies in total light control and I want the wide viewing angles, lack of hotspotting and lack of screen texture the ST 130 G3 material is known for.


But occasionally we might watch some sports (hockey, or the UFC) or just have a tiny bit of light on. Definitely no light ever aimed toward the screen - as discrete light as I can manage. For instance some narrow spot lights on dimmers over the viewing sofa so we can see each other.


Obviously the Firehawk material is the champ whenever you start introducing light, but do you ST-130 owners find you can have a little light on somewhere, and still get a decent image?


Thanks.


----------



## Carey P

I have both screens, currently using the ST130 G3 for the reasons you mentioned. I don't find it too distracting when using spots directly over seating in dim mode. It is mainly when lights come in at wide angles spilling onto the screen, such as a door opening at the side of the room. This is where the FirewHawk excelled.


However, with any light in the room you can expect a more washed out image (grayer blacks), but if it can be lived with temporarily, then fine.


----------



## KTTV Images

I am planning on using my existing Studiotech 130 screen (10 years old) with a JVC RS20 projector. Joe Kane has suggested in WS that there is an interference pattern visible with fixed pixel projectors and this 130 screen texture due to the grain not being small enough for 1080p. Is this screen going to work well with the RS20 ?


The other behavior I have heard of -which may be the same type of thing - is "sparklies". Could someone describe what the visible effect of sparklies looks like?

I am guessing it relates to a just visible beady type surface texture reflection off a portion of the the screen surface that changes/moves when you move your head position. Is this correct, how serious a problem is it, does it imapct the apparent resolution of the projected image, and is the new G3 version of the 130 a significant enough solution to be worth re-coating my old screen?.


Thanks

KT


----------



## WOLVERNOLE

"Sparklies" are evident not only on a gain screen for FP, but on rear projection screens and including DLP/SXRD/DILA. It's sorta like "when you see it, you see it." Primarily evident in BRIGHT areas of a scene (the sun, white clouds, light but bright blue sky scenes). Have you noticed a "pearlesence" on (real) snow glistening in the sun ? It is just what it says- "sparkling." I have only seen it on the VuTec SilverStar silver-colored screen (a 3.0+ gain screen) and it BOTHERS me in the aforementioned scenes- very evident.


----------



## scottferrell

I have a similar problem with my Stewart 100' tab tensioned greyhawk. It sat in my garage for about 24 months while I renovated and it developed wrinkles that I can't eliminate with the tabs. I agree if you tighten it too much it causes the bar to loose pull on the vertical. I telephoned Stewart and they have yet to return my call. It seems a shame to have such a nice screen ruined from just keeping it in storage. I was really excited to hook up my Jvc RS-1 and now all I can do is look at the wrinkles. It makes me want to put a rigid stick between the 2 tabs where the wrinkles are. Any other suggestions??


Scott


----------



## HiHoStevo




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *scottferrell* /forum/post/15152130
> 
> 
> I have a similar problem with my Stewart 100' tab tensioned greyhawk.
> 
> 
> Scott



Now that is what I call a Home Theater.... 100'


----------



## nuno_aguas

Hi,


I would be grateful for some help on the following issue.


I have had a 82" Grayhawk RS G2 screen on a fixed frame (Luxus SND082H) for three years.


I have the projector suspended from the ceiling and both seating and projection are from a distance of 1.8x screen width.


Previously I had a Epson Cinema 500 projector (720P) and I changed to a JVC HD1 this summer.


As a result I have two problems.


a) A slight tendency to hot spotting on bright scenes.

b) A visible screen mesh/grid/pattern on uniform images.


I would like to know if from your experience these problems would be solved with an upgrade to Grayhawk RS G3.


Thank you in advance,


Nuno


----------



## chichopf




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *nuno_aguas* /forum/post/15186430
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> 
> I would be grateful for some help on the following issue.
> 
> 
> I have had a 82" Grayhawk RS G2 screen on a fixed frame (Luxus SND082H) for three years.
> 
> 
> I have the projector suspended from the ceiling and both seating and projection are from a distance of 1.8x screen width.
> 
> 
> Previously I had a Epson Cinema 500 projector (720P) and I changed to a JVC HD1 this summer.
> 
> 
> As a result I have two problems.
> 
> 
> a) A slight tendency to hot spotting on bright scenes.
> 
> b) A visible screen mesh/grid/pattern on uniform images.
> 
> 
> I would like to know if from your experience these problems would be solved with an upgrade to Grayhawk RS G3.
> 
> 
> Thank you in advance,
> 
> 
> Nuno



Hola Nuno. Eu tenho a gh G3 e antes tuven un "sample" da G2.


A G3 tem um acabado muito mais fino pero tamen tem tendencia o "hot spot".


O peor e que a nova G3 tem muita mais tendencia os puntos brillantes que a G2, problema que eu sufro e ainda estou a discutir coa fabrica Stewart en Dinamarca.


Penso que solucionarÃ*as un problema pero tal vez terÃ*as outro novo. TeÃ±o curiosidade acerca da JK affinity de dalite.


Un saudo dende EspaÃ±a.


----------



## nuno_aguas

Gracias chipchpof


----------



## |M|B.M.F.

I spoke to a rep at stewart today and they said there was no difference between these two materials.


The studiotek 130g3 does not come in a size large enough for me in with their motorized mount. Any comments on this?


Is there indeed no difference (from a picture quality standpoint) between the ultramat 130 and the studiotek 130 g3.


BTW I am would like 54 x 126 cinemascope masked to 16 x 9.


----------



## R Harkness

Someone asked this a couple pages ago but it was never answered:

*Is the StudioTek-130 angular reflective, like the Firehawk material?*


I'm considering using the ST-130 material, but I'd have the projector mounted closer to the screen center, so I'm hoping that would work well with the ST-130 material.


Thanks.


----------



## BobL

The ST-130 is angular reflective like the firehawk. It has a wider viewing cone than the firehawk.


Bob


----------



## R Harkness

Hmm...


Now that I've asked the question...I'm not sure what the answer means for my set up.

Is there any disadvantage in my having the projector close to screen center with the ST-130 material?


----------



## btgracing

Hey guys,


I'm looking for advice, tips and whatever else you may have. I have a two story great room that I'm setting up for home theater use. The main function of the room is to be used for entertaining and, with the exception of the speakers, I don't want the theater stuff to be the main focus (thus, I'm painting the accent wall a color that might not be ideal and might even rip out the carpeting, put in hardwood floors and an area rug, etc). The room also has a lot of windows and will most likely not have curtains (other than the wall directly in front of the tv...behind the viewers). Here's a pic of the room before I did anything:











Yeah...lots of windows, but the good news is there aren't any light sources outside so it's pretty dark at night.


For everyday/casual/daytime viewing, I have a 60" Pioneer plasma on that's mounted on the wall. The console table is only temporary and I will replace it with something that's lower and wider to match the scale of the room.











What I'm planning on doing is build what would look like a shelf and hang it in the middle of the wall (centered between the two windows on the right, but will not span the entire width of the room). This way, I can put a big vase or some artwork on the shelf and most people wouldn't even know what's inside.











You can see that I already wired power and a low voltage box for the trigger and anything else I might want to run (1.25" conduit is used throughout).


Switch to movie watching mode and the plasma shuts off and the screen drops out of the shelf. I was planning on slotting it between the left and right channel speakers and the lower edge will be in front of the center channel. The projector will be mounted in the kitchen side of the back wall and will be about 10 feet up and 17 - 18 feet away from the screen (the room is 19' x 19'). The viewer's eyes will be about 14 - 15 feet from the screen. I was thinking somewhere around around 130" diagonal size.


Is this crazy? Too big? Too close? What screen material? My friend originally recommended ST-130 and I do understand that I will only use it when it's dark outside.


TIA,

Chester


----------



## Drexler

Considering your bright colored walls I would go with a Firehawk. The Studiotek will wash out a lot due to reflections.


At your seating distance my preference would be an at least 13 ft wide screen (viewing distance/screen width = 1.3). This is really big though and would require a very bright projector.


Another option if you want a really big screen is to go with a High power screen from Da-Lite, but then I would suggest you have a dark color on the wall opposite the screen. Also, it has some limitations such as projector placement and viewing angle, so I suggest you read up on it before you make up your mind


Good luck! It's a wonderful room you have, albeit not optimal for A/V.


----------



## Drexler




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/15328179
> 
> 
> Hmm...
> 
> 
> Now that I've asked the question...I'm not sure what the answer means for my set up.
> 
> Is there any disadvantage in my having the projector close to screen center with the ST-130 material?



With angular reflective screens, hotspotting can increase when the projector is close to the screen. However, I wouldn't worry with the Studiotek. Is has a really wide viewing angle and shouldn't be sensitive to projector placement.


Is there any particular reason your shifting interest towards the Studiotek from the Carada BW, or is it mainly the increased gain you're after?


Best regards


----------



## R Harkness

Thanks Drexler. As luck would have it my sample of Studio-Tek 130 just came to my door!


I like the Carada BW material very much. It's pretty much just an increase in gain I'm interested in at the moment (although I'll check to see if I can see any resolution difference between the Stewart/Carada...I doubt it).


I wanted to see how much brighter the ST-130 is vs the Carada to see if it might be worthwhile to go with the Stewart.


I've been sort of spooked about not having enough gain, largely due to my current Panasonic AE900 projector that I bought off ebay. It came with over 2,000 hours on the lamp and obviously from a heavy smoking environment: translation: it's putting out a dim image. I know the JVC RS20 I'll be buying will certainly be brighter, but at the same time I am going for as big a screen as possible (up to about 120" wide for some films, variable image size using 4 way masking), so any gain might help.


I like the numbers a bit better when I plug the StudioTek gain (1.3) into the screen calculator vs the Carada (most measure at around 1.1 gain). Tonight I'll check how much visible difference in brightness I see between the two, with projected images.


----------



## Drexler

It will be interesting to hear your thoughts regarding the differences between the samples. I got my ST sample today, but still lack the BW one. However, I also have a 1.0 gain sample from another manufacturer and I didn’t feel the difference in brightness to be that pronounced.


By the way: Man what a difference between the Studiotek and the Firehawk! The FH is REALLY dark, dark, dark. Though I have seen them plenty times before I never compared samples side by side.


Otherwise I have the same thought process as you and am going back and forward between the ST and BW. One day I feel that the calculated numbers from the ST feels much better, the next I think that 20% is nothing considering our logarithmic response to light and our eyes ability to adapt to darkness. Just think how it feels when you go to the bathroom in the middle of the night and become completely blinded for a minute or so when turning on the lights… Also, how much FtL is really needed? I hear reports that 6-8 FtL is enough. Maybe I get enough anyway with the BW? Also, I have no idea what I get and am happy with right now which kinda makes the calculations meaningless.










In that respect the price tag of the ST feels a bit heavy. Especially considering I could buy a BW here and now from the money I get selling my current screen, while I have to save quite a while and splash out an additional 2-3k euros for the ST (not considering the potential friction with my better half...







)


I also have a bad feeling that in few years 3D projection is coming which would require the shift to another screen that can keep the polarization of light or something else. Considering the price of the ST I wouldn’t want to change in at least 10 years if I go that way…


----------



## WOLVERNOLE

These are excellent points that you have raised !


----------



## Thatchmo

Hey guys!


I just received a JVC RS-20 and the 12v trigger on my old projector and the RS-20 are different and while I'm trying to get a new jack to work with the RS-20 I would like to watch some movies and dial in the new PJ!!! How can I get my Stewart Model A to drop the screen without a 12v signal??? There must be a method that overrides the 12 volt, right?


Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated!!!


Thanks,


Kirk


----------



## R Harkness

Drexler (and others)...


Sorry I haven't gotten back to this thread.


I received my Stewart screen samples several weeks ago. One big sheet of ST-130 (G3) and a sample board of smaller pieces of various stewart screens, labelled.


I've compared the Stewart extensively to the Carada Brilliant White material. My finding is that the Stewart is definitely brighter. It can be seen simply by seeing the materials placed over one another; the Stewart material is a bit whiter and brighter, and when I look closely the stewart as a slight sparkly glaze up close; the Carada has a more matte finish (although perhaps there is a mild-non-sparkly glaze...I'm not sure).


I projected plenty of material on both samples, pausing my projector on various images and using the image shift to shift relevant portions of the image on and off each screen sample, with the screen samples side by side.


Again, it shows the Stewart sample to be a bit brighter. It's interesting that the brightness difference is hard to see on a very dark image. In other words, video "black" looks very close on both. But the brighter the image, the more visible the difference between the two, especially if both are on a bright sky, the Stewart sample looks distinctly brighter. Not hugely by any margin - about as much brighter as I'd expect if the Stewart were a 1.3 gain and the BW a 1.1 gain or so.


Other differences I note are subtle, but distinct to my eyes. The image looks a bit more vivid ( a bit) on the Stewart, a bit sharper, a bit more detailed with slightly richer color. I note that once I put up the Stewart sample I could actually percieve the pixel structure of my 720p projector more readily on the Stewart material than on the Carada. Perhaps all that is attributable to the slight difference in brightness between the two samples. But the Stewart has a slightly different "look" or "feel" to the image - the Carada giving a sort of "image projected on a matte surface" vibe, the Stewart having a bit more of a glow or glaze. I actually like what the Stewart does here. For some reason I'm finding a slight increase in the believability of the textures I see on the Stewart sample, of actor's skin, mettle surfaces, eyes look a bit more real etc.


These are SUBTLE differences. And this is only from looking at samples. But my overall appraisal is that, for an image projected at the same brightness, I think I will slightly prefer the Stewart material as it looks just a bit "better" in every area. I'm willing to pay for the difference, myself. And a lot of what figures into this is that I want a pretty big screen and I have to scrounge for every bit of brightness I can get (unfortunately I can't deal with the issues of the truly high-gain screens as I find them distracting).


Is this a case of "you get what you pay for?" in terms of the Stewart over the cheaper Carada? I don't know. I get the sense the Stewart will look a bit better FOR MY purposes. So on one level _maybe_ that is the case. Again, I'm willing to pay more, based on what I'm seeing from the Stewart.


BUT...there's no way I'd portray these as big differences and for the price it's ridiculous

how well the Carada material keeps up with the stewart. I LOVE the Carada material. It is smooth, free of distracting artifacts (likely freer than the ST-130 whose slight gain may be visible in some scenes), has an even wider viewing angle than the Stewart. I can see the Stewart sample gets slightly darker at wide angles, whereas the Carada viewing angle is so wide I can't actually percieve the brightness drop off no matter where I stand from the screen material. I'd recommend people check out the Carada screens in a heartbeat, no matter how much money they have to spend.


So I find both screens deserve big props from what I can discern.


But I've decided on the Stewart ST-130 material for my room. I'm hoping I don't end up with any issues of hot-spotting or sparkly screen structure.


BTW, yeah the Firehawk samples look incredibly dark compared in room lights to the ST-130. But it's a different thing once you project on to them with room lights down. The gain of the Firehawk does boost up those bright areas quite a lot and there is nothing like the difference you might expect based on simply looking at the screen materials themselves.


However, I can't deal with the viewing angle issues of the Firehawk and I think the ST-130 will give me that added gain and pop in my room which will be light controlled and non-reflective.


----------



## Drexler

Rich,


Thanks for the summary! I'm still waiting for my projector so I haven't had the opportunity to make a comparison yet.










Would you mind elaborating a bit on how you are going about setting up your 4-way masking system? I'm going back and forward between motorized masking and not, but am a bit hesitant since I want a "clean" look and not som huge, haphazard, makeshift thing on the wall with curtains and stuff.







Might do a false wall thing though. But I don't really want to complicate things to much.


Also, the commercial systems are so far WAY too expensive for my taste.


Best regards


Ted


----------



## R Harkness

Ted,


Here is a link to a post I made on the UK AVforum, detailing my plans for using masking in my set up:

http://www.avforums.com/forums/8332961-post478.html 


Hope that helps.


Let me know if you have any questions.


Construction on this set up is about to begin in my home. Yay!


----------



## benitoj




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Thatchmo* /forum/post/15480102
> 
> 
> Hey guys!
> 
> 
> I just received a JVC RS-20 and the 12v trigger on my old projector and the RS-20 are different and while I'm trying to get a new jack to work with the RS-20 I would like to watch some movies and dial in the new PJ!!! How can I get my Stewart Model A to drop the screen without a 12v signal??? There must be a method that overrides the 12 volt, right?
> 
> 
> Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated!!!
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Kirk



Kirk,


Do you have power anywhere near the screen? If so, you can go to your local RadioShack and purchase a 12VDC wall transformer that may be used to trigger the screen.


Although not recommended, you can also "hot wire" the unit by giving direct power (via extension cord) to the motor. White and black to bring it down, white and red to retract.


----------



## The Dude Abides

I am about to purchase a stewart firehawk. I have a question for the experts...What is the difference between the G3 and SST other than 1.25 vs 1.1 gain respectively?

Is the only reason to go with one over the other based on gain preference?


I am going to get a 92" diagonal screen and an epson 7500, with about a 12-14 foot throw.


thanks.


----------



## Jim Noyd

One of the differences between the FireHawk G3 and the GrayHawk RS G3 are the gain and their Ambient Light Resistance. The FireHawk was developed to for this purpose and has an Ambient Light Front Reflectance Value of 27% and the GrayHawk has one of 49% of foot candle.


So you may want to consider the GrayHawk in rooms with excellent Ambient Light Control.


for more on the GrayHawk RS G3 go to
http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/res...sidential.html 

and for more on the FireHawk G3 go to
http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/res...sidential.html 


or call the Stewart Filmscreen at 800.762.4999 and they'll recommend a material based upon your projector and exact application.


----------



## R Harkness

FWIW...


Previously I'd only compared the larger Stewart ST-130 sample to my Carada brilliant white screen samples.


I'd also been sent a board containing samples of many of Stewart's other screen materials (smaller swatch samples). I'd only looked at them in daylight up until tonight. Just using daylight, the Snomatte (1.0 gain), ST-130 (1.3 gain) and Ultramatte (1.5 gain) are somewhat hard to distinguish in terms of gain and reflectivity. Although I can see how the Studiotek and Ultramatte lose a bit of their gain when far off-axis compared to the Snomatte.


In daylight, it's amazing how dark the Firehawk G3 material looks compared to the white screen samples, e.g. Studiotek . And I can really see how the Firehawk material darkens as I move off-axis. But I've also seen quite a number of installations with the Firehawk and I know it can look quite bright too with projected images.


Tonight I finally put the sample board on the wall and projected some images. My impressions in a nutshell are:


The gain of the Firehawk does come into play with projected images. It of course no longer looks dark gray. That said, despite the minor difference in rated gain of the Firehawk vs the Studiotek, I found the Firehawk was decidedly dimmer than the Studiotek. The portion of the image on the Studiotek just "popped," clearly brighter in every way vs the Firehawk. I actually thought the difference would be less than this with projected images, but it really tells me that if one needs a bit more gain the real-world difference between the brightness of the Studiotek and Firehawk is significant in making such decisions.


Another surprise was that I always preferred the Studiotek no matter which images I tested. I tested out bright images, dark images, and contrasty images. I thought especially in my room, which is somewhat light decor and not totally light controlled, even in a swatch test I'd see the contrast being maintained in the firehawk better than the Studiotek. Yet almost all images looked more punchy and contrasty on the Studiotek. For instance, a shot of the sky with a darker chain link fence in front of it. You'd think that would be a gimme to the Firehawk for maintaining the contrast. I'd have expected that the darker chain link fence against the brighter sky would have more contrast on the Firehawk. Yet the apparent contrast on the Studiotek actually looked better to my eye, most likely a perceptual thing, because the brighter background on the Studiotek made it feel more high-contrast against the dark chain link fence portion.


I knew I wanted to go with the Studiotek going in, but this made me even more sure that I'd want the Studiotek over, say, a Firehawk.


Of course I understand these are just swatches and I know that Firehawk does in fact maintain higher image contrast in challenging room conditions. I've seen it a number of times. But I'll have light control and generally have good control of room reflections and what I've seen makes the StudioTek a no-brainer in such a situation.


One other thing: Screen surface texture. It's hard to tell how prominent the screen texture is in real world use (full screen) from small swatches. But I can say that the Ultramatte 150 (1.5 gain) definitely had a more prominent screen texture than the StudioTek. I could see those both up close in the daylight, but also with projected images, for instance of a sky.

From a distance of about 7 feet I struggled to see any glaze, sparkly or screen structure on the ST-130, but I could perceive the sparkly glaze of the Ultramatte 150. I have a feeling this would be an issue for me with the Ultramatte 150 so, again, the ST-130 seems at this point to be the "just right" material for me. I've got a feeling it's gonna look reeeeeaally good with my (yet to be ordered) JVC RS20 projector.


Over 'n out.


----------



## RooRwOrks

StudioTek will give you the best off axis other than Snomatte with a half gain of 68 deg with the 4 samples you were comparing. I am a little surprised that you actually saw a drop in gain off of the tiny sample you had unless you were at extreme angles. Although I agree that StudioTek will give you the best representation of your media in a dedicated theater, Ultramatte and Firehawk still have their applications. The part I didn't understand was your perception of contrast. Firehawk will actually give you about 3x the contrast ratio that StudioTek will.


Regardless of contrast ratio, I think if you plan on keeping the lights off, or to a bare minimum, you will have yourself a great looking theater. JVC makes a phenominal projector at a great price. Sounds like you have most of the items decided on which I am sure relieves a great deal of stress on your part. Good luck with the project.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *RooRwOrks* /forum/post/15543450
> 
> 
> StudioTek will give you the best off axis other than Snomatte with a half gain of 68 deg with the 4 samples you were comparing. I am a little surprised that you actually saw a drop in gain off of the tiny sample you had unless you were at extreme angles.



I can also see it with the larger 8 x 11 inch Studiotek sample. I can see it drops to closer to a 1.0 gain the more I move to the side. It's by no means

obvious or a big deal. But it's there, as predicted by the Studiotek's specs.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *RooRwOrks* /forum/post/15543450
> 
> 
> The part I didn't understand was your perception of contrast. Firehawk will actually give you about 3x the contrast ratio that StudioTek will.



Well...no. No screen is rated for it's contrast ratio (at least not by reputable companies). A screen can't increase the contrast ratio of your projector, it can only preserve it. The Firehawk is built to _preserve_ contrast in ambient light situations by it's combination of darker screen material and gain coating which focuses light back to the viewer and rejects nearby wall/ceiling/floor reflections better than a regular white screen.


Various screen types can be used in part of _strategies_ for getting the most contrast ratio out of your projector, but the screen itself can not increase the contrast ratio, anymore than it can reflect more light than it receives.


Put both Firehawk and Studiotek in a totally light controlled room with reflections controlled and the contrast ratio you get from your projected image should be essentially the same, except that the Studiotek's slightly higher, more even gain (less hotspotting) should make for an over-all brighter image. This is why even Stewart Filmscreen will tell you they tend to recommend the Firehawk _if_ you have to combat any ambient light but if you've got good light/reflections control they'll tend to recommend the Studiotek. (Especially with newer projectors, most of which have pretty good black levels these days).


----------



## RooRwOrks

I understand that the screen is not rated by its contrast ratio, but that was not my point. My point was that Firehawk is optimized to give you improved contrast ratio over StudioTek. By the nature of the material you should see that the blacks are closer to black. Yes the whites will be dimmer but this is a trade off. So... YES, Firehawk does give you 3x the contrast ratio that StudioTek will give you. I am not saying it will increase the contrast from your projector, rather better represent it for the darker levels. I have also verified these numbers with the projection and screen system calculator supplied to me by Stewart.


----------



## R Harkness

RooRwOrks, I'm not trying to come down on you; but these are technical issues and clais that could use clarification.


If as you say the Firehawk provides 3X more contrast (with a given projected image) over the Studiotek, I'd like to know how it's physically possible. More telling is this question: If that were so, why it is then that Mark Robinson of Stewart Film Screens (as well as other Stewart representatives, not to mention AVS staff) consistently recommend the Studiotek _over_ the Firehawk if you have a light controlled environment.


Everyone wants more contrast ratio. If the Firehawk ACTUALLY gave you 3X more contrast ratio, e.g. if using a JVC RS20 projector I only got 10,000:1 with a Studiotek but a Firehawk would give me 30,000:1 - even in light controlled conditions....then many more projector owners would be clamoring to use a firehawk and it would be recommended even in light controlled conditions (so long as you didn't have really off-axis seating).


But...that's not the case. There's a reason the StudioTek is recommended over the Firehawk when you've got good light control. The firehawk's main reason for existence is to: 1. Perform better and maintain contrast ratio in ambient light conditions and/or 2. Provide the option of a gray screen base for projectors that have poorer black levels (where a gray screen will make for a darker image and hence a deeper black level). This is why the Firehawk loses it's advantage in light controlled conditions and/or when you've got a projector that already provides deep enough black levels for you. It does not maintain a 3X contrast level advantage over the Studiotek. Think about it: If the Firehawk actually did perform such magic, IT would be the industry standard for screen material, not the Studiotek.


(And as I mentioned, I actually saw no increase in contrast between the Firehawk and Studiotek samples).


----------



## RooRwOrks

Like I said its a trade off. Do you want brighter whites or darker blacks? StudioTek will give you a much larger viewing cone. But keep in mind, you will NOT get everything from one type of material.


Grey screens are designed to rely on powerful image sources that are able to produce adequate levels of luminosity so that the white areas of the image still appear as white, taking advantage of the non-linear perception of brightness in the human eye. Compared to a white screen, a grey screen reflects less light to the room and less light from the room, making it increasingly effective in dealing with the light originating from the projector. Ambient light originating from other sources may reach the eye immediately after having reflected from the screen surface, giving no advantage over a white high-gain screen in terms of contrast ratio. The potential improvement from a grey screen may thus be best realized in a darkened room, where the only light is that of the projector.


----------



## RooRwOrks

Oh and to answer you question on when to use StudioTek over Firehawk, or any grey screen for that matter really depends on your set-up. In a darkened room, with total light control, dark walls, dark furniture, etc. StudioTek is the way to go. If you have any other sources of ambient light, light colored walls, furniture, ceiling, drapes then there are benefits in going with a grey screen. In this situation, a grey screen will be more effective at killing this incident light and thus maintaining deeper black levels on the screen.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *RooRwOrks* /forum/post/15544495
> 
> 
> Oh and to answer you question on when to use StudioTek over Firehawk, or any grey screen for that matter really depends on your set-up. In a darkened room, with total light control, dark walls, dark furniture, etc. StudioTek is the way to go. If you have any other sources of ambient light, light colored walls, furniture, ceiling, drapes then there are benefits in going with a grey screen. In this situation, a grey screen will be more effective at killing this incident light and thus maintaining deeper black levels on the screen.



Err...that's what I've been saying.


I'm just not sure why you had asserted _"Firehawk does give you 3x the contrast ratio that StudioTek will give you."_ That's the claim I was pointing out as dubious. But now you are repeating what I've been saying about gray screens. So...color me confused as to what you are actually claiming with the Firehawk comments.










To repeat the points I've made: Gray screens (including the Firehawk) don't provide "increased contrast." They either _better preserve contrast_ in ambient light conditions, and/or can be used to dim the image if you desire deeper black levels from your projector (as many did when digitals had higher black levels than today). They don't increase contrast. In controlled lighting situations, a gray screen of any type won't produce more contrast with the same projected image vs a white screen. :


And as I mentioned, screens can be chosen as a _strategy_ to get more contrast from your projector. For instance, with a JVC RS20 the more you shut down the iris the higher contrast ratio you get. You might pair it, as some do, with a high gain screen like the Da Lite High-Power 3.0 gain screen, which will allow you to get similar light levels as with a lower gain screen, while shutting down the iris more and increasing the projector's contrast. But the screen itself doesn't increase contrast; you are doing it at the projector level. The same projected image on a lower gain screen will have the same contrast ratio, but it may look too dim for your tastes.


The same type of strategy can be employed with gray screens, as you point out. If you have a really bright projector you can use a gray screen which will lower the black level. Of course, it will also lower the WHOLE light level including the brightest parts. You'll get deeper blacks, but no change in actual contrast level. You can pump up the contrast control on your projector (white levels) if you want to raise just the bright areas back up...but (aside from likely clipping whites)...again this rise in contrast is being handled at the projector level, NOT the screen level.

Hence it's not correct to claim a _screen_ provides 3X the contrast of another screen. Screen material in of itself does not increase contrast.

That's the issue I've been addressing.


----------



## RooRwOrks

I agree with you to an extent, but total light control does not just mean turning off the lights. Total light control means sitting in a room with all black clothing, black chairs, wall and ceiling, essentially having nothing in the room that will reflect light. This is generally not the case. As an industry standard, this is used in screening rooms designed to eliminate all sources of ambient light.


At this point it really comes down to personal preference. I have a Firehawk screen in my theater. I can control the lighting from all sources with the only exception being my projector. I went with Firehawk because I wanted the flexibility. I can watch sports, HDTV, and play games on it with lights on and still get an incredible image. I have also noticed that when I am watching movies I can see reflected light on my walls and ceiling. This is why I chose the Firehawk as I did not want this to affect my contrast. I could paint my walls and ceiling flat black, or I could go with a grey screen and really not have to worry about this.


----------



## R Harkness

Yes your choice makes sense RooRwOrks. The Firehawk is a killer screen. Many of the best projected images I've seen have been on Firehawk screens!


----------



## RooRwOrks

I just look at it this way, the fact that you are in the Stewart thread makes me think you have already made the right decision. Please do not think I was trying to persuade you either way. I was just looking for some clarification.


----------



## Mikedit

I have a Firehawk G3 screen, currently used with an Epson 7500UB. The image is fantastic in my opionion in my environment. I have light control in the room but the ceilings are white with light carpeting, walls are sort of a dark green but I have movie posters along the walls of various colors. I also have double white french doors leading to the room. I am afraid if I told my wife I wanted to paint them black, I might be minus a limb or something else more valuable







Every person I have had over is amazed at the image quality, one person thought I had a rather large plasma screen until I pointed out the projector on the ceiling


----------



## vdmai

For the Firehawk G3, what does the specified Minimum Throw Distance 1.6 x image width mean?


----------



## Carey P




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *vdmai* /forum/post/15557537
> 
> 
> For the Firehawk G3, what does the specified Minimum Throw Distance 1.6 x image width mean?



This just means the projector shouldn't be mounted closer than 1.6 times the projected image width (or screen width).


The FireHawk has a narrower cone angle for viewing than the StudioTek, for instance. That is, the rated gain falls off quicker as you view the screen at higher angles. This is one of the qualities that also makes it reject ambient light. So hotspotting would be become rather objectionable at distances less than 1.6x screen width. It is even noticeable at 2x screen width but much less bothersome (though too much for me







).


----------



## vdmai

Carey P - Thanks...I'm just barely over the 1.6 than, but if it's noticeable at 2x I may have to rethink.


----------



## Carey P




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *vdmai* /forum/post/15557932
> 
> 
> Carey P - Thanks...I'm just barely over the 1.6 than, but if it's noticeable at 2x I may have to rethink.



Well, I am at 19ft and have a 10.5ft wide screen. It was really not that bad, but noticeable to my eyes with lights off. The problem I had was that the seating out to the high angles at front (~12ft from screen) were pushing the envelope, so to speak. You could see the variation in brightness. I wanted everyone no matter where seated, to see the same brightness across the screen. So now I am using the StudioTek material and have the FireHawk rolled up safe in its tube. Plus the StudioTek is a tad brighter overall.


I do miss the light rejection of the FireHawk, as far as light coming in from the occasional door opening at the side of the theatre. Also for 16:9 images on a 2.4:1 screen, the black bars on the ends were just about black with the FireHawk and did not require any masking at all. Now I see a slight gray in the bars, but it's not bad enough to do anything about, just yet.


----------



## RMK!

I had been shopping for a new tabbed tensioned screen when I came across a Demo Stewart Luxus A with the StudioTek 130 fabric at a great price from a local dealer. It replaced an Elite CineTension II with the Cinewhite fabric (1.0 gain). I had also received fabric samples from two other manufacturers. I compared the Elite to the sample materials (1.0, 1.1 and 1.4 gains) and all were brighter and smoother than the Elite.


Once I installed the Stewart (gain 1.3), I tested it against the samples including the 1.4 gain “brilliant white” and it (Studiotek 130) was brighter and better looking in all respects. I honestly did not expect the difference to be as dramatic.


What I took from this experience is that you need to view sample materials to determine what you like and works best for you. You need sample materials that are large enough to attach to your existing screen or place them on a wall to compare. Oh, and take the gain claims with a grain of salt.


I guess sometimes you do get what you pay for.


----------



## Jason Turk




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *RMK!* /forum/post/15805381
> 
> 
> I had been shopping for a new tabbed tensioned screen when I came across a Demo Stewart Luxus A with the StudioTek 130 fabric at a great price from a local dealer. It replaced an Elite CineTension II with the Cinewhite fabric (1.0 gain). I had also received fabric samples from two other manufacturers. I compared the Elite to the sample materials (1.0, 1.1 and 1.4 gains) and all were brighter and smoother than the Elite.
> 
> 
> Once I installed the Stewart (gain 1.3), I tested it against the samples including the 1.4 gain brilliant white and it (Studiotek 130) was brighter and better looking in all respects. I honestly did not expect the difference to be as dramatic.
> 
> 
> What I took from this experience is that you need to view sample materials to determine what you like and works best for you. You need sample materials that are large enough to attach to your existing screen or place them on a wall to compare. Oh, and take the gain claims with a grain of salt.
> 
> 
> I guess sometimes you do get what you pay for.



Nothing against Elite...they make a decent screen for the money, but what the heck was that dealer doing swapping a top end Stewart for an entry Elite??? The only thing I can think is with the economy they have a better time selling Elite...man that is a backwords step though for demo.


----------



## mjpuls

Does anyone have pics of how to hook up a stewart screen trigger? I was looking for a screen when a demo Stewart Visionary 100" was for sale, Grayhawk material.


When I picked up the screen the coil wire was hooked to a relay but no box was there. Just looking for a pic of the inside of the box to show the wiring from coil to relay and relay to 12v wires. The ground from the coil was not hooked up is this normal?


I have the manual but no pics of inside of the box....


Starting to believe that I was promised a 12v trigger option but got an $10 relay and dealer kept the trigger installed in the ceiling for their next screen!!!


Thanks Mark


----------



## HiHoStevo




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jason Turk* /forum/post/15813566
> 
> 
> Nothing against Elite...they make a decent screen for the money, but what the heck was that dealer doing swapping a top end Stewart for an entry Elite??? The only thing I can think is with the economy they have a better time selling Elite...man that is a backwords step though for demo.



My bet is the dealer just sold one of his "demo" screens...


I doubt he took the Elite in "trade."


----------



## RMK!




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jason Turk* /forum/post/15813566
> 
> 
> Nothing against Elite...they make a decent screen for the money, but what the heck was that dealer doing swapping a top end Stewart for an entry Elite??? The only thing I can think is with the economy they have a better time selling Elite...man that is a backwords step though for demo.



HiHoStevo is correct, I purchased the dealers demo screen and sold the Elite myself. Both were great deals











> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mjpuls* /forum/post/15813881
> 
> 
> Does anyone have pics of how to hook up a stewart screen trigger? I was looking for a screen when a demo Stewart Visionary 100" was for sale, Grayhawk material.
> 
> 
> When I picked up the screen the coil wire was hooked to a relay but no box was there. Just looking for a pic of the inside of the box to show the wiring from coil to relay and relay to 12v wires. The ground from the coil was not hooked up is this normal?
> 
> 
> I have the manual but no pics of inside of the box....
> 
> 
> Starting to believe that I was promised a 12v trigger option but got an $10 relay and dealer kept the trigger installed in the ceiling for their next screen!!!
> 
> 
> Thanks Mark



Sorry Mark, you should call Stewart on that one. My Luxus A has the 12 V trigger internal and has a mini jack connector on the screens case. My problem was my projector did not have a 12V trigger. I use two displays (dual HDMI outs on my SSP) but my SSP's triggers are for inputs only so I had to buy a current sensing 12V trigger made by Niles. It works great but was a little pricey for what it does.


----------



## Alex solomon

I was set on buying a 100" Carada BW as an upgrade to my current 92" Da-lite manual pulldown that has started to show some waves. Now a friend has offered to sell his 6 years old Stewart ST-130 for about the same price as the Carada BW. The ST-130 looks to be in good shape. Should I jump on this deal or would I be better off buying a new screen from Carada? My room is a bat cave.


----------



## AbMagFab

Okay, I've got the bug... I've had my 16x9 FHG3 for over a year, and I'm ready to upgrade in the next 6 months...


My room will need some construction, so I can get the necessary distance, and I'm likely going to need to put my speakers behind the screen.


I don't think I need a curved screen, as it will only be about 126" wide.


So - I see Stewart has a handful of 2.4:1 screens. I'd like one with masking, and I need it to be perfed. Any recommendations, or explanations of the different models?


(Also - to AVS - can you PM me/e-mail some prices just so I can prepare? I bought my current screen and projector from you.)


Thanks!

-Mark


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Alex solomon* /forum/post/16213659
> 
> 
> I was set on buying a 100" Carada BW as an upgrade to my current 92" Da-lite manual pulldown that has started to show some waves. Now a friend has offered to sell his 6 years old Stewart ST-130 for about the same price as the Carada BW. The ST-130 looks to be in good shape. Should I jump on this deal or would I be better off buying a new screen from Carada? My room is a bat cave.



I did some extensive comparisons of samples and slightly preferred the Stewart ST-130 over the Carada BW material. The Stewart was a touch brighter, which I liked (and needed since I'm going for a large screen). This tended to bring out a bit more detail and color vividness vs the Carada. I was looking at the G3 material, though. I'm not familiar with the older ST-130 material which I assume is what your friend would sell you.


----------



## Alex solomon




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/16214008
> 
> 
> I did some extensive comparisons of samples and slightly preferred the Stewart ST-130 over the Carada BW material. The Stewart was a touch brighter, which I liked (and needed since I'm going for a large screen). This tended to bring out a bit more detail and color vividness vs the Carada. I was looking at the G3 material, though. I'm not familiar with the older ST-130 material which I assume is what your friend would sell you.



Yes, it is the older version of the ST-130. My main concern is for the small gain in brightness, given my screen size is only 100" and the HT room is a bat cave with dark ceiling and walls, is it worth to buy the ST-130 which is a six years old screen is than a new Carada ? FIY, I sit 16' from the screen.


----------



## Jim Noyd

Stewart StudioTek vs. Da-Lite Affinity


The review includes a shootout of Stewart StudioTek 100 versus Da-Lite JKP Affinity.


"The StudioTek 100 is among the best front projector screens we've ever seen."
http://www.projectorcentral.com/stew...diotek_100.htm 


The review includes a shootout of Stewart StudioTek 100 versus Da-Lite JKP Affinity.

"A perfect projector screen does not change the way the light from the projector reflects. It does not cause a shift in color. It does not cause a loss of detail. It does not appear brighter or dimmer depending on where you sit. A perfect projector screen, in other words, is invisible.


Simply put, the Studiotek 100 comes closer to perfect neutrality than any projector screen we've ever seen. It has perfect color balance, near-perfect 1.0 gain at all points, no half-gain angle, and a smooth, pristine HD surface. It is a professional screen for use in absolute light controlled rooms. It is ideal for situations in which you want to see exactly what the projector is delivering, with no interpretive nuance being added by the screen. We have given the Studiotek 100 an Editor's Choice Award. It is highly recommended for professional use in absolute light controlled conditions."


----------



## Drexler




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Alex solomon* /forum/post/16214246
> 
> 
> Yes, it is the older version of the ST-130. My main concern is for the small gain in brightness, given my screen size is only 100" and the HT room is a bat cave with dark ceiling and walls, is it worth to buy the ST-130 which is a six years old screen is than a new Carada ? FIY, I sit 16' from the screen.



I don't think the older Studiotek versions are prepared for 1080p. That means that the structure of the screens might interfere with the smaller pixels, affecting the resolution. That is at least the reason I heard why they came up with the new G3 materials. Have no idea how big the effect is in reality though.


----------



## Jason Turk




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/16213727
> 
> 
> Okay, I've got the bug... I've had my 16x9 FHG3 for over a year, and I'm ready to upgrade in the next 6 months...
> 
> 
> My room will need some construction, so I can get the necessary distance, and I'm likely going to need to put my speakers behind the screen.
> 
> 
> I don't think I need a curved screen, as it will only be about 126" wide.
> 
> 
> So - I see Stewart has a handful of 2.4:1 screens. I'd like one with masking, and I need it to be perfed. Any recommendations, or explanations of the different models?
> 
> 
> (Also - to AVS - can you PM me/e-mail some prices just so I can prepare? I bought my current screen and projector from you.)
> 
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> -Mark



Drop me a note and I can explain the differences...for fixed general frames there are only a few options.


----------



## Jason Turk




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Drexler* /forum/post/16214720
> 
> 
> I think the older Studiotek versions isn't prepared for 1080p. That means that the structure of the screens might interfere with the smaller pixels, affecting the resolution. That is at least the reason I heard why they came up with the new G3 material. Have now idea how much the effect is in reality though.



Correct. This might present a problem on overall quality...


----------



## Alex solomon

Thanks for your help guys. It's Carada BW then.


----------



## R Harkness

At your screen size and viewing conditions I'd say go with the Carada as well.


----------



## Mikenificent1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jim Noyd* /forum/post/16214362
> 
> 
> Stewart StudioTek vs. Da-Lite Affinity
> 
> 
> The review includes a shootout of Stewart StudioTek 100 versus Da-Lite JKP Affinity.
> 
> 
> "The StudioTek 100 is among the best front projector screens we've ever seen."
> http://www.projectorcentral.com/stew...diotek_100.htm
> 
> 
> The review includes a shootout of Stewart StudioTek 100 versus Da-Lite JKP Affinity.



this is the screen I want when I upgrade, it' a shame they compared the screen with ambient light rather than it's intended use (i.e. a bat cave). Do you know of any other reviews of the snomatte?


----------



## R Harkness

I agree: not a great review. And it gives a misleading impression that a screen like the StudioTek 100 is some magical new material only appropriate for studios, or pure bat cave rooms. But it's essentially just a refined neutral gain white screen and plenty of us have used good old neutral gain screens (they are often seen as the standard) without living in bat caves.


It's just like choosing the Studiotek ST-130 material, which has even higher gain and would exacerbate any ambient light even over the neutral gain. Just have good light control and a room decor that is not light and you should benefit from whatever else is good about the screen (e.g. it's lack of artifacting, smoothness, ability to have small detail resolved etc).


----------



## LikeClockwork

Yeah, I don't think that review was too good either. I can see what they were trying to say, but it was not made clear. The whole thing with this material (according to Stewart) is that since it reflects light so well, any ambient light introduced will be reflected also, hence, lowering your contrast and washing your image out a lot faster. Not to mention the chance of cross reflection if you have non treated ceiling or walls close to the material. Not too sure how accurate, but it makes since to me.


----------



## Zigrivers

Hi guys -


This may have already been addressed in this thread, but I am looking for a nice, high quality AT screen with some gain of around 1.3. I've been reading quite a few positive comments about the StudioTek, but what isn't clear is if this screen is an AT screen, or can be ordered as an AT screen?


On Stewart's site it talks about optional Microperf X2, which I think turns the StudioTek into an AT screen?


Can anyone provide some insight here? And if there are other high gain AT screens I should be considering, please point me in the right direction - thanks!


Oh, it looks like I'm going to be purchasing the JVC RS20 and I'm looking at doing a 16:9 screen at either 120" wide, or 130" wide in a completely light controlled room.


Thanks!


----------



## mark haflich

Most Stewart fabrics can be microperfed making them AT.


----------



## Anectine

Hi all,


I am remodeling our family room and will be purchasing my first overhead projector and screen. I have read through a bunch of posts, and I have learned a lot, but still have questions about projector placement and screen material.


The room is fairly large (distance from screen to rear wall is about 18 feet). The primary viewing area will be from a 7 ft wide couch, centered relative to the screen; when sitting, the viewer will be about 14 feet from the screen. At the same distance, on both sides of the couch will be two armchairs angled about 35 to 40 degrees inward to face the screen. The seating can easily be moved forward if necessary. There will be a 55" LCD TV recessed into the wall for general viewing. I plan to use the projector primarily for watching movies or HD broadcasts at night. However, the room does have blackout curtains on the windows, and with the doors to the room closed, most of the ambient light can be eliminated during the day. The carpet is light tan, the walls are off-white ( Sherman Williams "Aria Ivory"), and the ceiling is white. So, no, it's not a bat cave.


I am planning to pair a Stewart Firehawk screen with a Sony vpl-vw200 / Panamorph UH480 combo.


The proposed screen is a Vertical Electriscreen Electrimask with the following specs:

Image Size: 40.75in x 96in (104.25in diag.) Aspect Ratio 2:35 : 1

Min. Masked Image Size: 40.75in x 72.5in (83in diag) Aspect Ratio 1.78 : 1


Currently we are planning to use Firehawk SST for the screen material.


My first question relates to projector placement. For this projector - screen combination, what is the best distance from the screen for the projector (it will be ceiling mounted). I was planning for a screen to projector lens distance of about 12 feet. The throw ratio for the projector is 1.42 - 2.43. Do I need to worry about having enough light output if I move the projector further back? Panamorph states that 12 to 24 feet is typical; 14.5 to 17.5 ft for "graphics level performance" (whatever that means). Do I need to move back closer to 14 ft to find the Panamorph sweet spot?


Second, and related to the first question: depending on the projector placement, should I be considering a Firehawk G3 instead of the SST. I read that the SST is designed for projector to screen distances of less than 1.6 x screen width. In my case, the 16:9 screen would be 1.6 x 72.5 = 116in and the 1: 2.35 would be 1.6 x 96 = 153in. Which one of these numbers do you use (I assume its the wider of the two screen sizes)? At 12ft (144in) the SST seems to make sense. At a longer distance, say 14 ft (168in), would the G3 be better?


Lastly, I don't want to stir up the gray vs. white controversy again, but there is this little voice in my head that keeps telling me that my life will somehow not be complete if I don't at least consider the Studiotek 130. My general impression from what I have read, however, is that my room is probably not quite right for the Studiotek 130. I just need someone to put me out of my misery on this one.


Thank you in advance for any advice that you all may have.


John


----------



## Anectine

I think I found one of my answers. When I googled "Panamorph recommended throw ratio" I found a link to what is apparently an earlier version of the Panamorph website, where I found the following page:

panamorph.com/SetupBasics.html 


(I can't post the actual link because I have not made three posts yet)


Here they state:


"Throw ratio (or sometimes "native" throw ratio) is defined as the distance (or "throw distance") between your projector lens and screen, divided by the width (in the same units) of your projector's image before the addition of a Panamorph lens. Anamorphic lenses always perform best with higher throw ratios. Residual aberrations, especially edge distortion, can become unreasonable at throw ratios below about 1.65. Residual edge distortion at higher throw ratios is minor enough to become masked off even with a thin screen border. At 2.0 and above distortion becomes very difficult to see. To determine a projector's range of throw ratios most accurately, use the manufacturer's stated maximum and minimum image width for a typical throw distance.


In my case 12 feet would place the projector at at throw ratio of 2, which apparently would be ok? Do any of you recommend a different distance based on my projector and likely Firehawk SST combo?


Thanks,


John


----------



## Jason Turk




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Zigrivers* /forum/post/16244979
> 
> 
> Hi guys -
> 
> 
> This may have already been addressed in this thread, but I am looking for a nice, high quality AT screen with some gain of around 1.3. I've been reading quite a few positive comments about the StudioTek, but what isn't clear is if this screen is an AT screen, or can be ordered as an AT screen?
> 
> 
> On Stewart's site it talks about optional Microperf X2, which I think turns the StudioTek into an AT screen?
> 
> 
> Can anyone provide some insight here? And if there are other high gain AT screens I should be considering, please point me in the right direction - thanks!
> 
> 
> Oh, it looks like I'm going to be purchasing the JVC RS20 and I'm looking at doing a 16:9 screen at either 120" wide, or 130" wide in a completely light controlled room.
> 
> 
> Thanks!



Depends on the model you are getting but often the ST130G3 can be perfed (as Mark indicated most of their fabrics can).


----------



## twodown

Has anyone ordered and received a cabaret screen from Stewart in the past couple of months? I placed an order 2 months ago for a cabaret screen (FireHawk G3) and although I have been assured it would ship multiple times, I have yet to receive the screen due to "inspection issues" and "QC issues"? The communication between Stewart/dealer or Stewart/myself in a timely fashion is frustrating. Curious if anyone else has experienced similar issues with Stewart.


----------



## RooRwOrks

I had a customer who ordered one that was delayed due to quality control. I believe the powder coat was rejected. Once the unit came in it looked incredible, but it did take about 8 weeks to ship out. I have not had any issues like this on any other screen.


----------



## rich wu

I ordered my Cabaret with Firehawk when it was first released about five months ago and I received it in about 5 weeks. The delivery was on schedule and their technical support was responsive.


----------



## twodown




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *RooRwOrks* /forum/post/16441328
> 
> 
> I had a customer who ordered one that was delayed due to quality control. I believe the powder coat was rejected. Once the unit came in it looked incredible, but it did take about 8 weeks to ship out. I have not had any issues like this on any other screen.





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rich wu* /forum/post/16443241
> 
> 
> I ordered my Cabaret with Firehawk when it was first released about five months ago and I received it in about 5 weeks. The delivery was on schedule and their technical support was responsive.



Thanks guys. I'm fine with delays etc. and sure the QC process plays a large role in the quality of their products. Everything I've heard/seen is that it will be a beautiful screen (the WAF certainly played a part in the purchase







). Just not impressed with the communication from Stewart. My dealer has stated multiple times he has never had these issues with Stewart previously.


----------



## Yog




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jason Turk* /forum/post/16256680
> 
> 
> Depends on the model you are getting but often the ST130G3 can be perfed (as Mark indicated most of their fabrics can).



What's the best place to get this in Alberta Canada. I am considering getting this one or Firehawk G3 for my RS20.


----------



## taxman95




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Yog* /forum/post/16448776
> 
> 
> What's the best place to get this in Alberta Canada. I am considering getting this one or Firehawk G3 for my RS20.



I don't know about Alberta, but I ordered my Stewart screen through Quebec Acoustics, who are one of the advertisers on AVS.


Very good service


----------



## MikeWojcik

Looking for a little advice on the visual impact of using a perforated / woven screen. I am building my first home theater in my basement - complete light control.

- room size is 12w x 17.5d x 8

- undecided between Triad in walls and a Definitive Tech ST speaker setup

- undecided between the Pioneer SC-07 and the Integra ATR 9.9

- undecided between the JVC RS20 and the Sony VPL VW70

- First row of seating will be 12' from screen, second about 17'

- Am thinking my screen size will be 106" diagonal


is it likely I will see any artifacts from the perforations / weave?


Thanks

Mike


----------



## limulus

Hello All,

I'd like to get a sample of the BW material. However, I don't see this anywhere on the Carada site. How do I get a sample? I did a search here on AVS for Brilliant White sample and found lots of references to samples, but didn't see one that told me how to actually get one.


----------



## Chrisx510




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *limulus* /forum/post/16457113
> 
> 
> Hello All,
> 
> I'd like to get a sample of the BW material. However, I don't see this anywhere on the Carada site. How do I get a sample? I did a search here on AVS for Brilliant White sample and found lots of references to samples, but didn't see one that told me how to actually get one.



call them..they sent me out samples of all there materials.


----------



## RooRwOrks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MikeWojcik* /forum/post/16455176
> 
> 
> Looking for a little advice on the visual impact of using a perforated / woven screen. I am building my first home theater in my basement - complete light control.
> 
> - room size is 12w x 17.5d x 8
> 
> - undecided between Triad in walls and a Definitive Tech ST speaker setup
> 
> - undecided between the Pioneer SC-07 and the Integra ATR 9.9
> 
> - undecided between the JVC RS20 and the Sony VPL VW70
> 
> - First row of seating will be 12' from screen, second about 17'
> 
> - Am thinking my screen size will be 106" diagonal
> 
> 
> is it likely I will see any artifacts from the perforations / weave?
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Mike




You are not going to see the perforations from 12' back. Two things to keep in mind though, you do lose about 10% light loss/pixel resolution with a microperforated screen. However, with either of these projectors and image size, this will not be a problem as they are plenty bright to light up a 33.4 SQFT screen with a little gain (1.3 recommended)


----------



## Jason Turk

I cannot comment on who your Stewart rep is, but they may be your issue. I am one of Stewart's largest HT dealers and I rarely have problems with my particular rep.


Regarding the Cabaret, it is a different beast than the standard eletrics...much more refined finishing involved so lead times are a bit longer.


----------



## AbMagFab

Jason - sent you a couple of PM's, but never heard a response. I'm looking for a price on the 2.35/2.4:1 equivalent of the 16:9 Luxus Delixe screenwall I have right now, at 120" wide.


Thanks!


----------



## Jason Turk




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/16465541
> 
> 
> Jason - sent you a couple of PM's, but never heard a response. I'm looking for a price on the 2.35/2.4:1 equivalent of the 16:9 Luxus Delixe screenwall I have right now, at 120" wide.
> 
> 
> Thanks!



My apologies! If you can, send me an email to [email protected] . I really cannot stand PM's and how they work. It is very possible I lost them due to my futzing around with it.


----------



## twodown




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jason Turk* /forum/post/16459811
> 
> 
> I cannot comment on who your Stewart rep is, but they may be your issue. I am one of Stewart's largest HT dealers and I rarely have problems with my particular rep.
> 
> 
> Regarding the Cabaret, it is a different beast than the standard eletrics...much more refined finishing involved so lead times are a bit longer.



Always a possibility....anyway the cabaret screen arrived earlier this week (around ~9 weeks) and I easily installed without any issues. Absolutely worth the wait!


----------



## Jim Noyd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *twodown* /forum/post/16516805
> 
> 
> Always a possibility....anyway the cabaret screen arrived earlier this week (around ~9 weeks) and I easily installed without any issues. Absolutely worth the wait!



Please post a few pictures!!!!!!!


----------



## rich wu

Here's a couple of photos of my HT setup with the Cabaret Firehawk screen. The screen is 100". The projector is a JVC RS20.


----------



## twodown




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jim Noyd* /forum/post/16517206
> 
> 
> Please post a few pictures!!!!!!!



If you will overlook my lack of photography skills and the camera distortion









This is my first projector/screen setup. The screen is cabaret Firehawk G3 using a Runco RS900 cinewide.

The most difficult part of the installation was running the romex


----------



## Jim Noyd

Rich and twodown-

These are great!


I'm doing the exact same thing.........a flat panel for daytime family viewing and a Cabaret at night when the big guns come out.


Excellent,


----------



## kay9

 http://cgi.ebay.com/Brand-New-Stewar...3A1%7C294%3A50 

I saw this stewart on ebay and wandering if this would be a good price. I am looking for a 110" which will be used with my Epson 6500. Viewing distance around 13.5 ft


----------



## flamaest

For those of you who have annoying sparkle issues on your FireHawks:



Welcome to the Stewart-sparkle club,


Stewart offered me some ridiculous screen swap price after dancing around with them for 4 months.


I then went on Ebay and got a brand new FH electroscreen with casing, screen, and all shipped for 60% cheaper than Stewart was offering to just replace my screen.


I am sorry to burst your bubble Stewart, but anything that carries at $4000 price tag needs to have better customer service than just a few years, especially when there's a proven manufacturing defect. Sorry, that's my opinion, and I am sure others feel the same way.


Folks, if your Stewart screen has physical sparkles and is older than a couple of years old, forget Stewart and get a new screen. Maybe you can sell your screen for a discount somewhere.


My 2 cents,

Fabian.


----------



## flamaest

For those of you looking for the Stewart optional IR box for the electriscreens:


BTW: The IR box which connects to the Stewart screens is the same used by their competition, down to the circuit board manufacturer. If you search around, you will find this optional IR box for 80% cheaper then the Stewart price. It's a 30 minute install.


2 cents,

F.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *flamaest* /forum/post/16539387
> 
> 
> For those of you who have annoying sparkle issues on your FireHawks:
> 
> 
> 
> Welcome to the Stewart-sparkle club,
> 
> 
> Stewart offered me some ridiculous screen swap price after dancing around with them for 4 months.
> 
> 
> I then went on Ebay and got a brand new FH electroscreen with casing, screen, and all shipped for 60% cheaper than Stewart was offering to just replace my screen.
> 
> 
> I am sorry to burst your bubble Stewart, but anything that carries at $4000 price tag needs to have better customer service than just a few years, especially when there's a proven manufacturing defect. Sorry, that's my opinion, and I am sure others feel the same way.
> 
> 
> Folks, if your Stewart screen has physical sparkles and is older than a couple of years old, forget Stewart and get a new screen. Maybe you can sell your screen for a discount somewhere.
> 
> 
> My 2 cents,
> 
> Fabian.



Don't the current G3 screens resolve this?


----------



## RooRwOrks

I have been through G1 to now G3 versions of Firehawk and the improvements have been incredible. flamaest is it possible you had an earlier version of Firehawk? I found the improvements in contrast with the introduction of ambient light heavily outweighed the occasional sparkle with G1. With my current G3 version of Firehawk I, nor anyone that has viewed my screen has seen or complained once about sparkles.


----------



## GetGray

I too used the original FH (110"). Very happy with it's all around performance. I used it with 3 chip DLB (bright). Never had an issue with sparkles.


----------



## eiger

Thinking about taking the plunge on the StudioTek 130 to match my Epson 7500.


Has anyone reported this screen to be a member of the Sparkle Club?


----------



## RooRwOrks

How about requesting a sample to be sent to you, or going to a local dealer and seeing a demo? Again as I stated before, I have never had a problem seeing sparkles. I have gone through generation 1 through 3 of Firehawk and never once had an issue. I am not doubting anyone's claims, I am just saying I have not had a problem.


----------



## Mike N Ike

I was hoping to use a Firehawk 2.35:1 110 D in my HT to replace my Da-lite HCCV. I tried some samples and at the screen edges the image is unacceptably dim. This is when seated centered on the screen. I used Fl_boy's gain calculator and it appears the gain at the left/right edges is about .5 vs 1.25 in the center. The samples are about 12 wide so we're talking about a fair amount of screen real estate that is affected.


I experimented with simulating a curved screen - put the edge samples about 4 to 5 away and titlted from the plane of the screen and it looked noticeably better.


If anyone is using a fixed or curved FH at this size I'd like to know your experience.


Thanks,

Mike


----------



## Pete

Using a curved screen for 2.35 will always give you better brigtness uniformity no matter what the size. It typically results in better contrast as the angle of reflection concentrates the return light towards the middle of the room so there's less light bouncing off the side walls and returning to the screen. On larger screen sizes or shorter throw situations, you'll also get better convergance/focus at the outer edges.


----------



## Mike N Ike

Thanks Pete. There seem to be more reasons than not why a curved screen will be the right choice for my setup. I need to start shopping around given the prices I'm seeing.


Mike


----------



## GetGray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mike N Ike* /forum/post/16578548
> 
> 
> I used Fl_boy's gain calculator



Where is this calc? Thanks.


----------



## sailor06

I intend to upgrade my projector to from 720p to a 1080p this fall; is it worthwhile to also to upgrade the screen from my 123 16:9 Firehawk G2 to a Firehawk G3? I am leaning towards getting a Panasonic 3000U or the annual updated model.


Would a StudioTek 130 G3 work in my environment - I have a light control room but I do intend a times watch sports with the rear double doors of the theater open. The screen is mounted in a shadow box lined with black velvet; the walls of room are covered in fabric (medium tan at the top and dark brown on the bottom).


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *sailor06* /forum/post/16596223
> 
> 
> I intend to upgrade my projector to from 720p to a 1080p this fall; is it worthwhile to also to upgrade the screen from my 123 16:9 Firehawk G2 to a Firehawk G3? I am leaning towards getting a Panasonic 3000U or the annual updated model.
> 
> 
> Would a StudioTek 130 G3 work in my environment - I have a light control room but I do intend a times watch sports with the rear double doors of the theater open. The screen is mounted in a shadow box lined with black velvet; the walls of room are covered in fabric (medium tan at the top and dark brown on the bottom).



I have rear doors as well, and with my FHG3, the minimal light that enters through the doors causes a noticable wash out on the screen. Bearable, but the ST130 would likely be a lot worse.


In terms of G2 to G3, if you don't have sparkly issues, you're probably fine. The G3 is supposed to have better resolution, and I'm thrilled with mine, but ultimately it's a cost/benefit issue.


----------



## Mike N Ike




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray* /forum/post/16596041
> 
> 
> Where is this calc? Thanks.



I have an appointment this morning but I'll look for it when I get back. It will take a little searching.


Mike


----------



## Mike N Ike




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray* /forum/post/16596041
> 
> 
> Where is this calc? Thanks.



Here it is:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...6#post12633346 


Mike


----------



## Breedbeyond

I just got some screen samples of the studiotec 130 g3 the sst g3 and the firehawk g3, now I am thinking about going with the firehawk g3 it looks amazing in the black level department however it does look a bit dark. I will be using a vw60 projector.


----------



## Mike N Ike

Have you talked to a dealer and got the price new?


Mike


----------



## Breedbeyond

I have only got 1 price quote so far.


----------



## flamaest




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AbMagFab* /forum/post/16540287
> 
> 
> Don't the current G3 screens resolve this?



Yes, I had a G1 when I talked to Stewart a few years ago..


I have a G3 now, that have no sparkles..


I expected to buy a solid screen once and have it last for several years. Instead, I later had to buy a new screen because of a screen defect which bugged the heck out of me.


F.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Breedbeyond* /forum/post/16599059
> 
> 
> I just got some screen samples of the studiotec 130 g3 the sst g3 and the firehawk g3, now I am thinking about going with the firehawk g3 it looks amazing in the black level department however it does look a bit dark. I will be using a vw60 projector.



I have this exact setup, and it's great. The blacks look really black, and the whites look really white. It's also fairly tolerant of ambient light.


Seems like a really good pairing to the VW60, IMO.


I've got a 110" 16x9 FHG3 Luxus Deluxe Screenwall looking for a new home soon, if you're interested!


----------



## Jason Turk




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Breedbeyond* /forum/post/16599059
> 
> 
> I just got some screen samples of the studiotec 130 g3 the sst g3 and the firehawk g3, now I am thinking about going with the firehawk g3 it looks amazing in the black level department however it does look a bit dark. I will be using a vw60 projector.



The VW60 is not a bright projector. What size are you wanting to do?


Yes the Firehawk G3 will have great blacks as that material lowers the perceived black levels. There are negatives (as with everything) though...


----------



## Breedbeyond

I would like to go between 106 and 110 inches.


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> I was hoping to use a Firehawk 2.35:1 110” D in my HT to replace my Da-lite HCCV. I tried some samples and at the screen edges the image is unacceptably dim. This is when seated centered on the screen. I used Fl_boy’s gain calculator and it appears the gain at the left/right edges is about .5 vs 1.25 in the center. The samples are about 12” wide so we’re talking about a fair amount of screen real estate that is affected.
> 
> 
> I experimented with simulating a curved screen - put the edge samples about 4” to 5” away and titlted from the plane of the screen and it looked noticeably better.
> 
> 
> If anyone is using a fixed or curved FH at this size I’d like to know your experience.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Mike



I use an electric 2.35:1 Firehawk G3 - 50.25" x 118" - 128" diagonal ( and also a Da Lite 16:9 HCCV 59.5" x 106" screen too ). We watch off axis sometimes and I don't notice any light fall off to speak of. Great screen. There is some sheen visible rarely on the brightest scenes, but we're watching a Lumis on it, so it's pretty bright!

http://gallery.avsforum.com/showphot...ppuser/7419278


----------



## Mike N Ike




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Craig Peer* /forum/post/16657377
> 
> 
> ... but we're watching a Lumis on it, so it's pretty bright!



Lumis... That might explain it.







My PD8150 won't throw that kind of light, but it's good to hear you're not seeing falloff. I'm also a little concerned with possible sheen because the throw distance is about 1.6 x the 2:35 width. IIRC that's about the recommended minimum but I've never been sure if that recommendation is referring to the 2:35 width or 16:9.


Thanks,

Mike


----------



## Jason Turk




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Breedbeyond* /forum/post/16656722
> 
> 
> I would like to go between 106 and 110 inches.



In a light controlled room you'd be okay. If you have a lot of ambient light, the Firehawk will help the contrast/black levels, but you might find the overall image to be dim.


----------



## bryanemerson

RooRwOrks,


Can you throw out some subjective opinions in the difference in Generations of the Stewart Firehawks? What PJs were in use? I am on the hunt to replace a SI, as my new home has a much smaller HT room (somehow has a much bigger playroom... Lost that battle!)


In my search for a new screen, I have found many non-G3 Stewarts priced well below the cost of new.


Also, how can you tell the difference between the G1 and G2? It does not appear to be in the model number like the G3.


----------



## RooRwOrks

Hey Bryan,


No there is no model number to denote if the screen is either G1-G2 version. You will probably need to get a serial number and contact Stewart to determine what year the screen was made. The difference between the G1-G3 materials is with the optical coating. Gain however will remain the same. The G1 version had a much more noticeable coating as far as texture and sparkles. With 480 resolution this was not as much of a problem. With the advent of 720 and 1080 projectors, the optical coating became much more noticeable under the higher resolution. The G3 version fixed this with a finer coating. A lot of people are probably trying to sell their older screens to upgrade to the latest versions, or getting rid of older demo units. I sold my original G1 to get a G2 and then my G2 to get a G3. I won't be buying a new screen anytime soon as 1080p looks phenomenal on it.


----------



## pulse

Hi,


Anyone know any dealers who would ship from the US to the UK? I'm currently looking to purchase a Luxus Deluxe Screenwall 16:9 Studiotek 130 Microperf 40.5" x 72" screen.


Thanks


Brian


----------



## RooRwOrks




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pulse* /forum/post/16724796
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> 
> Anyone know any dealers who would ship from the US to the UK? I'm currently looking to purchase a Luxus Deluxe Screenwall 16:9 Studiotek 130 Microperf 40.5" x 72" screen.
> 
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> Brian



I believe Stewart has a factory in Denmark. Have you tried to contact them?


----------



## pulse




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *RooRwOrks* /forum/post/16725402
> 
> 
> I believe Stewart has a factory in Denmark. Have you tried to contact them?



No mate, i'm looking for the cheapest deal i can get and that would be importing from the US rather than getting it from the UK distributer and Europe







So looking for dealers that ship to the UK from the US.


----------



## GetGray

I think 72" wide will still have to go freight. Have you priced freight on a box that big from US to UK? I'd think that would render any savings moot vs. even a small negotiated discount from the local guys. Now if you are trying to get a 14' Cinecurve the margins and room for savings go up, but again, that's a huge crate and I'd expect the shipping cost to be astronomical. I have a dealer in Belgium who might give you a decent deal if the local guy won't, surely shipping would be less from there.


----------



## pulse




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray* /forum/post/16729457
> 
> 
> I think 72" wide will still have to go freight. Have you priced freight on a box that big from US to UK? I'd think that would render any savings moot vs. even a small negotiated discount from the local guys. Now if you are trying to get a 14' Cinecurve the margins and room for savings go up, but again, that's a huge crate and I'd expect the shipping cost to be astronomical. I have a dealer in Belgium who might give you a decent deal if the local guy won't, surely shipping would be less from there.



Price for shipping is between $350/$400 from the US to UK. Don't think the guy in Belgium will match or beat the US prices either to be honest due to the price of the Euro just now which is very low. So i'm still prepared to import from the US for the cheapest deal which will probably save me a few hundred dollars even after paying import duty and taxes to customs in the UK. No one know any dealers that would ship from the US to the UK?


----------



## GBB

GetGray,

I would be interested in contacting the Dealer in Belgium. Can you give me his details?


----------



## Jim Noyd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GBB* /forum/post/16846764
> 
> 
> GetGray,
> 
> I would be interested in contacting the Dealer in Belgium. Can you give me his details?



Stewart Filmscreen - Europe

Mileparken 29

2730 Herlev

Denmark

Tel:+45 36 48 2204

Fax: +45 36 48 2299
[email protected]


----------



## Jason Turk

Thanks Jim. I myself get inquires for European sales but per Stewart rules turn them away. Is this where all European customers should go?


----------



## Jim Noyd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jason Turk* /forum/post/16852859
> 
> 
> Thanks Jim. I myself get inquires for European sales but per Stewart rules turn them away. Is this where all European customers should go?



Yes


----------



## Jason Turk

Thanks.


----------



## GBB

A brief note to thank (oficially) GetGraig and the other members of the forum. Their advice on the Stewart Screen dealers in Europe led to a very quick and professional deal on a new 110" Studiotek G3 Screen. Thank you all.


----------



## pulse

Hi,



Will be purchasing a JVC D-ILA HD750 soon







My room is very tightly controled for any ambient light. All walls, floor and ceiling are black with no outside light in the room. So i am planning on a 92" diagonal fixed Stewart screen but i'm torn on which would be the best material between Studiotek 100 or Studiotek 130 G3 ? Anyone have any opinions which would be the better of the two for my room and projector setup ?


Many thanks

Brian


----------



## Jmouse007

Given your light control regarding ambient light and what Stewart has to say about the Studiotec 130G screen material:

http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/res...sidential.html 


I would recommend the 130G.


----------



## dlinsley

Could someone post a link or picture showing the profile of the Dexlue Screenwall frame please? The Stewart brochure was the best I could find so far, but that shows it from an angle behind the frame







It kind of looks curved from the flat to the screen (like the SeymourAV frame), but I'd like ton confirm without wasting my local dealer's time.


----------



## pulse




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jmouse007* /forum/post/16911783
> 
> 
> Given your light control regarding ambient light and what Stewart has to say about the Studiotec 130G screen material:
> 
> http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/res...sidential.html
> 
> 
> I would recommend the 130G.



Yeh many thanks mate, will be going for the Studiotek 130G3 material


----------



## Jmouse007




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *pulse* /forum/post/16916407
> 
> 
> Yeh many thanks mate, will be going for the Studiotek 130G3 material



Given your specific application I believe it will be an exceptional choice. Yes, STEWART costs more but they make an outstanding product and *they stand by what they sell you 100%!*


We had two anoying minor imperfections that didn't exhibit until we had had our 100" Firehawk SST Electriscreen Screen for well over a year: Two small clots of dust were on the screen before they had sprayed on the screen coating and after the coating was sprayed on it created two small bumps. When the screen was rolled up, the bumps eventually created two small concave craters in our electriscreen that directly effected picture quality. We were unable to get rid of the bumps without scraping off the screen material and ruining the screen. We called STEWART, told them about the problem along with sending in several digital photos and they stood by their warranty and replaced it no questions asked. All we had to pay was labor to rehang the new screen. The new screen is perfect and we have nothing but good things to say about STEWART Screens; Yes they cost more but they are worth every penny.


----------



## merv43




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jason Turk* /forum/post/16660720
> 
> 
> In a light controlled room you'd be okay. If you have a lot of ambient light, the Firehawk will help the contrast/black levels, but you might find the overall image to be dim.



So from your advise here, what would you recomend for me, my room is 14 x 22 with 8' ceilings and it is light controlled since it is in the basement. I have been planing on upgrading my 92" firehawk to a 110" firehawk g3 (I will be asking you for a quote). I am currently using an old sony vpl-hs51a with very good results, but planing on upgrading later this fall to 1080p projector. Should I go with firehawk g3 or the studiotek?


----------



## cinema mad

Not Jason Turk But In A total light controlled room I would Go with the Studio Tek 130

no question... This screen surface is going to give good results for A wide variety of Projector's,

DLIA LCD DLP CRT..


Cheers..


----------



## merv43




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *cinema mad* /forum/post/16968315
> 
> 
> Not Jason Turk But In A total light controlled room I would Go with the Studio Tek 130
> 
> no question... This screen surface is going to give good results for A wide variety of Projector's,
> 
> DLIA LCD DLP CRT..
> 
> 
> Cheers..



Thank you, I am not sure what pj's to consider but I will start researching on these forums and creat a short list. My room is totaly dark with lights out so I will likely go studio tek. Thanks again.


----------



## Jason Turk




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *merv43* /forum/post/16967403
> 
> 
> So from your advise here, what would you recomend for me, my room is 14 x 22 with 8' ceilings and it is light controlled since it is in the basement. I have been planing on upgrading my 92" firehawk to a 110" firehawk g3 (I will be asking you for a quote). I am currently using an old sony vpl-hs51a with very good results, but planing on upgrading later this fall to 1080p projector. Should I go with firehawk g3 or the studiotek?



Some questions...you say light controlled...does that mean there are no windows AND it is dark colored? Both need to qualify to truly be light controlled.


Also, how soon are you upgrading? Gray screens help with both rooms with ambient light and projectors with poor black levels (which you qualify for now, but likely your new unit won't thus my asking).


----------



## merv43




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jason Turk* /forum/post/16969334
> 
> 
> Some questions...you say light controlled...does that mean there are no windows AND it is dark colored? Both need to qualify to truly be light controlled.
> 
> 
> Also, how soon are you upgrading? Gray screens help with both rooms with ambient light and projectors with poor black levels (which you qualify for now, but likely your new unit won't thus my asking).



Well, I do have a window in the room but it has a blackout blind that does not leak light, window is on the north side of house so no direct sunlight. The walls are tan with a (i know, bad) white ceiling. I was going to wait until December or January to upgrade the pj. I would like to jump on the new screen very soon. Here is a quick look at the room. Any advise would be great. Thanks


----------



## SmartEgg




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *twodown* /forum/post/16525632
> 
> 
> If you will overlook my lack of photography skills and the camera distortion
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is my first projector/screen setup. The screen is cabaret Firehawk G3 using a Runco RS900 cinewide.
> 
> The most difficult part of the installation was running the romex



That's a very nice setup!!! I'm thinking of picking up a Cabaret as well.


Do you think that the glossy surface of the cabaret could cause a glare from the projector with a screen with a shorter drop?


BTW, the finish of the Cabaret matches your Pioneer really great!


----------



## Jmouse007




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *SmartEgg* /forum/post/17006711
> 
> 
> That's a very nice setup!!! I'm thinking of picking up a Cabaret as well.
> 
> 
> Do you think that the glossy surface of the cabaret could cause a glare from the projector with a screen with a shorter drop?
> 
> 
> BTW, the finish of the Cabaret matches your Pioneer really great!



Regarding the glare: nothing a small piece of black velvet draped over the top couldn't fix


----------



## twodown




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *SmartEgg* /forum/post/17006711
> 
> 
> That's a very nice setup!!! I'm thinking of picking up a Cabaret as well.
> 
> 
> Do you think that the glossy surface of the cabaret could cause a glare from the projector with a screen with a shorter drop?
> 
> 
> BTW, the finish of the Cabaret matches your Pioneer really great!



Thanks....I've been very pleased with the screen and do not notice the cabinet at all while viewing. I'm sure there are others with more experience on the forum, but I would think you would be fine with a shorter drop.


----------



## richermartyn

Can you tell me in detail about Stewart.

I am so eager to know about it.

If you have information about it, then please tell me or reply on my site.


----------



## KurlonT

Would a 92" Firehawk G3 or SST be a good fit for a HT setup in a finished attic that has lighter pitched walls/ceiling? It would also need to be ok with ambient light coming from the back of the room (torchiere floor lamp that's on for gaming).


Room: 14' x 12' x 7' w/ a roof pitch of 8/12.

Projectors in mind: Epson 6100 or if there's extra in the budget the Epson 6500UB. The throw distance would be 12.5' and the viewing distance would be 10.5'.


Since the majority of the wall space follows the roof pitch I assume this causes lots of problems w/ ambient being directed at the screen wall. I can paint the pitched wall/ceiling a darker color (no black) but not sure it would help since they would still only be a few feet from the screen wall.


Thanks.


----------



## Carey P




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *KurlonT* /forum/post/17078856
> 
> 
> Would a 92" Firehawk G3 or SST be a good fit for a HT setup in a finished attic that has lighter pitched walls/ceiling? ...



Well, you have some things to consider for sure. The Firehawk G3 is great for controlling reflections to a close ceiling or side walls as well as rejecting light from side angles. It would work well with some ambient light like a lamp not pointed directly at screen, a semi-dark room, or lighter walls.


However, it is not recommended for very close projector distance (I believe 2X screen width is best) as there will be some hot-spotting. So, you may be pushing it a bit at 12.5 ft. It also depends on how wide your seating is as well.


How close your screen is mounted to the ceiling will also affect how much reflection you will notice. This can be quite annoying if you keep your ceiling light colored. However, this is certianly cut down by using the Firehawk. Note the projector must be mounted close to the top of screen (or higher) and the screen has a specific up and down side.


If you can paint the ceiling, I found that a dark blue (like a midnight blue)works just as well as black. I have had both. Possibly other dark colors would work too. Good luck.


----------



## KurlonT

Thx for the suggestions Carey.


I've read the Firehawk SST is better suited for projectors mounted 1.5x width or closer so might look at that one. The projector mount is a low profile model by Chief so it won't be a problem mounting it above the screen.


The top of the screen would be roughly 16" from the ceiling but at the left end it would be closer to 10" due to the roof pitch since it can't be wall mounted exactly in the center of the room. Guess in my case the most intense light reflections would come from ceiling and roof pitch closest to the screen so it would be ideal to have these darker. Also my seating area is pretty small at 6 feet wide so the narrow viewing angle shouldn't be a problem too.


Last would a high gain material even work in my situation? I know they have narrow viewing angles that will reject ambient light as well.


----------



## Carey P




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *KurlonT* /forum/post/17079823
> 
> 
> Also my seating area is pretty small at 6 feet wide so the narrow viewing angle shouldn't be a problem too.
> 
> 
> Last would a high gain material even work in my situation? I know they have narrow viewing angles that will reject ambient light as well.



With such a small seating width, you might be ok with the Firehawk G3, but it looks like the SST allows for a closer projector distance and is smoother, which may reduce the chance of the sparklies I've seen on the G3. Also, from the looks of your projector specs, it is certainly bright, especially at that distance. I wouldn't think you would have any problem with the SST plus some ambient light.


Because it's so bright, I would shy away from the G3 altogether, but also darken the ceiling. To tell you the truth, if you darkened the walls and ceiling, you could probably get away with the 130 G3 which is best screen I've ever had. As long as you don't have direct scattered light from the sides, I would think the projector brightness would drown it out. Your incredible contrast ratio should make up for the slight loss of Contrast from the ambient light. But this is up to you. Someone else might know better.


----------



## KurlonT

Using the Screen Gain Calculator I plugged in the numbers for the [email protected]" with my room numbers and came up w/ the following: Screen Gain: (Left/Center/Right) 0.22/0.92/0.22


Seems pretty close to the stated SST specs but I can see how this will deal with ambient light coming in from the sides more clearly now just not sure how much it will dim the overall image.


So using the Projection Calculator I plugged in the numbers of the center gain, Epson 6100 and my setup and came up with the following: Image Brightness: 23fL


I assume this for the brightest mode and other modes will cut this number down quite a bit. So far the SST seems like a good fit for my room.


----------



## Carey P




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *KurlonT* /forum/post/17084083
> 
> 
> Using the Screen Gain Calculator I plugged in the numbers for the [email protected]" with my room numbers and came up w/ the following: Screen Gain: (Left/Center/Right) 0.22/0.92/0.22



Those side numbers seem really low. Are you sure that's right? I think they were .49 before your edit. Seems like you would notice that fall-off if sitting at center even at 10.5 ft.


----------



## KurlonT




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Carey P* /forum/post/17085359
> 
> 
> Those side numbers seem really low. Are you sure that's right? I think they were .49 before your edit. Seems like you would notice that fall-off if sitting at center even at 10.5 ft.



Your right...Double checked and entered the wrong value for max gain at the offset angle...DOH! I also raised the projected center of the screen further from the floor too so the new numbers are the following: 0.57/0.98/0.57


Now this seems closer to the published SST specs. So would I notice this at 11' or should I go for something w/ a wider viewing angle but reject less ambient light?


----------



## wxnz79

I'd be interested to see how you go with the SST. I'm looking at a similar setup with throw distances projecting onto 100". Though Firehawk G3 specs say a minimum throw distance of 1.6x, there seems to be a general consensus that more is better.


----------



## KurlonT




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wxnz79* /forum/post/17088569
> 
> 
> I'd be interested to see how you go with the SST. I'm looking at a similar setup with throw distances projecting onto 100". Though Firehawk G3 specs say a minimum throw distance of 1.6x, there seems to be a general consensus that more is better.



I might have to scrap the SST idea and look for something with a wider viewing angle. Eventually I'll purchase theater seating and move the couch over to the side. Once that happens anyone on the couch will be left watching a very dim picture w/ the SST so better to future proof now.


----------



## wxnz79

Anything new and exciting shown at CEDIA by Stewart this year?


----------



## R Harkness

I now have my Stewart ST-130 G3 screen material up, combined with a Carada Masquerade masking system. (The system isn't finished as I'm adding more masking for a 4-way masking system).


Overall I'm very happy but it's been interesting.


My room isn't quite finished and I don't have full light control yet. But at the moment I'm using an old Panny AE900 projector - as I won't put my JVC RS20 into the system until it's finished and I have full light control.


Before my room reno started I was projecting on an ochre-colored wall. The image looked surprisingly good. Not the last word in detail or brightness - my Panny has over 2,000 hours on the bulb and it came from a heavy smoking environment, so it has a duller than average image at the moment.

But the black levels, while not great, didn't strike me as terrible either. Overall a fairly satisfying image. Not as bright as I'd like.


Since I was going for a large image - *125" by 61" of viewable image area*, using 4 way masking and projector zoom to vary the image size - I wanted to ensure I had a bright enough image.


So I tried the much discussed Da Lite HP material. I bought a 105" diagonal 16:9 section of the HP screen material and tried it on my wall. I had the projector behind the viewing chair so it was pretty much in line with the screen, as demanded by the retroreflective HP screen. Whoa that thing was BRIGHT. Turned my almost dead Panny projector into a blazing, DLP-looking light canon! And I was amazed at the increased perception of image sharpness, detail and color detail I got with the HP screen.


But I ultimately didn't care for the image on the HP with the Panny because it looked kind of odd and unbalanced, much as my friend's older Sanyo projector looked on his HP screen. The bright areas were too bright and the dark areas were too raised in level, so any object on screen that was a light source or was reflective tended to pop out of the image, almost looking detached from the rest of the image. I know that a projector with much better black levels would have helped with this quite a bit (and I did see my RS20 on the HP screen briefly - it looked very impressive).


But what really killed it was the viewing angles. I absolutely hated the way the image lost brightness (and along with it, the perception of losing detail, shadow detail etc) as I moved out of the center sofa seat toward the sides.

One of the reasons I've always preferred plasma over LCD flat panels is the viewing angle issue. I just find there is something more natural, believable and beautiful about an image that stays steady wherever I move or sit.


So I got a hold of a similar sized piece of Carada Brilliant White material (from someone who was moving to a different screen size). I LOVED this material! It has a beautiful, unobtrusive, matte-like finish that disappears

really well when an image is projected on it. And I LOVED the wide viewing angles. In a way the image reminded me even more of the things I liked about plasma (solid image) vs the HP screen material. Black levels actually looked fairly good too.


Really the only issue was brightness. I wasn't sure it was going to be bright enough. The Panasonic looked a tad dingy on the Carada screen and didn't have that zing of incredible brightness and sharpness as the image on the HP material, but it somewhat made up for that by looking more cinematic, deeper, more solid (at least in darker scenes...again...we are talking the projector/screen combo here - many people report quite a bright image with THEIR projector on the Carada BW material).


I ordered some Stewart samples, including a large piece of the StudioTeck ST-130 material, and a board with smaller samples of the rest of the Stewart screens.


As I described earlier in this thread, I did find the ST-130 looked noticeably brighter than the Carada. I found it brought out some more visible sharpness/detail, likely due to the slightly brighter image I'm sure. But there was also a certain "something" that made objects look a bit more tactile on the Stewart material.


I had considered the Firehawk material but I didn't care for it's tendency to hot-spot when I've seen it in action (many times) and I do see the screen coating on the Firehawk.


My room renovation will leave me with a dark ceiling (covered in brown felt), dark rug, dark viewing sofa, light walls, but lots of dark velvet brown curtains to pull over most of the light walls. I wanted to get the Stewart ST-130 for it's gain, image "pop" and wide viewing angles and hope I could control room reflections enough to get a good image.


I put up the Stewart screen material a couple weeks ago. Now that I have it up and paired with the same Panasonic 720p projector I've been using in the room for a while, I'm amazed at what the ST-130 brings to the party. It strikes me as amazingly "refined" and seems to bring out clarity, color and shadow detail in abundance from the projector. I get the feeling of seeing "all there is to see" in the source (or at least as this projector can render it). So it seems to have ended up as good an in-between the Carada and HP material type of selection - a "just right" surface for me. I'm getting nice vividness to the image with the type of added sharpness and detail I saw with the HP, but without the compromises in light drop off and viewing angles. Viewing angles seem fine and I can't help re-visiting many of my DVDs and HD material to see them again on this screen.


The only issue with this combo is black levels and possibly image wash out from both my lack of full light control and the fact I don't have curtains to cover my light walls yet. I can definitely see light coming back to the screen to lower the image contrast in some scenes. And black levels pretty much suck at the moment. At the same time, many scenes actually look punchier and more dimensional, with more contrast than I've seen before. The Transformers Blu Ray has never looked so impressively contrasty and dimensional in my room.


As far as the visibility of the screen surface goes, for the most part it disappears quite well, with the best of them. Though I can still see a bit of the optical coating surface sometimes on very bright areas, it's much better than any gray screen with gain I've seen (like the Firehawk where, once I see the surface I seem to see it over lots of source material). I've yet to see a perfect screen in this regard. Even the Carada screen didn't totally "disappear," although I found it to be a very innocuous surface even when I did detect it.


At the same time, there seems to be something I sort of like about some gain on a screen. There seems to be a certain lustre or intensity added to the image that in a way makes it look a bit more solid and convincing, especially bright areas.


So, my hope is that once I have my curtains in and full light control, as well as my JVC RS20 up and running, I will feel I've chosen the right screen.


I re-visited my local AV high end store and looked at their Panasonic 3000 and the JVC RS10 playing on Firehawk screens. I did envy the Firehawk's effortless way of maintaining image contrast to be sure and briefly wondered if I made the right decision going with the ST-130. But then I noticed the screen surface jump out at me at one point. And I moved off axis from the 120" wide 2:35:1 Firehawk screen the light drop off on the side furthest from me was very evident. I think that would dig at me too much and I thought "Yep, I made the right decision with the ST-130." (That said I still think the Firehawk screen is a marvel: many of the very best projected images I've seen have been on the Firehawk screen in various set ups).


So far it seems very promising.


----------



## recycleman




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray* /forum/post/16544229
> 
> 
> I too used the original FH (110"). Very happy with it's all around performance. I used it with 3 chip DLB (bright). Never had an issue with sparkles.



Would the original FireHawk work well with today's 1080p projectors? Obviously the first choice would be the Firehawk G3 but will my 5 year old Firehawk screen hold up nicely if I upgrade my projector?


----------



## merv43




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *recycleman* /forum/post/17261055
> 
> 
> Would the original FireHawk work well with today's 1080p projectors? Obviously the first choice would be the Firehawk G3 but will my 5 year old Firehawk screen hold up nicely if I upgrade my projector?



I would be supprised if you even could see a difference.


----------



## Jim Noyd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *merv43* /forum/post/17263960
> 
> 
> I would be supprised if you even could see a difference.



The optical coating for the G3 materials is much finer and optimized for the finer detail of 1080p content.


----------



## Franin

Screen and Schneider lens should be installed tomorrow.Been waiting a long time for this.


----------



## manoharshetty9

Hi There Everybody,


I have a 10 ft wide x 13 ft length x 10 ft height hometheatre room. The Ceiling is dark blue in color, the 13 ft walls are a red rust color and the floor is a very dark brown colour. One 10 ft wall has a Da-Lite Matte white screen, and the opposite 10 ft wall has the projector hanging from the ceiling with seating below it, making my viewing distance 12 ft. both these walls are a very dark blue in color. i do not have any windows and lights can be turned off.


the projector i am currently using is the NEC HT1100 which throws a picture that is bright enough for me, from a distance of 12 ft from the Matte white Da-Lite Screen. Screen width is 67".


I want to buy an 80" wide 16:9 screen. I don't think i need a grey screen because of the way i can control the light in my room and also 'cause i do not have light colored furniture in my room. the relatvely lightest colour being the red rust color walls on the sides which actually are not that light neither are they really dark.


Please tell me which screen (ie. the studiotek 100 G3 or 130 G3) will be best for someone like me who watches a lot of movies (2-3 hours everyday) and like to see a quality picture with deep blacks fine detail and good colours but not at the cost of being strained by the picture being too bright. I wanted to buy the Studiotek 100 but was a liitle confused after i read an article by projectorcentral.com on the Studiotek 100.


Also please comment on how the Da-Lite JKP affinity Screen (which is apparently a very light grey) will perform in my room as compared to the stewart screens.


PS. I will be upgrading to a 1080p LED projector in the near future.


Thank you for listening


----------



## merv43

What would a five year old stewart deluxe luxus firehawk 16x9 92" screen be worth? I am going to sell mine and go a littel bigger. Thanks


----------



## Pete




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *manoharshetty9* /forum/post/17294868
> 
> 
> Hi There Everybody,
> 
> 
> I have a 10 ft wide x 13 ft length x 10 ft height hometheatre room. The Ceiling is dark blue in color, the 13 ft walls are a red rust color and the floor is a very dark brown colour. One 10 ft wall has a Da-Lite Matte white screen, and the opposite 10 ft wall has the projector hanging from the ceiling with seating below it, making my viewing distance 12 ft. both these walls are a very dark blue in color. i do not have any windows and lights can be turned off.
> 
> 
> the projector i am currently using is the NEC HT1100 which throws a picture that is bright enough for me, from a distance of 12 ft from the Matte white Da-Lite Screen. Screen width is 67".
> 
> 
> I want to buy an 80" wide 16:9 screen. I don't think i need a grey screen because of the way i can control the light in my room and also 'cause i do not have light colored furniture in my room. the relatvely lightest colour being the red rust color walls on the sides which actually are not that light neither are they really dark.
> 
> 
> Please tell me which screen (ie. the studiotek 100 G3 or 130 G3) will be best for someone like me who watches a lot of movies (2-3 hours everyday) and like to see a quality picture with deep blacks fine detail and good colours but not at the cost of being strained by the picture being too bright. I wanted to buy the Studiotek 100 but was a liitle confused after i read an article by projectorcentral.com on the Studiotek 100.
> 
> 
> Also please comment on how the Da-Lite JKP affinity Screen (which is apparently a very light grey) will perform in my room as compared to the stewart screens.
> 
> 
> PS. I will be upgrading to a 1080p LED projector in the near future.
> 
> 
> Thank you for listening



There's an article in the September issue of Widescreen Review which compares the JKP Affinity with the StudioTek 100.


----------



## Jim Noyd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Pete* /forum/post/17301990
> 
> 
> There's an article in the September issue of Widescreen Review which compares the JKP Affinity with the StudioTek 100.



also look at:
http://www.projectorcentral.com/stew...diotek_100.htm


----------



## R Harkness

As someone very sensitive to screen surfaces and screen artifacts, I can't help but be curious about the new Stewart Studiotek 100. (I have the Studiotek 130 and it is superb, although I can detect the optical coating when viewing movie content).


The Studiotek 100 always seems to come with stern warnings about using it in anything but the strictest bat cave conditions. Yet it's pretty much a unity gain screen, and people have been using unity gain screens in many different home theaters without pulling their hair out that the image is washing out.


So I'm curious: Has anyone actually had experience with the new Studiotek screen? If so does it really only look excellent in a velvet-lined bat cave? Any comparisons to other similar screens?


I have a fully light controlled room with dark carpet, dark brown felt ceiling, and chocolate velvet curtains that can cover the vast majority of the walls in the room.

Is there any reason to expect the Studiotek 100 to under-perform the Studiotek 130 in such a scenario?


I'm also a intrigued, but a bit dubious, about the claims, for instance from Widescreen review, that the Studiotek 100 can offer "increased contrast" and resolution when used properly. I'm not sure why it would actually offer increased contrast in real-world use over, say the ST-130. If anything one might think with it's wide light dispersion it might be more challenging to realise increased contrast on the ST-100.


Thoughts?


----------



## Pete

Rich,


With respect to your question about "increased contrast", I think the reviewer was referring to the gray tint of the Affinity making for more contrast...but apparently at the expense of uniformity. As for the suitability of StudioTek 100 for your situation, it sounds like your room is suitably muted to appreciate the benefits when the lights are turned off....as long as your projector is in the upper percentiles of brightness/contrast capability.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Pete* /forum/post/17303158
> 
> 
> Rich,
> 
> 
> With respect to your question about "increased contrast", I think the reviewer was referring to the gray tint of the Affinity making for more contrast...



I'm talking about quotes like this from Widescreen Review, which in the review of the Studiotek 100 said:

_"This is a reference quality screen that exhibits *better contrast*, more detail, and far better uniformity over the entire image area than any other

screen material the company has to offer. "_


The "better contrast" is puzzling and I'm curious why the reviewer would claim such a thing and/or how it would have been explained...and verified.


----------



## Pete

So you're reading "better" to mean "increased"?


----------



## Dennis Erskine

The potential problem with the StudioTek 100 doesn't really reside in its unity gain (although related); but, rather in the fact it is a lambertian diffusor. A full lambertian diffusor (unity gain) is a requirement for reference screen materials and the StudioTek100 is a great screen!


Because of its lambertian characteristics, you will have more light splash onto side walls, floors and ceilings coupled with no ambient light rejection. In anything other than the proverbial "bat cave", you could have issues with reflected light off room surfaces affecting picture quality.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Pete* /forum/post/17305868
> 
> 
> So you're reading "better" to mean "increased"?



Of course.


Does that surprise you, for some reason?


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Dennis Erskine* /forum/post/17305873
> 
> 
> The potential problem with the StudioTek 100 doesn't really reside in its unity gain (although related); but, rather in the fact it is a lambertian diffusor. A full lambertian diffusor (unity gain) is a requirement for reference screen materials and the StudioTek100 is a great screen!
> 
> 
> Because of its lambertian characteristics, you will have more light splash onto side walls, floors and ceilings coupled with no ambient light rejection. In anything other than the proverbial "bat cave", you could have issues with reflected light off room surfaces affecting picture quality.



1. Aren't all unity gain screens (at least those without optical coatings to add gain) approaching lambertian performance? Or did Stewart have to do something special with their unity gain screen to increase diffusion?

If so, I'd be curious at how much wider, or more uniform, the Studiotek is vs an average white unity gain screen.


2. Comparing the Studiotek 130 to the Studiotek 100: I get that the 100 would reflect more light to the sides and visa versa, compared to the 130.

At the same time it seems to me the gain is lower than the Studiotek, so that _should_ in some way help in room contrast a bit. Wouldn't it?

(For the same reasons a gray screen helps, although not to the same degree of course).


As well, wouldn't the advantage of the Studiotek be very mild in terms of directivity and cross-light reflections? With it's higher gain, wouldn't the 130 actually be a bit _more_ prone to reflections coming at it from it's pretty wide angle of reflectivity?


I can certainly see why the ST 100 would perform in a more problematic manner vs a number of screens made to help combat room interactions (e.g. gray screens, gray screens with gain, highly directional screens with gain etc). What I can't quite get, yet, is why the ST 130 would perform any better in an imperfect room (aside from simply offering a bit of gain for dimmer projectors).


----------



## tbase1

How would a videomatte 200 8' scope screen look with a Alan tweaked ( higher brightness ) ruby and a prismasonic anamorphic lens? I'm running a wilsonart laminate screen currently and would like to up my gain a bit. Also, will it hot spot?


----------



## BobL

The studiotek 100 probably doesn't have any significantly wider diffusion than a typical 1.0 matte white screen but its surface is extremely smooth and shows more detail. Most matte white screens have some texture when viewed very close.


The 130 is less prone to cross reflections than the 100. Reflections or light coming from outside the viewing cone will be 'rejected' or greatly reduced compared to reflections or light coming from the viewing cone. Since the 100 has a wider viewing cone it is much more susceptible to reflections. It is a great material but as Dennis said it was designed for the true bat cave. And by bat cave I mean black velvet type walls, ceiling, floors ,etc., not just painted dark. Only in this environment will someone really benefit from the 100 otherwise the reflections would hurt its contrast.


Bob


----------



## Pete




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/17306602
> 
> 
> Of course.
> 
> 
> Does that surprise you, for some reason?



Perhaps the reviewer is referring to 'better' black field uniformity in conjunction with the white field uniformity...


----------



## KB1

Two questions for the experts:


I'm planning to buy a 100 16x9 Luxus Model A Electriscreen that will be wall mounted. I want the screen to drop down in front of a (also) wall-mounted super slim UN55B8000 Samsung TV (which should be 1.5 from the wall with the proprietary Samsung mount). How far will the screen be off the wall using the included wall brackets? I was told that I will probably need some 2x4 wood to get additional clearance (even with the reduced depth of the Samsung) but wanted to get you guys' opinions.


The second question is how difficult is it to mount this screen? I saw a post about the older model (the classic luxus A) but not specifically about the one I'm considering (smaller housing). Do the brackets move or are they fixed in the housing? Any feedback would be much appreciated. Thank you.


----------



## marswill

I have the same setup that you are proposing. I have a Luxus A 100" wall mounted screen that goes over an older large in wall mounted CRT. I needed 3 inches of clearance to clear the CRT. I built a spacer that ended up being 105" long by 3" wide and 5.5" high out of laminated 2x4's. I used kiln dried 2x4's and covered the final assembly with Ash veneer. The center part of the spacer is only 3.5" high giving me a 2" cavity where I buried the wiring. I also installed a 180 LED super bright color light bar made by Cyron in the cavity shinning up to the ceiling for a decorative backlight. I have the backlight controlled by x10. The 2x4's are flush bolted to the studs in the wall and the screen is then hung onto the front of the 2x4 assembly. It looks nice and provides an excellent solution to my problem. No wiring or lighting is externally visible.


----------



## tbase1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tbase1* /forum/post/17308673
> 
> 
> How would a videomatte 200 8' scope screen look with a Alan tweaked ( higher brightness ) ruby and a prismasonic anamorphic lens? I'm running a wilsonart laminate screen currently and would like to up my gain a bit. Also, will it hot spot?



Does anyone plan on answering my question or do I have to just buy the screen and then see for myself?







Here's a picture of my image on the wilsonart screen.


----------



## KB1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *marswill* /forum/post/17316739
> 
> 
> I have the same setup that you are proposing. I have a Luxus A 100" wall mounted screen that goes over an older large in wall mounted CRT. I needed 3 inches of clearance to clear the CRT. I built a spacer that ended up being 105" long by 3" wide and 5.5" high out of laminated 2x4's. I used kiln dried 2x4's and covered the final assembly with Ash veneer. The center part of the spacer is only 3.5" high giving me a 2" cavity where I buried the wiring. I also installed a 180 LED super bright color light bar made by Cyron in the cavity shinning up to the ceiling for a decorative backlight. I have the backlight controlled by x10. The 2x4's are flush bolted to the studs in the wall and the screen is then hung onto the front of the 2x4 assembly. It looks nice and provides an excellent solution to my problem. No wiring or lighting is externally visible.



Thanks Marswill for the very useful reply. I have a few follow-up questions if you don't mind. Are the brackets on the Luxus A floating or are they fixed to the end of the case? Also when the screen is fully retracted, how far is the screen from the back of the case (including the batten)? I'm trying to calculate the optimal depth for the spacer for my setup. How did you create the 3 inch spacer out of the 2x4? Nailing them together and shaving a one inch layer? I'm also assuming you went with a 5.5 height to match the height of the Luxus case? Finally, how is you wiring done, did you have it hardwired or did you use one of the remote options? I'm trying to figure out whether I should have an AC outlet high up near the case or if this is a bad idea. Thanks a lot in advance for the help.


----------



## marswill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *KB1* /forum/post/17318636
> 
> 
> Thanks Marswill for the very useful reply. I have a few follow-up questions if you don't mind. Are the brackets on the Luxus A floating or are they fixed to the end of the case? Also when the screen is fully retracted, how far is the screen from the back of the case (including the batten)? I'm trying to calculate the optimal depth for the spacer for my setup. How did you create the 3 inch spacer out of the 2x4? Nailing them together and shaving a one inch layer? I'm also assuming you went with a 5.5 height to match the height of the Luxus case? Finally, how is you wiring done, did you have it hardwired or did you use one of the remote options? I'm trying to figure out whether I should have an AC outlet high up near the case or if this is a bad idea. Thanks a lot in advance for the help.



Hi KB1,

The brackets on the Luxus A are fixed onto the back of the case and have keyhole slots that slip over the mounting screws (one on each end). The screen is a little over 3¾ from the back of the batten to the wall in my installation.


A finished 2x4 is actually 1.5x3.5 in size so gluing two of these together gave me my main support beam of 3x3.5x105. I then added a 3x0.5x12 plywood spacer to each end and put a 3x1.5x12 piece made from trimmed 2x4 on top of that thereby making the ends of the beam a total of 3x5.5 for the first 12. This gave me the cavity to hide things. Everything was glued and screwed and covered with Ash veneer. I counter-bored two holes through the main beam through which I bolted the beam to the studs in the wall. Of course I added two #12 stainless steel screws in the 12 sections from which to hang the screen.


I added a 115VAC outlet in the wall such that it resided in the 2 cavity of the beam using a small metal power strip that supported a romex cable clamp so that the wiring was all buried in the wall and hidden from view. The screen was ordered with the 12V trigger option. The trigger cable was run from the cavity through the wall to an outlet near the AV Receiver (Denon 4306) which controls the screen.


By the way, the reason I did things this way is that my theater room has a vaulted ceiling which prevented me from using a ceiling mount installation.


----------



## KB1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *marswill* /forum/post/17319431
> 
> 
> Hi KB1,
> 
> The brackets on the Luxus A are fixed onto the back of the case and have keyhole slots that slip over the mounting screws (one on each end). The screen is a little over 3¾ from the back of the batten to the wall in my installation.
> 
> 
> A finished 2x4 is actually 1.5x3.5 in size so gluing two of these together gave me my main support beam of 3x3.5x105. I then added a 3x0.5x12 plywood spacer to each end and put a 3x1.5x12 piece made from trimmed 2x4 on top of that thereby making the ends of the beam a total of 3x5.5 for the first 12. This gave me the cavity to hide things. Everything was glued and screwed and covered with Ash veneer. I counter-bored two holes through the main beam through which I bolted the beam to the studs in the wall. Of course I added two #12 stainless steel screws in the 12 sections from which to hang the screen.
> 
> 
> I added a 115VAC outlet in the wall such that it resided in the 2 cavity of the beam using a small metal power strip that supported a romex cable clamp so that the wiring was all buried in the wall and hidden from view. The screen was ordered with the 12V trigger option. The trigger cable was run from the cavity through the wall to an outlet near the AV Receiver (Denon 4306) which controls the screen.
> 
> 
> By the way, the reason I did things this way is that my theater room has a vaulted ceiling which prevented me from using a ceiling mount installation.



Thanks again Marswill! Very useful info indeed. I think I'll do something very similar as my setup does not allow for a ceiling installation (basement with drop down ceiling). Are the eyebolts levelled with the top of the case or slightly higher? I'm trying to also figure out the distance from the mount to the floor.


----------



## marswill




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *KB1* /forum/post/17320321
> 
> 
> Thanks again Marswill! Very useful info indeed. I think I'll do something very similar as my setup does not allow for a ceiling installation (basement with drop down ceiling). Are the eyebolts levelled with the top of the case or slightly higher? I'm trying to also figure out the distance from the mount to the floor.



Not sure what you mean by eyebolts. The only eyebolts that I'm aware of are for a suspended ceiling mount, i.e., the screen would be supported by cables or chains. That doesn't apply in my installation. If you mean the mounting brackets then they are on the back of the screen case with the top of the brackets flush with the top of the case. The brackets are also mounted flush with the back of the case and inboard from the ends of the case. You can learn a lot by reading the Luxus manual "Luxus A/SR-1 Electriscreen: Owner's Manual". This should be available on the Stewart Film Screen web site. If you can't find a copy you can PM me and I'll send it to you.


----------



## KB1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *marswill* /forum/post/17321354
> 
> 
> Not sure what you mean by eyebolts. The only eyebolts that I'm aware of are for a suspended ceiling mount, i.e., the screen would be supported by cables or chains. That doesn't apply in my installation. If you mean the mounting brackets then they are on the back of the screen case with the top of the brackets flush with the top of the case. The brackets are also mounted flush with the back of the case and inboard from the ends of the case. You can learn a lot by reading the Luxus manual "Luxus A/SR-1 Electriscreen: Owner's Manual". This should be available on the Stewart Film Screen web site. If you can't find a copy you can PM me and I'll send it to you.



Yes, sorry, I had meant the mounting brackets. I actually have looked at the manual but could not tell from the picture whether the brackets were flush with the top of the case. Your posts answered my questions perfectly, thanks again.


----------



## Don Stewart

The 130 is less prone to cross reflections than the 100. Reflections or light coming from outside the viewing cone will be 'rejected' or greatly reduced compared to reflections or light coming from the viewing cone. Since the 100 has a wider viewing cone it is much more susceptible to reflections. It is a great material but as Dennis said it was designed for the true bat cave. And by bat cave I mean black velvet type walls, ceiling, floors ,etc., not just painted dark. Only in this environment will someone really benefit from the 100 otherwise the reflections would hurt its contrast.


Bob[/quote]


Bingo!!!


----------



## EEaton

hello all,


i currently have a 120" 16x9 StudioTek 130 G3 w/ Microperf X2, with a throw and viewing distance of 14 feet using the Sony VPL-VW60 and total light control.


a friend wants to replicate my video performance but wants to go rear projection using the Sony VPL-HW15 and limited ambient light in a mutli purpose room.


which screen material would be best in this application? Aeroview, Lumiflex, or Flimscreen? Also, can you get the Luxus Deluxe frame for rear projection, or is there a different frame for rear projection?


thx in advance for your opinions.


----------



## Jim Noyd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *EEaton* /forum/post/17366491
> 
> 
> hello all,
> 
> 
> i currently have a 120" 16x9 StudioTek 130 G3 w/ Microperf X2, with a throw and viewing distance of 14 feet using the Sony VPL-VW60 and total light control.
> 
> 
> a friend wants to replicate my video performance but wants to go rear projection using the Sony VPL-HW15 and limited ambient light in a mutli purpose room.
> 
> 
> which screen material would be best in this application? Aeroview, Lumiflex, or Flimscreen? Also, can you get the Luxus Deluxe frame for rear projection, or is there a different frame for rear projection?
> 
> 
> thx in advance for your opinions.



Probably good to ask Jason Turk here or call Stewart sales for your options. We just introduced CrystalView 60 and the StarGlas RP installs look amazing.


----------



## Mike N Ike

Jeff Meier just posted a review/comparison of some Stewart and Da-lite screen materials.


Link is here .


I found it interesting that he measured the FH G3 at .9 gain @ 0 degrees. Wondering if the experience of folks here is in line with that. I always thought Stewart was pretty accurate in their gain ratings.


Mike


----------



## Franin

I'm sure they should be accurate, but then again..

I'm sure Don should be able to answer that.


----------



## darinp2




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mike N Ike* /forum/post/17403487
> 
> 
> I found it interesting that he measured the FH G3 at .9 gain @ 0 degrees.



As Jeff mentioned, it could have been due to the mounting situation. I'm not sure what placement he used, but if the meter was pointed straight at the screen and the projector was ceiling mounted then he would have been away from the peak gain for that screen with his meter and screen material down low compared to the projector. And the Firehawk has a pretty aggressive angular-reflective gain component (to go along with the gray component), so the spot where the Firehawk is brightest from one viewing position tends to be fairly small.


--Darin


----------



## umr




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *darinp2* /forum/post/17403733
> 
> 
> As Jeff mentioned, it could have been due to the mounting situation. I'm not sure what placement he used, but if the meter was pointed straight at the screen and the projector was ceiling mounted then he would have been away from the peak gain for that screen with his meter and screen material down low compared to the projector. And the Firehawk has a pretty aggressive angular-reflective gain component (to go along with the gray component), so the spot where the Firehawk is brightest from one viewing position tends to be fairly small.
> 
> 
> --Darin



The end of my document describes the mounting situation. The projector is ceiling mounted and maximum vertical shift was used on an RS20.


----------



## Andrew L.

Hi guys I was just curious what a 16:9 Stewart Screen with thats 86" across (I believe 100 or 110" diag.) might be worth on the used market? I'm not exactly sure what kind of Stewart it is, but it's about 12 years old, it's got the black fuzzy frame, any guesses?










(not it but looks pretty damn close to this which is a firehawk)


Thanks for any help.


btw I'm in the Seattle area if anyone would like to get a nice deal (and help me disassemble the frame







)


----------



## Haroon Malik

That is one big Stewart Filmscreen StarGlas display!







16 sheets of 10'x11' StarGlas!










http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiMIpeRst1A


----------



## Carlp336

Fixed Frame Luxus Deluxe 16:9 100"

StudioTek 130 G3


installed pic.










some Ps3 stills.


----------



## crimscrem

Looks fabulous! what projector are you using?


----------



## Carlp336




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *crimscrem* /forum/post/17847746
> 
> 
> Looks fabulous! what projector are you using?




epson 1080ub home.


----------



## KB1

Hi Guys,


I currently have an electriscreen Stewart 100 16x9 Studiotek screen coupled with a JVC RS25. I am contemplating upgrading to a constant height/anamorphic lens setup given that scope movies are a tad small on my screen. I actually had to move my couch 2 feet in (from a maximum 14 feet viewing distance) to get better immersion. Does anyone know what the normal cinemascope Stewart screen aspect ratio is? 2:35? I know that Stewart can customize most things but I was wondering what the regular stock was. I may upgrade to a 120 or 125 electriscreen. What do most people get anyway, 2:35, 2:37, or 2:40 aspect ratio screens? Seems that most new BDs are of the 2:40 variety so 2:37 could be a nice compromise. Thanks for any feedback.


----------



## WOLVERNOLE

Just purchased a Stewart ST-130 G-3, 108" diag. Luxus Deluxe screen, 1:78. I have it coupled with a new JVC RS-25 PJ.

This is heresy to many AVS'ers, but I went with this over a Hi-Power screen, primarily because I paid a bit more for my JVC RS-25 to get "ultimate black levels" and I felt that the Hi-Power, while it is awesomely smooth and bright whites, it "neutralized" the ADVANTAGE that my RS-25 was purchased for. Having said that, my wall samples showed out that neutral samples of 1.0-1.1'ish gain were a little blacker still than my (true) 1.3 gain...which BTW, samples proved out that the Carada BW is NOT 1.3 as advertised but as AVS folks have long noted, more neutral...just about 1.0-1.1.

This whole experience of trials/samples/looking at screens with material on it reveals that there IS NO IDEAL SCREEN, but for my room of black ceiling and front wall, burgundy flat paint walls and dark carpeting, the ST-130 was a "best choice" for me. The 1.3 gives me a little extra brightness and yet reasonable black levels...yea, I'd like the blacks a negative or neutral screen gives, but even my "OK, whatever" wife noted that many other screens gave dingy brights (say, depicting a beach scene).

I got a good price from Jason Turk here on AVS. Stewart costs more, but I see no grain or sparklies...which bugged me about the Silverstar (unacceptable). So, in final analysis, I'm a happy camper.


----------



## Kuro

I've just received my Firehawk SST a few days ago. The size is 100" and the projector I used is the Sony VW-80.


The throwing distance is approx. 13 ft.


I found that I'm seeing grain and sparklies on the screen. I'm just using the Standard mode on the VW-80 without any changes in the settings.


I thought the SST is the recommended screen for Sony projector with lower gain (1.1). So why am I seeing sparklies and grain? Setting the lamp mode from high to low does help with the sparklies (but not totally eliminates them), and it makes the whole picture a bit darker that I like (less popping).


Anyone has the recommended settings for using Sony VW series projectors?


I also found that the colors / contrast are not as "popping" as I hope it would be. It seems to be a bit washed out at times.


----------



## R Harkness

About the Studiotek ST-130 screen: like others I agonized about room interactions and whether to go with a neutral gain, or 1.3 gain, or "specialized" screen like the Firehawk.

A lot of folks understandably pointed toward the Firehawk if one is going to have any ambient light or brighter room decor. A general tenor of the opinions were that, in a very light controlled environment (no ambient light, dark decor to cut room reflections) the ST-130 would edge out the Firehawk in performance (less hotspotting, less screen texture, more "pop" to the image). But with ANY ambient light the ST-130 would purportedly wash out and the Firehawk was preferred.


Well, I've had the ST-130 for a couple months now and, while I much prefer to watch films in total darkness - I have total light control and dark decor for movie watching - I've been happily surprised by the image I get even with some ambient light. Amazed is probably a better word.


I'm sure when one is talking about the effects of ambient light - having any lights on - on a screen it's going to depend on the specifics of any situation. A single overhead light in the middle of the room turned on is likely to wash out the image more than carefully placed task lighting in the room.


In my case I have pot and track lights hooked up to a Lutron Grafik Eye 6 zone system.

So I can raise the lights that are only over the viewing sofa. Last night I left them on while we were watching a movie. We were not left in dim light - they were fairly bright over the sofa, yet I could not believe how great the image remained on the ST-130 projection screen. I could barely see any rising of the black levels at all and it was like looking at a big plasma, with some room lights on. I even started to wonder if the lights right above me were acting as some sort of "bias lighting" for my eyes, which helped maintain the impression of darker black levels. It's possible there was some such effect, though when I turned them off the image did look a bit better. But it still looked incredible with the lights on. It was the same when I had a UFC party a while back and I had the lights over the sofa on (my sofa is about 9 feet from my screen FWIW).


But...wow...given all that I'd read about not having any lights on if you choose the ST-130 it's performance, at least in my set up, with some task lighting on in the room

has been off the charts great. A real bonus I wasn't expecting.


----------



## Steve Carr




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *WOLVERNOLE* /forum/post/17866672
> 
> 
> Just purchased a Stewart ST-130 G-3, 108" diag. Luxus Deluxe screen, 1:78. I have it coupled with a new JVC RS-25 PJ.
> 
> This is heresy to many AVS'ers, but I went with this over a Hi-Power screen, primarily because I paid a bit more for my JVC RS-25 to get "ultimate black levels" and I felt that the Hi-Power, while it is awesomely smooth and bright whites, it "neutralized" the ADVANTAGE that my RS-25 was purchased for. Having said that, my wall samples showed out that neutral samples of 1.0-1.1'ish gain were a little blacker still than my (true) 1.3 gain...which BTW, samples proved out that the Carada BW is NOT 1.3 as advertised but as AVS folks have long noted, more neutral...just about 1.0-1.1.
> 
> This whole experience of trials/samples/looking at screens with material on it reveals that there IS NO IDEAL SCREEN, but for my room of black ceiling and front wall, burgundy flat paint walls and dark carpeting, the ST-130 was a "best choice" for me. The 1.3 gives me a little extra brightness and yet reasonable black levels...yea, I'd like the blacks a negative or neutral screen gives, but even my "OK, whatever" wife noted that many other screens gave dingy brights (say, depicting a beach scene).
> 
> I got a good price from Jason Turk here on AVS. Stewart costs more, but I see no grain or sparklies...which bugged me about the Silverstar (unacceptable). So, in final analysis, I'm a happy camper.



WOLVERNOLE, great post... been looking at both screens myself. will use ST130 for movies only and HP for (sports) no prime time tv watching here...



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/17890972
> 
> 
> About the Studiotek ST-130 screen: like others I agonized about room interactions and whether to go with a neutral gain, or 1.3 gain, or "specialized" screen like the Firehawk.
> 
> A lot of folks understandably pointed toward the Firehawk if one is going to have any ambient light or brighter room decor. A general tenor of the opinions were that, in a very light controlled environment (no ambient light, dark decor to cut room reflections) the ST-130 would edge out the Firehawk in performance (less hotspotting, less screen texture, more "pop" to the image). But with ANY ambient light the ST-130 would purportedly wash out and the Firehawk was preferred.
> 
> 
> Well, I've had the ST-130 for a couple months now and, while I much prefer to watch films in total darkness - I have total light control and dark decor for movie watching - I've been happily surprised by the image I get even with some ambient light. Amazed is probably a better word.
> 
> 
> I'm sure when one is talking about the effects of ambient light - having any lights on - on a screen it's going to depend on the specifics of any situation. A single overhead light in the middle of the room turned on is likely to wash out the image more than carefully placed task lighting in the room.
> 
> 
> In my case I have pot and track lights hooked up to a Lutron Grafik Eye 6 zone system.
> 
> So I can raise the lights that are only over the viewing sofa. Last night I left them on while we were watching a movie. We were not left in dim light - they were fairly bright over the sofa, yet I could not believe how great the image remained on the ST-130 projection screen. I could barely see any rising of the black levels at all and it was like looking at a big plasma, with some room lights on. I even started to wonder if the lights right above me were acting as some sort of "bias lighting" for my eyes, which helped maintain the impression of darker black levels. It's possible there was some such effect, though when I turned them off the image did look a bit better. But it still looked incredible with the lights on. It was the same when I had a UFC party a while back and I had the lights over the sofa on (my sofa is about 9 feet from my screen FWIW).
> 
> 
> But...wow...given all that I'd read about not having any lights on if you choose the ST-130 it's performance, at least in my set up, with some task lighting on in the room
> 
> has been off the charts great. A real bonus I wasn't expecting.



Just what I was looking for.. Thanks Rich, I will purchase the ST130 first for sure for movies. Just might be what I'm looking for with sports and alittle light on in the room.


Steve


----------



## Carey P

Rich, nice description. That's exactly what I found. I had the Firehawk G3 but changed to the ST-130 G3 and never looked back.


Kuro, I had similar problems with the Firehawk, though not as close (in ratio)as your throw distance, which could be making matters worse. Just make sure you mounted the screen with the "UP" mark up, not upside down.


----------



## AbMagFab




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kuro* /forum/post/17890790
> 
> 
> I've just received my Firehawk SST a few days ago. The size is 100" and the projector I used is the Sony VW-80.
> 
> 
> The throwing distance is approx. 13 ft.
> 
> 
> I found that I'm seeing grain and sparklies on the screen. I'm just using the Standard mode on the VW-80 without any changes in the settings.
> 
> 
> I thought the SST is the recommended screen for Sony projector with lower gain (1.1). So why am I seeing sparklies and grain? Setting the lamp mode from high to low does help with the sparklies (but not totally eliminates them), and it makes the whole picture a bit darker that I like (less popping).
> 
> 
> Anyone has the recommended settings for using Sony VW series projectors?
> 
> 
> I also found that the colors / contrast are not as "popping" as I hope it would be. It seems to be a bit washed out at times.



Isn't the SST the old one, and the G3 the new one?


----------



## WOLVERNOLE




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Steve Carr* /forum/post/17891243
> 
> 
> WOLVERNOLE, great post... been looking at both screens myself. will use ST130 for movies only and HP for (sports) no prime time tv watching here...
> 
> 
> Just what I was looking for.. Thanks Rich, I will purchase the ST130 first for sure for movies. Just might be what I'm looking for with sports and alittle light on in the room.
> 
> Steve



Steve-

I think you are "onto" an excellent option there ! I think that, at least for my application and for as Rich H. described for his room, the ST-130 is really a great screen and cannot be beaten. For sports, where the "best black level" is not of paramount importance, but rather more room light may be preferred and real puncht colors to jump out, the Hi-Power would be superb ! My only question in your application would be "optimum" projector placement. As you know, the HP is a retroreflective screen (straight-on much/most preferred placement VS angular reflective as the ST-130 which prefers a ceiling mount. How do you propose to satisfy "both beasts?"


----------



## Steve Carr




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *WOLVERNOLE* /forum/post/17894117
> 
> 
> Steve-
> 
> I think you are "onto" an excellent option there ! I think that, at least for my application and for as Rich H. described for his room, the ST-130 is really a great screen and cannot be beaten. For sports, where the "best black level" is not of paramount importance, but rather more room light may be preferred and real puncht colors to jump out, the Hi-Power would be superb ! My only question in your application would be "optimum" projector placement. As you know, the HP is a retroreflective screen (straight-on much/most preferred placement VS angular reflective as the ST-130 which prefers a ceiling mount. How do you propose to satisfy "both beasts?"



Hey WOLVERNOLE,


I have my pj ceiling mounted... 20x20 room and it's 18'-19' from the screen the HE lens that is. I have 3 samples of HP now and I'm sitting about 3ft or alittle less under the pj. I have my sofa's up on risers for the ButtKickers and I think that helped me out abit for the retroreflective screen, the samples are much brighter than the BOC that I'm using now.


I can tell though with the HP samples that my black level did drop alot compared to the BOC. I sampled some football playoffs and a few BD movies and I don't like the way the black level looks on my pj with the HP with the movies that is... I'm not going to sweat the games but the black level did drop their too.


My pj for now is an Optoma HD80 viewing image size of 55"x132" 2.40:1


Steve


----------



## Kuro




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Carey P* /forum/post/17892408
> 
> 
> Kuro, I had similar problems with the Firehawk, though not as close (in ratio)as your throw distance, which could be making matters worse. Just make sure you mounted the screen with the "UP" mark up, not upside down.



Hi Carey,


So what is the recommended throw ratio for the firehawk? Does zooming the image smaller help alleviate the problem?


What do you mean by mounting the screen with the "UP" mark up? The shop I bought the screen from is an authorized Stewart installer and they did the installation for me.


Would Studiotek 130 G3 be the better choice? The screen is in my living room, so there is some ambient light, I thought Firehawk is the better choice in my environment, no?


----------



## Carey P




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kuro* /forum/post/17897148
> 
> 
> Hi Carey,
> 
> 
> So what is the recommended throw ratio for the firehawk? Does zooming the image smaller help alleviate the problem?
> 
> 
> What do you mean by mounting the screen with the "UP" mark up? The shop I bought the screen from is an authorized Stewart installer and they did the installation for me.
> 
> 
> Would Studiotek 130 G3 be the better choice? The screen is in my living room, so there is some ambient light, I thought Firehawk is the better choice in my environment, no?



Hi Kuro,

I guess I was referring to the G3. Possibly the SST was made for shorter throws. I just know the G3 works best at 2X screen width throw distance. It can tend to hotspot any closer. Anyway, even at 2X distance, I noticed it being brighter at center, but this is also going to depend on how far away you sit. Zooming is not going to matter as long as you are filling the screen.


The scattered light rejection is absolutely great with that screen and if you don't have controlled lighting and windows, it may be your best choice.


If you had professional installers, then I'm sure they mounted it with the "up" side up. The screen is designed for a projector at the ceiling and reflects downwards. Mounting it upside down might accentuate the effects of hot spotting and sparklies. I did that by accident at first. When you put the screen together on the floor, it is best to keep the "up" side away from the wall. Otherwsie you have to turn it around before mounting.


I know with the G3, it is made for HD and the sparklies should be minimal. However, I still noticed a few on mine and I didn't care for the non-flat response. That is why I went for the ST130. I only have an occasional door open that lets light in caused by the dogs. I can live with that in order to have a movie that floats there without seeing the screen in any way.


----------



## Kuro




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Carey P* /forum/post/17897571
> 
> 
> Hi Kuro,
> 
> I guess I was referring to the G3. Possibly the SST was made for shorter throws. I just know the G3 works best at 2X screen width throw distance. It can tend to hotspot any closer. Anyway, even at 2X distance, I noticed it being brighter at center, but this is also going to depend on how far away you sit. Zooming is not going to matter as long as you are filling the screen.
> 
> 
> The scattered light rejection is absolutely great with that screen and if you don't have controlled lighting and windows, it may be your best choice.



Hi Carey,


I just checked the specs on the Stewart site, SST has a min. throw distance of 1.4x screen width and Studiotek 130 G3 is actually 1.3x (so surprise, it allows closer throw ratio than SST). Since I've a 100" screen, the screen width is 87" and 1.4x of that is 121.8" or just 1.8" over 10'. Since my projector is 13' away, I see that I've met the min. throw distance.


Your msg does remind me on how my installer had them setup in the shop: the projector is indeed mounted with higher throw ratio than my home setup.


BTW, mine is a Cabaret screen, so it is on a roller, not a fixed screen. Therefore, there is no "UP" marking to worry about. My projector is mounted high up on my rear wall (not ceiling), and the center of the lens is just at the edge of the screen display's top edge. I'm sitting just beneath the projector, so also approx. 13' away from the screen. There is a rear wall behind me, so I can't sit any further away. It is my living room, so there is light colored walls/ceiling/drapes/carpet. I cannot control ambient light during the day, so this setup is pretty much for evening viewing only.


Do you think if I set the lamp to low instead of high is a good way to avoid sparklies?


----------



## KB1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kuro* /forum/post/17898170
> 
> 
> Hi Carey,
> 
> 
> I just checked the specs on the Stewart site, SST has a min. throw distance of 1.4x screen width and Studiotek 130 G3 is actually 1.3x (so surprise, it allows closer throw ratio than SST). Since I've a 100" screen, the screen width is 87" and 1.4x of that is 121.8" or just 1.8" over 10'. Since my projector is 13' away, I see that I've met the min. throw distance.
> 
> 
> Your msg does remind me on how my installer had them setup in the shop: the projector is indeed mounted with higher throw ratio than my home setup.
> 
> 
> BTW, mine is a Cabaret screen, so it is on a roller, not a fixed screen. Therefore, there is no "UP" marking to worry about. My projector is mounted high up on my rear wall (not ceiling), and the center of the lens is just at the edge of the screen display's top edge. I'm sitting just beneath the projector, so also approx. 13' away from the screen. There is a rear wall behind me, so I can't sit any further away. It is my living room, so there is light colored walls/ceiling/drapes/carpet. I cannot control ambient light during the day, so this setup is pretty much for evening viewing only.
> 
> 
> Do you think if I set the lamp to low instead of high is a good way to avoid sparklies?



What are sparklies supposed to look like? I have a 100" ST130 (on a roller) with an JVC RS 25 14.5 feet away. In bright scenes (sky, snow, etc.) I have noticed a sort of "shimmering" effect, not dots, but areas of almost glistening patches. I don't see it in darker scenes but it has become very distracting in brighter scenes. If I move my head to the sides, then the effect diminishes. Seems surprising given what everyone has been saying about the ST130.


----------



## Kuro




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *KB1* /forum/post/17898814
> 
> 
> What are sparklies supposed to look like? I have a 100" ST130 (on a roller) with an JVC RS 25 14.5 feet away. In bright scenes (sky, snow, etc.) I have noticed a sort of "shimmering" effect, not dots, but areas of almost glistening patches. I don't see it in darker scenes but it has become very distracting in brighter scenes. If I move my head to the sides, then the effect diminishes. Seems surprising given what everyone has been saying about the ST130.



I think this is the sparklie effect everyone is saying here. It only happens on bright scenes. I didn't notice it when I was at the dealer's show room.


It is a nasty surprise to me, since this is my first projector screen and I thought Stewart is supposed to be the best there is...


----------



## umr




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kuro* /forum/post/17898970
> 
> 
> I think this is the sparklie effect everyone is saying here. It only happens on bright scenes. I didn't notice it when I was at the dealer's show room.
> 
> 
> It is a nasty surprise to me, since this is my first projector screen and I thought Stewart is supposed to be the best there is...



The Studiotek is the best angular reflective screen material I have seen, but all screens I have seen with significant gain add some character to the image compared to a SnoMatte which is the most neutral I have seen.


----------



## KB1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *umr* /forum/post/17898993
> 
> 
> The Studiotek is the best angular reflective screen material I have seen, but all screens I have seen with significant gain add some character to the image compared to a SnoMatte which is the most neutral I have seen.



Jeff, Does what I described sound like sparklies? My throw is also 14.5 feet, which is about 2x given the 87" width of the screen. I also have the iris haf-closed and the lamp on normal mode. The lights in the room are all off (basement). Seems surprising that I would have this problem given these parameters.


----------



## umr




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *KB1* /forum/post/17899059
> 
> 
> Jeff, Does what I described sound like sparklies? My throw is also 14.5 feet, which is about 2x given the 87" width of the screen. I also have the iris haf-closed and the lamp on normal mode. The lights in the room are all off (basement). Seems surprising that I would have this problem given these parameters.



I am not surprised at all. What you are seeing happens with all screens with significant gain.


If you want the best image from your projector possible use a SnoMatte and size it properly, place seating, projector and screen properly and make the room a cave. I would also adjust the system carefully after it is all setup and then sit back and enjoy.


----------



## KB1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *umr* /forum/post/17899167
> 
> 
> I am not surprised at all. What you are seeing happens with all screens with significant gain.
> 
> 
> If you want the best image from your projector possible use a SnoMatte and size it properly, place seating, projector and screen properly and make the room a cave. I would also adjust the system carefully after it is all setup and then sit back and enjoy.



Would closing down the iris help any? I'm kinda stuck with I have unfortunately







Also, If you are going to the NY area for a calibration trip, pls PM me as I am approaching the 100 hr mark on my RS25. Thx.


----------



## umr




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *KB1* /forum/post/17899226
> 
> 
> Would closing down the iris help any? I'm kinda stuck with I have unfortunately
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, If you are going to the NY area for a calibration trip, pls PM me as I am approaching the 100 hr mark on my RS25. Thx.



The darker the image the less of a problem these gain artifacts are. You can close the iris to reduce their severity. I worked on one 130 where the minimum light level was about 25 fL. I found it almost unwatchable because the gain artifacts were so extreme at that level while at 8 fL maximum it is very muted.


----------



## Carey P

Kuro, Sorry for the confusion. I thought the FireHawk required a longer throw than the ST-130. At least, that was my experience, but it also depends on where you are sittting. Even at 2X, if you sit 1X distance away you will notice a brighter center. If you sit to the side, you will notice a fall-off to the other side. This is worse if you have a 2.4:1 screen like mine.


Anyway, never had any shimmering, structure pattern, or any problems with the ST130, except for when my door opens on the side and light comes in, the screen gets washed out. This was not as problem with the FireHawk.


From the posts, maybe there is something different about the roller model. I assumed you had the fixed screen. Sorry. The sparklies I was really referring to was points of bright reflections that occur occasionally and go away when you move your head slightly.


If we are talking about very bright projectors, then any screen with higher gain than 1 could probably shimmer. I though the FireHawk was best for not-so-bright projectors like my old Panny 2000u. It produced about the right level on my 10.5 ft screen. The ST-130 is not quite as bright, but I know someday I will get another projector anyway.


----------



## Kuro




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *umr* /forum/post/17898993
> 
> 
> The Studiotek is the best angular reflective screen material I have seen, but all screens I have seen with significant gain add some character to the image compared to a SnoMatte which is the most neutral I have seen.



My Firehawk SST has a gain of 1.1. This is not a high gain value. My throw ratio is at 1.79. So why am I still seeing the sparklie effect?


----------



## umr




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Kuro* /forum/post/17899369
> 
> 
> My Firehawk SST has a gain of 1.1. This is not a high gain value. My throw ratio is at 1.79. So why am I still seeing the sparklie effect?



Because it uses a very high gain material to offset the gray added to the material. A Firehawk is much worse than a StudioTek in this respect.


----------



## Kuro




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *umr* /forum/post/17899443
> 
> 
> Because it uses a very high gain material to offset the gray added to the material. A Firehawk is much worse than a StudioTek in this respect.



It baffles me as to why my installer recommended the SST for matching with my Sony VW80 projector. Even Stewart said the SST is made for the Sony.


My brother is using a Grandview screen (about 1/3 the cost of my SST) and he is not seeing sheen or sparklies. But he also said the contrast and colors are not as good as my SST.


----------



## KB1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Carey P* /forum/post/17899356
> 
> 
> If we are talking about very bright projectors, then any screen with higher gain than 1 could probably shimmer. I though the FireHawk was best for not-so-bright projectors like my old Panny 2000u. It produced about the right level on my 10.5 ft screen. The ST-130 is not quite as bright, but I know someday I will get another projector anyway.



Probably what is happening to me, my RS25 is very bright and my room is not that big (about 16 x 18) with a low ceiling (


----------



## R Harkness

I do indeed see the sparkly screen texture of my ST-130 screen sometimes. It is certainly more subtle than the Firehawk, but it's still there. I love the screen but this is the only issue that makes me wonder about going for a Stewart Snomatte material some day. (But as it is, I feel I need the gain the ST-130 provides).


----------



## KB1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/17899624
> 
> 
> I do indeed see the sparkly screen texture of my ST-130 screen sometimes. It is certainly more subtle than the Firehawk, but it's still there. I love the screen but this is the only issue that makes me wonder about going for a Stewart Snomatte material some day. (But as it is, I feel I need the gain the ST-130 provides).



Yes, the snomatte fabric (or the new ST 100?) seems very interesting. I wonder how "truly" dark the environment must be in order to use it. I have total light control at night in my basement but my walls and carpet are certainly not black (brown). I also wonder if the size of the room given the light thrown by the PJ is a factor or not.


----------



## Carey P

Kuro, You have a slower fall-off than the G3, but the half-gain is still around 30 which can tend to hotspot depending on setup. If the shiny areas are more in the center, then it would support that theory. Try moving around, up and down too, and notice if/how the effect changes. Maybe your projector is just too bright?


Even though the ST-130 is at 1.3 gain, it looks very flat because the half- gain is only 68. So little chance of seeing any screen variation, though my projector is not that bright.


----------



## Carey P




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/17899624
> 
> 
> I do indeed see the sparkly screen texture of my ST-130 screen sometimes. It is certainly more subtle than the Firehawk, but it's still there. I love the screen but this is the only issue that makes me wonder about going for a Stewart Snomatte material some day. (But as it is, I feel I need the gain the ST-130 provides).



Rich,

I'm very surprised you see sparklies on the ST-130. What projector do you use and how close is it? I'm curious because someday I want to get a somewhat brighter projector. Thanks.


----------



## umr




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *KB1* /forum/post/17899843
> 
> 
> Yes, the snomatte fabric (or the new ST 100?) seems very interesting. I wonder how "truly" dark the environment must be in order to use it. I have total light control at night in my basement but my walls and carpet are certainly not black (brown). I also wonder if the size of the room given the light thrown by the PJ is a factor or not.



It depends on how close the surfaces are and their reflectivity as to the extent if the problem. If you download the screen report linked to below you can see how dark the furnishings are in my room. This is what I would target. Screens with gain gain can help with thus, but they are not a free ride.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Carey P* /forum/post/17900008
> 
> 
> Rich,
> 
> I'm very surprised you see sparklies on the ST-130. What projector do you use and how close is it? I'm curious because someday I want to get a somewhat brighter projector. Thanks.



I'm between 10 and 11 feet away from my screen. I use the JVC RS20 at about 13.5 feet from the screen, with the projector just above the top of the screen height.


I've always been very sensitive to such artifacts and couldn't bear RPTVs due to the Silk Screen Effect (we don't hear much about that anymore with the decline of RPTV). I knew, given my sensitivity to these issues that I was rolling the dice a little bit in getting a screen with any gain. But I felt I needed the gain and the optical coating seemed pretty benign from the ST-130 samples I had.


Like pretty much every screen I've seen with an optical coating, I can sometimes see a sort of gritty, specular over-lay on the image, particularly in images with mostly bright areas. My perfect screen would not exhibit this behaviour, but of course most set ups involve compromise. When I saw my RS20 on a neutral gain screen I found myself wanting just a bit more brightness to the image, and the ST-130 definitely brought that too the table to a very satisfying degree. So, for now, I think I've made the best set of compromises, although one day I might look at the Snowmatte, especially if I end up with a brighter projector in the future.


----------



## KB1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *umr* /forum/post/17900152
> 
> 
> It depends on how close the surfaces are and their reflectivity as to the extent if the problem. If you download the screen report linked to below you can see how dark the furnishings are in my room. This is what I would target. Screens with gain gain can help with thus, but they are not a free ride.



Very informative report. "The shimmering caused by these elements was visible in brighter elements of images." ST130 quote is a perfect summary of what I see. Just like Rich, I'm probably very sensitive to it and I do see the shimmering overlay in brighter scenes. I have the iris on my RS25 at -7 right now, I'll try to bring it down to -11 and see what happens. I think I had it there initially and did not notice anything until I opened the iris to -7 weeks ago. Snomatte might be a good choice for me eventually, my ceiling is black and my furniture is dark brown (carpet is lighter though). Right side of room is dark blue velvet curtain and left side wall (brown) is far from the screen given the asymmetric nature of the room.


----------



## Kuro




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Carey P* /forum/post/17899965
> 
> 
> Kuro, You have a slower fall-off than the G3, but the half-gain is still around 30 which can tend to hotspot depending on setup. If the shiny areas are more in the center, then it would support that theory. Try moving around, up and down too, and notice if/how the effect changes. Maybe your projector is just too bright?



Carey,


I'm using the Sony VW80 PJ. And yes, the shiny/shimmering/sheen area is indeed in the center. If I sit on the sides, the shimmering effect in the center is somewhat reduced.


I'm sitting approx 13 ft away and the VW80 is mounted above my head and slightly behind. A wall is about 14" behind my head.


Do you think adjusting the iris manually to reduced the light output will reduce the shimmering effect significantly? I don't want to reduce the light too much, as I like the bright and saturated colors the Firehawk is giving me


----------



## RooRwOrks

I use Firehawk G3 in my living room. I have my projector mounted at 1.6x the image width for 2.35:1 when I zoom out to fill it and I do not have any issues with sparkles. In my theater, I use StudioTek 130, again no issues with sparkles. I am using a less bright projector in my dedicated, but even in my living room, at the shortest throw recommended, I do not have any issues. I was contemplating on going with StudioTek 100, but was concerned about crossreflection washing out my image and projector brightness, decided to go with StudioTek 130.


On my older 1st generation Firehawk screen, I did have a few sparkle issues and when I called Stewart was told to lightly dab at the sparkle with a lead pencil. This actually helped fix the problem until I was able to upgrade to G3.


----------



## crimscrem

I'm trying to decide which Stewart screen material is best for my setup. I'm trying to figure out if I should go with the Firehawk SST or the StudioTek 130.


I'm a bit confused on what ambient light may need to be controlled, and figure out what Stewart screen makes the most sense. I describe my setup below, but a simple way of asking this is whether, for purposes of picking a screen, I am focusing on the light at the screen, the light in at the seating position, light that is near the location of the projector, or if it's really about any light at all. (I have a feeling the answer is "all ambient light.") And I hope this post makes some sense without pictures.


I have a space that is about 27-28 feet long and about 20 feet wide. The movie/media space is really about 15 x 15 with a kitchen/bar space occupying the back 12-13 feet of the room. (The seating distance from the screen will be about 15 ft.) The left side of the movie/media space will have a floor to ceiling wall that comes out only 5 feet from the wall on which I will be placing the screen. The right side of the movie/media space will have floor to ceiling walls that run the entire 27-28 feet. There are no windows on the 27-28 foot wall. There are no windows in the kitchen/bar space behind the media/movie space. The only window is roughly 18 feet to the left of the screen and 8 feet behind the screen. And as noted earlier, the floor to ceiling wall on the left side of the media/movie space that comes out 5 feet provides further "protection" against any light that may come in through the window. The walls in the media/movie space will be painted a very dark color. I'm thinking a very dark red. The kitchen/bar area will probably be a lighter color than the movie/media space, but not light. I'm thinking of a gray color.


I am planning on using either an Optoma HD8200 or a JVC DLA-RS10 projector. I'm contemplating either a 120" or 110" screen.


I am planning on putting lights in this media/movie and kitchen/bar space on dimmers. Nevertheless, I'd like to be able to watch HD TV shows and sporting events with some ambient light. A great example would be if I had a Super Bowl party. The media/movie space might be kept a bit darker and the kitchen/bar space behind the media/movie space (separate by a 42" wall) a tad bit brighter (enough to see where people are and move around).


Does this mean that I need to go with a Firehawk screen that works better with ambient light? Or do you think I can still go with a Studiotek 130? I understand the additional advantages of a Firehawk screen in helping with blacks and color contrast. But I really, really like the viewing angle of the Studiotek 130.


I apologize for the long post without pictures, and I appreciate any feedback. Thank you.


----------



## sknoogleplex

I just visited a home theater store (Gramophone in Columbia, MD), and saw several setups using gray Stewart screens. Does anyone know if these were likely to be firehawks or greyhawks? (I.e. is it particularly common for stores to use one or the other for their displays?)


The reason I ask is I'm looking to get a screen and I really like the one I saw. The Projector Central review of the Firehawk turned me off to it quite a bit with its discussions of viewing angles and hotspots. I was worried that the picture on a firehawk would become almost unwatchable from wide angles, but it really seemed quite viewable on this screen. The hotspots were not especially noticeable or distracting as I had feared. (It also looked great with a fair amount of ambient light.) Thank you.


----------



## crimscrem




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *sknoogleplex* /forum/post/17935012
> 
> 
> I just visited a home theater store (Gramophone in Columbia, MD), and saw several setups using gray Stewart screens. Does anyone know if these were likely to be firehawks or greyhawks? (I.e. is it particularly common for stores to use one or the other for their displays?)
> 
> 
> The reason I ask is I'm looking to get a screen and I really like the one I saw. The Projector Central review of the Firehawk turned me off to it quite a bit with its discussions of viewing angles and hotspots. I was worried that the picture on a firehawk would become almost unwatchable from wide angles, but it really seemed quite viewable on this screen. The hotspots were not especially noticeable or distracting as I had feared. (It also looked great with a fair amount of ambient light.) Thank you.



Not sure how much this helps, but the home theater guys I use have a firehawk set up in their showroom. I'm guessing someone will just tell you to give the store a call and ask them what they have up, so I might as well.


----------



## robkramer

Hey, I need a quick confirmation. I'll be locating my FH G3 soon, and I want to make sure Im using the right offset.


With the FH (angular reflective), you want the reflection off the center of the screen (yellow line in my photo) to be at eye level at the seated position, right?









http://www.pbase.com/image/121228735.bmp


----------



## FLBoy

Yes, that would make the screen center the brightest. You can also confirm this using my screen gain calculator linked below.


----------



## robkramer

Got the FH screen up on Saturday, and wow!










Colors are deeper, bolder, and the image is more 3-D like.










Washout (with the lights on) has been greatly reduced (compared to when I projected on a beige wall). "Hot spots" and "sparkles" are non-issues. The biggest surprise is that reflected light (from the image on the screen) is practically nil. I thought I would have to paint my ceiling (which is beige too), but nope, it stays dark.


I am loving it!


Ok, but now I need to *****. Mounting the "final assembly" was a big PITA.














Aligning the screen, blindly, with the 4 bolts in the wall sucked. Also, the screw heads (that attach the mounting tabs to the frame) scratched the wall during the final installation. Stewart needs to switch to "easy" 45-deg mounting bar like everyone else (a-la Carada). Stewart's way is ridiculously stupid, especially at this quality (and price) level.










Of course, its done and installed now.


----------



## FLBoy

Great looking installation, Rob!


----------



## robkramer

Thanks


----------



## afamily4

I have narrowed the choice of projector between Panasonic AE4000 and Epson 8500UB; it appears to be a toss up.


My question is about appropriate screen for either. My setup will be in the basement (light controlled) and I am looking for a screen size of 92-100". I have visited 4 local stores here. Three of them said I should get a Stewart screen (e.g., Stewart 100" luxusdeluxe studiotek130) - saying these are the very best. The 4th store said while Stewart is top of line, it is an overkill for such a mid-range projector & that I could go with something cheaper in the $1000$1200 range (vs. $2300-2400 for Stewart). Your advice is appreciated.


Thank you.


----------



## FLBoy

I agree with the 4th store. Besides, a 92-100" is pretty small for front projection. You may well want a larger screen down the road, perhaps with your next projector.


You don't say what type of screen you prefer--manual pull down, electric, or fixed frame. We would need to know that to make a recommendation of any kind. If you aren't sure, check out my screen comparison linked below.


----------



## elmalloc

Can someone contact me regarding pricing of the ST130 screens?


----------



## afamily4

Thanks. I am looking for fixed frame screen.


----------



## FLBoy

You might want to check out Carada.com. They sell only fixed frame screens through direct on-line sales and seem to be highly respected by most forum members here.


----------



## Aphasia

So, will the Firehawk help me, or am i just doomed forever... I actually took the plunge this week. Without actually having seen it in action. I've seen similar screens that strive for the same effect, but doesnt quite reach it, which is what just about everybody says. After that I've read, read and read some more. But putting half of of the cost of a Firehawk G3 for a copy that doesnt quite get there, when one is a quality junkie, no matter the circumstances, felt wrong, so... Yes, a 96" Firehawk G3 Tab tensioned motorized screen with 20" Top mask is ordered and on its way. And I cant wait to get my current cheap $150 grey screen out of the way. I always thought the new Panasonic AE4000 would lead to a new screen, just not a Firehawk G3. And i usually does my homework, and from what I've read about the Firehawk, that is what i need. And I think these images will show why. The living room is really a rather unsuitable home theater room in many ways.


And this illustrates my current problem. Reflected light from the screen itself that rebounds from the light walls. In the winter i can get it decently dark, and with a few modifications, I will be able to do that in the summer too. The largest problem is the white walls and i dont really have time for a full remodeling of the living room right now. Although this is an older image from my AX100 and is also a HDR-composite for the image within the frame, the reflextion in the frame at the right tells how the real image brightness is compared to the reflective light and how the camera sees it.












This is all the angels. The AE4000 will have about 2x throw range. All viewing will be from within +12º to -20º from center position and at a distance of 1,64x screen width.


----------



## Pete

Please report back when you get the FireHawk as to your impressions compared to what you've been using.


----------



## Aphasia

4 week delivery time and then i need to find a good way to mount it without drilling new holes. So it's still a while left. But even thought the ReAct i looked are supposed to be much worse, its still way better than the current. Although for $150 it is great. I knew it was a cheap shot, but it worked out. Although now several years later, it is starting to get abit wavy.


I'm also doing a comparison to an old-school silver pearl screen that is supposed to be used with slide projectors. So im gonna use that one to compare my current, then also as a reference for the stewart and take some photos.


----------



## nathan_h

I realize you don't want to remodel. But if you were to paint the ceiling dark gray you'd be happier.


----------



## Aphasia

It's not that I haven't thought about it. The problem is really that I dont really have anywhere to put the stuff in the living room while i remodel. Sure, one can do it around the couch and just cover it, but the walls, which has like two layers of weave and paint right now would need som real work. And that weave needs to come down do the bare concrete. And if i do something extensive like that, it would be a folly to leave the wooden floors alone, since they really need a good sanding and oiling because of age. So if i do remodel before i move, that will be an all or nothing thing. And since the hallway and dinner-room-part is connected in a single floor-space, its abit extensive.


Although I am redoing the kitchen later this spring, so I might just continue on. Although doing it properly would take at least a week if i do it myself. Or be quite costly if had somebody do it for me.


In the mean time, i hope the abilities of the Firehawk will get me some goodness. If not, I just might have to remodel as not to waste the fine screen I just bought


----------



## nathan_h

Yes, it is a slippery slope. Another idea, which would also help with sound: A large, black (or other dark color) square acoustic panel as wide as the screen, attached to the ceiling. That would capture both audio and video first reflections...


----------



## Aphasia




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *nathan_h* /forum/post/18221719
> 
> 
> Yes, it is a slippery slope. Another idea, which would also help with sound: A large, black (or other dark color) square acoustic panel as wide as the screen, attached to the ceiling. That would capture both audio and video first reflections...



Yeah, I've had adding something like that in my thoughts for quite a while. In the room picture you can see some isolation plates standing around. Right now im building framers for them so i can hang them on the walls properly. If decent enough and i get one over, I might just put it in the ceiling. Although the only bad thing is that i probably need to build a special absorber for the ceiling, since the main lamp mount is smack middle of where the first reflex from the center would be. On the other hand, depending on the lamp, it would act as a diffuser for that. So a pair of plates at each side for the mains is probably it. But I'm shopping for new lamps for the whole apartmen soon so I'f im lucky I might find something that fits the bill.


Although the lamp sits right outside the top of the frame in the last page. So to get something that would impact the light enough it would probably have to be quite large, something like a couple of square meters at least.


I've also debated putting up what amounts to black out curtains on the walls, if I can do it so it doesnt look like too bad. Even the ceiling. But the work that will take for the ceiling could be put to repainting it instead. But the cloth is one thing I'm doing for the balcony door to get the light isolation better for when the summer comes. Today It's a bit of a hassle in summertime. But putting up a pair of hooks in the frames to just hang a close thick curtain over the window when i want is an easy fix to do. It's mainly the door to the left in the room that needs it since i have blackout curtains on the main window which is decent enough.


----------



## Aphasia

Got the measurement approvement pdf from my dealer yesterday. Cant wait for it to finally get here.


----------



## john barlow




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *afamily4* /forum/post/18080200
> 
> 
> I have narrowed the choice of projector between Panasonic AE4000 and Epson 8500UB; it appears to be a toss up.
> 
> 
> My question is about appropriate screen for either. My setup will be in the basement (light controlled) and I am looking for a screen size of 92-100". I have visited 4 local stores here. Three of them said I should get a Stewart screen (e.g., Stewart 100" luxusdeluxe studiotek130) - saying these are the very best. The 4th store said while Stewart is top of line, it is an overkill for such a mid-range projector & that I could go with something cheaper in the $1000$1200 range (vs. $2300-2400 for Stewart). Your advice is appreciated.
> 
> 
> Thank you.



I was in the same boat as you and I wound up choosing the Panny because of the zoom feature. I ordered a 2.35:1 Firehawk G3 130" diagonal.


I figured that I'd be more likely to change pj's in the future so, buying the Firehawk and It wil satisfy me for years.


----------



## Aphasia

Im getting my Stewart next week, so right now it feels like a small extra christmas is comming..


----------



## Aphasia

Finally got the thing mounted and yesterday I hooked up all the electrics. Oh my, the term the seller used was "something akin to a 96" tv" really do have its merits. Not to mention that the AE4000 suddenly got a whole lot better then on my old screen.


This is what a screen should look like. And yes, I have been smiling like a fool since. This was greate late christmas present for myself.


----------



## Jason Turk




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Aphasia* /forum/post/18628166
> 
> 
> Finally got the thing mounted and yesterday I hooked up all the electrics. Oh my, the term the seller used was "something akin to a 96" tv" really do have its merits. Not to mention that the AE4000 suddenly got a whole lot better then on my old screen.
> 
> 
> This is what a screen should look like. And yes, I have been smiling like a fool since. This was greate late christmas present for myself.



Congrats! Stewart's are definitely cream-of-the-crop.


----------



## Aphasia

Thank you. I can easily see why you might not want it in a perfect room, but in a living room with white walls and a non-perfect darkening solution. It's great. My windows faces south, so its indecently bright in the evenings until eight or nine pm, but the stewart worked fine to tame that down. My old screen required me to use the smaller tv at days and bright evenings because of the washed out look.


----------



## doublewing11

Looking for a screen for new construction dedicated theater with dimensions 17 X 26 9/10 ft .....complete light controled room.


Viewing habits 90% music and movies with all lights off.........


10% Watching college football with lights on........


Would like a screen that can do both with the priority going to movie watching. 2:40 or 2:35 screen and plan on purchasing a projector with anomorphic lens.


Was leaning toward the SI Black Diamond but have decided to spend the extra money on a quality screen.


Looking at the following screens:


Cine-V 143" Diagonal or

4 Way 135" Diagonal Electomask


Which of the two screens would be better for my application and what fabric would be best? Are the screens too large? My first row of seating is at 15-16 feet and the 2nd row at 21 feet.


I'm still undecided about the projector.........confused now.... the JVC HD35 was my first choice but light output would be an issue. I've thought about purchasing an inexpensive projector for now and wait for two years when the LED's can produce enough light.....just a thought. Help is much appreciated.........


----------



## Trying to snow

I have just purchased a stewart luxus deluxe screenwall second hand. I was shocked to discover that it could not be mounted flush to the wall. Two wooden slabs were provided, and this would mean a big gap. The manual said something about "quick snap" using four wall brackets that act as hooks and allow flush mounting. That's ideal I thought, my screen has the rails that the brackets fit into, so I phoned Stewart and asked how I could get the brackets, but was sickened to discover that they wanted £130 ($200) for these small brackets that would cost less than £10 to make. There attitude was also very snooty. I'm used to dealing with Da-Lite, who have always been a helpful and jolly bunch.


Anyway, I can't afford these brackets, can anyone please suggest an alternate method to mount the screen flush? Many thanks.


----------



## Michael Sargent




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Trying to snow* /forum/post/18687818
> 
> 
> That's ideal I thought, my screen has the rails that the brackets fit into, so I phoned Stewart and asked how I could get the brackets, but was sickened to discover that they wanted £130 ($200) for these small brackets that would cost less than £10 to make.



If it's only going to cost £10, get someone local to make them for you.


----------



## ilpostini2

I just bought a Stewart Horizontal ElectriScreen ElectriMask, sight unseen for short money. It's the screen only, Studiotek 130 model number EMH 100-65B.

I have never seen one of these in action and was wondering where the motor is on a complete screen.

Are the motors Stewart uses a tubular motor the would go inside the metal roller with the screen attached that I have? Do the Stewarts have a remote control that handles the masking?

Thanks for your help.


----------



## luketo

Stewart Firehawk


----------



## mariob33

in the market for a 100inch 16x9 stewart screen any suggestions on who may offer best pricing.


----------



## nathan_h

For a new one, follow the link to avscience at the top of the page. Over the phone they usually have prices that rival any other authorized dealer.


For a used one, look in the classifieds here or audiogon / videogon. You might also get lucky with craigslist or eBay.


----------



## carloserodriguez

Which Stewart Filmscreen is best for the JVC DLA HD-990 projector? A screen that will also be used during the day when ambient light is a problem in the family room.


----------



## nathan_h

Nothing will solve the ambient light problem, but a Firehawk may be your best bet.


----------



## ilpostini2

I have a used Stewart Studiotek 130 tensioned electric screen and it has a crease in the lower right hand bottom of the screen right above the black weighted bottom.

Does anyone know if this crease will come out if left open?


----------



## umr




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ilpostini2* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I have a used Stewart Studiotek 130 tensioned electric screen and it has a crease in the lower right hand bottom of the screen right above the black weighted bottom.
> 
> Does anyone know if this crease will come out if left open?



They usually will come out. Give it a try.


----------



## Ron

Hi - I discovered a problem with my horizontal electrimask over the weekend. I guess I'll be calling Stewart today, but I wanted to see if anyone here has heard of this.


Basically, it's not responding at all, either the top or bottom mask. I don't hear the relays clicking in, and I've verified that I do have power to the masking. I have the infrared/remote interface, even when I point the original remote, with new batteries, right at the sensors, I get nothing. I've verified that something is coming out of the remote also.


The screen/masking is about 6 years old.


Has anyone heard of this?


----------



## ilpostini2

I have a tube with Stewart Studiotek 130 tab tensioned material on it and am attempting to motorize it using one of the two Somfy motors I have in my possession. I have a Somfy LT50 504S2 motor and also a radio controlled Somfy CMO RTS Motor,LT50 535A2.

The latter is a more powerful motor.

Does anyone know which Somfy motor Stewart uses in their Luxus screens?

Thanks


----------



## Jason Turk




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *nathan_h* /forum/post/18826128
> 
> 
> Nothing will solve the ambient light problem, but a Firehawk may be your best bet.



Agreed...front projection is always best in a light controlled setup. But if that isn't possible, a dark gray positive gain fabric, like the Firehawk, may be your best bet.


----------



## snarks

I ended up ordering a firehawk g3 123" from AV science and they gave me a way better deal than I expected.



I am 100% satisfied. The ambient light rejection outperforms my expectations and I would be very happy to have friends over to watch football during the day with lights on and the shades drawn. Everything other than the images with the spot lights right on the screen is very watchable to me.


This is the room . As you can see there are tons of lights and no shortage if light coming in at a side angle from the sliding glass doors and windows.










this is the screen with every single light on "including ceiling lights aimed right at the screen"


















this is with just the ceiling lights turned off


















all the lights off and the shade closed. The room is still very far from a bat cave. I could read a book in the chairs with ease.


----------



## snarks

Few more images. In the following order again.


1) every light on including ceiling spot lights aimed at the screen and shades open.


2) just the spotlights off.


3) lights off and shade closed but still very far from ideal projector conditions.




























again, anything but the spotlight image is a viewable image to me.


----------



## nathan_h

Not bad. I'm going to vote for some blackout curtains and a painted ceiling


----------



## snarks

at night when we would normally watch movies it is really dark.


There is no way the wife is going to let me get "black" curtains or paint the ceiling. Hence the firehawk : )


----------



## FLBoy




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *snarks* /forum/post/18913620
> 
> 
> There is no way the wife is going to let me get "black" curtains ...



Blackout curtains can be any color. They just have a liner that blocks light.


----------



## snarks

The curtains are a possibility but to be honest I don't want it to be a bat cave. If the sun is out I'd like to know it. Hence the choice of the firehawk and a bright projector.


----------



## Jason Turk

Not bad! Thanks for sharing the pictures!


----------



## Ron




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Ron* /forum/post/18893757
> 
> 
> Hi - I discovered a problem with my horizontal electrimask over the weekend. I guess I'll be calling Stewart today, but I wanted to see if anyone here has heard of this.
> 
> 
> Basically, it's not responding at all, either the top or bottom mask. I don't hear the relays clicking in, and I've verified that I do have power to the masking. I have the infrared/remote interface, even when I point the original remote, with new batteries, right at the sensors, I get nothing. I've verified that something is coming out of the remote also.
> 
> 
> The screen/masking is about 6 years old.
> 
> 
> Has anyone heard of this?



well, no responses, but just as well - I just figured it out and I wanted to share in case anyone else runs into this...


I have multiple ir receivers, since I control the system from multiple rooms. in one room, I installed a couple of new cfl light bulbs. apparently, that room's receiver was not a cfl-proof one! it was flooding the system with ir signal, apparently...there were a couple of things that didn't like that - the stewart masking, and my integra pre/pro. once I blocked that ir receiver, voila!


so, I've ordered a cfl-proof ir receiver for that room...I'm assuming that'll fix the issue!


now if I can just find a way to trade in my firehawk material for a studiotek 130 g3...


----------



## Jason Turk




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Ron* /forum/post/18931713
> 
> 
> well, no responses, but just as well - I just figured it out and I wanted to share in case anyone else runs into this...
> 
> 
> I have multiple ir receivers, since I control the system from multiple rooms. in one room, I installed a couple of new cfl light bulbs. apparently, that room's receiver was not a cfl-proof one! it was flooding the system with ir signal, apparently...there were a couple of things that didn't like that - the stewart masking, and my integra pre/pro. once I blocked that ir receiver, voila!
> 
> 
> so, I've ordered a cfl-proof ir receiver for that room...I'm assuming that'll fix the issue!
> 
> 
> now if I can just find a way to trade in my firehawk material for a studiotek 130 g3...



Wow that is either some sensitive equipment or powerful bulbs...glad it was resolved.


----------



## ilpostini2

I have a 119" dia. Stewart Filmscreen Luxus Model A Electriscreen and was wondering what I would need to add the 12v trigger option or the ir remote control option to the screen, or even if it can be done after market.

Thanks


----------



## Aphasia

I forgot to add any options when i ordered my Stewart, and when I looked at the prices the were rather expensive, but most seem to need some form of factory add-on. At the end I went with Kingpins generic controller instead. Works fine. It takes IR, Radio, IR via Cable or trigger input and has manual controllers on the box itself. Dont know if its available in the states though, but I bet you have a bunch of other generic options for adding 12 volt trigger to control the screen.


----------



## manoharshetty9

just got my 102" diagonal 16:9 Studiotek 130 G3 electriscreen with horizontal masking which i am using in a light controlled dedicated Home theatre room with dark blue walls and ceiling and floor. distance from screen is 13 feet. i have to chose between the above 2 projectors. please advise


----------



## HuskerOmaha

I have an Optoma HD72, lumens calculated at 350, 500 on high-performance mode.


9ft ceilings, potential screen area is 13.5 ft wide....


Would like to ceiling mount the projector, the basement is being finished, so mounting location is not an issue, can go anywhere.


Will probably leave the ceiling white...walls dark/black behind and near screen. Some ambient light from an adjacent wall window, otherwise controlled and in a basement.


Room is 13.5 x 30. Seating area will be in the 12-20ft range...this is also movable.


What would you recommend if you were building the room from scratch?


Projector was free, would rather use it and upgrade that part later.


Thanks


----------



## flaviomartins

Hi, I Have a stewart filmscreen with 10 years old, working in my CRT projector.


Now, i need a screen for use with the panasonic PT-AE4000 and i need a scrren 2,35:1 with 132 in luxus model


Does exist this size in this model?

What material recomend? The ambient has light control.


Tks,

martins,


----------



## Ron




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *HuskerOmaha* /forum/post/19176953
> 
> 
> I have an Optoma HD72, lumens calculated at 350, 500 on high-performance mode.
> 
> 
> 9ft ceilings, potential screen area is 13.5 ft wide....
> 
> 
> Would like to ceiling mount the projector, the basement is being finished, so mounting location is not an issue, can go anywhere.
> 
> 
> Will probably leave the ceiling white...walls dark/black behind and near screen. Some ambient light from an adjacent wall window, otherwise controlled and in a basement.
> 
> 
> Room is 13.5 x 30. Seating area will be in the 12-20ft range...this is also movable.
> 
> 
> What would you recommend if you were building the room from scratch?
> 
> 
> Projector was free, would rather use it and upgrade that part later.
> 
> 
> Thanks



Since you're asking for recommendations







then I would strongly advise you to reconsider leaving the ceiling white...the best thing you can do for your image and contrast is to have a bat cave - i.e. black ceiling. However, if you really can't do black, then look at a dark gray, or maybe a color recommended by Dennis Erskine, I think it's called Milano Blue - a search should turn up info on it. I would also find something to black out that window during daylight hours - for the same reason. A cover, blackout blinds, something.


But you definitely don't want a white ceiling, if you care about the image!


Also, if you have the flexibility, the center speaker should go behind the screen (i.e. a microperf). If not, then above the screen tilted down should be your second option.


12 feet back is good for a 9' wide screen for the front row of seats. That's 12' to the eyeballs, not to the front of the chair.


Actually, all of this should be in the construction area, or whatever it's called now. There's lots of info there, we should leave this thread for Stewart screen issues.


Edit: Sorry, on re-reading I see you had a subject on your post, asking if you should get a firehawk - so that part of the question does fit here. I didn't notice it initially since it was only in the subject line (and therefore doesn't get included in the quoted section). Unfortunately, I don't know about the Optoma, so someone else will have to address that question.


----------



## nitinchantu




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jonathan Teller* /forum/post/6315348
> 
> 
> Just how good is the FireHawk at shedding ambient light? Right now, I'm torn between the FireHawk and the Da-Lite High Power. I'm leaning towards the High Power based on input from Tryg and also just on price. Strangely though, I haven't really been able to grasp how the FireHawk and High Power match up against one another.
> 
> 
> My setup will be:
> 
> 
> - 106" diagonal 16x9 screen: bottom edge 28" off the ground; top edge 6'8" off the ground
> 
> - primary seat is 12 feet from screen, dead center width wise, eyes are about 3'6" off the ground
> 
> - other seats are just to either side of primary seat (one on either side) and on a riser behind: all seats within 30 degrees of screen center (15 degrees to either side of center)
> 
> - projector is 13 feet from screen: center of lens is even with top of screen (6'8" off the ground)
> 
> - I will have total darkness for serious movie viewing
> 
> - Walls, ceiling, floor and furniture are all dark so reflected light should be at a minimum
> 
> - For TV and gatherings though, I will have some ambient light.
> 
> - Ambient light is still low and controlled: 4 x 60 Watt sconces; two on either side wall.
> 
> - Light from sconces goes up onto ceiling and down along wall.
> 
> - All 4 sconces are behind the projector
> 
> 
> Now, I've heard that even though I've got a ceiling mount, the High Power will still perform better than most other screens with some ambient light. But I also have a setup that should work well for the FireHawk (at least according to Projector Central).
> 
> 
> What I really want to hear are opinions or experience on the High Power vs. the FireHawk in my particular setup.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Jon




I agree with you!!!!


----------



## Toe




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Ron* /forum/post/191832
> 
> 
> 
> Also, if you have the flexibility, the center speaker should go behind the screen (i.e. a microperf). If not, then above the screen tilted down should be your second option.



I disagree with this. If he cant go behind the screen, get that tweeter as close to ear level as possible, and as much in line with the FL and FR which should put the center channel BELOW the screen with a slight tilt up toward head level. That should be the 2nd option with the center above the screen a very distant 3rd.


As far as the screen recommend, I dont have any experience with the High Power, but I know the Firehawk would work very well all things considered in that situation.


----------



## merv43




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jonathan Teller* /forum/post/6315348
> 
> 
> Just how good is the FireHawk at shedding ambient light? Right now, I'm torn between the FireHawk and the Da-Lite High Power. I'm leaning towards the High Power based on input from Tryg and also just on price. Strangely though, I haven't really been able to grasp how the FireHawk and High Power match up against one another.
> 
> 
> My setup will be:
> 
> 
> - 106" diagonal 16x9 screen: bottom edge 28" off the ground; top edge 6'8" off the ground
> 
> - primary seat is 12 feet from screen, dead center width wise, eyes are about 3'6" off the ground
> 
> - other seats are just to either side of primary seat (one on either side) and on a riser behind: all seats within 30 degrees of screen center (15 degrees to either side of center)
> 
> - projector is 13 feet from screen: center of lens is even with top of screen (6'8" off the ground)
> 
> - I will have total darkness for serious movie viewing
> 
> - Walls, ceiling, floor and furniture are all dark so reflected light should be at a minimum
> 
> - For TV and gatherings though, I will have some ambient light.
> 
> - Ambient light is still low and controlled: 4 x 60 Watt sconces; two on either side wall.
> 
> - Light from sconces goes up onto ceiling and down along wall.
> 
> - All 4 sconces are behind the projector
> 
> 
> Now, I've heard that even though I've got a ceiling mount, the High Power will still perform better than most other screens with some ambient light. But I also have a setup that should work well for the FireHawk (at least according to Projector Central).
> 
> 
> What I really want to hear are opinions or experience on the High Power vs. the FireHawk in my particular setup.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Jon



I am going through the same delema you are, I am looking at a 106" in both the firehawk and high power. Problem is they are not in the same location, but they are with the same pj. I am leaning towards the firehawk it just does black better or at least it looks like it. I may be biased as well since in am currently using a 92" firehawk that is about 5 years old and has been great but we want a bigger picture. There is a cost difference for sure, not sure what difference you are looking at, but that is a considereation. Let us know what you have decided. Good luck.


----------



## monstosity12

I am in a dilema.


I have a choice to get a studiotek 100 g3, or a studiotek 130 g3.


With a studiotek 100 g3, I would have to use high lamp with iris fully open on the new upcoming jvc 3d projector to achieve my brigthness im after.


With the studiotek 130 g3, I can use low lamp with iris fully open.


What are some of the disadvantages and advatages of these choices, on the projector end regarding these choices? Im assuming native contrast would be the same since my gain will be lower with the iris fully open, compared to having to close the iris to get the same thing on a 1.3 gain screen, right?


BTW. My room is covered in black velvet.


----------



## Dennis Erskine

The StudioTek 100 would be appropriate only in a room that was either totally black, or darn near totally black. (Walls, ceiling, carpet, etc.)


----------



## Jim Noyd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Dennis Erskine* /forum/post/19260896
> 
> 
> The StudioTek 100 would be appropriate only in a room that was either totally black, or darn near totally black. (Walls, ceiling, carpet, etc.)



Time to update your signature Dennis as a member of CEDIA's board of directors and thanks again for all you do for the industry and this forum.


----------



## monstosity12




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Dennis Erskine* /forum/post/19260896
> 
> 
> The StudioTek 100 would be appropriate only in a room that was either totally black, or darn near totally black. (Walls, ceiling, carpet, etc.)



Thanks Dennis


My walls, ceiling are covered in black velvet (the whole room). The carpet is black carpet. I even sewed black velvet around my couch, so its totally black as well.


Screen size looking at is 120" WIDE 2.35.1 screen. Projector is the new upcoming JVC RS40 rated at 1300 lumens. So in essence, and hopefully, I would be getting 900 lumens in low lamp, and 1150 lumens in high lamp.

This is of course speculative, but would the Studiotek 100 still be appropriate?


Will have about 16-17 feet throw distance. Projector will be 1 foot above my head behind me.


With the Studiotek 130 im just worried about the foot lambert drop off at the edges and semi edges. My screen has a area surface of 55.82 square foot. And I am usually the only one watching movies, so I will be dead center always. Which gives the edges a 42 degrees from where I sit. Is this bad? This is a 4-6 foot lamberts difference with a brand new bulb on high lamp from center to edge if my calculations are correct?


I was also thinking about the SMX material CineMatte solid screen. Its rated at 1.4 and the graph shows basically no drop off even at 80 degrees. But im thinking this is more than likely a lesser gain to be able to achieve that. Such like the carada brilliant white is rated at 1.4 but its actually 1.1 around. Any thoughts?


----------



## Kevin Snyder

I'm just starting to look into curved screens.


I am interested in the Stewart Cine-W with studiotek130 material.


I notice there is a 5" border all around the screen. That takes up an awful lot of real estate. Is there ANY way to order this screen with a smaller border, similar to the other fixed screens??


Kevin


----------



## john barlow




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *flaviomartins* /forum/post/19182134
> 
> 
> Hi, I Have a stewart filmscreen with 10 years old, working in my CRT projector.
> 
> 
> Now, i need a screen for use with the panasonic PT-AE4000 and i need a scrren 2,35:1 with 132” in luxus model
> 
> 
> Does exist this size in this model?
> 
> What material recomend? The ambient has light control.
> 
> 
> Tks,
> 
> martins,



Hi, I got my 130" 2,35:1 Luxus Firehawk screen from a dealer that advertises on Audiogon. They go by the name, xtremefun


Stewart Filmscreen Luxus Deluxe 123in brand new firehawk g3 deluxe

Asking $2150.00 obo

New Retail $3097.00

Condition NEW

Days/Views 5 / 97


Ship cost Plus shipping

Ship from 60 lbs from 07728

Ship to USA only

Included Box, Manual

About Seller Xtremefun (279)

(send email) (view feedback) (other items)

Pay Terms Money Order, Personal Check, Visa/MC, Amex, PayPal

Make an Offer


Pictures

Stewart Filmscreen Luxus Deluxe 123in

luxusdeluxe Stewart Filmscreen Luxus Deluxe 123in

deluxe_screenwalllow



Description (Stewart Filmscreen Luxus Deluxe 123in)

I have brand new Stewart Luxus Deluxe Screens , factory new with Firehawk G3 !!!


G3 models are quick ship and can ship 2-3 days..


Other materials Studiotek, Gray Hawk, etc.. a little while longer.


Best deal available right now.


Paypal adds 3%


Shipping additional usually 125-150 depending on location


----------



## DouglasCleary

I am guessing that the answer is no but do you need the Cinema Sonic Processor (CSP) if you're using Audyssey?


----------



## zbroke

Getting a 128" 16:9 Studioteck 130 (fixed) delivered this week. This seems like a strange question but should I set the box in the room for a few days to let it acclimatize before I set it up or am I good to go?


Also, I'm not getting the PJ for another few months so if I decide not to install the screen right away, will it harm the material if it stays rolled in the box for a couple of months?


Thanks!


----------



## GetGray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DouglasCleary* /forum/post/19352786
> 
> 
> I am guessing that the answer is no but do you need the Cinema Sonic Processor (CSP) if you're using Audyssey?



Wouldn't think so, but the distributor says it must be ordered with at least 1 with a MP material. And the dealer screen configurator requires you to choose at least 1.


----------



## slantsflood

Can anyone with a studiotek 100 comment on how it handles a little lighting? Ive read in a review that it should have no light what so ever. Ive seen a dragonfly 1.0 gain matte white screen paired with a epson 9500 and it did great with some back room lights on. I am wondering how similar the studiotek 100 would be to the dragonfly screen. Im trying to invest in a screen and use it for a long time. I have seen a studiotek 130 and the shimmer was to distracting to me. So i am thinking the 1.0 gain is the way to go. The room will be all dark colors with no windows


----------



## rdewey

I would deeply appreciate a recommendation from this group on which Stewart screen to buy... I'm thinking the Firehawk G3 is right for this application (the screen will go where the tape designates which is 110" diagonal). I will be using a new JVC DLA-X3 projector...My wife will not likely allow any painting of this room or curtains, etc. Will there be a problem mounting a fixed screen over that plantation shutter?


----------



## nathan_h

In that room, if you really can't darken the ceiling at all, a Firehawk is the only decent option. And you can save money on the projector, since getting one with great contrast will make less of a difference.


Remember that the screen has a few inches of frame outside the viewable area, meaning you'll get into that section of the window that sticks out on the bottom. You'll likely need to get creative and create a mount that hangs the screen out a few inches to give the window clearance. (The home theater building section is probably a good place to discuss that and get tips, etc.)


I'd guess that that projector and screen combo gets you into the $6k range. If that room, I'd probably save a couple grand and get something like a Panasonic Viera TC-P65VT25 -- 65 inch plasma. No, the image won't be as large, but I'd say it will be of higher quality.


But if you are set on a front projection set up (and I don't blame you if you are) a Firehawk, with a ceiling mounted projector, is your best bet.


----------



## rdewey

Nathan, thanks for your input. So your concern is that the light scatter from the Firehawk will spread to the sloping ceilings and then spill back into the screen thus washing out the picture? I was worried about that myself, but I really wanted a big picture for that room. If I were to cover the back wall and plantation shutter with black velvet, would that help enough, or are the sloping white ceilings still going to do me in with that setup?


As to your point about the frame, the taped squares in the corners denote the extent of the Stewart Luxus Deluxe fixed frame, so this will fit above the window sill. However, since the wood of the plantation shutter extends out from the wall 1/2 inch, whatever brackets they use will need to hold the frame out from the wall by at least 1/2 inch to avoid touching the shutter.


Assuming I could convince my wife to let me paint those sloping ceilings, what would I need to use (color, type) to make this projector/screen combo a workable proposition?


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rdewey* /forum/post/19493871
> 
> 
> I would deeply appreciate a recommendation from this group on which Stewart screen to buy... I'm thinking the Firehawk G3 is right for this application (the screen will go where the tape designates which is 110" diagonal). I will be using a new JVC DLA-X3 projector...My wife will not likely allow any painting of this room or curtains, etc. Will there be a problem mounting a fixed screen over that plantation shutter?



That room is a projector's nightmare. Literally about as challenging as it gets in terms of image wash-out. Specialty screens are your only option for a decent image. The Firehawk is one, but you might consider going for something even more hard-core for fighting reflections, like a Black Diamond screen or some DNP screens.


----------



## mrlittlejeans

You should really darken that room up somehow. It is almost a shame to spend a lot of money on an expensive screen and projector with a room that will not allow your set up to approach its potential.


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rdewey* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Nathan, thanks for your input. So your concern is that the light scatter from the Firehawk will spread to the sloping ceilings and then spill back into the screen thus washing out the picture? I was worried about that myself, but I really wanted a big picture for that room. If I were to cover the back wall and plantation shutter with black velvet, would that help enough, or are the sloping white ceilings still going to do me in with that setup?
> 
> 
> As to your point about the frame, the taped squares in the corners denote the extent of the Stewart Luxus Deluxe fixed frame, so this will fit above the window sill. However, since the wood of the plantation shutter extends out from the wall 1/2 inch, whatever brackets they use will need to hold the frame out from the wall by at least 1/2 inch to avoid touching the shutter.
> 
> 
> Assuming I could convince my wife to let me paint those sloping ceilings, what would I need to use (color, type) to make this projector/screen combo a workable proposition?



Darker is better. Even if it has to be a color, though gray towards black is ideal. I'd worry about the sloping ceiling even before the screen wall, though you'll be happier if it's darker too like the ceiling will be.


But this is not the thread for that. I'd recommend starting a thread in the construction area titled like "I'm building a front projection home theater in an all white room. Help!" and lots of folks will likely jump in with ideas, especially after seeing the photo. It can be a very cool space with a few tweaks.


----------



## GeorgeHolland

I have a Studiotec 130 with a custom 47 ¼ x 84 screen size and wall mount frame purchased in late 1999.


I am learning the Studiotec 130 screen material I have was designed for 480P and not optimal for 1080P projectors like my current JVC HD750/RS20 or my future JVC RS50.


How much improvement would I see? I plan on ceiling mounting the JVC RS50 at the height and distance recommended for optimal 3D and 2d viewing. My HD750/RS20 is currently sitting on a shelf behind the back wall.


The room is 18' 6 long and 12' 6 wide. The center front row seat has a 9' 6" viewing distance before reclining. The room has complete light control with black carpet, black front wall, black side walls and ceiling extending 3 feet from the front wall, and finally dark red side walls and dark gray ceiling everywhere else.


Stewart Films is checking the serial number to verify what I purchased after I gave them a model number that indicated my screen material may be microperf. (Model # SND096.5HST13WM).


I might just be looking at an old quote since I don't remember ordering microperf, but if I did I assume that increases the re-sale value if I decide to sell it and purchase a G3 version of the screen.


Options are


1) Keep it and see how the RS50 looks. With the RS20 I never knew what I was missing but now that I know, the limitations will likely jump off the screen. Ignorance is bliss.


2) Buy new screen material and re-use the frame.


3) Sell the frame with the screen and buy all new, possibly going a little bigger.


My current screen was custom built to fit inside a section of the front wall that is 1 foot deeper than the rest so if I go with a bigger screen the length of my room will shrink by a foot to 11' 6 and my front row viewing distance will go to 8' 6.


Thanks.


George


----------



## GetGray

I would definately keep it and see how it looks, first. Will only cost you a few weeks of waiting on the new one if you dont' like it.


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GeorgeHolland* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I have a Studiotec 130 with a custom 47 ¼ x 84 screen size and wall mount frame purchased in late 1999.
> 
> 
> I am learning the Studiotec 130 screen material I have was designed for 480P and not optimal for 1080P projectors like my current JVC HD750/RS20 or my future JVC RS50.
> 
> 
> How much improvement would I see? I plan on ceiling mounting the JVC RS50 at the height and distance recommended for optimal 3D and 2d viewing. My HD750/RS20 is currently sitting on a shelf behind the back wall.
> 
> 
> The room is 18' 6 long and 12' 6 wide. The center front row seat has a 9' 6" viewing distance before reclining. The room has complete light control with black carpet, black front wall, black side walls and ceiling extending 3 feet from the front wall, and finally dark red side walls and dark gray ceiling everywhere else.
> 
> 
> Stewart Films is checking the serial number to verify what I purchased after I gave them a model number that indicated my screen material may be microperf. (Model # SND096.5HST13WM).
> 
> 
> I might just be looking at an old quote since I don't remember ordering microperf, but if I did I assume that increases the re-sale value if I decide to sell it and purchase a G3 version of the screen.
> 
> 
> Options are
> 
> 
> 1) Keep it and see how the RS50 looks. With the RS20 I never knew what I was missing but now that I know, the limitations will likely jump off the screen. Ignorance is bliss.
> 
> 
> 2) Buy new screen material and re-use the frame.
> 
> 
> 3) Sell the frame with the screen and buy all new, possibly going a little bigger.
> 
> 
> My current screen was custom built to fit inside a section of the front wall that is 1 foot deeper than the rest so if I go with a bigger screen the length of my room will shrink by a foot to 11' 6 and my front row viewing distance will go to 8' 6.
> 
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> 
> George



What are you seeing that you don't like?


Are you seeing the screen texture?


The Studiotech 130 from 1999 is still one of the best formulations ever made.


----------



## GeorgeHolland




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *nathan_h* /forum/post/19506049
> 
> 
> What are you seeing that you don't like?
> 
> 
> Are you seeing the screen texture?
> 
> 
> The Studiotech 130 from 1999 is still one of the best formulations ever made.



I was never looking for it since I had never been told by Stewart my screen was only designed for 480p so no, my ignorance has been bliss.


I'll take my own and GetGray's advice and see how it looks first. I can't imagine it will be much different that what I see today with my current JVC.


I also have another possible home for my HD750 so there is an outside chance I'll move the screen with it but am reluctant since the frame fits perfectly in the notch in my wall.


I'm still curious about what the difference would be.


Thanks for the replys.


----------



## tn1krr

Anyone got any specs or info on new Silver 5D material? Press release is just the usual hype, but what about gain (heard rumours on it being 2.0), min throw in terms of hotspotting avoidance, do I need to put the projector in the middle of screen like some other higher gain materials? Absolute batcave or not...?


Starting a new HT project soon and since I'm replacing my current JVC projector with a 3D model and ditching my 82" Greyhawk for a bigger screen (115" or so) with some gain for 3D brightness I'm obviously interested in getting a screen material that is the best compromize for 2D/3D. Originally looked at ST130, but this new material has gotten me interested too.


----------



## aceg1

There is currently a listing for a Stewart Studiotek 130 JKP screen on ebay. Is there such a beast? Is this a new screen material from Stewart? The actual picture in the listing shows the screen as a Stewart Studiotek 130 JKP screen.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Stewart-Studiote...76721104100588


----------



## R Harkness

As I recall, years ago Stewart originally created the ST-130 in consultation with Joe Kane.

You don't see Kane's name associated with the ST-130 these days, but perhaps someone put JKP in that add to sort of capitalise on his current brand status with screen materials (?).


----------



## GetGray

It actually has a emblem. Rich is right, must be an older screen. Nothing wrong with that though. Nothing to wear out or go bad.


----------



## buckley44

i have a firehawk g3 that i just ordered for my family room / media room and Im going to use a sony vw90es projector with 3d viewing option,i went with the firehawk because of my room and i got it for a good price, it's a 100" motorized , should i have any concerns about using it for 3d viewing also?


----------



## nathan_h

What are your concerns?


----------



## buckley44




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *nathan_h* /forum/post/19602204
> 
> 
> What are your concerns?



if it's going to be a issue with the brightness when playing 3d material,im kind of limited with my room because its in a family room,and there's ambient light,that's why i chose this screen. was wondering if i should of went with a brighter screen? but like i said im kind of limited because of the room.


----------



## mbw23air

How does the Grayhawk G2 screen compare against a Grayhawk G3? I have a chance to buy a used G2 and my major concerns are that the G3 will show resolution/details better and blacks will be better on the G3. Anybody seen both and can tell me the differences?


Thanks,

Mike


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mbw23air* /forum/post/20222030
> 
> 
> How does the Grayhawk G2 screen compare against a Grayhawk G3? I have a chance to buy a used G2 and my major concerns are that the G3 will show resolution/details better and blacks will be better on the G3. Anybody seen both and can tell me the differences?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Mike



I've seen both and have experience using both.

The main difference is the gain that was lowered a bit due to reformulating the optical coating to make it a little smoother.


The second generation Grayhawk is a .95 gain and the G3 is a .92. Not much of a difference and you would never see the difference. But there is a noticeable difference between the 'new' optical coating and the 'old'.


Benito


----------



## mbw23air




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20223201
> 
> 
> I've seen both and have experience using both.
> 
> The main difference is the gain that was lowered a bit due to reformulating the optical coating to make it a little smoother.
> 
> 
> The second generation Grayhawk is a .95 gain and the G3 is a .92. Not much of a difference and you would never see the difference. But there is a noticeable difference between the 'new' optical coating and the 'old'.
> 
> 
> Benito



Thanks Benito,


That helped out tremendously.


Mike


----------



## GetGray

Can't speak to the Grayhawk, but there was a very big difference going from the Firehawk original, to a G3. Sheen went from noticable, to just not there. That said, their claimed gain was lower on those 2 fabrics as well so that may have had some to do with it. I do run mine bright, right at about 20ftL.


----------



## Benito Joaquin

You are correct, the Firehawk showed the greatest improvement in that area. it caused it to go down from the 1.3 gain down to the 1.25 gain that it is now. The loss of gain is nothing especially when compared to the advantages with the new formula.


benny


----------



## clausdk

If sensitive to sparkling effect on the firehawk G3 - would an SST be better in a room with white walls, wooden floor and ceiling and some ambient light?


Projector would be a Optoma HD87 or Infocus SP8602.


Screensize will be 110", throw distance is around 16-17 feet.


I really like the qualities on the firehawk, I've seen it, but I seem to notice the sparkling alot. I'm not sure if I've been looking at older generations of the firehawk though.


I figure that the gain on the SST would be enough with the above mentioned projectors.


I haven't seen the SST nor the greyhawk so was wondering if that screen is less obvious, especially the sparkling.


I don't seem to be bothered too much with hot spotting actually.


----------



## Benito Joaquin

based off the size and the throw distance, go with the G3 material. There is a gain difference with SST being 1.1 and the G3 being 1.3 but the optical coating is nearly identical and hard to catch any differences.


I'm almost positive you were looking at the older generation firehawk. The G3 version is so much smoother and with much less sparkling.


I would recommend a sample so you could see for yourself. If you like, i can talk to my contact over at Stewart and have some sent out for you ASAP.


Thanks!


Benito


----------



## umr

I would also look at the Grayhawk if one is considering a Firehawk. The actual gain difference when ceiling mounted can be very small, while the difference in sparkling elements is large. Always get a sample and compare in your system.


----------



## clausdk

Ok I think I need to order some samples and test it out which I like better.


I seem to recall also only seeing the sparkling effect in bright scenes with big surfaces having same shade of brightness.


----------



## Coup330

let me ask something too







:


If my only concern is the reflected light from the screen itself that rebounds from the white walls and celling, with which screen to go?


Firehawk or Grayhawk?


Remember, the only problem are the reflections. In my understanding it has to be the Grayhawk, right?


----------



## GetGray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Coup330* /forum/post/20268368
> 
> 
> let me ask something too
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :
> 
> 
> If my only concern is the reflected light from the screen itself that rebounds from the white walls and celling, with which screen to go?
> 
> 
> Firehawk or Grayhawk?
> 
> 
> Remember, the only problem are the reflections. In my understanding it has to be the Grayhawk, right?



Firehawk. The GH has a ~180 deg viewing cone and it will wash out badly with ambient light or wright wall reflections. The Firehawk is the screen for ambient light/bright rooms, etc.. IMHO.


----------



## umr

I would not be as negative about the Grayhawk. It's overall gain is lower than the Firehawk, but it is not simply a gray screen. When the projector is ceiling mounted the actual screen gain from both of these is nearly the same. The Grayhawk will hotspot less and shimmers less. It depends on how the walls are oriented to the screen as to the benefit of a Firehawk versus a Grayhawk.


----------



## ilpostini2

Does anyone have any idea what this model number means?

LX092HFHB

I do know its a motorized Firehawk 110" Diag., but was curious what this model # means.


----------



## Benito Joaquin

Quote:

Originally Posted by *ilpostini2* 
Does anyone have any idea what this model number means?

LX092HFHB

I do know its a motorized Firehawk 110" Diag., but was curious what this model # means.
According to the model number it's not a 110" diagonal.

This is what the model number tells me:


Luxus Model A

Image size: 45" x 80" (92" diag.)

Aspect ratio: 1.78:1

Material: Firehawk (not G3)

Black case


Note that it does not give the black drop amount.


Get me the serial number and i'll get you all the details for that screen.


Benny


----------



## clausdk

I recently saw a G3 92" Firehawk using a Sim2 Domino 80 projector. Was sitting at 3 meters, so seating distance ratio of around 1.5, so rather close, for me atleast. 99% of the time I did not notice the screen itself. Only once or twice did I notice a little sheen. The overall benifits of this screen, for my viewing conditions, far outweighs the few downsides.


I did notice a little hotspotting/darkening at the top of the screen, but the installation was so that you would look right into the bottom of the screen basicly. I think if you install it so tha you look more directly into the screen it would be less of an issue.


----------



## Coup330

Quote:

Originally Posted by *GetGray* 
Firehawk. The GH has a ~180 deg viewing cone and it will wash out badly with ambient light or wright wall reflections. The Firehawk is the screen for ambient light/bright rooms, etc.. IMHO.
thanks.


and for what purposes is then the Grayhawk???

Quote:

Originally Posted by *umr* 
I would not be as negative about the Grayhawk. It's overall gain is lower than the Firehawk, but it is not simply a gray screen. When the projector is ceiling mounted the actual screen gain from both of these is nearly the same. The Grayhawk will hotspot less and shimmers less. It depends on how the walls are oriented to the screen as to the benefit of a Firehawk versus a Grayhawk.
thats my point. the firehawk has the hotspotting and the shimmer I don't like.


for what purposes is the Grayhawk made in your opinion? I don't understand for what the Grayhawk is made then, obviously.

The sidewalls in my case are well apart from the screen, the reflection comes mostly from the celling and the ground.


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Coup330* 
thanks.


and for what purposes is then the Grayhawk???



thats my point. the firehawk has the hotspotting and the shimmer I don't like.


for what purposes is the Grayhawk made in your opinion? I don't understand for what the Grayhawk is made then, obviously.

The sidewalls in my case are well apart from the screen, the reflection comes mostly from the celling and the ground.
I really wish owners of the Fire Hawk would post more screen shots of there screens...

Would love to see this screen in action via screen shots...

Lights On... and Lights Off...


----------



## R Harkness

Screen shots are generally so innacurate telling things like contrast/black levels is close to useless. You CAN see things like lack of screen uniformity/hotspotting in screen shots, though.


However, there is a review with screen shot comparisons of the Firehawk vs the BD here:

http://www.projectorreviews.com/scre...mond/index.php 


Having seen the Firehawk and BD screens many, many times, the Firehawk performs very close to the BD screens in ambient light. A local AV store has the the Firehawk screen in a room with two other projector screens going and even the occasional plasma, with some of the room lights on, yet the Firehawk still allows for decent picture in that room.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20314419
> 
> 
> Screen shots are generally so innacurate telling things like contrast/black levels is close to useless. You CAN see things like lack of screen uniformity/hotspotting in screen shots, though.
> 
> 
> However, there is a review with screen shot comparisons of the Firehawk vs the BD here:
> 
> http://www.projectorreviews.com/scre...mond/index.php
> 
> 
> Having seen the Firehawk and BD screens many, many times, the Firehawk performs very close to the BD screens in ambient light. A local AV store has the the Firehawk screen in a room with two other projector screens going and even the occasional plasma, with some of the room lights on, yet the Firehawk still allows for decent picture in that room.



I would just like to see screen shots of the firehawk in action and in peoples rooms.

Not at all intrested in a Firehawk vs BD Shoot out..


Will say this regarding taking Screen shots, from doing a recent Flat paint screen test and taking shots of an image being projected onto a painted wall,

What some said was hot spoting on my bd screen shots was also present in the screen shot of the image on the painted wall.


So you can get a hot spot created when taking the screen shot that is not present in the image being projected on the screen..


It just gave me greater understanding in how to take a screen shot to match the image on the screen with true whites, Blacks and skin tones...


Again would like to see the Firehawk in action and some new pics of it in peoples rooms.


----------



## Coup330




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Coup330* /forum/post/20312625
> 
> 
> thanks.
> 
> 
> and for what purposes is then the Grayhawk???
> 
> 
> 
> thats my point. the firehawk has the hotspotting and the shimmer I don't like.
> 
> 
> for what purposes is the Grayhawk made in your opinion? I don't understand for what the Grayhawk is made then, obviously.
> 
> The sidewalls in my case are well apart from the screen, the reflection comes mostly from the celling and the ground.



...


----------



## Slump Buster

After weeks of research I purchased my first projector last week (Benq w6000). Through this process I came across a gentleman selling a studiotek 130 screen and I am probably going to purchase the item.


I'm already over what my budget for the whole project was originally supposed to be (hard to pass up good deals, isn't it?) so I'm trying to save some money on the frame. I've seen several sites that show how to make DIY wood frames. This leads me to the following questions:


1) Is there a DIY frame that is more appropriate for this material? Most frames discuss some other material.

2) Is there a better way to attach the screen to the fabric other than fabric staples? The whole idea of stapling this stuff to wood seems so... permanent. I do recall one technique that involved creating a groove in the frame but I think this may be beyond my skills.

3) The screen size is 110" diagonal. Every technique that I saw had the border placed around the outer few inches of the frame. I'd rather not lose any more viewing area. Is there a way to create a panel around the frame? I'm not exactly sure what that might.


If you have any other general advice I'd love to hear it. I started reading through this thread but after it took me the better part of an hour to get through year 1 I thought I'd just toss something out there.


----------



## Benito Joaquin

Hey Coup,


there are a few reasons that the Greyhawk is manufactured. The main one being that if you have a smaller size screen with a very bright projector, a Firehawk or standard gray screen will hot spot. Greyhawk is offered for that reason. If i had a three chip with a smaller size screen, Firehawk wouldn't be recommended because it would definitely hot spot. That's also why greyhawk is offered not only in the .92 gain but also the .7 gain (i believe)


benny


----------



## orthoboy

I currently have a JVC HD 250 projector being used in my newly built theater. Minimal ambient light with walls and ceilings colored in various shades of brown. I am purchasing a 110" screen but debating between the Firehawk G3 or the Studiotek 130. I will be using for 50% movies 50% sports. As much as I would prefer the Firehawk because I can watch with some ambient light, I am not sure if this is my best choice due to my seating is an L-shaped sectional and I have read that its angular viewing is less then to be desired, thus the thinking of the Studiotek 130. Any advice?


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *orthoboy* /forum/post/20320241
> 
> 
> I currently have a JVC HD 250 projector being used in my newly built theater. Minimal ambient light with walls and ceilings colored in various shades of brown. I am purchasing a 110" screen but debating between the Firehawk G3 or the Studiotek 130. I will be using for 50% movies 50% sports. As much as I would prefer the Firehawk because I can watch with some ambient light, I am not sure if this is my best choice due to my seating is an L-shaped sectional and I have read that its angular viewing is less then to be desired, thus the thinking of the Studiotek 130. Any advice?



I would recommend you go with Firehawk G3. Your application is a demanding one that will require a screen that can handle some ambient light, especially for sports watching. The Studiotek 130 would be great but unfortunately as you know, it doesn't hold up to ambient light well. Unless you are totally off axis, you should be fine. In my set up, i am really off axis of a Firehawk G3 and have absolutely no problem. It gets a little dimmer but it's nice and uniform.


Benito


----------



## Slump Buster




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Slump Buster* /forum/post/20318998
> 
> 
> 
> 1) Is there a DIY frame that is more appropriate for this material? Most frames discuss some other material.
> 
> 
> 
> If you have any other general advice I'd love to hear it. I started reading through this thread but after it took me the better part of an hour to get through year 1 I thought I'd just toss something out there.



I finally saw some pics of what I am about to purchase and much of my previous post is now irrelevant. I did not realize that these screens are bungeed around a frame. But the rest of the post is still valid. Are there any good DIY's for these kinds of screens? It looks like I would need to build a tension bar around the back of the frame so that the bungee cords could be wrapped around. I see that the black border is already part of the screen. Any idea as to the height and width of the frame?


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Slump Buster* 
I finally saw some pics of what I am about to purchase and much of my previous post is now irrelevant. I did not realize that these screens are bungeed around a frame. But the rest of the post is still valid. Are there any good DIY's for these kinds of screens? It looks like I would need to build a tension bar around the back of the frame so that the bungee cords could be wrapped around. I see that the black border is already part of the screen. Any idea as to the height and width of the frame?
I always thought that stewart never used a bunggee system but button snaps...


----------



## Slump Buster

Quote:

Originally Posted by *fraisa* 
I always thought that stewart never used a bunggee system but button snaps...
Argh, you're right. I just zoomed in closer and what I thought were holes were actually buttons. Ugh... I'm beginning to think that the gain that I would be getting from buying this high-quality screen would be lost in the hassle of trying to make a frame for it.


----------



## GetGray

Snaps on flat, shock cord/grommet on curved.


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Slump Buster* 
Argh, you're right. I just zoomed in closer and what I thought were holes were actually buttons. Ugh... I'm beginning to think that the gain that I would be getting from buying this high-quality screen would be lost in the hassle of trying to make a frame for it.
Just a stupid question why do you want to make a diy frame?


----------



## BobL

You can get Stewart with a lace and grommet system if you like. Usually only done on large or curved screens.


Slump Buster,


The person is only selling the screen material and not the frame? That's unusual did he replace the screen material on his frame? You could probably find snaps to place on a DIY frame if you go that route but make sure they a placed correctly as you want it tensioned with no wrinkles or sags.


It might be easier to just order a new frame. If you can get the serial# for the old frame they will make another identical one. It won't be cheap but still a lot less expensive than a new Stewart screen if you got the material at a good price. A 110" Deluxe screen with Velux and Studiotek 130 material is $2682 MSRP for reference. You are not too far from AVS, call them and discuss the frame options and their price for the frame only.


----------



## Benito Joaquin

That is correct, the Lace and Grommet system is available on their AT series frames, curved or not. They will custom do a lace and grommet it needed. I've had a few situations where they a customer wanted a qty. of 4 L & G screens at 92" diagonal. The only problem with that is that the L&G screen will require a bigger than standard frame.


If you are interested in a frame price, feel free to contact any of the AVS Sales crew....anyone of us can help you out. We can also discuss the way the screens are made, i've made a few of these my self so that may help in figuring out how to attach to your own frame.


Benito


----------



## Slump Buster




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BobL* /forum/post/20325229
> 
> 
> You can get Stewart with a lace and grommet system if you like. Usually only done on large or curved screens.
> 
> 
> Slump Buster,
> 
> 
> The person is only selling the screen material and not the frame? That's unusual did he replace the screen material on his frame? You could probably find snaps to place on a DIY frame if you go that route but make sure they a placed correctly as you want it tensioned with no wrinkles or sags.
> 
> 
> It might be easier to just order a new frame. If you can get the serial# for the old frame they will make another identical one. It won't be cheap but still a lot less expensive than a new Stewart screen if you got the material at a good price. A 110" Deluxe screen with Velux and Studiotek 130 material is $2682 MSRP for reference. You are not too far from AVS, call them and discuss the frame options and their price for the frame only.



The seller said that he bought it from someone thinking that it would fit his frame but it did not so he bought a different screen. I wasn't in the high-end screen market but the price is right so I thought I'd give it a look. Yeah, unfortunately I am aware of the MSRP and that's why I am doubting that I could get a frame at a budget price.


I'll drop Benito an email to see what he has. I'm not exactly sure what this lace and grommet system is but it seems to be worth investigating.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Slump Buster* /forum/post/20326303
> 
> 
> The seller said that he bought it from someone thinking that it would fit his frame but it did not so he bought a different screen. I wasn't in the high-end screen market but the price is right so I thought I'd give it a look. Yeah, unfortunately I am aware of the MSRP and that's why I am doubting that I could get a frame at a budget price.
> 
> 
> I'll drop Benito an email to see what he has. I'm not exactly sure what this lace and grommet system is but it seems to be worth investigating.



Just be careful some that have screen material with no frame can be because there screen material was replaced leaving them with an extra screen with no frame...


If it was me i would NEVER buy an extra screen material without seeing it unrolled and mounted on a frame so it can be inspected...


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20326558
> 
> 
> Just be careful some that have screen material with no frame can be because there screen material was replaced leaving them with an extra screen with no frame...
> 
> 
> If it was me i would NEVER buy an extra screen material without seeing it unrolled and mounted on a frame so it can be inspected...



Very true. seeing in person is the best but with pics, i can also tell if a screen will be ok. If you show pics of creases or wrinkles, i can more than likely tell you if they will go away or not.


Benito


----------



## BobL

I doubt the frame is a budget price, nothing Stewart is budget priced But having priced Stewart screens the material typically costs more than the frame which surprises some people. That's why its worth checking with a dealer to get an exact price. You might be able to put together your screen for 1/2 price or maybe less, which I can guarantee you won't get from a dealer unless they like losing money!


----------



## Slump Buster

Very true statements! I'm going to head over to the DIY area to see if anyone has any experience with Stewart frames. I've searched for a couple of hours but haven't found anything yet.


----------



## Benito Joaquin

I have a huge ton of experience with Stewart frames.....let me know what kind of questions you have. I'm sure i can answer them.


Benito


----------



## ajreynol

Hey guys, I'm wondering if Stewart has a screen that might be able to accommodate my needs. Situation:


-Target screen size: 120"-150"

-Uncontrolled ambient light: yes, several windows about 14' above the viewing area (vaulted ceiling)

-Projector mounting point: 15' - 17', on ceiling (assumed)

-Projector brightness: 1600 lumens, 2500 lumens


Basically, I'm looking for a screen that can help diffuse some of the light that will be coming in on those college football Saturday afternoons. I wish I could control those high windows, but I just can't right now. As such, I assume I'll need a high-gain screen. As for the projectors...I'm considering the Sharp XV-Z17000 (1600) for its 3D capabilities, and the BenQ W6000 for its 2500 lumens (in the event that 1600 isn't bright enough).


What would be my best bet if I went with Stewart? Any info that can help me narrow my choices would be fantastic.


Thanks.


----------



## Benito Joaquin

Is the screen fixed or motorized? reason i ask is because if it's fixed, you can do the Firehawk G3. The fact that the light comes from above is a bad thing but you could still manage.


Benito


----------



## ajreynol

Thanks for the reply.


Re: the screen - I don't have one yet. I would prefer if it were fixed. As such, I'll move the Firehawk to the top of my list.


Since the windows above are a bad thing, would you then recommend I go with the higher lumen projector I'm considering? (2500 lumens)


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ajreynol* /forum/post/20347555
> 
> 
> Thanks for the reply.
> 
> 
> Re: the screen - I don't have one yet. I would prefer if it were fixed. As such, I'll move the Firehawk to the top of my list.
> 
> 
> Since the windows above are a bad thing, would you then recommend I go with the higher lumen projector I'm considering? (2500 lumens)



If it's fixed, you can definitely do that size using Firehawk G3.

The windows above are a bad thing only because of the way that Firehawk rejects ambient light. A higher output projector is always recommended for this type of application but also really depends on how big you decide to go with your image.


Benito


----------



## ajreynol

Understood. and can the Firehawk be purchased through AV Science?


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ajreynol* /forum/post/20347749
> 
> 
> Understood. and can the Firehawk be purchased through AV Science?



It can be along with other screen manufacturers. We are authorized dealers for many screen companies and for Stewart in specific, we are one of their top dealers. Feel free to contact any of us in sales.


Benito


----------



## ajreynol

will do. thank you for your time.


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ajreynol* /forum/post/20349449
> 
> 
> will do. thank you for your time.



Not a problem, that's what we are here for... even on Easter Sunday


----------



## Warbie




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20231553
> 
> 
> I'm almost positive you were looking at the older generation firehawk. The G3 version is so much smoother and with much less sparkling.



I had a sample of what was meant to be G3 firehawk material and could clearly see a sheen. This has me wondering whether it was mislabeled and actually an older version of the material. The sheen was the sole reason I didn't pick up a firehawk.


----------



## Benito Joaquin

You should be able to tell right away. Just feeling the material, it feels really rough, like low grade sand paper. Call them! Let them know what you think and have them send another one with them double checking that it is Firehawk G3 before they send it out. If you like, i can request it for you.


Benito


----------



## Warbie

Thanks for the offer, but I live in the UK. It took about 6 months and the calling of multiple different suppliers before getting the last lot of samples - I can't be bothered to do it again!


----------



## Benito Joaquin

oh wow, yeah that's a different situation.


Benito


----------



## fraisa

I really want to see a Firehawk Screen shot with lights on,

again i am a firehawk fan and dont want to see it fail.


But i just wish others would post some shots of this screen in action,

Lights On....


They say ask and you shall receive,

I just hope thats true....


Question....

Does Stewart Make a Electric Pull down of the Firehawk?


----------



## marswill

Yes, I have a motorized Firehawk G3 with 12V trigger. It works great as it comes down when the JVC projector come on.


----------



## Benito Joaquin

They have a manual pull down called a Communicator. To be honest, it's not really worth it. Da Lite for example....there's a huge price difference between motorized and pull down. The difference when working with a Stewart is very small. Might as well pay the extra and go with a motorized screen.


Benito


----------



## StarFlash

I am going to be upgrading my home theater to a Stewart 100" (16x9) screen later this year. I'm almost certainly going to be getting a JVC RS40. My room has all dark colors and full light control. I am considering going with the GrayHawk G3 material because I love really deep blacks. Does anyone think this is a mistake? Some people have said the blacks on the RS40 are good enough that one doesn't need a gray screen and one should go with the StudioTek 130 G3. Any opinions on this?


----------



## Benito Joaquin

I would not consider Grayhawk even though i truly like that material. Greyhawk is a .92 gain as opposed to the Firehawk which is a 1.25 gain. For a 100" screen, go either Firehawk or Studiotek 130.


Me personally, i would go for the pop you would get out of the Studiotek 130, especially if you do not plan on viewing with lights on. Firehawk is a great material but it's all application driven. There is no need to go with a grey screen in a completely darkened environment.


Benito


----------



## R Harkness

I mulled over a choice between the Firehawk or the ST-130 for a long time (having seen the Firehawk many of times, the ST-130 rarely). I'm glad I went for the ST-130 for it's extra brightness and "pop" as Benito says. It's just a killer screen.


For me it was a choice between going with a gray screen like the Firehawk to preserve contrast and living with some of it's compromises (e.g. hotspotting, screen texture) or going to some extra effort in controlling room reflections and using the white ST-130.

I'm happy I chose the latter route. I'm seeing the best projected images I personally have seen.


----------



## Hibo




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20360115
> 
> 
> I mulled over a choice between the Firehawk or the ST-130 for a long time (having seen the Firehawk many of times, the ST-130 rarely). I'm glad I went for the ST-130 for it's extra brightness and "pop" as Benito says. It's just a killer screen.
> 
> 
> For me it was a choice between going with a gray screen like the Firehawk to preserve contrast and living with some of it's compromises (e.g. hotspotting, screen texture) or going to some extra effort in controlling room reflections and using the white ST-130.
> 
> I'm happy I chose the latter route. I'm seeing the best projected images I personally have seen.



Rich,

I've been watching your thread. I too went with the St-130 about year and half ago, and have been amazed every time there's BlueRay outdoor scene of country side or colorful shots. Congratulations.

Hibo


----------



## fraisa

Stewart Stats...


ST 130 G3

Gain 1.3

Half Gain 68 Degrees

Viewing Cone 136 Degrees

Ambient Light Reflectance Value 82% Per Foot Candle

Good In Controlled Light Enviroments


FireHawk G3

Gain 1.25

Half Gain 30 Degrees

Viewing Cone 60 Degrees

Ambient Light Reflectance Value .27% Per Foot Candle

Good in Ambient Light


This shows the diff between the 2 models.

If you dont have a Dark Painted room then the ST will light it up with enough Reflective Light to land a plane....


The Firehawk has a reduced viewing cone but you can watch it with the lights on and it Reflects Less light back into the room..(not as good with Reflecting light vs a BD but its still decent)....


Now i understand the difference between the 2 models....


----------



## R Harkness

Yup, great screen.


Something that really surprised me during my research: When I finally got my large samples of the Firehawk and ST-130 screen in my room and tested with various projected images, I'd expected that I'd see more contrast on the Firehawk. I deliberately put up contrasty images (e.g. chain-link fences etc) and to my surprise, subjectively, the ST-130 appeared a bit more contrasty. Black areas seemed very close, but brighter parts of the image were noticeably brighter on the ST-130. A trick of the eyes no doubt, but the contrast on my ST-130 set up has been very vivid.


That said, even though I got an excellent image to begin with, the more room treatment I've added the better. I know have close to a bat-cave for viewing movies and I think my image is about as good as it's going to get...and it's had my guests dropping their jaws at the vividness and contrast.


The other thing is that the viewing angles are so good, hotspotting is virtually imperceptible, so it's like viewing a big plasma in some ways.

I love the way the image stays just right no matter where we sit on the sofa.


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *R Harkness* 
Yup, great screen.


Something that really surprised me during my research: When I finally got my large samples of the Firehawk and ST-130 screen in my room and tested with various projected images, I'd expected that I'd see more contrast on the Firehawk. I deliberately put up contrasty images (e.g. chain-link fences etc) and to my surprise, subjectively, the ST-130 appeared a bit more contrasty. Black areas seemed very close, but brighter parts of the image were noticeably brighter on the ST-130. A trick of the eyes no doubt, but the contrast on my ST-130 set up has been very vivid.


That said, even though I got an excellent image to begin with, the more room treatment I've added the better. I know have close to a bat-cave for viewing movies and I think my image is about as good as it's going to get...and it's had my guests dropping their jaws at the vividness and contrast.


The other thing is that the viewing angles are so good, hotspotting is virtually imperceptible, so it's like viewing a big plasma in some ways.

I love the way the image stays just right no matter where we sit on the sofa.
Totally agree if you had a bat cave style room then ST-130 Would really shine,

and you would gain the better viewing angle...


With that great screen harkness you should be able to make some Really Awesome Screen shots...


Now with regards to the ST 130 ,

Home theater Magizine did do testing of that screen vs the Bd in a recent

Test Bench of the BD 1.4 Screen,

Below is the pic from the Magizine of that testing...


ST 130 Stewart










Edit...

Removed the BD Pic comparision that is from the Article,


----------



## R Harkness

What a surprise. Fraisa putting the BD screen into another thread....


You forgot to mention those shots were done with ambient light directly hitting the screen, which obviously favor the BD screen.


However, for someone who wants to be able to watch their projected image with some lights on there are various ways of going about achieving that goal. If you don't want to invest any energy in intelligently setting up your room, you can instead invest more of your money in a specialty screen like the Black Diamond, which does some of your work for you. Although at some price...in terms of hotspotting, screen texture, and in the case of the .8 gain version, generally being relegated to small screen sizes due to the low gain effect on image brightness.


Another way of skinning that cat is just paying attention to how you set up your room and system. Keep your screen area darker than the area you want lit up, which is typically were you are sitting. No screen looks better with light shining directly on it, whether you are talking a Black Diamond or a white screen, so light shining over or on the screen isn't something you want in the first place.


My lighting is set in zones so I simply have the lights off over the screen, but lights toward the middle of the room back to the sitting area can remain on, with an extremely vivid image left on the projection screen. (Frankly, more vivid than I've seen with the BD screen in ambient light).


I have yet to take screen shots with an eye to showing actual image quality. I just snapped a few for my build thread showing different screen sizes. But I left the lights on in the room, except over the screen, and you can see what I mean about how the image still looks clear and rich, with good contrast:


----------



## Benito Joaquin

One other thing to note about the images that fraisa put up is that the Studiotek image is floating within the white image and never ends on the black border. Your perceived brightness, contrast...pretty much everything associated with the image is lowered simply because the image ends on a white screen that then ends on a black border. The BD screen on the other hand ends on the black border the way it's suppose to.


Also makes absolutely no sense for it to be a grey screen vs white screen. I still need to read the article, i'm assuming i'm really missing something.


Benito


----------



## R Harkness

Like any review the HT review generally concentrates on the BD screen's performance

in ambient light vs a white screen, hence the comparison to the Studiotek.


The reviewer concludes that the white screen will serve you better in a dark room, but that the BD is very helpful in a brighter room.


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *R Harkness* 
Like any review the HT review generally concentrates on the BD screen's performance

in ambient light vs a white screen, hence the comparison to the Studiotek.


The reviewer concludes that the white screen will serve you better in a dark room, but that the BD is very helpful in a brighter room.
And to what the Reviewer Concludes to i totally agree with and it would be the same conclusion with the Stewart Firehawk that is mentioned above.


Dark Room that is Painted and treated the Studio Tek Style Screen..

Light Room that is not paint treated and image watched in a ambient light style room then the Firewhawk Style Screen...(Ambient Light Style Screen)


----------



## fraisa

Quote:

Originally Posted by *R Harkness* 
]









Like i said above you should take more screen shots because you would produce amazing Pics.......


----------



## J.P

Is the "sparkling" effect from studiotek-130 lesser distracting,from a "longer" viewing distance?


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *J.P* /forum/post/20374365
> 
> 
> Is the "sparkling" effect from studiotek-130 lesser distracting,from a "longer" viewing distance?



I can say that it definitely is. One thing to note, the G3 material has the sparkling effect but nothing compared to the older generation.


The G3 material simply looks good!


Benito


----------



## R Harkness

Folks,


I have a 2D projector at the moment but may at some point move to a 3D projector.

I have not yet investigated screens for 3D but I am dimly cognizant that, apparently, some screen types are more suitable for 3D than others (and I have no idea why...that's how green I am with the 3D stuff).


I have the ST-130 screen material. How does it rate in terms of being suitable for 3D projection? (Gawd I'd hate to have to replace it!)


Thanks.


----------



## BobL

3D won't be a problem with the ST130 if your projector uses active glasses like the current Sharp or JVCs. If it uses passive glasses then the screen needs to hold polarization and the ST130 would not be a good choice. The current projectors that use a passive 3D system are well into the 5 figure range.


----------



## Benito Joaquin

Yeah you should be in good shape as Bob mentioned.

Some companies such as JVC even used that exact ST13G3 to showcase their projectors so i'm sure you'll be fine.


Benny


----------



## R Harkness

Whew. That's reassuring. Especially as I tend to like the JVC projectors.


Thanks guys.


----------



## zbroke

I use the ST130 G3 with the RS-40. Simply spectacular!


----------



## Franin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *zbroke* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I use the ST130 G3 with the RS-40. Simply spectacular!



I have to agree though I don't have the RS40 just the HD 350 and image is amazing.


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Franin* /forum/post/20407154
> 
> 
> I have to agree though I don't have the RS40 just the HD 350 and image is amazing.



JVC loves using Studiotek 130 to show off their projectors. That specific material produces some really nice images!


Benito


----------



## Franin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> JVC loves using Studiotek 130 to show off their projectors. That specific material produces some really nice images!
> 
> 
> Benito



Certainly does.


----------



## JackstrawWichita

After several months of research I am finally ready to begin construction.

My theater will be 16'wide and 24' deep 7'8" height

Walls & carpet Burgundy, Ceiling grey

I will be purchasing a Firehawk AT and Epson 8700 (possible Panny4000)

I want the largest 2.4 aspect possible so I can have the largest possible 16:9 image when watching sports as well.

I will have 2 rows of seats: 12' and 18' (on a riser)

How close to the ceiling and or the floor is to big?

Unfortunately there is a soffit across the front of the room and the screen needs to be below this

A 120" screen leaves me ~3.5" from the soffit and 30" from the floor

A 133" screen would likely have the frame on the soffit and be ~22" from the floor. I think this is likely to big. Do I need to go even smaller than the 120"?

I was thinking of 10-12" in front of the speakers. Would this be OK for this type of screen?

Thanks for any guidance


----------



## Benito Joaquin

The 120" diagonal is definitely not too big! at 30" from the floor you will be in good shape although I would highly recommend you lay it out on the wall with tape or something similar so that you can get an idea of how it will look from the second row. Also, field of view comes into play as well.


10-12 inches from the screen should be ok. I think Stewart recommends 11" from the screen so you are actually in perfect shape!


If you like, contact anyone from the sales team to provide you some great pricing!


Benito


----------



## jae3cpamd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/20361727
> 
> 
> What a surprise. Fraisa putting the BD screen into another thread....
> 
> 
> You forgot to mention those shots were done with ambient light directly hitting the screen, which obviously favor the BD screen.
> 
> 
> However, for someone who wants to be able to watch their projected image with some lights on there are various ways of going about achieving that goal. If you don't want to invest any energy in intelligently setting up your room, you can instead invest more of your money in a specialty screen like the Black Diamond, which does some of your work for you. Although at some price...in terms of hotspotting, screen texture, and in the case of the .8 gain version, generally being relegated to small screen sizes due to the low gain effect on image brightness.
> 
> 
> Another way of skinning that cat is just paying attention to how you set up your room and system. Keep your screen area darker than the area you want lit up, which is typically were you are sitting. No screen looks better with light shining directly on it, whether you are talking a Black Diamond or a white screen, so light shining over or on the screen isn't something you want in the first place.
> 
> 
> My lighting is set in zones so I simply have the lights off over the screen, but lights toward the middle of the room back to the sitting area can remain on, with an extremely vivid image left on the projection screen. (Frankly, more vivid than I've seen with the BD screen in ambient light).
> 
> 
> I have yet to take screen shots with an eye to showing actual image quality. I just snapped a few for my build thread showing different screen sizes. But I left the lights on in the room, except over the screen, and you can see what I mean about how the image still looks clear and rich, with good contrast:



What projector are you using?


----------



## MStanic

Need some advice,


Thinking of going with an 82 inch fixed 130 G3 and the Panny 4000. Also, have the option of the Panny VT30/65 plasma. For starters, which one would you pick?


The setup will be in a finished basement. I am currently using a Pioneer 60 inch plasma there on a stand and it works great. It is being relocated to another room though. The basment area only has the standard default basement windows on either side wall; otherwise, the room is dark at night. During day, if sunny outside or light clouds, it's not completely dark. I don't really want to cover the windows though. It's not high ceilings as it's a basement so standard 8 foot ceiling (maybe slightly less since it's basement). Viewing distance is about 12 feet but the current Pioneer 60 looks good on a stand. A mounted fixed screen will recess back when on wall so I don't imagine it would be too big based on viewing distance. Could I go bigger or would I want to? I guess a standard black frame from Stewart is best?


What about Panny 4000? It will hitting the screen from about 14 to 16 feet away and mounted on the low ceiling. Is there a distance/height restriction(s) when going with a projector/screen? Any other projector, within this price range, that you would consider?


Finally, would you consider the Panny VT30/65 plasma at all versus the Panny 4000 and Stewart 130? Don't really care about 3D now but would still be neat to have. Would I compromise anything else?


----------



## Benito Joaquin

MStanic, can you please confirm what the seating distance will be from viewer to screen? I know you mentioned it is currently 12' but just wanted to make sure it's 12' for the projection screen as well.


Benito


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jae3cpamd* /forum/post/20415108
> 
> 
> What projector are you using?



JVC RS20. About 3 years old now.


----------



## MStanic

With the screen on the wall, the viewing distance probably increases by about 2 or 3 feet from where the current Pioneer plasma sits on the stand. That would make the viewing distance from the sweet spot around 10 to 12 feet away for sure. The projector would sit about two feet back from this main viewin area. I would have to measure at home tonight to be totally accurate but that's pretty close. What are your thoughts/concerns?


----------



## Benito Joaquin

My only concern is that you are going too small on the image. Even if you are not a fan of a arge image, I would still recommend you go larger. If you are going to be roughly 11' from the screen, an 82" diagonal is cutting you a bit short. I would recommend a 92" diagonal at the very least.


my opinion, go with the projector set up over the plasma.

If you stick with the 82" diagonal, i would consider the Greyhawk material over the ST13. If you plan on bumping it up a bit, then you could stick with the ST130 and get a very nice image. Price difference between the two is small.


As far as projectors, take a look at the epson 8700. It will provide a better overall image than the Panny. Only reason I would choose the Panasonic over the Epson is if you really need the memory presets that it provides.


Benito


----------



## Hibo

Wondering if I've ever heard someone say " ah, the tv or screen I bought is too big" . On the other hand, most people do buy larger view-screens.


Also, do not buy the screen by the diagonal. I want to know ... How wide is it? and how tall is it? If your about 12 feet away, go over 100 inches in width.


My usable peripheral view at 12 feet is about 20 feet, I say try to fill it up, within reason.

Hibo


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Hibo* /forum/post/20492447
> 
> 
> Wondering if I've ever heard someone say " ah, the tv or screen I bought is too big" . On the other hand, most people do buy larger view-screens.
> 
> 
> Also, do not buy the screen by the diagonal. I want to know ... How wide is it? and how tall is it? If your about 12 feet away, go over 100 inches in width.
> 
> 
> My usable peripheral view at 12 feet is about 20 feet, I say try to fill it up, within reason.
> 
> Hibo



Very Good advice....


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Hibo* /forum/post/20492447
> 
> 
> Wondering if I've ever heard someone say " ah, the tv or screen I bought is too big" . On the other hand, most people do buy larger view-screens.
> 
> 
> Also, do not buy the screen by the diagonal. I want to know ... How wide is it? and how tall is it? If your about 12 feet away, go over 100 inches in width.
> 
> 
> My usable peripheral view at 12 feet is about 20 feet, I say try to fill it up, within reason.
> 
> Hibo



hmmm.....that's interesting advice.

I've never heard people suggest going with image width and height over diagonal when speaking of sizes. I've heard people use those dims to calculate seating distance and a few other things but not when referring to images.


In the years that i've been doing this, i've only had people use the image width over diagonal when working with native 2.35 screens.


Not saying that you are wrong or right, just that i've never heard it said like that before.


Either way.....good advice on the image size!! If I were designing his room or recommending things, i would go a little bigger than 82" diag.


Benito


----------



## MStanic

Hi,


I know you recommended the Epson over the Panny projector but if I stay with the Panny (as this is my current choice) will the Panny give me just as good a display on the 82 as it will on the 92 ST130 G3. Don't you have to have very high end projectors as the screen gets bigger diagonally? Should I be purchasing a 2.35:1 screen or a 16:9 screen when using the Panny? This is a dedicated HT room but there will be regular TV viewing as well.


What HDMI cable should be used with the Panny as far as protocol/standard? I assume HDMI 1.3? How many HDMI cables should be ran back from the projector to my Preamp/Anthem D2V?


Are there any 3D projectors available yet worth looking at? I don't have any experience with screen/projector so please bear with the excess questions.


----------



## JackstrawWichita




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MStanic* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> 
> I know you recommended the Epson over the Panny projector but if I stay with the Panny (as this is my current choice) will the Panny give me just as good a display on the 82 as it will on the 92 ST130 G3. Don't you have to have very high end projectors as the screen gets bigger diagonally? Should I be purchasing a 2.35:1 screen or a 16:9 screen when using the Panny? This is a dedicated HT room but there will be regular TV viewing as well.
> 
> 
> What HDMI cable should be used with the Panny as far as protocol/standard? I assume HDMI 1.3? How many HDMI cables should be ran back from the projector to my Preamp/Anthem D2V?
> 
> 
> Are there any 3D projectors available yet worth looking at? I don't have any experience with screen/projector so please bear with the excess questions.



Not sure if I'm the best person to help since my theater is still under construction. I am waiting on a Studiotech 130 G3 120" and a Panny 4000. Went back and forth between this and the Epson 8700 for more than a month. While I preferred the Epson in most ways, I picked the Panny for the motorized zoom and memory presets. I will be mounting the projector on the ceiling and this was a major difference between 2 projectors that are very similar in may ways. Probably would have gone with the Epson if I was not mounting it on the ceiling. I did a great deal of research and came to the conclusion that this projector would work well with the ST 130 but as I said I don't have it yet so I hope I was right







. I went 2.4 because I really wanted the CinemaScope effect. At 120" the screen will still allow for a pretty big picture when viewing sports, etc in 16:9. If your screen is 82" and you go 2.4 you may. not be happy with the size of a 16:9 image. It really depends upon your taste and what type of content you will be watching most. As for the cables, I always have extra when I am running through walls, ceilings. I put a few CAT6 cables up there as well. You never know...


----------



## MStanic

Thanks for the response. I'm not sure I really understand the difference between a 16:9 and a 2.35:1 screen other than I guess the latter doesn't show the black bars since it is tailor made for cinemascope? What about regular TV viewing, would it be the opposite in that a 16:9 will display high def & SD TV content better as oppose to a 2.35:1. I'm thinking of the 92 inch ST130 G3 as oppose to the 82 inch.


What about the Sony VPL-VWPRO1 vs the Panny 4000 in terms of brightness, size and performance; in particular, with the ST130 G3 screen.


----------



## JackstrawWichita




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MStanic* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Thanks for the response. I'm not sure I really understand the difference between a 16:9 and a 2.35:1 screen other than I guess the latter doesn't show the black bars since it is tailor made for cinemascope? What about regular TV viewing, would it be the opposite in that a 16:9 will display high def & SD TV content better as oppose to a 2.35:1. I'm thinking of the 92 inch ST130 G3 as oppose to the 82 inch.
> 
> 
> What about the Sony VPL-VWPRO1 vs the Panny 4000 in terms of brightness, size and performance; in particular, with the ST130 G3 screen.



16:9 gives you an aspect ratio of 1.78. A 1.78 screen is 1.78" wide per 1" of height and a 2.4 screen is 2.4" wide per 1" of height. I found that most (not all) of the newer movies I like are CinemaScope 2.4 aspect. I went with a 2.4 screen so these movies would fill the screen as large as possible. A 2.4 aspect screen that is 120" wide would be 50" high. When watch a movie it will fill this screen. When I watch TV (HD 16:9) which would be 1.78 aspect I will be limited by the height if my screen. The picture will still be 50" high but it will only be 89" wide (50 x 1.78). The screen is still 120" wide so there will be 15.5" black bars on either side of the image. Whichever aspect screen you choose you will have some "dead space" when watching content which is in a different aspect. What I liked about the Panny 4000 is that you can zoom and focus when you switch from one source to another with the remote rather than adjusting the projector directly. It even let's you save settings so you can have one for 2.4 and one for 1.78. This way you just press a button and the projector will adjust for the content you are watching. As best I can tell it was the only projector in this price range with this feature. I don't have any knowledge of the Sony you mention


----------



## Benito Joaquin

Quote:

Originally Posted by *MStanic* 
Thanks for the response. I'm not sure I really understand the difference between a 16:9 and a 2.35:1 screen other than I guess the latter doesn't show the black bars since it is tailor made for cinemascope? What about regular TV viewing, would it be the opposite in that a 16:9 will display high def & SD TV content better as oppose to a 2.35:1. I'm thinking of the 92 inch ST130 G3 as oppose to the 82 inch.


What about the Sony VPL-VWPRO1 vs the Panny 4000 in terms of brightness, size and performance; in particular, with the ST130 G3 screen.
to be honest....i don't think there's much of a comparison between the Pro1 and the Panny 4000. The Pro1 is an all around better projector. But it should be for the difference in price.

Sony just had a price increase on the Pro1 so if you can find it for the old price, i'd jump on it.


Benito


----------



## MStanic

Okay, the biggest I can go with is 92 inches and I will be using the Panny 4000. The room is painted a dark chocolate Benjamin Moore French Press color with the ceiling being a ligther Coastal Path tan/beige. The ligthing is controlled but some light will get in from the basement windows during the day. The projector will be about 14 feet from the screen.


Is the StudioTek 130 G3 still the one to go with?


----------



## nathan_h

Paint the ceiling darker, invest in blackout curtains, and the 130 will be perfect.


----------



## MStanic

Nah, I can't make that compromise. Just won't be allowed plus it would literally look like a cave. In light of this, is the StuioTek 130 still the one or go with a Gray or Fire hawk screen?


----------



## zbroke




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MStanic* /forum/post/20551440
> 
> 
> Nah, I can't make that compromise. Just won't be allowed plus it would literally look like a cave. In light of this, is the StuioTek 130 still the one or go with a Gray or Fire hawk screen?



Here's my experience with the ST130G3. When I first got my projector, a JVC RS40, my HT room was all painted dark brown with dark carpet etc... Perfect colors (short of black) for a HT. The room has 3 faily large windows with 2" wood blinds. Until I installed blackout curtains a fews days after, the room was NOT usable during the day.


My own experience.


----------



## Benito Joaquin

Highly recommend the Firehawk material over anything else.


The Studiotek would be great but as zbroke mentioned, you would really need to get that room as dark as possible.


We are authorized Stewart dealers so if you are interested in pricing, feel free to contact us!


Benito


----------



## MStanic

Thanks guys. I think I will opt for the Firehawk G3 then as that seems like the screen based on the fact that I don't want to be devoid of light everytime I sit to watch a TV or a movie.


Anybody have any experience here with the Firehawk G3 and the Panny 4000?


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MStanic* /forum/post/20552291
> 
> 
> Thanks guys. I think I will opt for the Firehawk G3 then as that seems like the screen based on the fact that I don't want to be devoid of light everytime I sit to watch a TV or a movie.
> 
> 
> Anybody have any experience here with the Firehawk G3 and the Panny 4000?



Buddy of mine has the Firehawk G3 material but with the Panny 3000. Looked pretty good in his living room.


Any specific questions?


Benito


----------



## MStanic

Just wanted to make sure my dealer was recommending the Firehawke and not the Grayhawke. Would the Grayhawke work also? What's their difference?


----------



## umr




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MStanic* /forum/post/20552291
> 
> 
> Thanks guys. I think I will opt for the Firehawk G3 then as that seems like the screen based on the fact that I don't want to be devoid of light everytime I sit to watch a TV or a movie.
> 
> 
> Anybody have any experience here with the Firehawk G3 and the Panny 4000?



Get samples. I find the Firehawk material to not have the gain claimed for many installs. In most ceiling mount situations the StudioTek 130 will be much brighter..


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MStanic* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Nah, I can't make that compromise. Just won't be allowed plus it would literally look like a cave. In light of this, is the StuioTek 130 still the one or go with a Gray or Fire hawk screen?



I understand what you mean and then I'd recommend you dont compromise by getting the studiotek. The nice gain and lambertian surface will just mean you wash our your image in a room with ambient light and a bright ceiling.


At the size you are talking about, assuming a ceiling mounted projector, the firehawk gain should be fine.


Samples are useful but can be hard to use objectively.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *zbroke* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> Here's my experience with the ST130G3. When I first got my projector, a JVC RS40, my HT room was all painted dark brown with dark carpet etc... Perfect colors (short of black) for a HT. The room has 3 faily large windows with 2" wood blinds. Until I installed blackout curtains a fews days after, the room was NOT usable during the day.
> 
> 
> My own experience.



+1


----------



## ZIMMERLI THIERRY

Hi Guys

I am looking for a 135" elctric screen (LuxusA) if anybody knows where I can find the best deal

Thanks


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ZIMMERLI THIERRY* /forum/post/20576774
> 
> 
> Hi Guys
> 
> I am looking for a 135" elctric screen (LuxusA) if anybody knows where I can find the best deal
> 
> Thanks



Have you tried us yet?

Feel free to contact us, we can help!


Benito


----------



## JackstrawWichita




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *MStanic* /forum/post/20552291
> 
> 
> Thanks guys. I think I will opt for the Firehawk G3 then as that seems like the screen based on the fact that I don't want to be devoid of light everytime I sit to watch a TV or a movie.
> 
> 
> Anybody have any experience here with the Firehawk G3 and the Panny 4000?



I went back and forth as well. Just put up a Studiotech AT 127" with the panny 4000 ceiling mounted. I have 2 rows of seats 12' & 18' away. Each row has 2 high hats with 120 watt bulbs on dimmers. Watch the Yankee game with lights on ~50% and the image was amazing. I could have had the lights on brighter if I chose.

I'm very happy with my choice over the FH or BD given my set up. No windows, light control. My only hesitation on the ST was the ability to keep some light on when watching sports etc. In my current set up it is no problem at all


----------



## JackstrawWichita




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20576820
> 
> 
> Have you tried us yet?
> 
> Feel free to contact us, we can help!
> 
> 
> Benito



I would definitely recommend working with Benito. Great price, even better service


----------



## zbroke

Quote:

Originally Posted by *JackstrawWichita* 
I went back and forth as well. Just put up a Studiotech AT 127" with the panny 4000 ceiling mounted. I have 2 rows of seats 12' & 18' away. Each row has 2 high hats with 120 watt bulbs on dimmers. Watch the Yankee game with lights on ~50% and the image was amazing. I could have had the lights on brighter if I chose.

I'm very happy with my choice over the FH or BD given my set up. No windows, light control. My only hesitation on the ST was the ability to keep some light on when watching sports etc. In my current set up it is no problem at all
I agree with this statement. Lighting on dimmers, as long as it doesn't project directly on the screen is ok (to a certain degree). Daylight however is a killer.


----------



## Cliffside

I'm not sure if this has already been asked, but I'm curious if a Firehawk g3 will be compatible with any of jvc's newer 3d projectors. I saw someone comment it wouldn't be an issue with the ST130 and although I won't be changing out pj for awhile, I really don't want to replace the screen material.


----------



## fraisa




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Cliffside* /forum/post/20615003
> 
> 
> I'm not sure if this has already been asked, but I'm curious if a Firehawk g3 will be compatible with any of jvc's newer 3d projectors. I saw someone comment it wouldn't be an issue with the ST130 and although I won't be changing out pj for awhile, I really don't want to replace the screen material.



Stewart is coming out with a high gain screen that would be better in 3d.


----------



## Jim Noyd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *fraisa* /forum/post/20615207
> 
> 
> Stewart is coming out with a high gain screen that would be better in 3d.


 http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/res...sidential.html


----------



## Benito Joaquin

They recently came out with the new 5D material which is geared for 2D and also passive 3D.

If you are worried if the Studiotek 130 will work with 3D, you are ok. If you are asking about a new skin for your existing frame, you can look into the Firehawk LS material....better for 3D than the Firehawk G3.


Benito


----------



## KrellMania

I have lived happily with my Firehawk 92" Horizonal Electrimask (maybe G2) for 5 years until I move to my new house with bigger room W15' x D22' x H9.5'. The screen seems to be too small and I plan to replace it with 110" size. My current projector is JVC RS-20. I built RPG diffusor on the Front wall for 2-channel optimization, so I cannot use fixed/on-wall screen. The room tone color is in dark Grey both wall and ceiling. Only 1 window which has the double curtain to control the light.


This is my 1st time to change the screen, so I don't have much experience on it and looking for the right screen:

- I can't live without electrimask for 2.35:1 movie

- I plan to replace my projector with JVC RS-60 or new gen next year.

- I may sometimes watch 3-D movies after changing the projector.

- Should I stay with Firehawk model like G3 or change to StudioTek130 G3 or any other screen models?


Many thanks for any suggestion.


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *KrellMania* /forum/post/20704625
> 
> 
> I have lived happily with my Firehawk 92" Horizonal Electrimask (maybe G2) for 5 years until I move to my new house with bigger room W15' x D22' x H9.5'. The screen seems to be too small and I plan to replace it with 110" size. My current projector is JVC RS-20. I built RPG diffusor on the Front wall for 2-channel optimization, so I cannot use fixed/on-wall screen. The room tone color is in dark Grey both wall and ceiling. Only 1 window which has the double curtain to control the light.
> 
> 
> This is my 1st time to change the screen, so I don't have much experience on it and looking for the right screen:
> 
> - I can't live without electrimask for 2.35:1 movie
> 
> - I plan to replace my projector with JVC RS-60 or new gen next year.
> 
> - I may sometimes watch 3-D movies after changing the projector.
> 
> - Should I stay with Firehawk model like G3 or change to StudioTek130 G3 or any other screen models?
> 
> 
> Many thanks for any suggestion.



Will your speaker placement require you to do microperf?

With that room, i guess it all comes down to how much light you can eliminate from coming through that window. If you can get most or all of it, definitely go with a Studiotek 130. If a lot of light is coming through, go with the Firehawk G3.


Benito


----------



## KrellMania




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20708934
> 
> 
> Will your speaker placement require you to do microperf?
> 
> With that room, i guess it all comes down to how much light you can eliminate from coming through that window. If you can get most or all of it, definitely go with a Studiotek 130. If a lot of light is coming through, go with the Firehawk G3.
> 
> 
> Benito



My Maxx2 is placed on the side and around 3' in front of the screen. I am quite concerned about sound set up and my current speaker placement would allow 110" max but not sure if microperf is required or not.


The double curtain could eliminate over 95% of the light (just small glimpse underneath the curtain).


Just notice the new Silver 5D model good for both 2D and 3D.

Would that be an interesting choice if I watch 3D sometimes?


----------



## Benito Joaquin

I would suggest you get some samples. Me personally, i would recommend the Studiotek 130 for your application but without personally being there, it's hard to make a firm recommendation.


The Silver 5D material is amazing if you are doing standard 2D and passive 3D. So it really depends on what type of 3D you will be using.


Benito


----------



## tn1krr

Anyone got any info besides what is shown on the Stewart site on the new Reflections Active 3D screen. I'm trying to select (been trying for 6 months now







) around ~110 inch fixed screen for my new full batcave theater. I'm already in 3D age with my DLA-X3 projector so I'm looking for the best 2D/3D combo screen there is so high polarization preservation would be very nice.


This new screen sounds quite interesting (I was torn between Silver 5D and ST130 before this), but atm even the minimum projection distance is not available. The 1.7 gain also sounds nice, would boost JVCs brightness without high lamp mode. I'm quite allergic to visible screen coating/texture, anyone seen this screen in dealer demo or similar? I've been asking for samples for current generation of ST130 and Silver 5D from my local dealer but it seems to take ages to get anything on this side of pond.


----------



## Jim Noyd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tn1krr* /forum/post/20816877
> 
> 
> Anyone got any info besides what is shown on the Stewart site on the new Reflections Active 3D screen. I'm trying to select (been trying for 6 months now
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) around ~110 inch fixed screen for my new full batcave theater. I'm already in 3D age with my DLA-X3 projector so I'm looking for the best 2D/3D combo screen there is so high polarization preservation would be very nice.
> 
> 
> This new screen sounds quite interesting (I was torn between Silver 5D and ST130 before this), but atm even the minimum projection distance is not available. The 1.7 gain also sounds nice, would boost JVCs brightness without high lamp mode. I'm quite allergic to visible screen coating/texture, anyone seen this screen in dealer demo or similar? I've been asking for samples for current generation of ST130 and Silver 5D from my local dealer but it seems to take ages to get anything on this side of pond.



The Reflections Active 170 3D would be your best choice for both 2D and 3D imaging. The Silver 5D is for passive 3D and your JVC DLA-X3 is active using shutter glasses.


----------



## tn1krr




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jim Noyd* /forum/post/20816925
> 
> 
> The Reflections Active 170 3D would be your best choice for both 2D and 3D imaging. The Silver 5D is for passive 3D and your JVC DLA-X3 is active using shutter glasses.



That follows my thinking too, but details on the characteristics of this new material are still a bit lacking. I mean things like

- what is the minimum throw distance?

- any drawbacks if projector is ceiling mounted eg. around top or a bit above screen?

- is it already available/shipping?


Just trying to figure out if this material is worth waiting/suitable for my environment (throw distance 1.7 x screen width, ceiling mounted projector...)


----------



## Jim Noyd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tn1krr* /forum/post/20820206
> 
> 
> That follows my thinking too, but details on the characteristics of this new material are still a bit lacking. I mean things like
> 
> - what is the minimum throw distance?
> 
> - any drawbacks if projector is ceiling mounted eg. around top or a bit above screen?
> 
> - is it already available/shipping?
> 
> 
> Just trying to figure out if this material is worth waiting/suitable for my environment (throw distance 1.7 x screen width, ceiling mounted projector...)



Reflections Active 170 3D is similar to most elevated gain screens; longer throws really help with minimizing hot spotting and maximizing center to edge uniformity.


The longer the throw, the more collimated the projected light is and the smaller the standard deviation of incident angles. This results in better image uniformity.

Reflections Active represents what Stewart Filmscreen feels is an optimum balance of light recovery for insertion loss, while retaining a functional half gain performance with 'normal' lenses. 1.5:1 throw distance would be a functional minimum, but the display quality will benefit a lot from longer focal lengths when possible.


Reflections Active is a great performer with high mounted projectors. The behavior of the material is to distribute light within it's stated off axis performance, along an angular reflective path. So a high mounted projector will tend to deliver light centered slightly lower than the angle of incidence. Reflections active is not retro-reflective like glass bead screens, which benefit from lower projector mounting options.


It's always good practice to keep the projector within the upper and lower limits of the screen's top and bottom sight lines when possible. Extreme mounting positions, result in the need to use digital anti-keystone utilities that have highly deleterious effects on image fidelity. Many projectors now have highly functional lens shift options, but not all are equal, and some extreme settings may affect brightness uniformity, increase chromatic aberration artifacts, and result in geometry distortions.


Reflections Active is shipping at the end of September 2011, and will be available in all of Stewart's mounting systems, fixed frame, electrically operated drop down, with or without masking. The material can be either Micro-Perforated or Cinema Perforated upon request.


----------



## jamie ford

Question. If I were to look at the surface of a studiotek 130 screen how would I be able to tell if its the G3 vs. the earlier version?


Thanks.


----------



## Benito Joaquin

Quote:

Originally Posted by *jamie ford* 
Question. If I were to look at the surface of a studiotek 130 screen how would I be able to tell if its the G3 vs. the earlier version?


Thanks.
without experience it would be hard to tell. I can tell you that the G3 version is much much smoother than the previous generation but without experience of the G2 version, you have nothing to compare it to.


I don't even think you'd be able to get a sample of the older version.


If it feels really rough, it's the old version. If it feels smooth, you're working with the G3.


benito


----------



## tn1krr

Talked my local vendor about Reflections Active 170 3D and it seems over here it will take several months, maybe until Q1/2012 before we're gonna see actual screens at this side of Atlantic. I'm a bit tempted to wait and use a cheap screen as a place-holder for some months (as I was super happy with my Greyhawk Electriscreen in my old short throw living room setup), but info about polarization retaining characteristics with screen this seems to be nowhere to be found. I mean if this screen retains significant amount of polarization with 1.7 gain it will be perfect for active 3D with for example my JVC DLA-X3. Even the gain layer in the Grayhawk had a huge effect on the 3D brightness due to polarization retained.


However, if the 1.7 gain is alone supposed to increase 3D brightness enough then I might as well get 1.2-1.3 gain screen with some polarization retention for equal brightness without having to wait near half-a-year.


Anyone any info about this? Any news about sample availability? It would be perfect if a sample would be tested and info added to "Screens for 3D Projection" thread. Getting any samples in Europe seems to be nearly impossible









http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1300238


----------



## jamie ford




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20953488
> 
> 
> without experience it would be hard to tell. I can tell you that the G3 version is much much smoother than the previous generation but without experience of the G2 version, you have nothing to compare it to.
> 
> 
> I don't even think you'd be able to get a sample of the older version.
> 
> 
> If it feels really rough, it's the old version. If it feels smooth, you're working with the G3.
> 
> 
> benito



Thanks for the reply. I will check the smoothness or lack there of. I have recentley purchased a pre-owned, but never mounted, ST130 and there is some confusion, from the folks at Stewart as well, as to whether it is G3 or the former version of the 130.


To that end I did my projector calculations using the Stewart website which has data for the ST 130 G3, it seems, through reading completely through this thread, that the minimum throw distance for the ST 130 is 1.4 times width versus 1.3 times the width for the G3 material. I should be ok, if these numbers are accurate, but am just a foot inside the minimum with my short throw Marantz VP4001 projector.


Can anyone here confirm the 1.4 figure I mentioned above? Thanks, I know I can always phone Stewart if need be but thought I'd check here first.


Thanks again.


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jamie ford* /forum/post/20954743
> 
> 
> Thanks for the reply. I will check the smoothness or lack there of. I have recentley purchased a pre-owned, but never mounted, ST130 and there is some confusion, from the folks at Stewart as well, as to whether it is G3 or the former version of the 130.
> 
> 
> To that end I did my projector calculations using the Stewart website which has data for the ST 130 G3, it seems, through reading completely through this thread, that the minimum throw distance for the ST 130 is 1.4 times width versus 1.3 times the width for the G3 material. I should be ok, if these numbers are accurate, but am just a foot inside the minimum with my short throw Marantz VP4001 projector.
> 
> 
> Can anyone here confirm the 1.4 figure I mentioned above? Thanks, I know I can always phone Stewart if need be but thought I'd check here first.
> 
> 
> Thanks again.



Get the serial number of the existing screen, i can find out for you with that if it's the G2 or G3 version.


What image size are you going with? How far back are you putting the projector?


Benito


----------



## jamie ford

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* 
Get the serial number of the existing screen, i can find out for you with that if it's the G2 or G3 version.


What image size are you going with? How far back are you putting the projector?


Benito
That's kind of you, thanks. I will pm you the serial number but will need to dig it out/up.


The screen size is 110" diagonal with my Marantz showing a max throw distance of 12'7". (this is from the Marantz manual as well as projector calc.)


If the older 130 material is 1.4 times width that would call for a minimum throw distance of a hair under 11'. If my calculations are corect..(110" diagonal screen having a width of 94".


Thanks again for your help.


Jamie


----------



## juztfurfun

I have received differing recs on which stewart screen gain to choose.

The choice is between studiotek 130 and ultramatte 150 or the new reflections screen( gain is 1.7)

The room is totally light controlled with dark walls. The new 2D and 3D projector will be the sony 95es with rated 1000 lumens---at least on day one! The screen size will be 114 inches diagonal--56 x 99 inches in 16:9 AR . The throw distance is 13.5 feet and I will watch 2D movies 80 percent and 3D 20 percent--with definite light fall-off in 3D----sooooo which gain to choose: 1.3 or 1.5---or 1.7 thanx


----------



## Benito Joaquin

Me personally, i would do the 1.3 or 1.5 gain tops. I know that Sony used a 1.5 gain when working with their projectors.


Benito


----------



## guyan123

Hi


I have a Optoma HD87 projector and would like a FireHawk 110 inch 2.35:1 screen.

My viewing distance would be about 8 feet from the screen.

I understand the FireHawk requires a lens to screen throw of 1.6 x image width but is this the 16:9 image or the 2.35:1 image size?

If it is the 2.35:1 image size then my throw would be below 1.6 x image width because the projector would be 12.32 feet from the screen which is the ideal distance for my 16:9 image then i would be using a anamorphic lens for the 2.35:1 image.


Thanks


----------



## Benito Joaquin

it's for the 16:9 image.

One thing to note, i wouldn't say that it requires the throw of 1.6 x image width. Yes it's true, to get the best out of the Firehawk material, it's definitely recommended, but not absolutely necessary. Also, if you get worried about hotspotting, you can consider the Firehawk SST material.


We are an authorized Stewart dealer so if you or anyone else is in need of pricing, feel free to contact us.



Benito


----------



## shadow39

Well looks like I will be a proud owner of a new Stewart screen. Just ordered the luxus model A electric screen with the new reflections 170 3D material at 110". It will be paired with a Sony HW30. Probably take a few weeks for it to be manufactured and delivered but can't wait to see it. Will post pics and impressions when it's installed.


----------



## Benito Joaquin




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *shadow39* /forum/post/20978154
> 
> 
> Well looks like I will be a proud owner of a new Stewart screen. Just ordered the luxus model A electric screen with the new reflections 170 3D material at 110". It will be paired with a Sony HW30. Probably take a few weeks for it to be manufactured and delivered but can't wait to see it. Will post pics and impressions when it's installed.



Very nice!! Definitely post pics when you get everything up and running.


Benito


----------



## ccool96




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Benito Joaquin* /forum/post/20979222
> 
> 
> Very nice!! Definitely post pics when you get everything up and running.
> 
> 
> Benito



Benito,


I was trying to send you a PM but doesn't let me.


Thanks,

Chris


----------



## R Harkness

I have to say as a Studiotek 130 owner....


I second guess myself as much as anyone. So I'm always wondering "is there anything I could have done, or could to for an even better image?"


Naturally when people rave about other types of screen materials is piques my interest.

Especially those that preserve contrast, like specialty screens (e.g. Black Diamond/DNP..or high gain High Power screens and the like).


Every time I am able to check out another screen material it re-affirms I've made the best decision on the ST-130. I simply can not put up with the obviousness of the screen artifacts of the specialty screens - all that obvious hot-spotting, off-axis dimming, speckly screen coating...yuck! (I can certainly see the appeal to many people of such products to be sure. They just don't do it for me).


The ST-130 yielded an amazing image for me from day one, in terms of brightness, image clarity and color balance. I have found that this is a screen that certainly rewards you the more room reflections you can control. It certainly looked great in my "controlled room reflections but nowhere near bat-cave" beginning. But my current image looks even more spectacular in terms of a life-like dynamic contrast, with room reflections even more controlled (almost bat-cave like).


Yes, I'd love it if a screen could look just as good without going to the effort of controlling room reflections. But...ye canna break the laws of physics, and I am willing to go with the more pure image and work on my room, vs a gray screen with gain.


The main screen that tugs my curiosity is the ST-100. I'd LOVE to see how that works in my room. It would be a bit dimmer, and it would also spread more light around so I don't know if ultimately I would like the trade offs. But..still curious.


----------



## AV Science sales 1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ccool96* /forum/post/21025721
> 
> 
> Benito,
> 
> 
> I was trying to send you a PM but doesn't let me.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Chris



Hey Chris,


Sorry, best bet is to email me.

Email is in signature.


I'll keep an eye out and get to it right away.


Benito


----------



## drummermitchell

Does anyone know how far from the wall a Stewart CineW frame sticks out from the wall 2-3".

Also with say a 40 degree curve at 120" width+5" for frame(all around),

how much would the outside curve stick out from the wall.

trying to see if I can go bigger as I have gik tritraps in my front corners and would like to keep them there.

If the curved end stick out past the tri's,then I should be good.

my wall is 12'W,I can just make it with a 120"W+10"around for the frame,

Thanks.


----------



## fraisa

Man i forgot all about this company,,,,


----------



## GetGray

Quote:

Originally Posted by *drummermitchell* 
Does anyone know how far from the wall a Stewart CineW frame sticks out from the wall 2-3".

Also with say a 40 degree curve at 120" width+5" for frame(all around),

how much would the outside curve stick out from the wall.

trying to see if I can go bigger as I have gik tritraps in my front corners and would like to keep them there.

If the curved end stick out past the tri's,then I should be good.

my wall is 12'W,I can just make it with a 120"W+10"around for the frame,

Thanks.
Little bigger but this one will give you an idea. Drawing attached. A dealer can run the dimensions for you.

 

TecHHT_DemoScreen12-29-10a.pdf 47.1728515625k . file


----------



## drummermitchell

Thanks alot Scott,that helps tremendously.

So I have 8" roughly at both ends,I'll play around with 4-6"(just in case to see where she'll be).Screens,lenses,takes a awhile.Scott has Isco raised their prices yet,thanks.


----------



## AV Science sales 1

They can also customize it for you to accommodate your application. if it's nothing major, there wouldn't be an upcharge either.


Benito


----------



## GetGray

Not yet. shhhhh.


----------



## shadow39

Good news about the 110" reflections 170 3d screen I ordered 3 weeks ago, should be delivered on Wednesday or Thursday and will be installed this Saturday. Will post some pics and thoughts when it's all up.


----------



## AV Science sales 1

Very nice!! What projector are you using with it?


Benito


----------



## shadow39

I'm using the Sony HW30 which I purchased from you







it will be 11'5" from the screen so I'm hoping there won't be any hot spotting or sparklies but since this is new material and just out and not seeing it action makes me a bit nervous. Nice thing is I can put the Sony into low mode for 2D and hopefully that will help but will really just have to wait and see on Saturday.


----------



## WhereToStart




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *shadow39* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> I'm using the Sony HW30 which I purchased from you
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it will be 11'5" from the screen so I'm hoping there won't be any hot spotting or sparklies but since this is new material and just out and not seeing it action makes me a bit nervous. Nice thing is I can put the Sony into low mode for 2D and hopefully that will help but will really just have to wait and see on Saturday.



I'm very interested in your impressions as I am considering that screen with a VW95


----------



## AV Science sales 1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *WhereToStart* /forum/post/21100064
> 
> 
> I'm very interested in your impressions as I am considering that screen with a VW95



what size did you have in mind with the 95?


Benito


----------



## WhereToStart




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science sales 1* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> what size did you have in mind with the 95?
> 
> 
> Benito



I'm thinking 110-115 but it is a new smaller space so I am going to test out some sizes on the wall for a bit to see what actually works.


The Stewart is definitely in my short list, and the DNP, and maybe Carada.


----------



## bambam

I have a Firehawk from about six years ago. It is not the G3, but just the "Firehawk" that was available at that time. What would the gain be on that screen, and would it be sufficient for 3D? It is a 92" diagonal.


----------



## shadow39

Just wanted to report that I got my 110" Stewart Luxus model A installed on Saturday with their new Reflections 170 3D material. Will try and post some pics by next week but I will give a few thoughts on it now. I'm using the Sony HW30 with it placed 11'5" back and can say that hot spotting is practically non existent and I can detect no sparcklies in bright or scenes with snow. I feel it gives 2D movies a very nice pop with colours. Only thing I'm a little disappointed in is 3D movies aren't as bright as I thought they would be and when watching 2D movies if I really look at the screen I can see the texture a bit but only if I really concentrate on one spot if that makes any sense. I am surprised that the viewing angle is better than I thought it would be which is good. When putting the screen up/ down the motor is quiet. That's about it for now have only watched Star Wars episode 1 on blu ray and in 3D pirates and beauty and the beast so I want to see a few more movies in my collection before I really can say how much I like it but so far it's pretty good.


----------



## Jim Noyd




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *shadow39* /forum/post/21117741
> 
> 
> Just wanted to report that I got my 110" Stewart Luxus model A installed on Saturday with their new Reflections 170 3D material. Will try and post some pics by next week but I will give a few thoughts on it now. I'm using the Sony HW30 with it placed 11'5" back and can say that hot spotting is practically non existent and I can detect no sparcklies in bright or scenes with snow. I feel it gives 2D movies a very nice pop with colours. Only thing I'm a little disappointed in is 3D movies aren't as bright as I thought they would be and when watching 2D movies if I really look at the screen I can see the texture a bit but only if I really concentrate on one spot if that makes any sense. I am surprised that the viewing angle is better than I thought it would be which is good. When putting the screen up/ down the motor is quiet. That's about it for now have only watched Star Wars episode 1 on blu ray and in 3D pirates and beauty and the beast so I want to see a few more movies in my collection before I really can say how much I like it but so far it's pretty good.



can you do separate calibrations for 2D and 3D?


----------



## egrady

I just set up my new Studiotek 130 which I purchased from AVS Science. Thanks Benito!


My old screen was a Carada BW. A good screen, but I was looking for increased brightness when needed. The difference in gain, even though both are rated about the same, was immediately apparent. The Stewart screen isn't cheap, but it is a step up and well worth the higher cost.


The one complaint I have is the mounting design. The Carada has a rail you attach to the wall. You simply place the screen frame above the rail and slide it down until it locks into place. The rail can also be leveled very easily while on the wall, which makes leveling the screen a breeze. The Stewart approach is Rube Goldberg reincarnated. I shook my head, gave up and slid the "quick snap" brackets underneath the Carada rail which I had left in place.


Stewart needs to make conventional wall mounting as simple and convenient as Carada.


----------



## AV Science sales 1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *egrady* /forum/post/21268359
> 
> 
> I just set up my new Studiotek 130 which I purchased from AVS Science. Thanks Benito!
> 
> 
> My old screen was a Carada BW. A good screen, but I was looking for increased brightness when needed. The difference in gain, even though both are rated about the same, was immediately apparent. The Stewart screen isn't cheap, but it is a step up and well worth the higher cost.
> 
> 
> The one complaint I have is the mounting design. The Carada has a rail you attach to the wall. You simply place the screen frame above the rail and slide it down until it locks into place. The rail can also be leveled very easily while on the wall, which makes leveling the screen a breeze. The Stewart approach is Rube Goldberg reincarnated. I shook my head, gave up and slid the "quick snap" brackets underneath the Carada rail which I had left in place.
> 
> 
> Stewart needs to make conventional wall mounting as simple and convenient as Carada.



not a problem!! Since you paid a good amount for the screen, it's good to see that there is a clear visual difference.


I can always bring that up. I'll agree with you, some of their ways are still a bit 'old school' and works but isn't the best.


Benito


----------



## StarFlash

Does anyone who owns a Stewart screen with horizontal masking panels have a comment about the following issue I am having with my screen?


I recently acquired from AVS (Benito) a 100 inch diagonal 16:9 screen with the horizontal masking panels. When I move the lower masking panel up or down, I can hear a noise coming from the spring inside the right-hand side of the frame. It sounds as if the spring is being plucked as it expands or contracts. The spring inside the left-hand side of the frame makes no such noise. From 1999 until 2011, I owned a similar screen with an 84 inch diagonal and it made no such noise on either side. I am wondering if other people are hearing this noise with their screen's panels. Does anyone know if this noise is indicative of a problem? My panel moves up and down very smoothly, so the noise does not appear to be causing an immediate problem. I'm just concerned that if the spring is rubbing against something, it could cause the metal to wear over time and it could eventually break.


----------



## Ron




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *StarFlash* /forum/post/21304425
> 
> 
> Does anyone who owns a Stewart screen with horizontal masking panels have a comment about the following issue I am having with my screen?
> 
> 
> I recently acquired from AVS (Benito) a 100 inch diagonal 16:9 screen with the horizontal masking panels. When I move the lower masking panel up or down, I can hear a noise coming from the spring inside the right-hand side of the frame. It sounds as if the spring is being plucked as it expands or contracts. The spring inside the left-hand side of the frame makes no such noise. From 1999 until 2011, I owned a similar screen with an 84 inch diagonal and it made no such noise on either side. I am wondering if other people are hearing this noise with their screen's panels. Does anyone know if this noise is indicative of a problem? My panel moves up and down very smoothly, so the noise does not appear to be causing an immediate problem. I'm just concerned that if the spring is rubbing against something, it could cause the metal to wear over time and it could eventually break.



I have not heard this kind of sound. I think you're right to be concerned, I'm thinking something is slightly out of place. Maybe call Stewart about it?


----------



## AV Science sales 1

Hey Starflash,

sorry for the delay in responding. I know the sound you are referring to. I've seen and heard it before with other units with the same design as yours.


I can look into a solution for you. It's usually just replacing the spring and maybe the cord / pulley system. you'll get your hands a little dirty but should be an easy fix.


Benito


----------



## R Harkness

This is sort of repeating a sentiment I expressed in a post on the previous page but...


I had a chance to see JVC HD250 (I believe) on a smaller Black Diamond .8 gain screen. As usual while I was initially impressed by the way the screen held very nice contrast, even on a small screen I could see the image struggling a bit brightness-wise.

Not to mention the obvious screen texture and hotspotting. (Still, an excellent product for what it's designed to do).


At home the ST-130 material makes it so much easier to have a bright, brilliant image that holds terrific contrast (excellent black levels in a light controlled room) at much larger image sizes. I can go about 10 ft wide on my ST-130 and it still looks bright, while I could already see brightness limitations on the BD/JVC combo with a 93" diag screen. The ST-130 is still seems to be the best..that is the best performing, least compromised...screen I could have chosen for _my_ room!


I can't wait to fire up my new JVC RS55 ("4k-lite") projector on this screen!


----------



## Dr. Horrible

Hey, so how are you guys managing to do business with Stewart Filmscreen these days?? I've been trying since the start of November to get some samples from them via AVScience. Mike Garrett (of AVScience) must have tried at least four times now with different contacts at Stewart -- all with no result. He's finally just thrown in the towel and apologized for Stewart's apparent lack of interest in dealing with potential customers.


I've recently moved and I'm upgrading my JVC RS1 to an RS55 (coming Wednesday, woot!) and I'm looking to put in a retractable 12' x 5' screen in my new home theater space. I'd just go with Da-Lite whom I've used before for fixed screens for both myself and my brother but I'm interested in seeing Stewart's current 1.3 and 1.5 materials before deciding.


So how'd you manage to get samples from Stewart or did you just order blind? Anybody with recent Stewart samples to spare? (I'm in Santa Cruz, CA.)


----------



## longbow




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Dr. Horrible* /forum/post/21332855
> 
> 
> Hey, so how are you guys managing to do business with Stewart Filmscreen these days?? I've been trying since the start of November to get some samples from them via AVScience. Mike Garrett (of AVScience) must have tried at least four times now with different contacts at Stewart -- all with no result. He's finally just thrown in the towel and apologized for Stewart's apparent lack of interest in dealing with potential customers.
> 
> 
> I've recently moved and I'm upgrading my JVC RS1 to an RS55 (coming Wednesday, woot!) and I'm looking to put in a retractable 12' x 5' screen in my new home theater space. I'd just go with Da-Lite whom I've used before for fixed screens for both myself and my brother but I'm interested in seeing Stewart's current 1.3 and 1.5 materials before deciding.
> 
> 
> So how'd you manage to get samples from Stewart or did you just order blind? Anybody with recent Stewart samples to spare? (I'm in Santa Cruz, CA.)



I can't speak to the slow samples, but I have 2 ST130 screens and there is nothing like that material. If you room is light controlled, it is the best I have seen. Be patient and you will be glad you took your time!


----------



## AV Science sales 1

Hey Dr. Horrible, I have a few extra samples from my own personal stash I can probably send to you. Feel free to send me your info.


Thanks!


----------



## Rich Wiegard

Looking for a quick sanity check on the projector / screen combination I'm using. My previous projector was an Optima HD70? from 6 or so years ago. Several months ago I switched to the Epson 9500UB. I am still using the 110" Stewart Firehawk screen I had used with my Optima. I'm not sure of the exact version of Firehawk, but it's about 6 years old if that helps, maybe even 7. Greyish/silver. I recall at the time the recommendation was to go with that screen with the DLP Optima projector. Now that my projector is no longer DLP, is that still a decent combination?


The room is a dedicated media room, minimal ambient light when watching movies. During the daytime the 2 rear windows in the room bring in a very small amount of light but I have blinds/curtains so it's very little.


Just curious on what the ideal screen is for the 9500UB. I'm tossing around the idea of maybe moving up to 120".


Thanks,

Rich


----------



## SKINSnCANES

Can anyone suggest a good Stewart screen to use with the Runco Q-750i with a Whitney anamorphic lens?


Anyone tried their curved screens? Do you think its worth the extra expense?


What can I expect to see using a Runco instead of a Da-lite or other less expensive brand?


----------



## SKINSnCANES




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *drummermitchell* /forum/post/21041405
> 
> 
> Does anyone know how far from the wall a Stewart CineW frame sticks out from the wall 2-3".
> 
> Also with say a 40 degree curve at 120" width+5" for frame(all around),
> 
> how much would the outside curve stick out from the wall.
> 
> trying to see if I can go bigger as I have gik tritraps in my front corners and would like to keep them there.
> 
> If the curved end stick out past the tri's,then I should be good.
> 
> my wall is 12'W,I can just make it with a 120"W+10"around for the frame,
> 
> Thanks.



Did you buy this screen and try it out yet? Im looking for feedback on it. Did you user your projector with a flat screen first to be able to compare if it made a noticeable difference on the edges?


----------



## GetGray

A 56" tall (about 11' wide) 2.35 Cine-W (curved) is speced at 8" from the wall to the front edge of the frame at the sides.


Skin: I love the Firehawk material and recommend them to my customers for installations with DLP's in particular. I have one in my personal theater with a 3-chip DLP. Unless it's a Batcave, then the ST130 is very nice. Depends on your screen size and how much gain you need (or don't need).


----------



## SKINSnCANES




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray* /forum/post/21363256
> 
> 
> A 56" tall (about 11' wide) 2.35 Cine-W (curved) is speced at 8" from the wall to the front edge of the frame at the sides.
> 
> 
> Skin: I love the Firehawk material and recommend them to my customers for installations with DLP's in particular. I have one in my personal theater with a 3-chip DLP. Unless it's a Batcave, then the ST130 is very nice. Depends on your screen size and how much gain you need (or don't need).



My theater will be dedicated with full light control, and I believe I said Im going to use the Runco LED projector. I was looking at the Stewart studiotek 130, I was thinking that since I had a projector that does an excellent job of black levels and colors that I wanted a pure screen. Im not sure if I need a grey screen to help with contrast. I considered the 1.0 gain screen but figured the little bit of extra gain would be nice for times when there may be some lights on.


I know people talk about the LEDs not having enough light but frankly from what I've seen in the few demos this is a statement not based on having seen it. It bright scenes it was too bright and I would have preferred the output turned down. I think it has plenty of light for viewing. And the detail in black scenes was outstanding.


----------



## SKINSnCANES




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray* /forum/post/21363256
> 
> 
> A 56" tall (about 11' wide) 2.35 Cine-W (curved) is speced at 8" from the wall to the front edge of the frame at the sides.
> 
> 
> Skin: I love the Firehawk material and recommend them to my customers for installations with DLP's in particular. I have one in my personal theater with a 3-chip DLP. Unless it's a Batcave, then the ST130 is very nice. Depends on your screen size and how much gain you need (or don't need).



GetGray - Is the Firehawk screen grey or white? I was assuming it was grey but then I thought about it and I'm not actually sure. I looked on stewarts site and saw there is two fire hawk screens but I can't see if its white or grey. Theres the Firehawk G3 and SST


----------



## BobL

The firehawk is gray. The SST is for shorter throw installations.


----------



## SKINSnCANES




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BobL* /forum/post/21366951
> 
> 
> The firehawk is gray. The SST is for shorter throw installations.



how do you define short throw? My room is 17 feet long, so the throw will be between 14-15 feet. 1.87 is the min ratio and it will be close to that, maybe around 2


----------



## BobL

SST throw ratios 1.4-1.6

G3 throw ratios 1.6 or >


----------



## IGO2XS

I have been looking at many screens and have settled on purchasing a Stewart Screen. I am using a DP M-Vison Cine 260 HC (high contrast) projector. The specs say it is 2000 lumens. I do have a few windows that will be covered with very heavy black out draperies but I only watch movies at night anyway so there would be complete darkness. I do need an accoustically transparent screen as I will have my center channel speaker behind the screen. The screen will be 16:9 (1:78) and approximately 135 "wide. Would appreciate any opinions on this. thank you. Mark






http://www.digitalprojection.com/Bro...1/Default.aspx


----------



## AV Science sales 1




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *IGO2XS* /forum/post/21368639
> 
> 
> I have been looking at many screens and have settled on purchasing a Stewart Screen. I am using a DP M-Vison Cine 260 HC (high contrast) projector. The specs say it is 2000 lumens. I do have a few windows that will be covered with very heavy black out draperies but I only watch movies at night anyway so there would be complete darkness. I do need an accoustically transparent screen as I will have my center channel speaker behind the screen. The screen will be 16:9 (1:78) and approximately 135 "wide. Would appreciate any opinions on this. thank you. Mark
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.digitalprojection.com/Bro...1/Default.aspx



That M Vision is one of my favorite projectors. I've seen it paired up with Stewart screens with amazing results. At 135" wide, that's a pretty big 16:9 screen. I would suggest you look into the Ultramatte 130 or possibly jumping up into the Ultramatte 150. Both available in microperf.


Benito


----------



## rovingtravler




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *SKINSnCANES* /forum/post/21362797
> 
> 
> Can anyone suggest a good Stewart screen to use with the Runco Q-750i with a Whitney anamorphic lens?
> 
> 
> Anyone tried their curved screens? Do you think its worth the extra expense?
> 
> 
> What can I expect to see using a Runco instead of a Da-lite or other less expensive brand?



The real question is what size do you want? with a 1.0 gain at 98" diag you will get around 16 FL at 120" diag 1.0 gain you will get around 10.5 FL


What do you consider a good level of light? Also is you get a Stewart you can go up in gain without hotspoting. a 1.3 Studiotek G3 is a great pairing and I have see the Q-750i with a 135" diag scope ST130 G3. with more than enough light to have a great experience.


----------



## lem321

Question about Stewart tensioned screens and remote control:

I was doing some research on the Stewart tensioned screens and noticed that the amount of extension of the screen comes pre-set from the factory to drop a certain distance (depending on the customer's specs). According to the owner's manual, there is some range of adjustment so you can limit or extend the drop by +/- a few inches. Does anyone know if this negatively affects the tab-tensioning system if this is done? Also there is a bewildering array of options to control the screen remotely (up and down, masking, etc). Does Stewart have a remote option (IR or RF) that permits use of a universal remote such as the Logitech Harmony One?


----------



## marswill

I just ordered my screen with the 12V trigger option. This will allow your projector, AV receiver, or in my case the video processor, to lower and raise the screen. My AV receiver and video processor both support the 12V trigger feature. Most projectors do also but my JVC RS1 projector doesn't support this feature.


----------



## joepaiii

All I have the chance to get a used 120 16x9 Stewart Firehawk screen. Not sure how old it is. What should I look out for when inspecting the screen? Does Stewart's gain covering wear off? How easily is it damagd? What would be a reasonable price?


----------



## joepaiii




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *joepaiii* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> All I have the chance to get a used 120 16x9 Stewart Firehawk screen. Not sure how old it is. What should I look out for when inspecting the screen? Does Stewart's gain covering wear off? How easily is it damagd? What would be a reasonable price?



Also it had a model number of It's SNDQ120HFWezX.


Is there anyway to tell if this is an SST or G3?


----------



## dasoccerbomb

Need a recommendation on Screen. Like many other people here I am trying to decide between the Firehawk G3 and the Studiotek 130. My room is completely light controlled the walls are dark gray and the ceiling is even darker. My problem is that i do have 4 light Sconces. Two on the back wall where the projector will be mounted and two on the side wall because of this i am thrown on witch material to get. I have not purchased my PJ yet buy think i have decided on the EPSON 6010. I am including a model of the room to give you guys a better idea of what the room looks like (The window in the model is going to be 100% covered). Oh yeah the PJ will be mounted 15' 9" away and i am considering going with a 110" screen. Thanks Guys


----------



## Ron

but you'll have those lights (and all light/lights) off during the movie, right? if so, I would go with the studiotek - I wish I would have. I have the firehawk, and it's fine, but I think my image would be a little brighter with my current projector (jvc rs2).


having said that, I don't know much about the epson, but as long as it has a good contrast ratio, I would think you'd want the studiotek. (but if you decide you want a firehawk, like if you'll have light in the room, let me know if you want to buy one that's 107" wide (123" diagonal)!







)


----------



## dasoccerbomb

More then likely I will have the lights on but will have them at a very dim setting, just enough to illuminate the globe. I would love to go larger than 110 diagonal but unfortunately I am maxed out on height in this room.


----------



## Ron




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dasoccerbomb* /forum/post/21464263
> 
> 
> More then likely I will have the lights on but will have them at a very dim setting, just enough to illuminate the globe. I would love to go larger than 110 diagonal but unfortunately I am maxed out on height in this room.



okay, with any light on you'd probably want the firehawk.


but, can I ask why you want to have them on at all, especially since it sounds like you won't have them on enough to light the floor (but it will be enough to light the screen)? just curious, you may change your mind once you get to that point, and it's your ht to enjoy as you see fit!


----------



## dasoccerbomb

I think i am just going for the overall ambiance, I mean when you go to any regular theater they always dim the lighting but leave the lights on just slightly. Id have to go back and look again but when I set the lights to movie mode (ie dim the lights to the point where just the globe is illuminated) I don't believe the lights are hitting the ground and i dont think they are bright enough at that point to be picked up by the screen.


Updated with a little better picture of the sconces


----------



## rsmag9

I just purchased a Stewart Studiotek 130 screen from another member of avsforum (just received it yesterday and upon unpacking found that the screen material was folded, not rolled. I plan on contacting Stewart for advice but was hoping someone on here would know if the fold marks will disappear, possibly with a hair dryer (it's a 110" screen and was folded into about a 16" square during shipping). It's the snap style screen with Luxus frame. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks


----------



## nathan_h

I cannot say for sure but it's possible by putting it onto the frame the folds will disappear over a little time.


The hair dryer might help but I won't recommend it since I don't have any experience with whether that might cause problems.


I would be annoyed with the seller, unless that folding was disclosed up front and factored into the sale and you had a reasonable plan (fixing it or replacing it). But that's just my opinion.


----------



## jamie ford




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rsmag9* /forum/post/21510550
> 
> 
> I just purchased a Stewart Studiotek 130 screen from another member of avsforum (just received it yesterday and upon unpacking found that the screen material was folded, not rolled. I plan on contacting Stewart for advice but was hoping someone on here would know if the fold marks will disappear, possibly with a hair dryer (it's a 110" screen and was folded into about a 16" square during shipping). It's the snap style screen with Luxus frame. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks



I recentley purchased a used Stewart screen and had excellent luck contacting Stewart with a few questions I had. Give them a ring I am sure they have seen/responded to your situation in the past.


Good luck.


----------



## R Harkness

I played around a bit with my screen samples - small ones unfortunately. I have a totally light controlled room and currently use the ST130 in my set up. First thing about the ST-100 snow matte material is that even it has some tiny sparklies when viewed from several inches away. Though not that my eye picked up from further away.


Pixel resolution was very clearly better on the ST-100 vs the other screen samples that had gain, e.g. the firehawk etc. Though the difference between the ST-100 and the ST-130 was pretty marginal in that respect.


I was actually expecting the ST-100 material to look a bit more washed out than the ST-130 material, but to my surprise it consistently looked a tiny bit better in contrast. Only looking at the sample (which can be quite misleading) it was the best material I've seen. One day I might try this material....


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *rsmag9* /forum/post/21510550
> 
> 
> I just purchased a Stewart Studiotek 130 screen from another member of avsforum (just received it yesterday and upon unpacking found that the screen material was folded, not rolled. I plan on contacting Stewart for advice but was hoping someone on here would know if the fold marks will disappear, possibly with a hair dryer (it's a 110" screen and was folded into about a 16" square during shipping). It's the snap style screen with Luxus frame. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks




FWIW...


Before I got my Stewart ST-130 material I was using a 105" diagonal sheet of neutral gain screen material, taped on to my wall (obviously not permanent). It fell down countless times and looked incredibly rough each time I picked it up from the floor- completely folded and wrinkled. Yet again and again those wrinkles essentially disappeared when I simply taped it up again. If I had actually stretched that material on to a frame I'm sure it would have been totally flat.


I suspect your screen material may be more robust than you think, and once put in a frame I'm betting it will look fine, especially with a projected image.


----------



## R Harkness

Can anyone tell me if the Stewart ST-100 material would be ok for 3D?


Thanks


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/21544980
> 
> 
> Can anyone tell me if the Stewart ST-100 material would be ok for 3D?
> 
> 
> Thanks



If your projector is bright enough and your screen is small enough that you can adequately light it up in 3D then you will be fine, but those are big if's. It all comes down to lumen output and screen area. Take the lumen output of the projector in 3D mode and divide by the area of the screen. Multiply by gain (in your case 1.0) then divide by 4 and that will give you aprox. Foot Lamberts for 3D.


----------



## R Harkness

Thanks for the reply. I was mainly concerned about the "polarization" issue, where some screens (brightness aside) seem to be less suitable than others.


----------



## BobL

Polarization is a big issue if you are using a passive 3D system, with active 3D it is not a problem. If using a passive 3D system the best choice for 2D/3D would be the 5D material. With active 3D any of the other screens will work fine and pick the one that is best for your situation.


The ST-100 is a top notch screen and will have the best detail of any of them but you lose contrast very fast due to light reflecting off the wall, ceiling, and other surfaces back to the screen. If your room is not close to the ideal black bat cave so to speak it wouldn't be the best choice but if it is close to that ideal environment this screen rocks as long as you have a bright enough projector. A screen with some gain like the ST-130 or FH to reduce those reflections from hurting contrast would be a better choice for most installations.


Anytime you have a screen with gain the coating to make that gain will somewhat skew/blur the pixels as light is being bent to direct the light in a given direction. Nobody has beat physics with this. A screen that distributes light evenly in all directions will cause the pixels to be clearer and more defined. You have a good eye if you noticed these difference with the ST-100 compared to the other screens.


----------



## wlm94

I have a reflections 170 screen with microperf. It is 120" and is in total light controlled room with 14.5 feet viewing distance. I can still see grain and I think it is the microperf. I am using the JVC RS55 and the throw is at 14.5 feet as well. I have black carpet and black ceiling. I was informed if the room was light controlled that you would not be able to see the microperf past 12 feet. Would like to hear some feedback. No lights on in the room and no windows and doors shut.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BobL* /forum/post/21550649
> 
> 
> Polarization is a big issue if you are using a passive 3D system, with active 3D it is not a problem. If using a passive 3D system the best choice for 2D/3D would be the 5D material. With active 3D any of the other screens will work fine and pick the one that is best for your situation.
> 
> 
> The ST-100 is a top notch screen and will have the best detail of any of them but you lose contrast very fast due to light reflecting off the wall, ceiling, and other surfaces back to the screen. If your room is not close to the ideal black bat cave so to speak it wouldn't be the best choice but if it is close to that ideal environment this screen rocks as long as you have a bright enough projector. A screen with some gain like the ST-130 or FH to reduce those reflections from hurting contrast would be a better choice for most installations.
> 
> 
> Anytime you have a screen with gain the coating to make that gain will somewhat skew/blur the pixels as light is being bent to direct the light in a given direction. Nobody has beat physics with this. A screen that distributes light evenly in all directions will cause the pixels to be clearer and more defined. You have a good eye if you noticed these difference with the ST-100 compared to the other screens.



So, have you seen the ST-100 in good conditions? And does it deliver? For instance, vs the ST-130, is there any detectable increase in clarity, or contrast (as some claim), or realism? Is the screen really "invisible" once projected upon?


Thanks,


----------



## BobL

I have seen the ST-100 in a lab near us, at Stewart's facility and in my house. The lab is all black with black velveteen on many surfaces. It does deliver increased clarity which is noticeable compared to other screens, The JKP screens are a close second. I doubt contrast changes much though. ANSI contrast would change depending on the room conditions. I'm not sure I would call it "invisible" but it is like a reference speaker it tells it like it is.


When in that perfect room the room does seem to disappear as there are no reflections for your eyes to focus on.


----------



## R Harkness

Thanks BobL.


For me the room is supreme, so I keep trying to edge toward the "black box" capability when I'm viewing movies. In my view, a super dark environment is not only better for maintaining projected image quality, it also makes for a more intense, immersive, cinematic experience.


----------



## jeffreyaallen

We are replacing an Electriscreen we put in about 12 years ago (reconfiguring room and going with a stationary 2.35:1 rather than a retractable 16:9) and need some help pricing the used screen. We can't seem to figure out even which model on Stewart's website is their current equivalent...


Screen material: Ultramatte 150

Model number: SR-AH 92 (45" x 80")

Serial number: 99 SRA 98XXXXX


It's the tab-tensioned motorized drop-down screen. We have the 12V screen trigger interface.


It's been gently-used in a dedicated theater room programmed to roll it up with room off (so it's clean from fingerprints and wear and tear that come from a screen hanging around, etc.).


Any suggestions for how to price it? Any idea what the current equivalent model is?


----------



## Skylinestar

Anyone heard of Silver Screen Home Theater? This shop is selling cheap screens in Videogon. Wondering if it's reliable.


----------



## Jugdish69

looking at the Stewart ST-130 to pair with a Sony HW30.... My room is completely light controlled with a white ceiling and tan walls. Question I have is we will be using the projector for gaming and will need some ambient light for that. Is the ST130 a good option or will the image wash out too much with some ambient light. I currently have a Carada classic cinema white which is OK, but the image is not great. It handles ambient light well.....


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jugdish69* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> looking at the Stewart ST-130 to pair with a Sony HW30.... My room is completely light controlled with a white ceiling and tan walls. Question I have is we will be using the projector for gaming and will need some ambient light for that. Is the ST130 a good option or will the image wash out too much with some ambient light. I currently have a Carada classic cinema white which is OK, but the image is not great. It handles ambient light well.....



I wouldn't want to use a 130 with a white ceiling even in a totally dark room. But the bottom line is that the I don't think the 130 will be a big change in that kind of environment for you from what you are currently using, especially with ambient light.


Don't get me wrong, it's one of the best screens on the market, but not for all use cases.


----------



## Jugdish69

what would you recommend? The image on the Carada is nice and bright, but my issue is that the screen has vertical striations running down the entire screen making the picture less than prime looking. I chalk that up to being a "low cost" issue.


----------



## nathan_h

Sounds like a warranty issue on the Carada. I don't want to tell you not to get a Stewart Screen. I love mine. But I'm not sure it's the solution. Have you tried the Carada thread, or even talking with the manufacturer directly?


----------



## Jugdish69

yeah.... there are a few that notice the striations. Carada is sending me a replacement screen when they get a new lot in. They seem to think its a manufacturing issue where the screen comes out on rollers. It almost looks like stretchmarks! Kind of odd looking. I appreciate your honest opinion....


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jugdish69* /forum/post/21654023
> 
> 
> looking at the Stewart ST-130 to pair with a Sony HW30.... My room is completely light controlled with a white ceiling and tan walls. Question I have is we will be using the projector for gaming and will need some ambient light for that. Is the ST130 a good option or will the image wash out too much with some ambient light. I currently have a Carada classic cinema white which is OK, but the image is not great. It handles ambient light well.....



FireHawk G3 would be a good choice for you. Give us a call if we can help you.


----------



## David Shapiro

I received an interesting suggestion the other day. I would like a scope screen, but we also watch a lot of broadcast TV. I currently have a Microperf 10' x 6' Studiotek 130. The suggestion was to go to a 12' x 6' screen, since that would accommodate a 12 x 5 ft scope size, that can revert to the 10 x 6 that we like. I was thinking of the new Stewart Reflections 170, since we want the gain for an eventual 3D setup. We are currently sitting 15 ft. away, but if I'm making these changes, I would move the screen to about 10 ft. away. We have very good light control, and I'm getting rid of the white ceiling and green wall behind the screen, in favor of a medium gray ceiling and a deep blue background, to help the contrast. Any thoughts. Oh, my current projector is a DPI highlite 260 HC.


David


----------



## R Harkness

This post is to Mark Haflich ﻿﻿, hoping he shows up to answer:


Mark,


Thanks so much for commenting on the performance of your new Studiotek 100 material. It's very intriguing for me as I have the ST-130 material (love it) but as good as it is, my ideal is to get that "screen disappearing" effect you describe with your ST-100 snomatt.


(I now have an 8" x 11" sample of the ST-100 material. Comparing it to my ST-130, the ST-100 has obviously less blurr from optical coating when looking at pixels close up. From a distance, at least with this sample, the brightness difference seemed negligeable (there, but not terribly big difference). It's also been pointed out in some reviews of the ST-100 that due to the subtle hotspotting nature of the ST-130, darker as you move away from the centre of the screen, the overall measured difference of the entire screen surfaces of an ST-100 and ST-130 are not as far off as the gain rating suggests (as the ST-100 remains bright corner-to-corner).


So I hoped the impact of the brightness drop would be somewhat mitigated by this fact. Though, you do note definitely seeing a brightness drop.

(I have to consider these things since I sometimes view images at 130" diagonal 16:9 or 118" wide scope).


I am just about at "bat cave" performance for my room, in terms of employing dark fabrics to cut all room reflections, which is another reason why I'm considering the ST-100 material. Another thing is I absolutely LOVE even image brightness, and viewing angles that are unrestricted, for which the ST-100 no doubt excels.


Still, I admit I'm kind of surprised you found the ST-100 made such a noticeable difference over the ST-130, but it's nice to know that a performance gain in my system is a future possibility (switching to the ST-100). Any additional comments or insight you have on your new screen material would be welcome.


BTW, when you said your wife thought it was "like viewing the disc for the first time" was that a comment comparing your new ST-100 material vs your ST-130, or a comment on the Sony 1000 projector's performance?


Thanks.





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 4* /forum/post/21695150
> 
> 
> Cool. 15/9?
> 
> 
> Anyhow, today I replaced my Studeotec 130 GII with a piece of Snomatt. My screen is only 54 x 96. The brightness drop was noticeable but the Sony was still plenty bright tjhough I did open the iris up a bit more.
> 
> 
> The picture however was noticeably and markedly better. The clear window I have talked about here became clearer. Perhaps what I am trying to say is the screen material was now absent from perception. I watched one of those under the seas 3D Imax films and it was like being in an aquarium. Crystal clear and great depth with considerable visability of the space behind the primary objects being filmed.
> 
> 
> I called my wife down and she said this was like viewing the disc for the first time.
> 
> 
> She then asked to watch the video of the musical Memphis on a PBS station. She felt it was like being slightly off stage or being the conductor in the orchestra pit. I said do you want to me to switch to one of our other projectors for comparision. She said why? She said this was amazing and made watching HD into a new experience and was obviously magnitudes better than our other projectors. I put the best one on anyway, and it is no slouch, and she said was I trying to kid her. It was now unwatchable.
> 
> 
> When watching a projected image in a good HT, one is aware that it is a projected image and not the actual you are there scene. The new screen material now removed the awareness of the screen from that perception in my HT. The projector, perhaps because of the increased pixel density and increased lumens over the other projectors I, on the Studeotec 130 GII screen presented a much more liquid rather than digital
> 
> picture if that makes any sensethan I have seen before. The picture just looked real but with the 130GII I was still aware of the screen.. Obviously what we saw last night was due to the projector and screen and being in a black pit. My wife stayed in the theater for almost 4 hours, a new record. This one gets shipped out on Tuesday.


----------



## AV Science Sales 4

Hi Rich. She had seen the Sony before on my 130 but not on the Snomat. My 130 was GII also not GII. The picture was a tad dimmer to my eyes but not a huge drop and I could easily negate it with menu settings (opening the iris up).


The biggest difference was the absolute light uniformity accross the screen and a complete absence of texture. The screen material just was gone.


David Shapiro. What is your throw using full scope width. You need a long throw to avoide hot spotting with high gain screens and 1.7 is a compromise for 2D in order to boost 3D brightness.


----------



## G-Rex

I agree to my eyes, with samples only, the ST100 only appears to be slightly dimmer to the 130. With my samples I could discern what Mark describes. The 100's lack of shimmer from the .3 less gain translates into a very sharp solid looking image with the perception of more detail. I wish the 1000 could handle a 141" wide scope ratio ST100, and it still may, but not sure I am willing to take that chance.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *G-Rex* /forum/post/21697211
> 
> 
> I agree to my eyes, with samples only, the ST100 only appears to be slightly dimmer to the 130. With my samples I could discern what Mark describes. The 100's lack of shimmer from the .3 less gain translates into a very sharp solid looking image with the perception of more detail. I wish the 1000 could handle a 141" wide scope ratio ST100, and it still may, but not sure I am willing to take that chance.



Yeah,


I had a 104" diag 16:9 screen of the Carada BW material. Jeff Miere - "umr" - had measured his BW sample at 1.03 gain and his ST-100 sample at 1.02 gain, so in terms of gain a negligible difference. I loved the Carada but at least with my previous projector when I was using it (Panny AE900) I appreciated a bit more gain on the ST-130. I wonder what type of quality difference there would be between the ST-100 and the Carada BW.


If the ST-100 would be visibly better than my ST-130 I might go for it and deal with the slight light drop.


----------



## David Shapiro




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 4* /forum/post/21697143
> 
> 
> David Shapiro. What is your throw using full scope width. You need a long throw to avoide hot spotting with high gain screens and 1.7 is a compromise for 2D in order to boost 3D brightness.



Right now, 1.8. The first row of seats is 15 feet from the screen. I also want to move the screen closer to the seats, but I do have some real estate on the ceiling to play around with.


David


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 4* /forum/post/21697143
> 
> 
> Hi Rich. She had seen the Sony before on my 130 but not on the Snomat. My 130 was GII also not GII. The picture was a tad dimmer to my eyes but not a huge drop and I could easily negate it with menu settings (opening the iris up).
> 
> 
> The biggest difference was the absolute light uniformity accross the screen and a complete absence of texture. The screen material just was gone.



Thanks Mark.


One more thing: I know your room is a "bat cave" but I'm not sure whether you used paint to make it dark or dark fabric. What I'm wondering is, did you notice any visual increase in the amount of light thrown off your ST-100 to the surrounding ceiling/walls, vs your ST-130?


Apparently one is supposed to expect this, given the ST-100's wider reflective pattern, hence you may see ceilings/walls lighting up more than with the ST-130. Was that the case?


Also, did you note any difference (good or bad) in terms of apparent image contrast or detail with the ST-100 over the ST-130? Supposedly the lack of light scatter is purported to allow a tighter image and better contrast, though I don't know how perceptible this would be (and would obviously depend on room conditions).


(I'm trying to make the area around the screen as invisible as possible - hence surrounding it with black velvet). Since you are really the only person with an ST-100, especially having just replaced your ST-130, you are about my only source of insight on this screen. (And your posts are getting me serious about purchasing the ST-100).


Thanks,


----------



## G-Rex

R Harkness, did your above question get anwered via pm? I also wondered about the ST100 light scatter on walls/ceiling vs the ST130.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *G-Rex* /forum/post/21718233
> 
> 
> R Harkness, did your above question get anwered via pm? I also wondered about the ST100 light scatter on walls/ceiling vs the ST130.



Mark didn't reply directly to me about that, but he did mention it to someone else in the Sony 1000 thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...7#post21707107 


Quote:

*"The Snomatt is not to be used in a less than black pit room. It has a gain of one and sprays light all over the place. My black everything sucks it up killing all reflections. yYou can see a lot more of the black fabric on the walls with the Snomatt vs the Studeotec 130. "*


That "light spray" is what concerns me, because I'm trying to make the area around the screen as invisible as possible with velvet. I can achieve this with my ST-130 screen (using Fidelio black velvet, everything around the screen disappears).


I'm confused by what Mark wrote because on one hand he says his black velvet "sucks it up killing all reflections" but on the other says "You can see a lot more of the black fabric on the walls with the Snomatt"...which seems to indicate the opposite.


----------



## nathan_h

I don't know Mark's theater space, but it's not unusual to use velvet on the front wall around the screen and some other black fabric like Guildford of Maine, on the side walls.


They could have different light absorbing properties.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/21719010
> 
> 
> Mark didn't reply directly to me about that, but he did mention it to someone else in the Sony 1000 thread:
> 
> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...7#post21707107
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> *"The Snomatt is not to be used in a less than black pit room. It has a gain of one and sprays light all over the place. My black everything sucks it up killing all reflections. yYou can see a lot more of the black fabric on the walls with the Snomatt vs the Studeotec 130. "*
> 
> 
> That "light spray" is what concerns me, because I'm trying to make the area around the screen as invisible as possible with velvet. I can achieve this with my ST-130 screen (using Fidelio black velvet, everything around the screen disappears).
> 
> 
> I'm confused by what Mark wrote because on one hand he says his black velvet "sucks it up killing all reflections" but on the other says "You can see a lot more of the black fabric on the walls with the Snomatt"...which seems to indicate the opposite.



Not Mark, but I believe what he means is the viewing angle is greater with the Snomatt, therefore the light scatter is greater on the surrounding walls. If you do not have a lot of dark non reflective materials on the walls, that light will get bounced right back on to the screen, washing out the image. Mark can see that more light hits the black velvet, but a lot of it does not make it back to the screen since it is hitting black velvet rather than a reflective wall surface.


Like everything else in HT wide viewing angle has its compromise and that is light scatter and usually lower gain.


----------



## skinimin

Hi,


I am in the process of purchasing this screen. It is being sold as a Firehawk G3 but I suspect it is an earlier version. I have attached some pictures so if anyone can help identify it I would appreciate it.


If it is an earlier Firehawk or Firehawk G2 how would it compare to the G3?


Thanks


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5* /forum/post/21719449
> 
> 
> Not Mark, but I believe what he means is the viewing angle is greater with the Snomatt, therefore the light scatter is greater on the surrounding walls. If you do not have a lot of dark non reflective materials on the walls, that light will get bounced right back on to the screen, washing out the image. Mark can see that more light hits the black velvet, but a lot of it does not make it back to the screen since it is hitting black velvet rather than a reflective wall surface.
> 
> 
> Like everything else in HT wide viewing angle has its compromise and that is light scatter and usually lower gain.



Yes, I do get that. My issue is that my motivation for using velvet around my screen (which I do) is not only to reduce light reflections back to the screen, but to produce a pitch black surrounding for the image, so my eyes see only the image. At the moment I have this. My L/C/R speakers are very close to the screen surface, but covered with very dark Fidelio black velvet, the are pitch black and invisible, even in bright scenes. A screen that somehow lit up that black velvet enough to make it visible would be a bit of a backward step for me in that regard.


That's why I'm interested in the "sucks up all the light" but "I can see much more light on the black fabric" comments. Because if he sees his black fabric lighting up that much more, then it's not actually sucking up all the light (including reflections).


I guess I don't know what kind of material Mark has used near his screen. Perhaps it's not a super dark material, like the Fidelio velvet I use.


The problem is, the amount of additional light scatter and it's effects on the visibility of nearby surfaces is likely something I'll never be able to know, until I've spent all the money buying and putting up the screen.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/21721050
> 
> 
> Yes, I do get that. My issue is that my motivation for using velvet around my screen (which I do) is not only to reduce light reflections back to the screen, but to produce a pitch black surrounding for the image, so my eyes see only the image. At the moment I have this. My L/C/R speakers are very close to the screen surface, but covered with very dark Fidelio black velvet, the are pitch black and invisible, even in bright scenes. A screen that somehow lit up that black velvet enough to make it visible would be a bit of a backward step for me in that regard.
> 
> 
> That's why I'm interested in the "sucks up all the light" but "I can see much more light on the black fabric" comments. Because if he sees his black fabric lighting up that much more, then it's not actually sucking up all the light (including reflections).
> 
> 
> I guess I don't know what kind of material Mark has used near his screen. Perhaps it's not a super dark material, like the Fidelio velvet I use.
> 
> 
> The problem is, the amount of additional light scatter and it's effects on the visibility of nearby surfaces is likely something I'll never be able to know, until I've spent all the money buying and putting up the screen.



I suspect it is the cream white chairs that he has.


----------



## kabrumbs

Guys,


I am going to purchase a masquerade cih and a ST130 stewart screen.

I have talked to Rex from Carada and he said to me that the best frame/installation would be something that leave the screen 2 inches max from the wall, and use the wrap-around method.


I could take a Luxus Deluxe, but the frame would be hidden inside the Mascarade and increase the gap and the chance for some shadows.


The Luxus frame is 1 1/2 inches, I dont know how much it would increase with a wrap-around method.


If I could purchase only the fabric, I could make an aluminum frame that would meet the requirements from Carada.


Any thoughs?


[]s Humberto


----------



## Carey P




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *kabrumbs* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> Guys,
> 
> 
> I am going to purchase a masquerade cih and a ST130 stewart screen.
> 
> I have talked to Rex from Carada and he said to me that the best frame/installation would be something that leave the screen 2 inches max from the wall, and use the wrap-around method.
> 
> 
> I could take a Luxus Deluxe, but the frame would be hidden inside the Mascarade and increase the gap and the chance for some shadows.
> 
> 
> The Luxus frame is 1 1/2 inches, I dont know how much it would increase with a wrap-around method.
> 
> 
> If I could purchase only the fabric, I could make an aluminum frame that would meet the requirements from Carada.
> 
> 
> Any thoughs?
> 
> 
> []s Humberto



Nice masking system. I think Stewart will sell only fabric if you ask. I first had a Firehawk installed on my Luxus Deluxe frame but then decided on the ST130 because I had good light control. I was able to get just the ST130 material with snaps to match the existing frame. The Firehawk is now rolled up in its original tube in case I want to sell. My screen is 137" 2.4:1. So I'm sure they could do same without the snaps. However, the screen is stretchy and requires precise contact points to avoid any sagging or rippling. Its very taught when mounted to frame. I wonder if they could provide the frame snaps with a map of their mounting positions. Just a thought. It would certainly be difficult without the snaps.


----------



## kabrumbs

I see that they have a lace and grommet installation system. It is easier to do a diy frame install with those.


If they worked like the Seymour Center Stage, i have all the planning ready!!!


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/21721050
> 
> 
> Yes, I do get that. My issue is that my motivation for using velvet around my screen (which I do) is not only to reduce light reflections back to the screen, but to produce a pitch black surrounding for the image, so my eyes see only the image. At the moment I have this. My L/C/R speakers are very close to the screen surface, but covered with very dark Fidelio black velvet, the are pitch black and invisible, even in bright scenes. A screen that somehow lit up that black velvet enough to make it visible would be a bit of a backward step for me in that regard.
> 
> 
> That's why I'm interested in the "sucks up all the light" but "I can see much more light on the black fabric" comments. Because if he sees his black fabric lighting up that much more, then it's not actually sucking up all the light (including reflections).
> 
> 
> I guess I don't know what kind of material Mark has used near his screen. Perhaps it's not a super dark material, like the Fidelio velvet I use.
> 
> 
> The problem is, the amount of additional light scatter and it's effects on the visibility of nearby surfaces is likely something I'll never be able to know, until I've spent all the money buying and putting up the screen.



My mains are very close to my screen and half of my mains stick past the front edge of my screen. In very bright scenes you could see the side of my speakers slightly, so I also covered my mains with black velvet. My sound panels have flat black cloth also. With this and my masking system, you see nothing but the image when watching a movie. So I understand excatly what you are talking about. My screen is Enlightor 4K. It is a low gain screen that does spread the light, but I am still able to maintain the look of nothing but image. I think with your setup, you will be able to do the same thing with the Stewart 100.


----------



## GetGray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *kabrumbs* /forum/post/21735996
> 
> 
> I see that they have a lace and grommet installation system. It is easier to do a diy frame install with those.
> 
> 
> If they worked like the Seymour Center Stage, i have all the planning ready!!!



The screens for the CineW are lace and grommet. So if you ordered a screen to fit a CineW you'd have a grommeted screen. I have ordered one like that for a customer of mine who had a particular masking system they wanted to keep but wanted to retrofit a Stewart material. However, I'd be extreemely careful about how much tension is applied. It does not work like the Seymour screen. There isn't much tension with their "lace" system. Too little, it will sag, too much it will stretch it and ruin it. Some dealers may be able to help you with the details and recommendations for your DIY frame.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5* /forum/post/21736037
> 
> 
> My mains are very close to my screen and half of my mains stick past the front edge of my screen. In very bright scenes you could see the side of my speakers slightly, so I also covered my mains with black velvet. My sound panels have flat black cloth also. With this and my masking system, you see nothing but the image when watching a movie. So I understand excatly what you are talking about. My screen is Enlightor 4K. It is a low gain screen that does spread the light, but I am still able to maintain the look of nothing but image. I think with your setup, you will be able to do the same thing with the Stewart 100.



Thank you. That's very helpful.


----------



## GetGray

Not allowed to discuss street pricing on forum. I'd guess about 50% of complete CineW screen, if that's what you are asking


----------



## kabrumbs

Thanks a lot GetGray.. It seems to me that the best way is to use a standard luxus frame with wraparound, and if turns out to be more than 2 inches alo will try to increase the depth of the masquerade.


----------



## GetGray

You are welcome. FYI, I gut got a dealer announcement from Stewart today for a substantial sale they are having on their quick ship models. Sale ends March 31st. See your preferred Stewart dealer or Jason/Mike at AVS, might get a little better than normal price if you have a common size. I skimmed back quickly in the thread and didn't see you size mentioned.


Cheers,

Scott


----------



## johng




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *skinimin* /forum/post/21719565
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> 
> I am in the process of purchasing this screen. It is being sold as a Firehawk G3 but I suspect it is an earlier version. I have attached some pictures so if anyone can help identify it I would appreciate it.
> 
> 
> If it is an earlier Firehawk or Firehawk G2 how would it compare to the G3?
> 
> 
> Thanks



With the model and serial number shown in picture 1, you should simply call Stewart and ask. That's the only way to be absolutely certain.


----------



## kabrumbs

Thanks again!!! Will try that!!!

[]s Humberto


----------



## breadvan

Anyone knows what's the smallest sized 2.35:1 Stewart electric screen? Is it 91" diagonal ? HD 130 material.


----------



## Mike Garrett

Deleted


----------



## Jimbo85281

Is a hair dryer the best method for getting wrinkles out of a firehawk fixed screen that's been in storage for a while? Thanks all


----------



## breadvan

My electric one had big crease problem but after dropping the screen down for couple of nights and using a hair dryer to mildly heating it, all was fine again.


----------



## jacked




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Carey P* /forum/post/21731853
> 
> 
> I first had a Firehawk installed on my Luxus Deluxe frame but then decided on the ST130 because I had good light control. I was able to get just the ST130 material with snaps to match the existing frame. My screen is 137" 2.4:1.



Hi Carey,


I`ve done exactly the same as you and have ordered the ST130 material to swap-over from my Firehawk G3 screen. My room is now a batcave with full light control so I thought the Firehawk G3 might not be the best material to suit those conditions so I opted for the ST130.


I would welcome your thoughts on the ST130 and how it compares to your Firehawk in performance terms and picture quality improvements.


My screen is 117" 2.40:1 with a JVC HD950 projector.


Can I also just ask you do you recall approx how long your order took for the change of material ?

I ordered my material 2 months ago and haven`t had any updates.


Cheers mate,

Dave


----------



## Carey P




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jacked* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Carey,
> 
> 
> I`ve done exactly the same as you and have ordered the ST130 material to swap-over from my Firehawk G3 screen. My room is now a batcave with full light control so I thought the Firehawk G3 might not be the best material to suit those conditions so I opted for the ST130.
> 
> 
> I would welcome your thoughts on the ST130 and how it compares to your Firehawk in performance terms and picture quality improvements.
> 
> 
> My screen is 117" 2.40:1 with a JVC HD950 projector.
> 
> 
> Can I also just ask you do you recall approx how long your order took for the change of material ?
> 
> I ordered my material 2 months ago and haven`t had any updates.
> 
> 
> Cheers mate,
> 
> Dave



Well, I'm pretty sure it didn't take that long. It was several years ago so I really don't remember, sorry.

I was using a Panasonic AE2000U at the time and now a 7000. It's mounted at 18ft from the screen at the top edge, so i didn't have any real hot-spotting issue. But, I didn't care for the somewhat sparkly appearance of the Firehawk and wanted a screen that would essentially disappear and had flat wide angle response with a little more gain. I found I didn't need the contrast advantage since the LCD projectors had improved enough in that area. What I did like about the Firehawk's narrower cone angle was that the ceiling, walls and floor did not light up as much as the ST130. Also, for 16:9 material the black bars on the sides were so dark, there would never be need for black masking. It simply looked like I had a 16:9 screen.


With the ST130, I don't notice any screen structure at all, just the movie. No drop off to the sides of the 2.4:1 format. The room lights up a bit more, but now I don't need any lights on low in order to eat while watching







. Note, I do have a blacked out front wall and dark blue ceiling and dark walls. The black bars are still low enough to not be annoying, since again, projectors have improved in that area and have also have internal masking. I'm not sure why people would ever need side masking these days, but I digress. Anyway, the ST130 wide angle response allows moving the projector closer if you need more brightness, especially for 3D. I just can't do that with my setup, but I'm very happy with it as is. Good luck.


----------



## Jimbo85281

Jacked,


If you don't mind me asking, how much was your replacement 123" material? I was thinking about doing the same thing with my 123. Thanks


----------



## jacked




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jimbo85281* /forum/post/21854349
> 
> 
> Jacked,
> 
> 
> If you don't mind me asking, how much was your replacement 123" material? I was thinking about doing the same thing with my 123. Thanks



Hi Jimbo,


You have a pm.


Dave


----------



## jacked




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Carey P* /forum/post/21854199
> 
> 
> Well, I'm pretty sure it didn't take that long. It was several years ago so I really don't remember, sorry.
> 
> I was using a Panasonic AE2000U at the time and now a 7000. It's mounted at 18ft from the screen at the top edge, so i didn't have any real hot-spotting issue. But, I didn't care for the somewhat sparkly appearance of the Firehawk and wanted a screen that would essentially disappear and had flat wide angle response with a little more gain. I found I didn't need the contrast advantage since the LCD projectors had improved enough in that area. What I did like about the Firehawk's narrower cone angle was that the ceiling, walls and floor did not light up as much as the ST130. Also, for 16:9 material the black bars on the sides were so dark, there would never be need for black masking. It simply looked like I had a 16:9 screen.
> 
> 
> With the ST130, I don't notice any screen structure at all, just the movie. No drop off to the sides of the 2.4:1 format. The room lights up a bit more, but now I don't need any lights on low in order to eat while watching
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Note, I do have a blacked out front wall and dark blue ceiling and dark walls. The black bars are still low enough to not be annoying, since again, projectors have improved in that area and have also have internal masking. I'm not sure why people would ever need side masking these days, but I digress. Anyway, the ST130 wide angle response allows moving the projector closer if you need more brightness, especially for 3D. I just can't do that with my setup, but I'm very happy with it as is. Good luck.



Thanks very much for your comments.


I have black velvet all around the screen area on the walls and ceiling so that should block any extra light that the ST130 reflects. I just need to find out how long this order is going to take !!


Dave


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jacked* /forum/post/21853667
> 
> 
> 
> I would welcome your thoughts on the ST130 and how it compares to your Firehawk in performance terms and picture quality improvements.



Just adding another opinion to the mix....


I currently use the ST130 G3 screen material. I haven't owned the Firehawk material, but I investigated the Firehawk thoroughly over the years in which I was deciding on my screen material (as my HT was being designed and built). I have big samples of it, and I've seen the Firehawk under every condition imaginable - from brightly lit, to full light control virtual bat-cave conditions, including with the same projector models I've used in my home theater (JVC). I have a good idea of it's performance vs my ST130 material.


The upshot is: In a room that has dark surfaces and perfect light control (no ambient light) I definitely prefer the ST130. The ST130's higher gain and finer screen coating simultaneously gives more brightness/vividness/punch to the image, while also presenting a smoother image (sparkly screen structure is rare on the ST130, but quite obvious to me on the Firehawk). It also has a more natural, even illumination - I find the hot-spotting of the Firehawk quite obvious and distracting (it's brighter in the centre, dimmer to the parimeter of the image, and if you sit more to one side of the screen, the opposite side goes visibly darker than the one closer to you).


Contrast-wise, I found it interesting comparing the 8x11 samples of ST130 and the Firehawk in my home (before getting the ST130). I'd expected the Firehawk to look obviously more "contrasty," but if anything it was the opposite. The added brightness of the ST130, in a room in which light reflections are pretty controlled, tended to make image areas with very dark/bright areas look like they had better contrast (a trick to the eyes no doubt, but ultimately that's what we are doing anyway).


I've found that once I did a good job of controlling reflections I've never seen a better projected image than what I'm getting with the JVC RS20 or RS55 on my ST130 - black levels look fantastic but the image isn't remotely dull or dim, it's bright and alive. And the extra gain (over a Firehawk) allows me to blow up the image with my 4 way masking quite large, and still get nice brightness to the image.


The only screen I can see possibly replacing my ST130 is the ST100, only to get the ultimate in "invisible screen" characteristics. Unfortunately I'd take a hit in brightness, so it's likely I'll be sticking with the ST130 as the best compromise I could find, all things considered.


FWIW...


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Carey P* /forum/post/21854199
> 
> 
> WThe black bars are still low enough to not be annoying, since again, projectors have improved in that area and have also have internal masking. I'm not sure why people would ever need side masking these days, but I digress.



I use masking because, even though the JVC projectors do the best black levels, blacks are still visibly higher than "real black" (e.g. the screen frame and the black surrounding wall in my home theater). Bars being "not annoying" is subjective. The difference between my side masking (or top masking) being deployed - and hence being able to see the projected "black" - vs deploying the masking is very, very obvious. It just looks way better with the masking. In fact it looks best when everything is "perfectly" masked. That is, even when there is a sliver of black bar, say the type you get when you change from a 16:9 source to a 1:85:1 movie and you get an inch or two of projected black bars top and bottom, once even those are removed and the transition is made perfectly clean between movie image and black borders, it's like it "snaps" into place and becomes a magic-window effect on the scene.


That's my experience, anyway.


----------



## Carey P




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> I use masking because, even though the JVC projectors do the best black levels, blacks are still visibly higher than "real black" (e.g. the screen frame and the black surrounding wall in my home theater). Bars being "not annoying" is subjective. The difference between my side masking (or top masking) being deployed - and hence being able to see the projected "black" - vs deploying the masking is very, very obvious. It just looks way better with the masking. In fact it looks best when everything is "perfectly" masked. That is, even when there is a sliver of black bar, say the type you get when you change from a 16:9 source to a 1:85:1 movie and you get an inch or two of projected black bars top and bottom, once even those are removed and the transition is made perfectly clean between movie image and black borders, it's like it "snaps" into place and becomes a magic-window effect on the scene.
> 
> 
> That's my experience, anyway.



I have just a couple of comments to add. I don't know about the JVC's, but the Panasonic has no light spill to the right or left of the projected image, so in 16:9 those side bars are illuminated mainly by reflected or scattered light originating from the central image itself. Its not "projected black" in this case. In a dark bat cave with light absorbing surroundings close to the screen, those areas look very close to black. Even more so with the Firehawk due to less scattering. In fact, the only time they may not blend in with the black velvet frame is during a fade to black. Even then I don't notice them. What ruins it is if someone opens a door or turns on a light. Then you see the bars as grey because the screen is white of course. This is where I miss the Firehawk with its great off-angle light rejection. In any case, masking would take care of this. So to be cost-effective, I try not to open any doors during a 16:9 movie







.


There's another issue in that horizontal bars are more disturbing to the brain than vertical bars. This may be due to the way the eyes move about the screen during a movie, I'm not really sure. But I always eliminate those anyway by slight zooming if needed.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Carey P* /forum/post/21860950
> 
> 
> I have just a couple of comments to add. I don't know about the JVC's, but the Panasonic has no light spill to the right or left of the projected image, so in 16:9 those side bars are illuminated mainly by reflected or scattered light originating from the central image itself. Its not "projected black" in this case. In a dark bat cave with light absorbing surroundings close to the screen, those areas look very close to black. Even more so with the Firehawk due to less scattering. In fact, the only time they may not blend in with the black velvet frame is during a fade to black. Even then I don't notice them. What ruins it is if someone opens a door or turns on a light. Then you see the bars as grey because the screen is white of course. This is where I miss the Firehawk with its great off-angle light rejection. In any case, masking would take care of this. So to be cost-effective, I try not to open any doors during a 16:9 movie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 
> There's another issue in that horizontal bars are more disturbing to the brain than vertical bars. This may be due to the way the eyes move about the screen during a movie, I'm not really sure. But I always eliminate those anyway by slight zooming if needed.



I will tell you this. There is very little difference between the top and bottom bars and my black velvet masking panels with my EN4K screen and JVC RS45. My room has flat black walls, floor and ceiling. In other words, the masking hardly makes a difference. I have it so I use it, but with this combination, the bars are not a big standout.


----------



## Carey P




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5* /forum/post/0
> 
> 
> 
> I will tell you this. There is very little difference between the top and bottom bars and my black velvet masking panels with my EN4K screen and JVC RS45. My room has flat black walls, floor and ceiling. In other words, the masking hardly makes a difference. I have it so I use it, but with this combination, the bars are not a big standout.



Mine blend in too, though I always fit to the full height anyway. You must have a 16:9 screen. My last point was actually about the brain-eye connection. People typically are more bothered by horizontal bars than side bars, but that's probably more on flat panels than anywhere else. I suppose either way, if they blend in with the frame, it really shouldn't matter.


----------



## R Harkness

How much of a difference something makes tends toward the subjective (though not totally).


I have the JVC RS55 (great black levels), the ST130 (sometimes using large image sizes, e.g. up to 135" 16:9 diagonal), total light control and close to a "black box" as far as killing room reflections.


The black levels are great. But still nowhere near the "true" black of the velvet masking. I can still perceive even small slivers of black bars if the masking is not perfect and to my eye it always makes a difference to get rid of the last bit of black bars.


I've seen set ups before where people said the black bars aren't distracting, or aren't "really all that noticeable" or don't make much difference. But I have yet to see such a set up where I agree. (That includes the Black Diamond screens, often touted as making masking "no longer needed").


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/21877505
> 
> 
> How much of a difference something makes tends toward the subjective (though not totally).
> 
> 
> I have the JVC RS55 (great black levels), the ST130 (sometimes using large image sizes, e.g. up to 135" 16:9 diagonal), total light control and close to a "black box" as far as killing room reflections.
> 
> 
> The black levels are great. But still nowhere near the "true" black of the velvet masking. I can still perceive even small slivers of black bars if the masking is not perfect and to my eye it always makes a difference to get rid of the last bit of black bars.
> 
> 
> I've seen set ups before where people said the black bars aren't distracting, or aren't "really all that noticeable" or don't make much difference. But I have yet to see such a set up where I agree. (That includes the Black Diamond screens, often touted as making masking "no longer needed").



Masking is definitely better, but when watching a lot of movies (except really bright day lit scenes) there is not a huge difference between my black velvet masking and the EN4K screen in my all black room. As soon as you introduce ambient light, then it is a different matter.


----------



## tyraxus

Guys,


I've got a Firehawk G3 screen that I'm seeing what I'd call some anomalies on. I'm wondering if they are just expected of this material of if my screen is defective and needs to be replaced or... something else.


I'm seeing what I would call horizontal bands across the screen where the image is darker. They are only visible when a bright image is shown. If the lights are up in the room and the projector is off you cannot see them at all.


I was wondering if the screen just needs to settle in from the tensioning or something else - as a home theater novice I'm just not sure. Considering the cost of the screen I'm rather concerned about this issue. Thoughts?


Thanks,

-Tyraxus


----------



## GetGray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *tyraxus* /forum/post/21903544
> 
> 
> Guys,
> 
> 
> I've got a Firehawk G3 screen that I'm seeing what I'd call some anomalies on. I'm wondering if they are just expected of this material of if my screen is defective and needs to be replaced or... something else.
> 
> 
> I'm seeing what I would call horizontal bands across the screen where the image is darker. They are only visible when a bright image is shown. If the lights are up in the room and the projector is off you cannot see them at all.
> 
> 
> I was wondering if the screen just needs to settle in from the tensioning or something else - as a home theater novice I'm just not sure. Considering the cost of the screen I'm rather concerned about this issue. Thoughts?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> -Tyraxus



In case you didn't, put up a white pattern or image and wiggle the PJ. If banding moves it's not the screen. If it does not move, screen. IMO, you should not get any banding from the screen. Speak to your dealer about it.


----------



## Jimbo85281

Does anyone know of a way to eliminate sparkles and screen texture seen on my firehawk g2 screen? I think it's just something that has to be dealt with when it comes to the firehawk screens but I wasn't sure if people had techniques to reduce it. It's seen mostly on light colored material and can become quite annoying. I have a fairly bright projector (lg cr181d) and I sit 13' from my 123" screen. If this is just something inherent in the screen tech, should I upgrade the material to the g3 to eliminate this?


----------



## Atlantan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/21696839
> 
> 
> This post is to Mark Haflich ﻿﻿, hoping he shows up to answer:
> 
> 
> Mark,
> 
> 
> Thanks so much for commenting on the performance of your new Studiotek 100 material. It's very intriguing for me as I have the ST-130 material (love it) but as good as it is, my ideal is to get that "screen disappearing" effect you describe with your ST-100 snomatt.
> 
> 
> (I now have an 8" x 11" sample of the ST-100 material. Comparing it to my ST-130, the ST-100 has obviously less blurr from optical coating when looking at pixels close up. From a distance, at least with this sample, the brightness difference seemed negligeable (there, but not terribly big difference). It's also been pointed out in some reviews of the ST-100 that due to the subtle hotspotting nature of the ST-130, darker as you move away from the centre of the screen, the overall measured difference of the entire screen surfaces of an ST-100 and ST-130 are not as far off as the gain rating suggests (as the ST-100 remains bright corner-to-corner).
> 
> 
> So I hoped the impact of the brightness drop would be somewhat mitigated by this fact. Though, you do note definitely seeing a brightness drop.
> 
> (I have to consider these things since I sometimes view images at 130" diagonal 16:9 or 118" wide scope).
> 
> 
> I am just about at "bat cave" performance for my room, in terms of employing dark fabrics to cut all room reflections, which is another reason why I'm considering the ST-100 material. Another thing is I absolutely LOVE even image brightness, and viewing angles that are unrestricted, for which the ST-100 no doubt excels.
> 
> 
> Still, I admit I'm kind of surprised you found the ST-100 made such a noticeable difference over the ST-130, but it's nice to know that a performance gain in my system is a future possibility (switching to the ST-100). Any additional comments or insight you have on your new screen material would be welcome.
> 
> 
> BTW, when you said your wife thought it was "like viewing the disc for the first time" was that a comment comparing your new ST-100 material vs your ST-130, or a comment on the Sony 1000 projector's performance?
> 
> 
> Thanks.



Hello Rich,


Newbie here, Black Diamond 4K 1.4 and Firehawk G3 were my first choices. To my eyes, both had a bit of distracting shimmer. I have pretty much blacked out my basement where I can control the lightning. Decided to avoid the 1.3/1.4 gain materials and I have on order the ST-100 material, 110 in diagonal 16:9, Velux frame. Screen should be installed 1st week in June, will try to post my observations.


PJ is an older one, got a great deal on it, Pioneer Elite FPJ1 should have decent black levels. According to my calculations the luminance should be sufficient.


Cheers


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness* /forum/post/21877505
> 
> 
> How much of a difference something makes tends toward the subjective (though not totally).
> 
> 
> I have the JVC RS55 (great black levels), the ST130 (sometimes using large image sizes, e.g. up to 135" 16:9 diagonal), total light control and close to a "black box" as far as killing room reflections.
> 
> 
> The black levels are great. But still nowhere near the "true" black of the velvet masking. I can still perceive even small slivers of black bars if the masking is not perfect and to my eye it always makes a difference to get rid of the last bit of black bars.
> 
> 
> I've seen set ups before where people said the black bars aren't distracting, or aren't "really all that noticeable" or don't make much difference. But I have yet to see such a set up where I agree. (That includes the Black Diamond screens, often touted as making masking "no longer needed").



The reason the black bars are close to matching the black velvet on my screen is the 0.85 gain VS the 1.3 gain of your screen. Makes your screen 1.5 times brighter than mine. That will be a noticeable difference in the black bars. On dark movies, the bars are nearly indistinguishable from the masking. In bright scenes, it stands out more.


----------



## Mike Garrett

Just a reminder. The Spring Fling sale ends this month.


----------



## Glenn Baumann




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5* /forum/post/22028681
> 
> 
> Just a reminder. The Spring Fling sale ends this month.



Where can one find the details regarding the Spring Fling sale?


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Atlantan* /forum/post/22028500
> 
> 
> Hello Rich,
> 
> 
> Newbie here, Black Diamond 4K 1.4 and Firehawk G3 were my first choices. To my eyes, both had a bit of distracting shimmer. I have pretty much blacked out my basement where I can control the lightning. Decided to avoid the 1.3/1.4 gain materials and I have on order the ST-100 material, 110 in diagonal 16:9, Velux frame. Screen should be installed 1st week in June, will try to post my observations.
> 
> 
> PJ is an older one, got a great deal on it, Pioneer Elite FPJ1 should have decent black levels. According to my calculations the luminance should be sufficient.
> 
> 
> Cheers



Great! I'll be very interested in how it works out for you.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Glenn Baumann* /forum/post/22029649
> 
> 
> Where can one find the details regarding the Spring Fling sale?



Give us a call.


----------



## totopsgr




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *lem321* /forum/post/21446556
> 
> 
> Question about Stewart tensioned screens and remote control:
> 
> I was doing some research on the Stewart tensioned screens and noticed that the amount of extension of the screen comes pre-set from the factory to drop a certain distance (depending on the customer's specs). According to the owner's manual, there is some range of adjustment so you can limit or extend the drop by +/- a few inches. Does anyone know if this negatively affects the tab-tensioning system if this is done? Also there is a bewildering array of options to control the screen remotely (up and down, masking, etc). Does Stewart have a remote option (IR or RF) that permits use of a universal remote such as the Logitech Harmony One?



Hi, I am able to answer both your questions. Recently I had to replace my Stewart Firehawk due to problems that is claimed that were caused by no fully depoying my custom masking length. So yes try to get exactly the ammount of masking that is appropriate for your installation. I also utilise a logitech harmony remote to deploy my screen.


Hope I helped


----------



## curtishd

Anyone have the 5D screen and care to post a pic or two with a review?


----------



## rovingtravler




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *curtishd* /forum/post/22051088
> 
> 
> Anyone have the 5D screen and care to post a pic or two with a review?



I do not own a 5D but have seen it 3 times for a total of about 2 hours.


----------



## chrisb42

I use the Sony HW30 with an older Firewhawk screen. It looks great in 2D, but in 3D I get color shifts when looking through the (active) glasses: green to the left side, red to the right side.


Is that due to the screen material, or is there something I can tweak?


And generally asking (we have the Luxus A Electriscreen): is it at all possible to update the screen material, or does updating require a completely new screen?


Thanks,


-Christian


----------



## jacked

Hello Folks,


I have ordered a change of screen material for my Stewart fixed frame. This was paid for on Nov 16th last year and I still haven`t received it !


My screen is a 117" 2.40:1 with the Firehawk G3 material and I wanted to change to the Studiotek 130 material instead, so I was referred to Integrity Home Theater who has ordered this new material from Stewart and they processed the credit card payment on Nov 16th 2011.


For whatever reason there has been delays, endless delays !

As I don`t think they`re in the office on a daily basis, it`s been very frustrating getting replies to my emails from Integrity. I contacted Stewart directly and their reply on March 27th said that this order had been updated in the Stewart Filmscreen System and for me to contact Integrity Home Theater for the latest information and completion date.


I received an email from Integrity on May 1st to say they had got my screen material from Stewart. I was told it would be shipped to me on Friday 11th, which never happened. Then I was told it would be shipped on Friday 18th - and although this is being sent overseas I don`t know if Integrity have shipped it or not because I`ve not received any shipping information and they haven`t replied to my emails - as yet.


It is now over 3 weeks since I was told the screen material had arrived at the dealers and over 6 months since I paid my money and placed the order, I think this is totally unacceptable and very poor customer service.


All I want is proper confirmation that my screen is on its way to me but it`s got to the stage where if this order still hasn`t been shipped I will be seeking legal advice, contacting my credit card company to start claiming a refund and complaining to Stewart Filmscreen directly.


If I knew for definite it was on its way there wouldn`t be a problem but this has gone on far too long now.


I would really welcome any suggestions / comments on how I can resolve this or does anyone have any contacts at Stewart Filmscreen that can intervene on my behalf and apply some pressure.

The serial number for my screen for reference is T0904560.


Thanks very much guys.


Dave


----------



## rovingtravler




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jacked* /forum/post/22060343
> 
> 
> Hello Folks,
> 
> 
> I have ordered a change of screen material for my Stewart fixed frame. This was paid for on Nov 16th last year and I still haven`t received it !
> 
> 
> My screen is a 117" 2.40:1 with the Firehawk G3 material and I wanted to change to the Studiotek 130 material instead, so I was referred to Integrity Home Theater who has ordered this new material from Stewart and they processed the credit card payment on Nov 16th 2011.
> 
> 
> For whatever reason there has been delays, endless delays !
> 
> As I don`t think they`re in the office on a daily basis, it`s been very frustrating getting replies to my emails from Integrity. I contacted Stewart directly and their reply on March 27th said that this order had been updated in the Stewart Filmscreen System and for me to contact Integrity Home Theater for the latest information and completion date.
> 
> 
> I received an email from Integrity on May 1st to say they had got my screen material from Stewart. I was told it would be shipped to me on Friday 11th, which never happened. Then I was told it would be shipped on Friday 18th - and although this is being sent overseas I don`t know if Integrity have shipped it or not because I`ve not received any shipping information and they haven`t replied to my emails - as yet.
> 
> 
> It is now over 3 weeks since I was told the screen material had arrived at the dealers and over 6 months since I paid my money and placed the order, I think this is totally unacceptable and very poor customer service.
> 
> 
> All I want is proper confirmation that my screen is on its way to me but it`s got to the stage where if this order still hasn`t been shipped I will be seeking legal advice, contacting my credit card company to start claiming a refund and complaining to Stewart Filmscreen directly.
> 
> 
> If I knew for definite it was on its way there wouldn`t be a problem but this has gone on far too long now.
> 
> 
> I would really welcome any suggestions / comments on how I can resolve this or does anyone have any contacts at Stewart Filmscreen that can intervene on my behalf and apply some pressure.
> 
> The serial number for my screen for reference is T0904560.
> 
> 
> Thanks very much guys.
> 
> 
> Dave




I sent you a PM with a member who is very high up Stewart and helped me resolve an issue in 4 days!


----------



## jacked

Thanks very much David, PM replied to.


Kind Regards,

Dave


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *chrisb42* /forum/post/22055096
> 
> 
> I use the Sony HW30 with an older Firewhawk screen. It looks great in 2D, but in 3D I get color shifts when looking through the (active) glasses: green to the left side, red to the right side.
> 
> 
> Is that due to the screen material, or is there something I can tweak?
> 
> *And generally asking (we have the Luxus A Electriscreen): is it at all possible to update the screen material, or does updating require a completely new screen?*
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> -Christian



You can replace the fabric. You just need to provide the serial number of your screen. Shoot us an email if we can help you.


----------



## Jimbo85281

Does anyone have a ballpark figure of what just material replacement would be for a 123" sst firehawk or greyhawk? I have the snap on screen material. My local vendor is no help at all unfortunately and Stewart won't quote directly. Thanks


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Jimbo85281* /forum/post/22067793
> 
> 
> Does anyone have a ballpark figure of what just material replacement would be for a 123" sst firehawk or greyhawk? I have the snap on screen material. My local vendor is no help at all unfortunately and Stewart won't quote directly. Thanks



Shoot us your screen model and serial number and we can help you.


----------



## breadvan

Could anyone remind me how the tab tension on a Stewart Luxus A electric screen is adjusted? Haven't done that in ages, one thing though is the housing is hidden in the ceiling so would be very hard to adjust from that side. Thanks.


----------



## m Robinson

If the side cords are too tight, you may get diagonal wrinkling in the lower corners. If the side cords are too loose, you might see vertical undulation in the fabric.


Most of the time the screen material elongates a little bit, the side cords don't stretch as much, and it's good to lengthen the side cords, using the adjustable thimbles on the batten ends. From underneath, you insert a philips #2 screwdriver, turning the screw as if to loosen, will lengthen the side cord. Good luck with it!


----------



## wasteofmoney

Found this ad below on craigslist. He can do for $600. It has the older StudioTek 130 screen material and not the newer G3. Also has the ElectriMask features to change aspect ratio. Don't really know if I need all that with 1080p, blu-ray, etc.....


What do you guys think? I think it's a Luxus Deluxe by looking at the model#. He sais the Studiotek 130 screen material is mint. Does this stuff last long? Im worried this thing might need expensive motors and new screen material soon.



Stewart Filmscreen Corporation Theater Screen

Screen Material Studio Tek 130

Model Number 100h(which means 100 inch )


Studio quality theater screen for projection set up for a home theater. this screen is huge. has side curtains which are runned electricly to suit all video ratio aspect.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wasteofmoney*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1410#post_22111631
> 
> 
> Found this ad below on craigslist. He can do for $600. It has the older StudioTek 130 screen material and not the newer G3. Also has the ElectriMask features to change aspect ratio. Don't really know if I need all that with 1080p, blu-ray, etc.....
> 
> What do you guys think? I think it's a Luxus Deluxe by looking at the model#. He sais the Studiotek 130 screen material is mint. Does this stuff last long? Im worried this thing might need expensive motors and new screen material soon.
> 
> Stewart Filmscreen Corporation Theater Screen
> 
> Screen Material Studio Tek 130
> 
> Model Number 100h(which means 100 inch )
> 
> Studio quality theater screen for projection set up for a home theater. this screen is huge. has side curtains which are runned electricly to suit all video ratio aspect.



Did you ask the aspect ratio? Depending on age, it could be one of the older 4:3 screens.


----------



## wasteofmoney




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1410#post_22113891
> 
> 
> Did you ask the aspect ratio? Depending on age, it could be one of the older 4:3 screens.



Here is a picture. I'm no expert but it appears rectangular, so I assume 16:9


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wasteofmoney*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1410#post_22113967
> 
> 
> Here is a picture. I'm no expert but it appears rectangular, so I assume 16:9



If the screen is in good shape and everything works, then it is a very good deal.


----------



## supermarket

I asked this in its own thread a week ago but haven’t gotten a response. Maybe it’s better asked in the “official” thread.


I have a Firehawk G3 screen with a dark spot in the top center. It looks like the coating on the screen is damaged, and the spot doesn’t go away when I follow the recommended cleaning procedure. Has anyone seen anything like this before? Is it repairable?


You can see the spot in the middle of this picture:


----------



## Mike Garrett

I doubt that it is repairable, if it can't be removed by cleaning.


----------



## m Robinson

It is not repairable. Sorry!


----------



## breadvan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1410#post_22109416
> 
> 
> If the side cords are too tight, you may get diagonal wrinkling in the lower corners. If the side cords are too loose, you might see vertical undulation in the fabric.
> 
> Most of the time the screen material elongates a little bit, the side cords don't stretch as much, and it's good to lengthen the side cords, using the adjustable thimbles on the batten ends. From underneath, you insert a philips #2 screwdriver, turning the screw as if to loosen, will lengthen the side cord. Good luck with it!



Thanks Mark, I tried loosening the screw a fair bit but it didn't seem to have made much of a difference, may be I should take a picture to show you what I'm trying to get rid of, the white part of the screen is fine, just that the black side portion of the screen is kind of wrinkled.


----------



## Coup330

Can anybody help out?


I took the occasion and bought a Stewart Screen material (Firehawk G3) without a frame and now I have to build my own Aluminium frame. As the Screen has snappers, the best solution I found is to mount some snap studs with a screw to the Aluminium. These snap studs are a really good idea.



Now can somebody tell me the exact space between the snap studs on an original Stewart Frame (Gap or from snap stud middle to snap stud middle)?


The Screen Vinyl is tensioned over the snap stud, so that is very important to know for me.


----------



## GetGray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Coup330*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1400_100#post_22143362
> 
> 
> Now can somebody tell me the exact space between the snap studs on an original Stewart Frame (Gap or from snap stud middle to snap stud middle)?
> 
> The Screen Vinyl is tensioned over the snap stud, so that is very important to know for me.


They float on the stewart frame. The snaps can move along the frame to allow the screen to fit just right.


----------



## m Robinson

Stewart snap mounted screens are mounted on a 4" center to center spacing, with a snap located at the center point of each leg of the frame.

When you get to the corner we follow a procedure, but I'm not going to explain that here. Just do a transfer layout for the last two snaps, closest to each corner.


So you get your rectangle together. Measure each way on each leg to the mid point, and mark your center line.


You will need to figure out what the screen O.D. was originally. The snaps are 3/8" in from the O.D.



Good luck!


----------



## Mike Garrett

Stewart has now introduced a new line of screens. This new line is called Cima. These screen come in fixed sizes, so you can't get them cut down for in between sizes. These screens are a lower cost alternative compare to their current line. Contact your dealer for more information.


----------



## Mike Garrett

A little more information regarding the new Cima line.


The screens are available as following:


Above ceiling electric with 6" of top drop (tab tension, white housing)

Above ceiling electric with 12" of top drop (tab tension, white housing)

Below ceiling electric with 6" of top drop (tab tension, white housing)

Fixed frame (2-1/2" wide VeLux wrapped frame)


The screens are available in 16:9 and 16:10 aspect ratio.

The screens are available in five sizes in each aspect ratio.

For 16:9 you have: 92", 100", 110", 123" and 135" (diagonal)

Fabric choices are White, 1.1 gain and gray, 0.95 gain.


----------



## NL-MindfluX

*First Question:* Where to get those EZ-Mount brackets for a normal price?


Would like to fix my Luxus Deluxe Screenwall as close as possible to the wall. Apparently they ask 200 dollars for those EZ-Mount brackets here in Europe









The package should contain some sliding nuts and 4 metal flush plates like on the picture below.


I have a postal address in Hawthorne California, but Europe or the Netherlands would be better if possible.

*Second Question:* How to check if my Studiotek 130 is G3 material or not? Does the sticker behind the screen note G3 then?


Mine has:

Screen material: Studiotek 130

Model number: SNDQ110H

Serial number: K0900#### (Can PM the # if needed)


Mine was originally a Grayhawk RS, the sticker on the frame is not the same:

Screen material: Grayhawk RS

Model number: SNDQ110H

Serial number: K0700#### (Can PM the # if needed)


At the lower left there is a badge "Grayhawk RS JKP Certified".

*Third Question:* I see a hot spot 1/5th of the screen exactly in the middle when I put 100 IRE on.


It's obvious to me this is the JVC DLA-X30 reflecting in the screen material. I have been watching the two together with no hot spot at all when the JVC was standing on a table to the left. But now I mounted my JVC close to the ceiling I notice a shiny spot exactly in the middle.


I am projecting from a 4 mtr (13 ft) distance with a 66% down shift (80% is the maximum). I notice it with lamp on normal (like eco) with lens aperture very close. I can lower the JVC another 0.2 mtr (0.7 ft).


----------



## AV Science Sales 3




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *NL-MindfluX*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1440#post_22190420
> 
> *First Question:* Where to get those EZ-Mount brackets for a normal price?
> 
> Would like to fix my Luxus Deluxe Screenwall as close as possible to the wall. Apparently they ask 200 dollars for those EZ-Mount brackets here in Europe
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The package should contain some sliding nuts and 4 metal flush plates like on the picture below.
> 
> I have a postal address in Hawthorne California, but Europe or the Netherlands would be better if possible.
> *Second Question:* How to check if my Studiotek 130 is G3 material or not? Does the sticker behind the screen note G3 then?
> 
> Mine has:
> 
> Screen material: Studiotek 130
> 
> Model number: SNDQ110H
> 
> Serial number: K0900#### (Can PM the # if needed)
> 
> Mine was originally a Grayhawk RS, the sticker on the frame is not the same:
> 
> Screen material: Grayhawk RS
> 
> Model number: SNDQ110H
> 
> Serial number: K0700#### (Can PM the # if needed)
> 
> At the lower left there is a badge "Grayhawk RS JKP Certified".
> *Third Question:* I see a hot spot 1/5th of the screen exactly in the middle when I put 100 IRE on.
> 
> It's obvious to me this is the JVC DLA-X30 reflecting in the screen material. I have been watching the two together with no hot spot at all when the JVC was standing on a table to the left. But now I mounted my JVC close to the ceiling I notice a shiny spot exactly in the middle.
> 
> I am projecting from a 4 mtr (13 ft) distance with a 66% down shift (80% is the maximum). I notice it with lamp on normal (like eco) with lens aperture very close. I can lower the JVC another 0.2 mtr (0.7 ft).



You have to get them from a dealer...and it is up to the dealer what they charged, though Stewart has a cost. Did you lose yours, or did your screen come with the other type? If the latter, these EZ mounts may not work...


----------



## NL-MindfluX

I've bought it second hand from a movie production company, but it's absolutely in mint condition. Only downside is that those brackets are missing. They used a totally different mounting system which is not suitable here.


----------



## Mike Garrett

Stewart will have a 14' wide Ultramatte 130 microperf screen at CEDIA this year. It is a 2.35 aspect ratio Electriscreen model ABB. If interested in this screen let us know.


----------



## soonerfann

Just purchased a 107" ST130 from Jason here at AVS. The frame is just smaller than the opening of my front screen wall. So my question is this. How will I go about installing the frame given that the back wall is 22" behind the front screen wall? Should I mount the screen flush with the framed wall or inset slightly? Thanks guys.


----------



## bytebuster

Folks,

Wanted to get your take on which wireless module to opt for (RF or IR) for my Luxus model A screen?

Besides the obvious advantage of the RF module not needing a clear line of sight, any other differences between the two which I should consider


----------



## GetGray

RF will require their remote. Be harder to integrate into a control system unless the system has a RF generator. I don't know of one that does. IR will allow IR blasters or emmiters to be used (if required) and can be tied to control systems from Harmony Remotes, Universal Remote sytems, iPad Apps with Global Cache, Crestron etc. Or you can simply add the IR protocol to your programable IR remote.


HTH,

Scott


----------



## GetGray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *soonerfann*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1400_100#post_22264532
> 
> 
> Just purchased a 107" ST130 from Jason here at AVS. The frame is just smaller than the opening of my front screen wall. So my question is this. How will I go about installing the frame given that the back wall is 22" behind the front screen wall? Should I mount the screen flush with the framed wall or inset slightly? Thanks guys.


Depends on which mount type you got. If the EZ mount, I'd run some vertical 2x's on the back of your screen wall attached toe the back edge of the wall. Then attach the screws to those and hang the screen on them. Will put the screen slightly inset. Shim the face of the 2'xs where the screws go to make the screen flush with screenwal as desired.


HTH, Scott


----------



## bytebuster

Folks,

I plan to ceiling mount my Luxus A Firehawk G3. Will be ceiling mounting it to the I-joist

Which bolt should I be using for mounting the screen. I don't recollect seeing any recommendation in the manual.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *bytebuster*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1440#post_22319299
> 
> 
> Folks,
> 
> I plan to ceiling mount my Luxus A Firehawk G3. Will be ceiling mounting it to the I-joist
> 
> Which bolt should I be using for mounting the screen. I don't recollect seeing any recommendation in the manual.



Manual will not give you a recommendation, due to not knowing what you are attaching to nor how much material you have to go through to get to solid wood support. What you use also depends on the number of fasteners you will be able to use. If you are mounting to a single joist, then I am not sure that you could get more than one fastener installed for each end. Give us a little more detail on what you are doing?


----------



## BrolicBeast

Unboxing video of a 120" Stewart Studiotek 130 G3....these screens are very well packaged and perform very well. A special thanks for Mike from AVS for suggesting this screen to me, and for a great price!


----------



## Mike Garrett

Got a kick out of the video. Enjoy your screen.


----------



## Mike Garrett

Wanted to let everyone know the retractable screen housings for the new Stewart Cima line looked really nice. The housing looked so good, that I am expecting the regular line to eventually be changed over to this newer housing. Very heavy gauge aluminum with nice looks to go with it.


Added

I guess while I am talking about these screens, I should tell you a few other new things. On the above ceiling model, the doors do not just open downward like many of the screens on the market. The doors open and move up into the housing so that nothing but the screen is below the ceiling. From an installers stand point a couple of other neat features. You can remove the screen and roller with out any tools. Also access to the junction box is inside the screen housing. The design, features and quality of the new housing looks more like a replacement for the existing Stewart line rather than a lower cost option.


----------



## mlg33

Hello,


What screen material would you recommend to match a JVC X35, in a multi-media room with whites walls and ceiling ?

Knowing that we watch movies in very dark conditions (no ambient light).


Firehawk ? Grayhawk ? 130 ?

Unless otherwise advised, I'd like to combine it with a Cabaret housing.


Thank you.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *mlg33*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1440#post_22469293
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> What screen material would you recommend to match a JVC X35, in a multi-media room with whites walls and ceiling ?
> 
> Knowing that we watch movies in very dark conditions (no ambient light).
> 
> Firehawk ? Grayhawk ? 130 ?
> 
> Unless otherwise advised, I'd like to combine it with a Cabaret housing.
> 
> Thank you.



I would probably look at the FireHawk, but would like to know more about your room. How close are the side walls and ceiling? Also are there any windows in the room? If so what are you using to cover the windows?


----------



## truwarrior22

So I picked up this crazy large Stewart Electriscreen 130 Ultramatte, but it's not going to work for me. It's almost 12" long and I bet it's almost 200 pounds. I think it's made for large conference rooms, etc. I was told it's 16:9 aspect. All the wiring appear to be there but I don't see a controller. Anyone intrested in trading for a 100-110" fixed frame? Located in Northern IL.


----------



## truwarrior22

Otherwise, thinking about maybe removing the screen material and some how mounting it in the basement. Don't really need it to have to go up and down lol Just don't have theconroller parts or know how on how to get this monster to work for me.


Thoughts?


----------



## truwarrior22

Sorry one more question. I also got a smaller EM 100-20B anyone know what aspects this model supports? I can't even find this model in the manual?


----------



## Elite Benito

that model number is incomplete. All it states is that it's a drop down screen with an image diagonal of 100". the 20B suggests that it has 20" of top masking so it's a little more than the standard 12" which could be a problem depending on how much you need to adjust it.


The EM model is a unit that has masking panels to mask the image width down so more than likely it's a 100" diagonal 16:9 with masking for 4:3. It doesn't give details on the type of material you have but you can get that info from the batten bar if you bring the screen down.


Benito


----------



## truwarrior22

The screen size is 60x80, just not sure if it's horizontal masking or vertical? Masking 20" BLK drop: 4", sides 3". Bat 90" Case 104". Guess I'll have just have to unpack it more?


----------



## Elite Benito

If that's the case, then more than likely it's a horizontal masking. no point in having vertical masking on a 4:3 screen. at least not with the em model. best bet is to open it up. which you'll probably need to just to see what type of material it is.


Benito


----------



## truwarrior22

Material is st-130. Is the horizontal masking fully adjustable or preset? I should be able to just lower the masking till it's 16x9..? My unfinished basement has 8' ceiling. Will the 20" masking be an issue with that?


Thanks for all the help thus far!


----------



## truwarrior22

Also wouldn't it be better to have a little extra back drop then not having enough? If you have to much can one just not drop the screen all the way?


----------



## truwarrior22

Also, any one know how much this screen is worth so I can see if I can get a even trade for a high contrast fixed 16:9 screen? It's pretty much brand new, never mounted. I actually just took it out of the crate to inspect it.


Thanks!


----------



## truwarrior22

Hm, the more I research on this electrimask, it's actually really cool! Just trying to figure out if it would work best with a 9' (family room) or 7 1/2' ceiling (basement). Thoughts?


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *truwarrior22*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1470#post_22488931
> 
> 
> Also wouldn't it be better to have a little extra back drop then not having enough? If you have to much can one just not drop the screen all the way?



On a tensioned screen, you want it fully lowered.


----------



## truwarrior22

That's what I was thinking too... How would I calculate the screen's position? Back drop + maskings - case housing since it will be in the ceiling? Is there a calulator out there anywhere? Looks like I don't have access to the Steward Filmscreen online one.


Thanks!


----------



## breadvan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1470#post_22494864
> 
> 
> On a tensioned screen, you want it fully lowered.



Hi Mike, what would be the issue if a tensioned screen is not fully lowered?


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *breadvan*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1470#post_22496770
> 
> 
> Hi Mike, what would be the issue if a tensioned screen is not fully lowered?



The screen is not properly tensioned, so you can get screen curling, wrinkles and waves.


----------



## breadvan

Got it Mike, thanks.


----------



## Elite Benito




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *breadvan*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1470#post_22496770
> 
> 
> Hi Mike, what would be the issue if a tensioned screen is not fully lowered?



Like Mike mentioned, you do want it fully lowered. How much less drop did you want? Generally with Stewart screens, you have a little play in there.....+/- 3". You are able to adjust the tension on the screen to add or take away a little bit of tension. If you have Studiotek 130, it's a little easier to manage as opposed to something like an Ultramatte material. If you are trying to go from 20" down to 6 or 7....you are going to have problems. For that situation, it would be best to have it go back to the factory and have them cut it down for you. You have a good unit there, I would do what I could to keep it and make it work.


Benito


----------



## breadvan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Elite Benito*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1470#post_22499036
> 
> 
> Like Mike mentioned, you do want it fully lowered. How much less drop did you want? Generally with Stewart screens, you have a little play in there.....+/- 3". You are able to adjust the tension on the screen to add or take away a little bit of tension. If you have Studiotek 130, it's a little easier to manage as opposed to something like an Ultramatte material. If you are trying to go from 20" down to 6 or 7....you are going to have problems. For that situation, it would be best to have it go back to the factory and have them cut it down for you. You have a good unit there, I would do what I could to keep it and make it work.
> 
> Benito



Thanks I have the backdrop issue you mentioned since the screen was moved from another apartment which has much higher ceiling. My 130 screen has 24" backdrop and now I am only using around 7 - 8", however, I have not noticed any issue on the white screen part, while there is some wrinkles on the side masking. My screen is rolled up most of the time so hopefully it will last a bit longer until I could afford another one


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Elite Benito*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1470#post_22499036
> 
> 
> Like Mike mentioned, you do want it fully lowered. How much less drop did you want? Generally with Stewart screens, you have a little play in there.....+/- 3". You are able to adjust the tension on the screen to add or take away a little bit of tension. If you have Studiotek 130, it's a little easier to manage as opposed to something like an Ultramatte material. If you are trying to go from 20" down to 6 or 7....you are going to have problems. For that situation, it would be best to have it go back to the factory and have them cut it down for you. You have a good unit there, I would do what I could to keep it and make it work.
> 
> Benito



Hi Benito, how are you doing?


----------



## Elite Benito




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1470#post_22500314
> 
> 
> Hi Benito, how are you doing?



It's going great Mike, living the good life like everyone else here









Good to hear from you. I'll shoot you a pm with my personal info so we can catch up!


Benito


----------



## yin

I have a JVC projector and would like to buy a Stewart Microperf x2. My question is which screen (135 inch diagonal 16:9) material should I use for the D-ila?The room is totally light controlled,The room is made up of two rooms the wall that separated the two rooms from each other was taken out. Have the room were I sit has a yellow carpet and yellow walls, the screen would be put into the other room which is dark blue, the walls are closed off by dark blue velvet from the ceiling to the floor. Although the environment is light controlled I`am not sure about the reflection from the yellow walls back to the screen which would be in the blue part. So do I need to have a grey or white microperf x2?

Thanks


----------



## Future Vision

My only options might be the Firehawk since I need a motorized and HC screen for my living room with light walls and celing, but I'm able to darken the room.

Am I stupid to go for Firehawk, It's >5 years old and I think they might upgrade it sooner or later.

Anyway, why I have decided to buy the Stewart is mainly for the money, since I need a motorized screen I'm looking at 18500$ for DNP, 11000$ for BD and (only) 7000$ for FH.

That is still a lot of money, and that's why I want to be sure. I can't see for my self, since there is nowhere for me to see those screen in a surrounding close to mine.

Why I ask is because I've been reading quite much for the last months and I'm getting mixed up about all the pros and cons, (everyone) have a different angle on how they see it.

I know this is hard to answer, since it depends on that I'm able to see, mounting issues and throw distance and so on, but anyway, I'm hoping some answer will help me enough to make a decision.

I'm probably gonna match the screen with Sony HW50ES. My throwing distance is only 1.55 and the lens will be 8" above the top of the screen.


Thanks all...


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *yin*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1470#post_22504288
> 
> 
> I have a JVC projector and would like to buy a Stewart Microperf x2. My question is which screen (135 inch diagonal 16:9) material should I use for the D-ila?The room is totally light controlled,The room is made up of two rooms the wall that separated the two rooms from each other was taken out. Have the room were I sit has a yellow carpet and yellow walls, the screen would be put into the other room which is dark blue, the walls are closed off by dark blue velvet from the ceiling to the floor. Although the environment is light controlled I`am not sure about the reflection from the yellow walls back to the screen which would be in the blue part. So do I need to have a grey or white microperf x2?
> 
> Thanks



Which JVC projector do you have and what is your throw distance?


----------



## tjsbuyer

I have a 110" Firehawk that I have used with an Infocus DLP. It has worked great in my application. I am thinking of upgrading to a new Sony LCOS projector but would prefer not to shell out for a new screen also. How would the Firehawk look with one of the new Sony units HW50? thankyou.


----------



## TK Doom




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *yin*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1470#post_22504288
> 
> 
> I have a JVC projector and would like to buy a Stewart Microperf x2. My question is which screen (135 inch diagonal 16:9) material should I use for the D-ila?The room is totally light controlled,The room is made up of two rooms the wall that separated the two rooms from each other was taken out. Have the room were I sit has a yellow carpet and yellow walls, the screen would be put into the other room which is dark blue, the walls are closed off by dark blue velvet from the ceiling to the floor. Although the environment is light controlled I`am not sure about the reflection from the yellow walls back to the screen which would be in the blue part. So do I need to have a grey or white microperf x2?
> 
> Thanks



I am about to order my screen...JVC X75 and about 18 ft throw, I am thinking Ultramatte 150, would love to hear what people say about yours and mine.


totally light controlled room as well.


----------



## yin

@AV Science Sales 5


I have a JVC DLA-HD10K long throw


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *yin*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1470#post_22609982
> 
> 
> @AV Science Sales 5
> 
> I have a JVC DLA-HD10K long throw



Is your throw ratio 2.04 -3.91?


----------



## yin

yes


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *yin*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1470#post_22612224
> 
> 
> yes



You did not list your throw distance?


----------



## yin

2.04 -3.91


19Ft from screen


----------



## flash2003

Hi All,


I have a question for all you Stewart Filmscreen experts. I have an opportunity to purchase a used Luxus Firehawk screen circa 2005. Would I see a big difference in video quality between this screen and the new G3 material? Projector is a Runco LS-3. Theater room is a basement but not totally light controlled.


Thanks


----------



## Bardia

Gentleman,


I need to know which Steart screen would suit my need best and need your feedback. I am planning to get the DLA-X55 from JVC. This would be for my living room. Big window on one side. White furniture, Behind the screen is painted dark brown, side walls are beige. With all lights turned off, I get a very small amount of ambient light from the big window and of course the white furniture and white speakers.


From what I gather, Firehawk G3 seems to be the best choice for my set up. I need to get the Visionary Tensioned screen that rolls up to the ceiling. Any thoughts?


This picture shows the G3 with hotspotting so I am not sure if I will face the same scenario with this screen/projector combo

http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/manufactured-screens/32885-stewart-firehawk-g3-screen-2.html#axzz2Dkp8wb2Q


----------



## Bardia

Ok, don't everybody answer at once.


----------



## Brian B

What does your dealer suggest? What size screen are you looking at?


B.


----------



## Bardia




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Brian B*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1470#post_22659497
> 
> 
> What does your dealer suggest? What size screen are you looking at?
> 
> B.


I want to get a 95" screen, 2:35:1


I haven't talked to a dealer yet. If I go with a dealer, the set will cost me about $2000 more. I would like to see if I can do this myself.. But we'll see..


----------



## GetGray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Bardia*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1400_100#post_22667022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Brian B*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1470#post_22659497
> 
> 
> What does your dealer suggest? What size screen are you looking at?
> 
> B.
> 
> 
> 
> I want to get a 95" screen, 2:35:1
> 
> 
> I haven't talked to a dealer yet. If I go with a dealer, the set will cost me about $2000 more. I would like to see if I can do this myself.. But we'll see..
Click to expand...

Contact me, I'll help you. [email protected]


----------



## GetGray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Bardia*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1400_100#post_22667022
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Brian B*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1470#post_22659497
> 
> 
> What does your dealer suggest? What size screen are you looking at?
> 
> B.
> 
> 
> 
> I want to get a 95" screen, 2:35:1
> 
> 
> I haven't talked to a dealer yet. If I go with a dealer, the set will cost me about $2000 more. I would like to see if I can do this myself.. But we'll see..
Click to expand...

Contact me, I'll help you. [email protected]


----------



## stm69

Hi,


Was hoping to see if anyone had some ideas. I acquired a Stewart FireHawk G3 screen for a basement install. I believe it's a 2:35 ratio, the manual states FireHawk G3 OD: 48-1/4 X 109. Unfortunately I decided that a 16:9 screen would be better suited for my needs. It is the Lexus frame and snaps on. So anyways:


1) Does Stewart offer the ability to "upgrade/change" the aspect ratio by varying the height of the side pieces?

2) Does Stewart offer any sort of trade-in program?


I'm very close to the Amelia, OH location if that makes any difference.


Thanks!


----------



## djnickuk

Hi,


I just aquired a used Stewart LX092H motorised screen with Grayhawk material.


It came with wall mounts but I need to ceiling mount it.


Are ceiling mounts still available? Anyone have any?


Or do I need to get a metal fabricator to make me some.


Many thanks in advance.


----------



## djnickuk

Not to worry. A local steel fabricator will make me a pair for £5 each. Bargain.


----------



## Sandy S




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *breadvan*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1470#post_22500215
> 
> 
> Thanks I have the backdrop issue you mentioned since the screen was moved from another apartment which has much higher ceiling. My 130 screen has 24" backdrop and now I am only using around 7 - 8", however, I have not noticed any issue on the white screen part, while there is some wrinkles on the side masking. My screen is rolled up most of the time so hopefully it will last a bit longer until I could afford another one



Stewart told me if you find you have too much backdrop you should fully lower the screen and let it hang at least once a week.


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by breadvan
> 
> 
> Thanks I have the backdrop issue you mentioned since the screen was moved from another apartment which has much higher ceiling. My 130 screen has 24" backdrop and now I am only using around 7 - 8", however, I have not noticed any issue on the white screen part, while there is some wrinkles on the side masking. My screen is rolled up most of the time so hopefully it will last a bit longer until I could afford another one
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stewart told me if you find you have too much backdrop you should fully lower the screen and let it hang at least once a week.
Click to expand...


That usually works. If you are off drop wise just a bit, you can adjust up to 6 inches with the adjustment screw. And believe it or not, it's possible to get new material ( with less drop ) and install it yourself - although it does look a bit tricky. But it's far less expensive than a whole new screen !


----------



## omalley34male

Hi i have a stewart looking terrible wrinkles and Waves 110 electriscreen how did you get rid of yours is the wrinkles bacause the tab tention is not right adjusted?

[email protected] if you have got time to help me

Thanks


----------



## omalley34male


stewart.jpg 289k .jpg file
IMG_0320.JPG 559k .JPG file


----------



## omalley34male


IMG_0319.JPG 593k .JPG file
IMG_0318.JPG 390k .JPG file
IMG_0315.JPG 832k .JPG file
IMG_0314.JPG 644k .JPG file


----------



## omalley34male


IMG_0309.JPG 670k .JPG file
IMG_0306.JPG 391k .JPG file
1 shining pixels.JPG 200k .JPG file
5.JPG 320k .JPG file
25.JPG 274k .JPG file


----------



## omalley34male

Can averyone with Pictures of stewart screens dammage please put up your Picture to warn others


----------



## m Robinson

Hi O'Malley,

I tried to get the serial number off your photo but couldn't quite get it. Please post your serial number and I will look into the situation.

The screen looks dreadful, but it also looks pretty old. How long have you owned it?



Mark Robinson

Stewart Filmscreen


----------



## Craig Peer

I was going to say it looks damaged or something happened to it. I have never had issues with either my Stewart or Da-Lite electric screens that I've owned - ever - over the last 12 years.


----------



## m Robinson

We shipped this screen in Feb of 2004. So it's not new. It may still be the original owner?


----------



## djnickuk

I recently took delivery of a second hand Stewart Luxus classic with Grayhawk material. It was originally purchased in 2004.


I think the guy had had it rolled up and unused for a few years.


When Extended there is a line of dimples down one side like the screen has been pressing against an internal nut. And also what look like light fold marks.


Will these errors rectify when the screen has been extended for a few days to a week. Or could these now be permanent?


----------



## m Robinson

Hello Nick,

Often a series of dimples will correspond to an insect carcass adhered, usually to the back of the fabric. Look about a foot higher than the last dimple, on the back. The best thing to do with a seldom used screen is to let it hang out as many hours as you can. It is difficult to predict what will fall out and what will remain. A bit of heat, moderately elevated heat near the screen can help it along.


Also Hello Craig! Good to see you, been up any boulders lately?


----------



## Craig Peer

Hi Mark! No, just skate skiing until the weather warms up enough for climbing and whitewater kayaking! And I've been enjoying my new StudioTek 130 G3 electric screen - just installed it last week !!


I'm also impressed with the Neve 1.1 gain material in the Cima line. I think you guys should add that material to the general screen line up. It would fit nicely between the Snowmatt / StudioTek 100 and the 130 G3.







And more importantly, I'd buy it if it came in a Luxus Model A with a black case !!


----------



## omalley34male

Hi Robinson i saw that you work on Stewart funny it should be easiest way to get Contact wia a forum

Are the new screens realy better in material ? im gona take some photos today to show you what i mean


everybody says Stewart is the way to go but after this experience i dont know if i should trust the to buy yet Another Stewart

Thanks /


----------



## omalley34male

Yet Another Stewart screen for sale and of course it has wrinkles


----------



## GetGray

What does your local dealer say? They should be giving you support, not a Stewart person who comes here occasionally on their own free time to give input and answer questions. IMO. I have a great many in service and in the 7 or so years I've been dealing with them, I've never had a problem with any except one and that was less of an issue. For that one, Stewart not only replaced it, they sent an engineer to the customers home and changed it themselves. Properly installed and cared for I haven't experienced what that one appears to have done.


----------



## m Robinson

Here is what you can do. The two batten side cords can be adjusted. So using a philips screwdriver, turn the little screws under the batten end caps, counterclockwise until they come free. Then re-engage them and only tighten a minimum amount, say two full turns. Leave the screen deployed for a few days, or at least overnight each night for a week. Make sure all the tabs are freely movable on the side cord. This screen appears to not have been deployed for a very long time. Lack of use is the downfall of roller screens. The more they are deployed, the flatter they are and all sorts of problems just don't appear.


We'll re-screen any unit we've built for a pretty fair price. So contact a dealer near you and inquire. We do not deal directly as a general policy. It makes me sad to see a screen in such disrepair. Did you purchase it recently? If not, why have you waited so long to address the issues?


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> Yet Another Stewart screen for sale and of course it has wrinkles



Properly used and cared for electric screens do not have these problems. If you fully extend the screen and let it hang, any wrinkles on a properly cared for screen will disappear in no time.


No wrinkles on my two screens ( one Stewart, one Da-Lite ) - http://www.avsforum.com/g/a/2082359/digital-projector-theaters/ 


Omalley - your screen looks destroyed !


----------



## omalley34male

I have own the screen for I Think 4 years and it had some wrinkles when I got it but it kept getting worse and the paint started come of the masking sticking to the backside as it is rolled up, then two of the tab hooks come lose and I refitted them in the same position as they were


the tabcords I misunderstood having sent Picture to Stewart I was suggested to release the cords a couple of turns and at first doing that I just turn the screw from under lying on the floor with a screwdriver and didn't notice the alu piece the cords were in turned and twisted ... I thought they hade some system making them not rotating but the cords did so and I hade to hold the piece with a pliers and turn the screw with the other hand

now afterwards I understand that the turned cords was the problem and when pulling the screen up and down the cords twisted on the roll ended up on the canvas and ripped out pieces on both sides .. That I can live with and the Picture area is not affected by it, but the screen doesn't get and flatter


I have been in Contact with Stewart for atleast 2 years now and sending mail to every address I could get hold of but nothing happens and I had a dispute with the support guys after they implied I hade done the damage myself so I didn't want to talk to them and Stewart Us don't reply to any mail



If you buy he best/ most expensive brand and in World like say a Ferreira you don't want the paint to come of just standing in the garage ...

And certainly not to have some smuch telling you they Think you intentionally make the damage yourself.


at first I was given a price to send the screen to rescreening and when I wanted to do so they changed and told me it wasn't done here and the screen had to be sent awayn and it was verry expensive to ship and it was better if I just bought a new one instead

I asked about just the canvas and to replace it myself and they said it was werry hard and not manageable


I thought buying a Stewart was for Life .. My first screen a cheep 170 cm screen bought used for 15 years ago being stored in the garage for nearly 8 years I rolled down to have a look and it was in the same condition as when I stored it away perhaps all cheep screens have a more reliable material


I don't know what to do if I can trust Stewart to buy a new screen ..if I buy a screen I want to know its lifespan is atleast 15-20 years hell they have pergaments in the combs in Egypt being 1000 years how hard can it be ???


----------



## omalley34male

Robinson

i have noticed my screen had a waist its wider up and down and in the middle its smaller is the tention realy to hard ? if i release and let the screen hang wouldnt the screen be more long and schrimping in the mid ?


----------



## omalley34male

Craig are you just stupid ??


Properly used and cared for electric screens do not have these problems. If you fully extend the screen and let it hang, any wrinkles on a properly cared for screen will disappear in no time.



I can give you Picture of atleast 10 people having Stewart screen and they are all with "Stewart waves"

is sits on the wall, you put it up and down with Electric motor what do you meen with proper used ????


do ypu Have a secret way of pushing the button that all other have missed ?


----------



## omalley34male

Craig is the White screen on the Picture above wrikled ??



sorry to these hard Words in the mail earlier im just so fed up with all i know best guys ..

my home Cinema i have earned by working dont ypu guys Think i care for my stuf ?


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> Craig is the White screen on the Picture above wrikled ??



I have used nothing but electric screens for the entire time I've had a home theater - 12 years + - both Da-Lite and Stewart, and I've never had a problem like those photos. How were these screens treated? Were they kept rolled up for 3 years? Were they stored in a 105 degree F garage?


Yours looks like maybe a defective material or a mechanical problem damaged it when rolling itself up. I don't know. I just know that I've owned 4 different electric screens and have never had problems. Get a fixed screen !


----------



## omalley34male

CRAIG sorry for my reply i had a bad day ok


the screen have been on my wall for the last 4+ years and it just gets worser every year i tried to have the screen roll down when im not home

the screen covers the door i go into the room with so i cant have it hangiing when im home


all recomends i had was to release the tension a bit and i release it two turns and for 5 month i release it 2 more rounds and it doesnt seam to help its like

the material is to flappy i have about 23 Celsius in the house so its no hard envirement


just seems a Little bit odd having a tab screen and it Waves and iwe seen plenty more like this and my 15 year old screen in the garage is flat like a wallpaper

so in my opinion tab DOESN make s_ _t for the screen its just a seeling trick to make customer buy them and Think they are propper built .. yeah ..


----------



## m Robinson

So here is how it appears to me. You purchased a used screen which is wrinkled. You are overseas or something and shipping it to the factory for a re-screen, and back is too expensive. So therefore all tab tension screens made by Stewart Filmscreen are not good. The curvature in the sides is by design. Go ahead and release the batten tension side cords all the way. Let them dangle. Some of that wrinkling will come out. Best of luck to you, I don't know how else to help you!


----------



## Craig Peer

By the way, if anyone is looking for a 2.35:1 Stewart Firehawk G3 Luxus Model A Electriscreen ( no wrinkles thank you very much ), I have one for sale -

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1460216/stewart-luxus-model-a-classic-electriscreen-firehawk-g3-n-california-area


----------



## omalley34male

So here is how it appears to me. You purchased a used screen which is wrinkled. You are overseas or something and shipping it to the factory for a re-screen, and back is too expensive.


- The folks at Stewart says it was to expensive to ship the screen to them and then to US have it re-screened sent back to local Stewart and then to me would be nearly the same price as buying a new



So therefore all tab tension screens made by Stewart Filmscreens are not good.


- No a just implied that it took me 5 minutes on the web to find a person trying to sell a wrinkled Stewart screen is that just a coincident ???




The curvature in the sides is by design. Go ahead and release the batten tension side cords all the way. Let them dangle. Some of that wrinkling will come out. Best of luck to you, I don't know how else to help you!


Thanks for the reply I will try it


I also Think a big Company like Stewart should have done the rescreen by goodwill or at a very nice price ..


----------



## Tnedator

How does the Stewart Vertical screen wall mask (the masking that rolls down from the top on each side) look for a 2.35 CIH screen. There are only a couple pictures on Stewart's site and two things that jump out at me/concern me are:


1. The top border is significantly thicker than the right/left/bottom when the mask is retracted (when watching 2.35) and will be significantly thicker than the bottom when extended and watching 1.78/1.85. Does this look bad in person?


2. How well does the masking look/lay when extended? Does it look like there are two loose curtains hanging on each side of the screen?


----------



## GetGray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Tnedator*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1500_100#post_23197404
> 
> 
> How does the Stewart Vertical screen wall mask (the masking that rolls down from the top on each side) look for a 2.35 CIH screen. There are only a couple pictures on Stewart's site and two things that jump out at me/concern me are:
> 
> 
> 1. The top border is significantly thicker than the right/left/bottom when the mask is retracted (when watching 2.35) and will be significantly thicker than the bottom when extended and watching 1.78/1.85. Does this look bad in person?
> 
> 
> 2. How well does the masking look/lay when extended? Does it look like there are two loose curtains hanging on each side of the screen?


Steve Bruzonsky, here on the forum has one. Maybe see if he can show you some pictures of one in service.


----------



## NickRHave

I'm using a Epson 8700UB and am looking at getting a Firehawk G3. I like to watch sports with the side lights on, so I don't thing the Studiotek 130 would be a better fit. I'm currently shooting on a Grayhawk that's 7 years old. The screen will be 100" 16x9. I'm shooting from 12' 6" away and I'm ceiling mounted. However, I'm about 5.5" below the top of the screen. I'ts a dedicated theater room with the wall where the screen is painted black with the remaining walls painted a rust color. The ceiling is a black dropped ceiling while the carpet is a beige color. My question is should I still go with a Firehawk or the Studiotek 130? This is driving my wife and I nuts. I need to make a decision. Thanks

photo.JPG 1485k .JPG file


----------



## GetGray

Probably the Firehawk. Sent you a PM for some details to know for sure.


----------



## breadvan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Craig Peer*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1500#post_23127630
> 
> 
> That usually works. If you are off drop wise just a bit, you can adjust up to 6 inches with the adjustment screw. And believe it or not, it's possible to get new material ( with less drop ) and install it yourself - although it does look a bit tricky. But it's far less expensive than a whole new screen !



Can anyone show me how to 'manually' lower the screen all the way? My electric one is preset to stop at a certain length.


----------



## omalley34male

Breadvan

in the left side of the screen there is a hole so you can reach two small hex screws one for stopping uppwards and one for the lowering stop

take a flasclight and you can see them


----------



## breadvan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *omalley34male*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1530#post_23204918
> 
> 
> Breadvan
> 
> in the left side of the screen there is a hole so you can reach two small hex screws one for stopping uppwards and one for the lowering stop
> 
> take a flasclight and you can see them



Thanks shall give that a try, although my screen resides in a housing so might be hard to actually see inside, anyway thanks.


----------



## Craig Peer

Do you still have your owners manual Breadvan? There is a picture in it showing where the adjustment screws are.


----------



## breadvan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Craig Peer*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1530#post_23211741
> 
> 
> Do you still have your owners manual Breadvan? There is a picture in it showing where the adjustment screws are.



Unfortunately not Craig, is it something that can be downloaded? Mine is a common Luxus Model A


----------



## Craig Peer

It is - here you go - http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/residential/dealer_area/manuals/manuals_residential.html


----------



## breadvan




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Craig Peer*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1530#post_23212338
> 
> 
> It is - here you go - http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/residential/dealer_area/manuals/manuals_residential.html



Thanks a lot for your help!


----------



## Craig Peer

If anyone is looking for an electric 2.35:1 Firehawk G3, I just reduced the price on my - just FYI.










http://www.avsforum.com/t/1460216/stewart-luxus-model-a-classic-electriscreen-firehawk-g3-n-california-area


----------



## truwarrior22

Hey guys, I came across a 100" 4:3 electriscreen electrimask with ST130. It's made to mount in the ceiling. Top masking is 20" Would this work for a room with 9'? Anyone else have one of these screen? Are they any good? My room is 14' wide so i wonder if it's big enough. The depth of the room is deep since it opens to the kitchen.


Thanks!


----------



## truwarrior22

Also anyone know how much this would cost to install on average. There is a floor above and the wall it would run against is a outside wall.


Thanks!


----------



## weingok

i think so, I haven't really been able to grasp how the FireHawk and High Power match up against one another.


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> Hey guys, I came across a 100" 4:3 electriscreen electrimask with ST130. It's made to mount in the ceiling. Top masking is 20" Would this work for a room with 9'? Anyone else have one of these screen? Are they any good? My room is 14' wide so i wonder if it's big enough. The depth of the room is deep since it opens to the kitchen.
> 
> 
> Thanks!



Seems to me that a 4:3 screen is of limited use in a world of 16:9 projectors..........unless it is really cheap !


----------



## omalley34male

Craigh please look up what it COSTs to send the screen to Sweden i need a screen and stewart isnt even answer on mail .. i asked for a price on a new screen from european guys and they dont give a ****


----------



## CaptKid

i just recently purchased a 4-way Electrimask ST130 microperf screen that has some slight blemishes on the screen borders. Can someone tell me specifically what material the border is made of and how I might be able to repair it?


----------



## m Robinson

Hello,

That is Velux a proprietary material we have made for us. How much do you need? Email me at [email protected] and I'll see if I can help you out.


----------



## cscotty2hotty

  


I was just given this stewart motorized projector screen and know nothing about it and cant find any information about it I tried searching here and google. Have no idea how to set it up to work properly as the wires coming from it were cut. I assume it had a switch of some sort to move it up and down. Anyone know where to get a owners manual, instalation instructions or anything like that? Sorry the picture is sideways posting from my phone is easier then transfering pics to my computer


----------



## shirvington

I purchased a studiotek 130 about two years ago and have recently noticed yellow lines oriented in a vertical direction across the entire screen almost aligned with what could have been folds during the original shipment. They cannot be removed with soap and water and I suspect they are permanently and perhaps chemically now a part of the screen material. Any ideas? Thanks


----------



## Pawellang

Recently I bought SIM2 M.150 and I do not know, which screen to choose - Firehawk, Greyhawk or ST130? I am currently using a 97" grey 0.8 screen, but it seems to be too dark for me (12 fL measured). My room can be light controlled, but there are grey walls and white ceiling (60 cm from the top of the screen). I would like to go for ST, but I am afraid that some light could be reflected and wash out black. Did anyone use it in similar conditions?


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *shirvington*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1530#post_23360993
> 
> 
> I purchased a studiotek 130 about two years ago and have recently noticed yellow lines oriented in a vertical direction across the entire screen almost aligned with what could have been folds during the original shipment. They cannot be removed with soap and water and I suspect they are permanently and perhaps chemically now a part of the screen material. Any ideas? Thanks



The screens are not folded when shipped. They are on a roll, for this very reason. Not sure what the problem is. Have you used the lens shift to see if the lines move with the image? If so then it is the projector and not the screen. Or do you see these lines with no image on the screen?


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Pawellang*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1530#post_23362098
> 
> 
> Recently I bought SIM2 M.150 and I do not know, which screen to choose - Firehawk, Greyhawk or ST130? I am currently using a 97" grey 0.8 screen, but it seems to be too dark for me (12 fL measured). My room can be light controlled, but there are grey walls and white ceiling (60 cm from the top of the screen). I would like to go for ST, but I am afraid that some light could be reflected and wash out black. Did anyone use it in similar conditions?



What is your throw distance and viewing distance? Are you wanting to stay with the same 97" (diagonal or width?) screen?


----------



## Pawellang

Throw distance is around 4.3 m and viewing distance is 4 m. My side walls are 1.5 m from the screen. I would like to stay with 97 or max 100" screen.


----------



## Pawellang

100" Diagonal


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> I was just given this stewart motorized projector screen and know nothing about it and cant find any information about it I tried searching here and google. Have no idea how to set it up to work properly as the wires coming from it were cut. I assume it had a switch of some sort to move it up and down. Anyone know where to get a owners manual, instalation instructions or anything like that? Sorry the picture is sideways posting from my phone is easier then transfering pics to my computer



Check here for a manual - http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/residential/dealer_area/manuals/manuals_residential.html


----------



## Pawellang




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1530#post_23363592
> 
> 
> What is your throw distance and viewing distance? Are you wanting to stay with the same 97" (diagonal or width?) screen?



As I wrote above it is 100" diagonal. Could you tell me which of these screens will be the best for mine PJ in these condtitions? I saw some photos in the internet and I like the picture of the ST130, but I am afraid that walls and a ceiling in my room could caused some problems.

Firehawk would probably be better, but I do not like how it changes colors and that it has narrow viewing angle.

Greyhawk seems to be the best solution from all, but 0.92 gain would be probably too low.

I have quite a big problem with choosing the proper screen


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Pawellang*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1530#post_23368316
> 
> 
> As I wrote above it is 100" diagonal. Could you tell me which of these screens will be the best for mine PJ in these condtitions? I saw some photos in the internet and I like the picture of the ST130, but I am afraid that walls and a ceiling in my room could caused some problems.
> 
> Firehawk would probably be better, but I do not like how it changes colors and that it has narrow viewing angle.
> 
> Greyhawk seems to be the best solution from all, but 0.92 gain would be probably too low.
> 
> I have quite a big problem with choosing the proper screen



If you leave the ceiling white, then I would go with the FireHawk. If you can paint the ceiling a flat dark color or add black masking to the ceiling, then ST130 would work.


----------



## Pawellang




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1530#post_23369395
> 
> 
> If you leave the ceiling white, then I would go with the FireHawk. If you can paint the ceiling a flat dark color or add black masking to the ceiling, then ST130 would work.



OK, I see. Thank you for your help


----------



## Brian B




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Pawellang*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1560#post_23370970
> 
> 
> OK, I see. Thank you for your help



Sent you a PM Pawellang.


B.


----------



## TK Doom

Recently bought a large Cinecurve 181. Which is a 2.40:1 screen.


The remote has no 2.40 setting. It only has a 2.35:1 setting. This setting opens it all the way to 2.4 and my installer actually had to make a 2.35 setting on User 1.


Anyone know why that is?


----------



## vidafly

yeah,not by the last name of the customer-like most other manufacturers. thanks


----------



## m Robinson

Hi TK,

There is a method to why we do that. The BRIC control system is fully flexible. So you can program any setting into any preset. With the 11 button control and or hand held IR remote, you have six addressable preset locations. They do not necessarily need to correspond to the labeling on either the wall mounted control or the remote. For instance you can set the masking at 1.78 and store that location on the 1.33 or 2.35 or the 1.78 address. You also have the red button which is "home". Pressing home, sends the masks off stage to the stored position. That's your 2.40. So then when you go to 2.35, if you do so without zooming, you'll have the masks in a very small bit on the screen. Then you go on through the other presets, down to 1.33.


We set it up so that you are not wasting a pre-set on the fully open condition, which is set by the home button. You can put anything you want into any preset.


We could change the art work on the 11 button control and remote, but it's expensive and 99 percent of the customers use the factory supplied switch and remote for setup initially on the first day, then they go into serial integration pages via Crestron, Control 4, AMX, ELAN take your pick.


Thank you for purchasing Stewart Filmscreen products! We really appreciate the business!


----------



## TK Doom

thanks for the reply, my installer is having trouble with the top left corner being not square, so thats is why i wasn't sure what 2.4 was, zero masking? a bit of masking? etc. If the screen is going to be all the way open for 2.4, then either he is doing something wrong, or there is a defect. As all the way open, in the top left there is a defect.


----------



## m Robinson

Can you send me pictures? My email is [email protected]


What is the nature of the problem you are seeing?


----------



## ivanhoek

I have the same "problem", and have seen it with a few screens.. It's not that the screen isn't square (this you can easily verify with a .. square) , the problem is that it's VERY hard to get the screen surface and the projector lens perfectly parallel. I've managed to get it quite close, and I assume this is why most screens include the black border to account for some minor level of overshoot. In residential construction there hardly is anything square and level all throughout, so you're starting from a fairly difficult position, and to top it off, there are tools to measure pitch/yaw, but nothing to perfectly measure rotation.


I don't think I've ever seen a completely perfect installation, though you can and should get pretty darn close if you spend the time.


----------



## TK Doom




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1500_100#post_23420492
> 
> 
> Can you send me pictures? My email is [email protected]
> 
> 
> What is the nature of the problem you are seeing?



Thanks. I'll email later tonight .


----------



## m Robinson

A fundamental thing to check is lens shift utilization. Depending on the quality of the lens, if shift exceeds a certain point, you can see something that looks like a geometric shriveling of one or both corners of the image. Looking forward to the images. Thank you for purchasing Stewart Filmscreen products!


----------



## timhet

I've got the opportunity of buying a 2nd hand studiotek 130 g3 screen for about half the rrp. I'm just wondering if there is anything I should be concerned about buying a 2nd hand had studiotek? It is less than a year old. Am I likely to have any issues with it? The original owner has taken good care of it. I'm thinking in terms of tension etc.


----------



## nathan_h

Test it out first of course, but it sounds like a great deal.


----------



## DaveN

I am moving into a rental home and I was wondering if anyone has the msrp on a stand for a 110" Stewart 16x9 screen? It would be easier than repairing sheetrock

when we leave.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DaveN*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1560#post_23500009
> 
> 
> I am moving into a rental home and I was wondering if anyone has the msrp on a stand for a 110" Stewart 16x9 screen? It would be easier than repairing sheetrock
> 
> when we leave.



MSRP is $448. Let us know if we can help you.


----------



## baloo_btru

How long are Stewart screens expected to last, if you take care of them?


----------



## baloo_btru

That's exactly what I wanted to hear, thanks!


----------



## R Harkness

Help!


I've always been careful to the point of paranoia about getting anything on my Stewart ST-130 screen.


Today a tiny little bug landed on two spots a couple inches apart on the screen. When I shooed the bug off the screen it seemed to have left two tiny little brown spots, probably the size of a very small grain of rice at most. I knew I probably would never notice them from my viewing seat, but just knowing the screen had been sullied bugged me.


I looked at the cleaning instructions for my screen. First I tried a super soft bristled brush on those spots (a camera lens brush) which didn't budge them. Then I heavily diluted a drop of dishwashing liquid in a clean bowl and using a Q-tip (to get the least possible amount of liquid on the screen) I dabbed each spot and the brown spots immediately want away. I dabbed the screen very carefully to dry.


But then when I moved back from the screen the area I just cleaned now looked like a slightly darkened smudge. Oh no!!! I thought maybe it just wasn't dry yet (and I put, like, microscopic amount of water/detergent for those spots). But an hour later they are still there, and I can see that damned dark spot - about the size of a silver dollar - on bright material. Looking closely at the dark area it is totally invisible and nothing seems amiss with the optical coating. It's only when I move my head back to about 3 feet (and beyond, to my viewing distance) that the dark bit suddenly becomes visible, from any angle). I'm so frustrated.


What do you think I've done to the screen and is there any advice on fixing it? Of course now I'm terrified at the idea of attempting any more cleaning. Given the care I took it's hard to imagine I could have scuffed or damaged the optical coating (I barely touched the screen with the Q-tip, no pressure at all).


----------



## R Harkness

^^^ BUMP ^^^^ anyone?


Thanks.


----------



## G-Rex

I would pm Mark Robinson above ^^. He is the VP of technology at Stewart and is very knowledgeable.


----------



## GetGray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1560#post_23541321
> 
> 
> ^^^ BUMP ^^^^ anyone?
> 
> 
> Thanks.


Your dealer should be able to go to Stewart with your issue and help you resolve it. I work with Stewart on my customers behalf. While it would be easier for me to point the customer directly to Stewart, they really expect the dealers to be handling the issues in the field and reporting up when there's a problem.


----------



## R Harkness

Thanks. For various reasons, trying to resolve this through my dealer isn't a great option for me, so I'm still hoping Stewart or someone could respond.


----------



## omalley34male

Anyone here on the forum who knows what a new screenmaterial for a firehawk/studiotec 110 16/9 elecriscreen would cost ?

i have asked around the World and no one at Stewart replies ....


the closest i got so far is that its werry expensive

and that it would cost as much to rescreen included shipping that i would better buy a new screen ...


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> You should check with your local dealer to see what's up.thank you



Stewart Filmscreen - Europe

Mileparken 29

2730 Herlev

Denmark

Tel:+45 3648 2204

Fax: +45 3648 2299

[email protected]


----------



## CaptKid

I was fortunate enough to get a steal of a deal on a pre-owned ST130 Electrimask screen about 2-months ago. Unfortunately, while being shipped it was butchered by Fed-Ex. The frame and components were intact but the black VELUX material that covers the frame borders and masking panels was a total disaster; looked like it had been dragged behind a car.


Thankfully, Mark Robertson and Hideki Okamoto from Stewart were able to supply me with brand new replacement VELUX material and I was able to reupholster the screen. After a bit of a hassle with Fed-Ex they honored my insurance claim and so began the task of bringing the screen back to its original glory. To achieve a factory finish took an incredible amount of time and patience but the results were worth the effort. Thanks again to Mark and especially Hideki; testament to the legendary Stewart customer service.


Here are the photos pre-rehab
 
 
 
 


During the middle of the 12-step program;-)

 
 
 
 
 


Finally, here is the finished product


----------



## Craig Peer

Nice screen Capt ! I'd think the Velux material would be not too hard to fix. At least the screen surface itself was OK.


----------



## Craig Peer

I'm really impressed with the new Neve 1.1 gain material - it's smack dab between SnoMatte ( unity gain - need a black velvet pit ) and StudioTek 130 G3. Super smooth, uniform and no surface texture. Very neutral.


Neutral screen surfaces that don't add artifacts to the picture is my Mantra !







I have come to hate screen artifacts, myself.


----------



## omalley34male

what is neve 1.1 +???

i cant find it on stewart


----------



## Craig Peer

It's only available in the new CIMA line - http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/cima/index.html


----------



## Craig Peer

Check out this 35' wide electric screen at Stewart Filmscreen !


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Craig Peer*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1590#post_23554021
> 
> 
> I'm really impressed with the new Neve 1.1 gain material - it's smack dab between SnoMatte ( unity gain - need a black velvet pit ) and StudioTek 130 G3. Super smooth, uniform and no surface texture. Very neutral.
> 
> 
> Neutral screen surfaces that don't add artifacts to the picture is my Mantra !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have come to hate screen artifacts, myself.



I'm intrigued!


----------



## Bryce Edwards

OK,


Need advise on screen material for a new (my first) theater room PJ setup. Here's what I'm planning:


17' D x 13' W cave

Very dark brown flat walls/ceiling, very dark brown carpet.

Dark fixtures/furniture and fully controlled lighting (no windows)


JVC X-35 shelf mounted, ~15.5' throw

120" 16:9 fixed screen


One row proper theater seating @ 14', eventually on riser

Extra row in front as needed for kids (couch or beanbags)


Watch mostly movies, then HDTV, sports, little gaming (but will increase as kids age), and no 3D interest as of yet.


I would like the option of having some lighting on for sports/TV but would make that secondary to best PQ for movies.


Also, tell me what lighting I should consider as now is the time for me to determine. I was going to go with spotlights aimed straight down.


Thanks in advance,


::Bryce::


----------



## Brian B




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Bryce Edwards*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1590#post_23557674
> 
> 
> OK,
> 
> 
> Need advise on screen material for a new (my first) theater room PJ setup. Here's what I'm planning:
> 
> 
> 17' D x 13' W cave
> 
> Very dark brown flat walls/ceiling, very dark brown carpet.
> 
> Dark fixtures/furniture and fully controlled lighting (no windows)
> 
> 
> JVC X-35 shelf mounted, ~15.5' throw
> 
> 120" 16:9 fixed screen
> 
> 
> One row proper theater seating @ 14', eventually on riser
> 
> Extra row in front as needed for kids (couch or beanbags)
> 
> 
> Watch mostly movies, then HDTV, sports, little gaming (but will increase as kids age), and no 3D interest as of yet.
> 
> 
> I would like the option of having some lighting on for sports/TV but would make that secondary to best PQ for movies.
> 
> 
> Also, tell me what lighting I should consider as now is the time for me to determine. I was going to go with spotlights aimed straight down.
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> 
> 
> ::Bryce::



speakers behind the screen?


I would check out Studiotek 130 and 100.


B.


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> Also, tell me what lighting I should consider as now is the time for me to determine. I was going to go with spotlights aimed straight down.
> 
> 
> Thanks



Spots straight down are a good option. Don't put any lights near the screen. Install dimmers on everything. And yes, the StudioTek 130 might be a good choice - I sure like mine.


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> I'm intrigued!



Stay tuned Rich - I'm working on my last theater upgrade - replacing my existing Da-Lite HCCV 1.78:1 screen, hopefully wiith the NEVE material !


----------



## telem

Hello everyone,


I am looking to change my screen and I would like to have your recommendation. My projector is a Sony VW1000ES and I can install a motorized screen (Luxus model A?) of a 302cm diagonal or 152cm*271cm. Tensioned screen is a must. How about the material? GrayHawk RS G3 / Firehawk SST(Sony optimized). or StudioTek 130? No ambient light in my dedicated room but the ceiling and walls are white and the carpet beige.

Any other suggestions?


Thanks for your help !


----------



## MYHOMETHEATER

  


Just got my theater up and running. I went with a 2.37:1 studiotek 130 @ 125" dia. Paired with a jvc rs4810 and could not be happier


----------



## Craig Peer

Nice looking theater !!


----------



## MYHOMETHEATER

  


Thanks


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> Hello everyone,
> 
> 
> I am looking to change my screen and I would like to have your recommendation. My projector is a Sony VW1000ES and I can install a motorized screen (Luxus model A?) of a 302cm diagonal or 152cm*271cm. Tensioned screen is a must. How about the material? GrayHawk RS G3 / Firehawk SST(Sony optimized). or StudioTek 130? No ambient light in my dedicated room but the ceiling and walls are white and the carpet beige.
> 
> Any other suggestions?
> 
> 
> Thanks for your help !



With your room a Firehawk ( which one would depend on your throw for one thing ) would probably work best.


I know there are folks that say the Firehawk doesn't have the " pop " of a white screen, but you have a fair amount of lumens at your disposal with your VW1000. And nothing kills " pop " like a white room washing out a white screen from room reflections. I should know. I very much enjoyed using a Firehawk for 5 years, up until I decided to make drastic changes to my theater room. Blacks on the StudioTek sample in the middle of my Firehawk " glowed " and looked very elevated compared to the Firehawk. Whites were brighter too, but it's all relative, and the brighter blacks bugged me. I used movies like 2001 and V for Vendetta and Prometheus as a test. Not until I totally covered the front 2/3rds of the theater with black carpet, and drastically darkened the walls and ceiling did the StudioTek start to look better than the Firehawk. It took an " extreme make over " of the room before the StudioTek 130 sample became invisible on the Firehawk during dark / black space scenes. My recent class at Stewart only re-enforced the interaction of a room and the screen.


----------



## m Robinson

Craig,

You were here at the plant? How did I miss you? I may have been traveling.


Mark Robinson


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Bryce Edwards*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1590#post_23557674
> 
> 
> OK,
> 
> 
> Need advise on screen material for a new (my first) theater room PJ setup. Here's what I'm planning:
> 
> 
> 17' D x 13' W cave
> 
> Very dark brown flat walls/ceiling, very dark brown carpet.
> 
> Dark fixtures/furniture and fully controlled lighting (no windows)
> 
> 
> JVC X-35 shelf mounted, ~15.5' throw
> 
> 120" 16:9 fixed screen
> 
> 
> One row proper theater seating @ 14', eventually on riser
> 
> Extra row in front as needed for kids (couch or beanbags)
> 
> 
> Watch mostly movies, then HDTV, sports, little gaming (but will increase as kids age), and no 3D interest as of yet.
> 
> 
> I would like the option of having some lighting on for sports/TV but would make that secondary to best PQ for movies.
> 
> 
> Also, tell me what lighting I should consider as now is the time for me to determine. I was going to go with spotlights aimed straight down.
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> 
> 
> ::Bryce::



Since you want to have some lights on viewing, I would use the ST130 material with your 4810. For dark movie viewing, you will be able to use low lamp and the iris closed nearly all the way down. For sports, lights on viewing you will be able to get nearly 30 FL with a new lamp.


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> Craig,
> 
> You were here at the plant? How did I miss you? I may have been traveling.
> 
> 
> Mark Robinson



I was. And it was a bit of a whirlwind tour, what with the old training room across the street being out of service. We spent quite a bit of time off site for the remainder of the training.


----------



## baloo_btru

I just purchased a Firehawk G3 secondhand. It was rolled up for a few weeks, and there are several small wrinkles in the screen, especially near one corner. Its been up for almost two weeks now and they don't seem to be getting better.


Do you think perhaps some of the snaps are not all the way on, or will these continue to come out if I just leave it up?


Or how else can I get these wrinkles out?


----------



## baloo_btru

Thanks. They are just soft wrinkles, no major creases. Unfortunately the screen is in my basement, which is fairly cold even now in the middle of summer.


I'll give it some more time before resorting to the hairdryer trick since I'd rather avoid that.


----------



## baloo_btru




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Stan-Lee*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1590#post_23594574
> 
> 
> Perfect! No hard wrinkles/creases! Just give it time to undo itself. Try moving it to a warmer part of the house!! (If you can)



It's fairly impractical to move it now, but I am going to put a space heater in the room and try to get the room temp up a few degrees. That will probably speed up the process a bit.


----------



## Threefiddie

Trying to request screen samples from Stewart.... they passed me off to two people then to a dealer near me and won't give me a sample until they talk to me and I have to explain my "situation". When Da-Lite, Carada, and SI just send me samples from their live chat or email....


anyone else having to jump through loops to get stewart samples?


----------



## Brian B




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Threefiddie*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1590#post_23605127
> 
> 
> Trying to request screen samples from Stewart.... they passed me off to two people then to a dealer near me and won't give me a sample until they talk to me and I have to explain my "situation". When Da-Lite, Carada, and SI just send me samples from their live chat or email....
> 
> 
> anyone else having to jump through loops to get stewart samples?



Where are you planning on getting the screen from if you go Stewart? I would think AVS would be able to help you out without all the crazy run-around.


B.


----------



## GetGray

What samples do you want?


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> Where are you planning on getting the screen from if you go Stewart? I would think AVS would be able to help you out without all the crazy run-around.
> 
> 
> B.



Thanks. Yes, Stewart wants customers to get samples from dealers only ( don't ask why - they like it that way ) - not direct from them. Send me an email with contact info and what samples you are interested in.


----------



## Threefiddie




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Brian B*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1590#post_23605353
> 
> 
> Where are you planning on getting the screen from if you go Stewart? I would think AVS would be able to help you out without all the crazy run-around.
> 
> 
> B.



Well no one at the moment, I haven't seen it, but I have my sony hw50 on order with AVS.



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Craig Peer*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1590#post_23605872
> 
> 
> Thanks. Yes, Stewart wants customers to get samples from dealers only ( don't ask why - they like it that way ) - not direct from them. Send me an email with contact info and what samples you are interested in.



Email sent!


----------



## Ryansa4

Is this something that can be repaired? Not sure if there are snaps or rivets that hold it in place.


The screen is an UltraMatte 130 221" x 247"


----------



## baloo_btru

That sucks! How did it happen?


----------



## Ryansa4

No clue. Not sure if it's just normal wear-and-tear or someone put some unnecessary weight on the right corner of the screen. The screen is about eight years old now, iirc.


----------



## m Robinson

Hello Ryan,

That screen could be re-bound in the field. New webbing and snaps can be applied. It has to be done by a Stewart person, but it can be done.

Where are you located? Send me email if you like [email protected]


----------



## hmunster2

Hello, I am new to both projection and this forum. I have a room that I am going to use for home theater, mostly movies, but also sporting events, with some ambient light. My dimensions are 17 front to back and 14 wide.

Since i know nothing about this, other than what I have gotten off of the AVS forums, and what I have seen at dealers showrooms-I have decided to go with an Epson 6020 projector and a 100" screen.

My room has 2 windows, one on the back wall in the corner and another on the side wall adjacent to the other window (what i mean is both windows are one one side and at the back of the room). The room has been painted with black front wall and ceiling and the other 3 walls are very dark brown. The LRV is only about 3 for the brown and 1 for the black.

Since I know zero about this stuff, I am talking to a AV installer, who is well regarded in the area. He says that he wouldn't recommend going above a 100" screen size in my room, and after seeing one of his rooms with the 6020 and a 100" screen I think that is right.

Sorry for the lengthy preamble, here is my question-he has a Stewart Ultrmatte 150 , model SN100 ,used, which he says would be great for my application. What I saw on the Stewart site said that this screen has a limited off axis viewing angle and is for low output projectors (which the 6020 is not). My seating is an L-shaped sectional, so some people will definitely not be in the "sweet spots".

Does this screen make sense for my application?

If not, what screen would you recommend-my budget is about $1500 max for a 100". I really want a great image for movies, less concerned about that of the sports (thinking that on a Sunday afternoon, watching NFL, probably want some light in the room-gotta get to the beer).

Thanks


----------



## Nukeproof

I have a 92" Retractable Studiotek 130 that I bought from a local installer who posted at Audiogon about 3-4 years ago. When I finally opened it, it is wrinkle pretty badly. I had it hung in my garage for about 2 weeks now but it hasn't gotten better so I want to let it go. How much should I list for one of these in this type of condition? Where is the best place to sell such screen? The motor works fine but the screen is wrinkled.


----------



## Brian B




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hmunster2*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1620#post_23646200
> 
> 
> Hello, I am new to both projection and this forum. I have a room that I am going to use for home theater, mostly movies, but also sporting events, with some ambient light. My dimensions are 17 front to back and 14 wide.
> 
> Since i know nothing about this, other than what I have gotten off of the AVS forums, and what I have seen at dealers showrooms-I have decided to go with an Epson 6020 projector and a 100" screen.
> 
> My room has 2 windows, one on the back wall in the corner and another on the side wall adjacent to the other window (what i mean is both windows are one one side and at the back of the room). The room has been painted with black front wall and ceiling and the other 3 walls are very dark brown. The LRV is only about 3 for the brown and 1 for the black.
> 
> Since I know zero about this stuff, I am talking to a AV installer, who is well regarded in the area. He says that he wouldn't recommend going above a 100" screen size in my room, and after seeing one of his rooms with the 6020 and a 100" screen I think that is right.
> 
> Sorry for the lengthy preamble, here is my question-he has a Stewart Ultrmatte 150 , model SN100 ,used, which he says would be great for my application. What I saw on the Stewart site said that this screen has a limited off axis viewing angle and is for low output projectors (which the 6020 is not). My seating is an L-shaped sectional, so some people will definitely not be in the "sweet spots".
> 
> Does this screen make sense for my application?
> 
> If not, what screen would you recommend-my budget is about $1500 max for a 100". I really want a great image for movies, less concerned about that of the sports (thinking that on a Sunday afternoon, watching NFL, probably want some light in the room-gotta get to the beer).
> 
> Thanks



If you are talking fixed, then a CIMA Tiburon 100" would be ~$1500. I believe it has a wider viewing angle and will help when the lights are on. (If night/low ambient/dark viewing is main viewing) you could go with the Neve material.


B.


----------



## omalley34male

you are so screewed

this kind of screens gets wrinkle and you cant do anything avout it they informed me to let the tab tension cords loose and let it hang for a while ... i have hade it like this 4 month now and its not getting any better thats stewart quality

just suck it in .. and ive asked a hole hunch of people what the cost to rescreen it but cant get a price anywere

but you can always buy Another screen


----------



## omalley34male

Nukeproof


DSCN0481.JPG 215k .JPG file

DSCN0482.JPG 220k .JPG file


----------



## omalley34male

   


Welcome to the slub of useless Stewartscreens


----------



## Nukeproof

  


Oh that sucks. I think the tensioner is not strong enough so it's wrinkle vertically rather than horizontally. Someone told me to leave it out in the sun but I have no where hang that huge screen. Could I just leave it on the ground?


----------



## Brian B




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *omalley34male*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1620#post_23647691
> 
> 
> you are so screewed
> 
> this kind of screens gets wrinkle and you cant do anything avout it they informed me to let the tab tension cords loose and let it hang for a while ... i have hade it like this 4 month now and its not getting any better thats stewart quality
> 
> just suck it in .. and ive asked a hole hunch of people what the cost to rescreen it but cant get a price anywere
> 
> but you can always buy Another screen



Did you buy this new?


B.


----------



## zuimeima

good info, That would drive me crazy! You may be different. Good Luck. thank you


----------



## Steven414

I'm having a hard time trying to find a site that sells Stewart screens. Even googling that question is getting me no results. I want to look into the Stewart Reflections Active 170 3D. Can anyone lead me in the right direction, please.


----------



## Brian B




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Stan-Lee*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1620#post_23655325
> 
> 
> According to his previous post, he bought a pre owned & wrinkled screen....



So he bought a defective used screen and his complaint is with the manufacturer? Doesn't make any sense...


B.


----------



## Frohlich




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Brian B*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1620#post_23659206
> 
> 
> So he bought a defective used screen and his complaint is with the manufacturer? Doesn't make any sense...
> 
> 
> B.



I know exactly how he feels. I bought a wrecked used Honda and now Honda won't fix it for me under warranty. Darn defective wrecked Hondas, what a horrible company.


----------



## kirkgames

haha, I'm hoping the Firehawk is a dramatic improvement over the wall or my wife is going to kill me.


----------



## omalley34male

Oh dear Frohlish or what it was your name is .. just to prove my point today 2013-09-04 23:44 i will look to find a used stewart that is wrinkled .. like thats gona be hard ...

ok looking on ebay ...


bingo

not even lying on the floor this screen is without wrinkles ...

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Stewart-firehawk-110-inch-screen-/300957046814?pt=US_Projection_Screens_Material&hash=item461270181e 


and it took me about 4 minutes so take your lame comparison to Honda .......


so what does that say about the quallity of stewart screens ... if i show 10 screens here that all have the same problem everybody here acuse me for some reason ... not one of all people

have anything to say about Stewart not even people here on the forum having problem themself i dont know if the new screens are better but the earlier is verry bad quallity

and they still was the most expensive screen in the World whey buying them secondhand or not


----------



## omalley34male

Brian B no i bought it secondhand why are you asking ?

is that a valid excuse " if it have more then one owner" its ok to be wrinkled ??


can anyone here please tell me so i know how earlier owner make them wrinkled ? because it seems like its not a quality problem from Stewart instead everybody telling me its user / opperating errors

do you realy Believe that a person buys the first brand in the bussiness and then does not take care of his investment .


----------



## omalley34male

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stan-Lee View Post


According to his previous post, he bought a pre owned & wrinkled screen....


So he bought a defective used screen and his complaint is with the manufacturer? Doesn't make any sense...


B.


Just as a compare


I earlier had a Chrysler PT cruiser and after a couple of years the bumpers start to look terrible light marks appeared after the manufactor had them covered in tape for protection but ripping of the tape

made something in the colour not protective ifrom the sun ... the UV protection was dammage pleaso lok at all earlier 2001-2002 pr cruiser an you know what i mean

all cars of the same two years could get their bumper fixed free of charge as a warranty althou the car was 6 years old


do you guys Think everybody having a PT cruiser make this by themself or is it a bad work from Chrysler ..? lets hear ...

i didnt had my fixed cause it didnt bother me i also bought that car secondhand and that it a Biiig sin here i understand


so secondhand values should be ****** in Stewart screens


----------



## GetGray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *omalley34male*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1600_100#post_23701406
> 
> 
> ...complaining...



C'mon man. Give it a rest. Stewart is not going to fix your used, damaged screen for free. Or I wouldn't anyway. The product has a warranty. Published or available, and is a warranty fair to the consumer in my opinion. You screen is not even close to under warranty. As such no warranty service should be expected. No matter how many times you poop on them here, or point out other out of warranty screens that someone else probably didn't take care of.


I've sold a lot of Stewart screens. It's my personal favorite and almost always my recommendation to my friends/customers. They are all I have ever owned personally. I've sold fixed and drop downs, of every size, model, and aspect. In all of the many, many Stewart screens I've dealt with, I've had one real wrinkle issue, in 8 years. For that one screen Stewart not only replaced it, but they coordinated with my customer, then sent their engineers on a road trip to take the old screen down, install the new screen and make sure my customer was happy. Show me another screen company who would have done that.


If you want that kind of treatment, buy a new one, from a reputable, authorized dealer like me, who supports you. Otherwise, we get that you are not happy with your used broken screen.


I'd have helped you get a repair as cheap as possible but you are in Europe IIRC and it's just not practical with me in the USA. Return it to the guy who sold it to you, pay to have it fixed, or toss it in the trash. Whatever. When buying used, buyer beware. You really need to know how the thing was treated before you got it. It is a high end product and there are plenty of ways to screw it up if it's not cared for properly. None of which are Stewart's fault or responsibility. IMHO.


Cheers,

Scott


----------



## baloo_btru




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *omalley34male*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1620#post_23701340
> 
> 
> Brian B no i bought it secondhand why are you asking ? is that a valid excuse " if it have more then one owner" its ok to be wrinkled ??can anyone here please tell me so i know how earlier owner make them wrinkled ? because it seems like its not a quality problem from Stewart instead everybody telling me its user / opperating errors do you realy Believe that a person buys the first brand in the bussiness and then does not take care of his investment .



Dude just stop. Your screen has obviously been abused. Stop blaming the manufacturer for whatever the hell happened to your screen.


I bought a secondhand stewart and its in great condition.


The difference you don't see is that the condition of your screen is not a manufacturing defect but a result of neglect and abuse.


----------



## Frohlich




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *omalley34male*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1620#post_23701296
> 
> 
> Oh dear Frohlish or what it was your name is .. just to prove my point today 2013-09-04 23:44 i will look to find a used stewart that is wrinkled .. like thats gona be hard ...
> 
> ok looking on ebay ...
> 
> 
> bingo
> 
> not even lying on the floor this screen is without wrinkles ...
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/Stewart-firehawk-110-inch-screen-/300957046814?pt=US_Projection_Screens_Material&hash=item461270181e
> 
> 
> and it took me about 4 minutes so take your lame comparison to Honda .......
> 
> 
> so what does that say about the quallity of stewart screens ... if i show 10 screens here that all have the same problem everybody here acuse me for some reason ... not one of all people
> 
> have anything to say about Stewart not even people here on the forum having problem themself i dont know if the new screens are better but the earlier is verry bad quallity
> 
> and they still was the most expensive screen in the World whey buying them secondhand or not



Oh dear Omelletepants..or whatever your name is. Did you even read the add you posted as "evidence". No mention of wrinkles...but it does mention liquid splatter and paint. Sure sounds like the original owner took great care of it. I know I keep mine in the garage and somehow motor oil got on it. Stewart should probably replace my screen for free since there is no warning label saying not to get motor oil on it. You bought a used defective screen...DEAL WITH IT!!!


----------



## MYHOMETHEATER

Just iron it out...then your good to go  remember high heat


----------



## omalley34male

GetGray i didnt expect to get it for free

i asked about a price on recreen it and i Think a 50% knock of would be fair but i cant get a price .. it seems totaly impossible to get a rate on rescreen a 110"


----------



## omalley34male

get gray also the screen had just minor wrinkles when i first put it up over the years it just got more and more the black board paint have come of in the material you can see small cracks of aging so lets talk quallity


----------



## omalley34male

Baloo if you are so clever please please give the knolledge to us imortals how do you make a stewart screen wrinkled ??

what kind of abuse are you suggesting please dyngmes show me as you so clearly know that my screen been abused has a troll wrinkled it over the years it been in my livingroom it Always have

black certains normal room temperature newer direct Sunlight

isnt it funny that mor ons Always know that it was abused NEVER a defect from factory ...


----------



## omalley34male

FRolisss


Oh dear Omelletepants..or whatever your name is. Did you even read the add you posted as "evidence". No mention of wrinkles...but it does mention liquid splatter and paint. Sure sounds like the original owner took great care of it. I know I keep mine in the garage and somehow motor oil got on it. Stewart should probably replace my screen for free since there is no warning label saying not to get motor oil on it. You bought a used defective screen...DEAL WITH IT!!!


My evidence was a wrinkled screen that was what i showed ... do you have a problem with that ?


----------



## baloo_btru




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *omalley34male*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1620#post_23706546
> 
> 
> Baloo if you are so clever please please give the knolledge to us imortals how do you make a stewart screen wrinkled ?? what kind of abuse are you suggesting please dyngmes show me as you so clearly know that my screen been abused has a troll wrinkled it over the years it been in my livingroom it Always have black certains normal room temperature newer direct Sunlight isnt it funny that mor ons Always know that it was abused NEVER a defect from factory ...



How old is the screen? Had the tension ever been adjusted, and by whom?


----------



## Craig Peer

Stewart has a new Firehawk material - the Firehawk G4 ! I understand it replaces the G3 and the SST. Hopefully I can get a sample this week.


----------



## Pyxle

 http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/PDFs/FireHawk%20G4_print.pdf 


Check out the flat slope of the on-axis area.

 

G4

 

G3

 

SST


----------



## Craig Peer

That's cool - I had not seen that yet ( must have gone up last week while I was at Cedia ). A wider sweet spot !!


----------



## Craig Peer

I got a G4 sample today. It doesn't look terribly different from the existing G3 and SST, but obviously the actual screen properties are different ( and better ).


----------



## thomaco

I notice on the Stewart website that they also claim the FireHawk G4 is designed for 4K+ projectors. Is there any indication of what improvement the G4 is above the G3 for a 4K projector? I currently have a G3 and am thinking of getting the new Sony 4K projector. I don't really plan to get the new G4 material but am curious as to what improvement it might provide.


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> I notice on the Stewart website that they also claim the FireHawk G4 is designed for 4K+ projectors. Is there any indication of what improvement the G4 is above the G3 for a 4K projector? I currently have a G3 and am thinking of getting the new Sony 4K projector. I don't really plan to get the new G4 material but am curious as to what improvement it might provide.




It's supposed to have a finer grained surface than the G3. I'm going to need to look at both closer under better lighting.


----------



## Wood Pile

Does anyone know the optimal project placement for using a FireHawk G4 screen? For example, my projector is mounted 8 feet from the floor (1.5 feet above the top of my current screen) at the back of the room. I'm well beyond the minimum throw distance Stewart states on their flier but I don't see where they specify at what height the Firehawk works best.


----------



## m Robinson

Firehawk fabrics are angular reflective surfaces. Light distributed into the viewing area is centered on a complementary angle to the angle of incidence. They do benefit from higher placement of a projector. When placing a projector, you want to focus on getting the lens situated so that you do not have to use any keystone correction at all. This means your projector should be no higher than the top of your image area, and no lower than the bottom of your image area.


Your description sounds pretty good. Line up the lens so that it is just under the top of your image area. This will also optimize your angle of distribution for the the projected light in the viewing area. You'll minimize head shadowing, when folks head for the kitchen or restroom, and you'll be within the functional sweet spot for the fabric, in terms of incident angle and light distribution in the viewing area.


The Firehawk fabrics have an engineered viewing cone which is functional in preserving black level to a degree, but not quirky enough to destroy color rendering on or off axis. Color with Firehawk is not as uniform as it is with our matte fabrics, Snomatte and Studiotek 130, but it is much more accurate on and off axis than some of the popular "black" screen offerings. It sounds to me like you have a good setup for Firehawk, adequate throw, which normalizes incident angles, reducing hot-spot, and a beneficial projector placement plan.


Thank you very much for considering Stewart Filmscreen products! We appreciate your interest!


----------



## TL5

I got samples of both the Firehawk G4 and the Cima Tiburon. Boy is the firehawk darker! What are the differences between them as far as dealing with ambient light?


----------



## Wood Pile

Mark, thank you for the excellent answer. I'll definitely seek out a sample. Hope to be a customer soon.


----------



## Mike Garrett

It is official. You can now order Stewart Cima with perf and in 2.35 aspect ratio.


----------



## Craig Peer

I had friends come over last night to watch " Limitless ". They hadn't been in our theater since I installed my new screens. We were watching on my 118" wide 2.35:1 StudioTek 130 G3 screen. My friend Bob said " wow - this looks better than any commercial theater - the picture is great " !!


Thank you Stewart !!


----------



## Craig Peer

Hi Lee. My SIM Lumis Host. It's a tough call on which screen I like better - the Neve is better for my 16:9 screen since I don't need as much gain - plenty bright with a 1.1 gain.


----------



## omalley34male

PTFE is supposed to 1.0 and is missprinted on Stewart look at the sst and studiotec 130 , snowmatte130 for example

1,1 on PTFE


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> PTFE is supposed to 1.0 and is missprinted on Stewart look at the sst and studiotec 130 , snowmatte130 for example
> 
> 1,1 on PTFE



What does Teflon have to do with Stewart screens ?


----------



## omalley34male

** PTFE - 1.0 Gain, Reflectance Standard

it means that a screen is projecting the same light that is from projector no loss or gain

in stewart it says PTFE is 1.1 on studiotec 130 ,snowwhite 130


----------



## chevyblazer5150

Total newbie to the world of Avs and I jumped in with both feet and bought a used Stewart filmscreen ultramatte 150 off craigslist. Now my problem is how to raise and lower the screen. I tried searching here and on their site but haven't seen the controller cable. I don't want to use the projector that came with it and there is no cable to connect it.


Their site says 12v power and I did get an adapter with it. If you guys can point me in the right direction I'd be eternally grateful!!


----------



## helderlima

Is the Firehawk G3 suitable if the windows are behind the sofa (in other words, the ambient light comes from behind the projector and perpendicular to the screen)? The distance from the windows to the screen is about 5 meters (16 feet).


----------



## Drexler

No screen can handle light that comes perpendicular to the screen. How can it know what is projected light and what is stray light? It cant. High contrast screens can supress light coming from the sides, ceiling or floor. If it comes from behind, get a curtain!


----------



## helderlima




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Drexler*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1650#post_23931486
> 
> 
> No screen can handle light that comes perpendicular to the screen. How can it know what is projected light and what is stray light? It cant. High contrast screens can supress light coming from the sides, ceiling or floor. If it comes from behind, get a curtain!



Do you mean that a normal screen will work as good as an screen with ambient light rejection properties? Or among such special screen, is there one that may help better than other ones? DLP, Screen Innovations, Stewart, all of them are the same quality in this situation?


----------



## Drexler

I am saying it is a bad situation and none of them will look any good unless you can block that light. No screen is designed to handle ambient light that comes from the same direction as the projected light. What you can do is try to overpower it with a really bright projector, but you will never get convincing blacks and contrast no matter what.


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> I am saying it is a bad situation and none of them will look any good unless you can block that light. No screen is designed to handle ambient light that comes from the same direction as the projected light. What you can do is try to overpower it with a really bright projector, but you will never get convincing blacks and contrast no matter what.



+1. No screen can defy the laws of physics or work miracles. It reflects light. It there is light you don't want reflected off the screen - like from a window - block the window.


----------



## Soulnight




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Craig Peer*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1650#post_23799945
> 
> 
> I got a G4 sample today. It doesn't look terribly different from the existing G3 and SST, but obviously the actual screen properties are different ( and better ).



Is there less shimmering? What are the differences? What about blacks? White? Screen structure?


Where did you get a sample?


Thank you!


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> What are the differences?



See post #1652 of 1674 - above. I'm pretty certain that blacks, whites look similar. I never saw much shimmering or screen structure when I had my G3. With a lower gain on the G4, I'm pretty sure there would be less artifacts on a G4 than a G3.


If you want a sample, send me an email with your mailing address. I'll send you one.


----------



## BrolicBeast

Hi all, I'm looking to get a twelve foot (wide) screen. I am currently considering a Falcon Screen, but recent discussion on my build thread is leading me to believe that the 1.1 gain of the falcon screen might not be adequate to sustain a desirable brightness for 2D and 3D. I'm coming from a Stewart ST130 G3 screen, which I was very satisfied; however, I'm now going in the Acoustically Transparent direction which means an additional loss of brightness. Thus, my question is this: which of Stewart's AT Screens can at least match the quality of the ST130 (which I loved), but has sufficient gain to get a great brightness in both 2D and 3D. Projector is a Sony VPL-VW600ES. Any help would be most appreciated!


----------



## BrutaleZEN

Hi guys,


I am going to buy a JVC DLA-RS6710 soon to put in my HT room. My throw distance is 3,37m and my seating position around 2,60m from the screen, maybe a little more. My walls are light brown, my ceiling is white, floor is dark blue carpet. I can have total control of the lighting. I was recommended a 83" Stewart Studiotek G130, Luxus Deluxe 16/9 with Microperf X2 (I need a AT screen as my speakers will be behind the screen). I will probably go for a 100" screen. Is the screen recommended will match my projector in my set up ? Any other recommendation ? I will watch a mix of Movies, TV Shows and play games, not too much TV watching.


Have a good day.


----------



## BrutaleZEN

Oh I forgot, I will watch 3D program too ...


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> Hi all, I'm looking to get a twelve foot (wide) screen. I am currently considering a Falcon Screen, but recent discussion on my build thread is leading me to believe that the 1.1 gain of the falcon screen might not be adequate to sustain a desirable brightness for 2D and 3D. I'm coming from a Stewart ST130 G3 screen, which I was very satisfied; however, I'm now going in the Acoustically Transparent direction which means an additional loss of brightness. Thus, my question is this: which of Stewart's AT Screens can at least match the quality of the ST130 (which I loved), but has sufficient gain to get a great brightness in both 2D and 3D. Projector is a Sony VPL-VW600ES. Any help would be most appreciated!



With that projector the new Stewart Cima Perforado could work - http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/cima/Documents/PerfOrado_2013.pdf 


" Great brightness " will always depend on screen size. The Perforado starts at 1.1 gain. What size screen are you thinking about getting?


----------



## Ron




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *BrutaleZEN*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1600_100#post_23963119
> 
> 
> Hi guys,
> 
> 
> I am going to buy a JVC DLA-RS6710 soon to put in my HT room. My throw distance is 3,37m and my seating position around 2,60m from the screen, maybe a little more. My walls are light brown, my ceiling is white, floor is dark blue carpet. I can have total control of the lighting. I was recommended a 83" Stewart Studiotek G130, Luxus Deluxe 16/9 with Microperf X2 (I need a AT screen as my speakers will be behind the screen). I will probably go for a 100" screen. Is the screen recommended will match my projector in my set up ? Any other recommendation ? I will watch a mix of Movies, TV Shows and play games, not too much TV watching.
> 
> 
> Have a good day.



Any chance you can paint the ceiling a dark color? Your image will thank you! Darker walls would help too - but of course I don't know how much flexibility you have in colors...just wanted to mention it.


----------



## BrutaleZEN

Hi,


I didn't want to touch anything at first, but it is looking more and more that I will have to put a darker color on walls and ceiling. I can do that as it is my house. Let me know about your advice on screen ?


Have a good day.


----------



## Ron

since you have light control, and you're going to go with darker colors, then that screen will be a great match for your projector!


----------



## BrutaleZEN

Hi All,


I am in the process of designing my cabinet / screen wall and I try to figure out the lengh of the brackets if I use the Quick Snap Wall Mount on my soon to be delivered 100" 16/9 Studiotek 130 G3 Luxus Deluxe. I try to measure where I need to have the beams that will support the screen. How long are those brackets and how far are they from the border of the frame ?


Thanks a lot for your help.


----------



## Craig Peer

It's all on the Stewart website if you look around - http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/owners_manual/sn_manual.pdf


----------



## omalley34male

And once again a used Stewart who is ruined


wrinkled, material is deteriating chips torn out of canvas

is this the quallity you expect when you buy the most expensive screen in the World ?????


i thought you was buing a screen of Life or atleast 25 years or more .. i have a 15 year old cheep screen still perfect in material but here are once again stewarts lousy

screen material enjoy the Pictures and this isnt my screen just a screen i found at ebay


perhaps Stewart can tell me the age of this screen ? and also how he have destroid it like you guys told me that i have done with my screen ...


http://www.ebay.com/itm/Stewart-Filmscreen-LX-92-HD-Motorized-Screen-FireHawk-92-DEMO-/221336301412?pt=US_Projection_Screens_Material&hash=item3388abef64 

a1.jpg 199k .jpg file
a2.jpg 282k .jpg file
a3.jpg 212k .jpg file
a4.jpg 178k .jpg file
a5.jpg 357k .jpg file


----------



## omalley34male




----------



## m Robinson

The screen in the Ebay auction is from 2003. So ten years old.


----------



## hwoarang


Received my custom Firehawk G4, Luxus A, motorised screen today with IR remote.  120", 2:35, 19.5" of blackout drop.  This screen is for a non-dedicated theater to pair with a Sony VPL-VW600es which gets installed today.

 

The cabinet is fairly standard.  For the price, I was hoping for more, but I and the installers were horrified at the lack of quality assurance.  Here's what we found:

 

 After paying a HUGE premium to include an IR remote (im in a rental so I don't want to hard wire), the housing came with an ugly black power box attached that has this horrid Fisher Price looking IR sensor with a long white cable.

 

The housing is black, the power cable leading from the screen is white and it came unterminated with no plug on the end.  The power box is black, obnoxious looking and ruins the aesthetic of the entire room, and there is a long white cable hanging from that with a cheap looking IR sensor on the end.

 

On top of that, the remote was not new, it was used, scuffed all over, and doesn't work. I worked hard to buy this screen, and I'm all about paying a premium for a premium product, but when you're charging double what the competitors are, this is unacceptable.

 

See the photos attached.  The installers were shocked as they had literally installed a much lesser brand screen a few hours before with everything built into the housing and all they had to do was plug in the power.  I've called and left a message for Stewart, as has the dealer but haven't heard from anyone yet.

 



 



 

Someone please chime in...


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> Someone please chime in...



I have a couple of comments -


> Quote:
> The cabinet is fairly standard. For the price, I was hoping for more


- that's the basic Luxus Model A case. That is what I own. Stewart makes fancier cases, if that is what you wanted. Like the Caberet model.


> Quote:
> On top of that, the remote was not new, it was used, scuffed all over, and doesn't work.


That's lame - I'm sure they will send you a new one.


> Quote:
> The installers were shocked as they had literally installed a much lesser brand screen a few hours before with everything built into the housing and all they had to do was plug in the power.


None of the Da Lite or Stewart electric screens I've owned came with anything more than either a pigtail, or just a J box to wire to. That's how they come.


Normally this type of screen would be installed behind a soffit or some such concealed valance, so those controls would not be seen. Like in my theater -


----------



## hwoarang


Awesome.  Thank you Craig.

 

I have exposed beams and nowhere to hide the box so I'll have to build something aesthetic.  The nicer casing would have worked really well for me but it was at least another 3 weeks wait.  I'm still surprised about the lack of termination, a separate box and a dangling IR sensor.  Thanks for chiming in.  I'm on the phone now and they're working on a quick fix.  Not a good start.  Hope the picture quality is AMAZING.  I'll know in about 2 hrs!


----------



## hwoarang


Quick question.  My installer is here and they're mounting the projector.  The top of the viewable portion of my screen is 73" from the floor.  Should the projector be mounted so that the top of the lens is no higher than the top of the viewable portion of the screen?  I've heard so many different things, but I want optimal picture quality.

 

Thanks very much!


----------



## Craig Peer

When I buy a Stewart screen, I feel my money is going into an excellent screen surface. I'm not saying that the look of the case is not important - and in your situation, it is ( I personally don't much care ). You could hide the entire screen with a curtain rod with a velvet valance or some such decorative arrangement. I do think you will be pleased with the picture - what projector are you using?/


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> Should the projector be mounted so that the top of the lens is no higher than the top of the viewable portion of the screen?



Yes. The less lens shift the better. However, I don't see where you mentioned what projector you are installing. 73" is only 6 feet + - you can probably mount your projector a bit higher. Your install guys should know where to mount it.


----------



## hwoarang


Sorry,  yes, this is the VPL-VW600es.  I just want to make sure that i'm optimising on picture quality and not risking performance in any way.  So as I read it, you're saying that I want it as dead center as possible but I have some give on the vertical height without affecting picture quality whatsoever?  Thanks again.  The install guys are not so familiar with 4K and want to make sure that they can set it and forget it.  I also have some logistical/furniture/decor items that would benefit from a projector being higher up.  How far up would you say I can go above the screen without affecting picture?  Thank you sir!


----------



## Brian B




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hwoarang*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1680#post_24086267
> 
> 
> Received my custom Firehawk G4, Luxus A, motorised screen today with IR remote.  120", 2:35, 19.5" of blackout drop.  This screen is for a non-dedicated theater to pair with a Sony VPL-VW600es which gets installed today.
> 
> 
> The cabinet is fairly standard.  For the price, I was hoping for more, but I and the installers were horrified at the lack of quality assurance.  Here's what we found:
> 
> 
> After paying a HUGE premium to include an IR remote (im in a rental so I don't want to hard wire), the housing came with an ugly black power box attached that has this horrid Fisher Price looking IR sensor with a long white cable.
> 
> 
> The housing is black, the power cable leading from the screen is white and it came unterminated with no plug on the end.  The power box is black, obnoxious looking and ruins the aesthetic of the entire room, and there is a long white cable hanging from that with a cheap looking IR sensor on the end.
> 
> 
> On top of that, the remote was not new, it was used, scuffed all over, and doesn't work. I worked hard to buy this screen, and I'm all about paying a premium for a premium product, but when you're charging double what the competitors are, this is unacceptable.
> 
> 
> See the photos attached.  The installers were shocked as they had literally installed a much lesser brand screen a few hours before with everything built into the housing and all they had to do was plug in the power.  I've called and left a message for Stewart, as has the dealer but haven't heard from anyone yet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Someone please chime in...



Why did you get the remote option in the first place? I've never even seen one of those! We always sell it with the screen trigger interface (STI) which is pretty much standard. That way when you turn your projector on, the screen comes down and when you turn it off the screen goes up.


As Craig said, that is the standard case. If you wanted something fancier then there are other options.


Good luck with the install,


B.


----------



## hwoarang


I've got exposed beams so a wire running across the beams to the projector would look atrocious.  I'm all about aesthetics and decor.   I know most here aren't too bothered, but its my living room as equally as it is my home theater.  Thanks for the luck.  I'll have the girlfriend snap a couple shots when its all done.  I still have a ton of decorating to do after, and somehow have to get it all done by Friday!!  Yikes.

 

Any further thoughts on how far I can mount the projector above the viewable screen area would be appreciated.  We've got it dead center at the moment but want to lock in a height.  The higher I can go without affecting picture quality would be great.  Thanks as always.


----------



## Craig Peer

I'm sure that the screen trigger option wouldn't work for him Brian as he is renting, and can't run the wiring to the projector. Heck - I don't use a screen trigger. Which screen am I going to trigger - my 16:9 screen, or my 2.35:1 screen?


----------



## hwoarang


A nice problem to have...


----------



## hwoarang




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Craig Peer*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1680#post_24086903
> 
> 
> 
> Yes. The less lens shift the better. However, I don't see where you mentioned what projector you are installing. 73" is only 6 feet + - you can probably mount your projector a bit higher. Your install guys should know where to mount it.


 

How high do you think I can go above the top of the screen, in inches?  Thanks!  It's happening as we speak!


----------



## nikos77




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hwoarang*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1680#post_24087437
> 
> 
> How high do you think I can go above the top of the screen, in inches?  Thanks!  It's happening as we speak!



Don't be too paranoid.... you could go a whole foot and it would make marginal difference.

I have used max lens shift from a panasonic...and it was not a huge difference.


The advise is just so if it is possible you could get every little bit of performance...


Enjoy.


----------



## hwoarang


I removed the tilt (whoops, didn't know) and centered the projector with the screen and am using slight lens shift to make up for about 3.5" difference from the middle of the lens to the top of the viewable portion of the screen.  This helped image quality significantly.  My problem is with the sparkles.  The Firehawk G4, arrived with a dead IR sensor, a used remote, and when the screen retracts, the right side is higher than the left by about a 1/4-3/4".  On top of that, my girlfriend, who is a Film Editor, sat down for the first time and said "what are all those sparkles?"  That was her first impression of the screen/projector.  I'm talking to Stewart, and the lads up there are very helpful, but I paid several thousand dollars more to "NOT" have these issues.  I'm spending a lot of time that I don't have trying to rectify the issues.  I'm too busy now with the holidays, but If the sparkles don't ease up, this thing is going back.  I'm hoping the coating will settle or something as there is a strong smell of chemicals from the screen when it drops down.

 

I have a Sony VPL- V600es on high lamp mode, in the dark, struggling to put out a bright/vivid picture.  If I had to do it all again, I would go with a STK 130.  I debated on this for four months and my gut was telling me to do STK130 for the brighter picture.  Even though I'm in a non-batcave environment, this is my living room, a Hollywood Hills loft, 1930's spanish building with darker stained beams and floors, brick walls and two lighter coloured walls.  I have no interest in watching movies with the lights on or during the day without treating the windows.  To those of you debating, the Firehawk is just too dim of a picture.  With the lights on, the image doesn't wash out as much as other screens, but it's still not that watchable...  This was my hesitation all along and I was right.  Get the STK130 and treat your room as much as possible.


----------



## hwoarang




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hwoarang*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1680#post_24095099
> 
> 
> 
> I removed the tilt (whoops, didn't know) and centered the projector with the screen and am using slight lens shift to make up for about 3.5" difference from the middle of the lens to the top of the viewable portion of the screen.  This helped image quality significantly.  My problem is with the sparkles.  The Firehawk G4, arrived with a dead IR sensor, a used remote, and when the screen retracts, the right side is higher than the left by about a 1/4-3/4".  On top of that, my girlfriend, who is a Film Editor, sat down for the first time and said "what are all those sparkles?"  That was her first impression of the screen/projector.  I'm talking to Stewart, and the lads up there are very helpful, but I paid several thousand dollars more to "NOT" have these issues.  I'm spending a lot of time that I don't have trying to rectify the issues.  I'm too busy now with the holidays, but If the sparkles don't ease up, this thing is going back.  I'm hoping the coating will settle or something as there is a strong smell of chemicals from the screen when it drops down.
> 
> 
> 
> I have a Sony VPL- V600es on high lamp mode, in the dark, struggling to put out a bright/vivid picture.  If I had to do it all again, I would go with a STK 130.  I debated on this for four months and my gut was telling me to do STK130 for the brighter picture.  Even though I'm in a non-batcave environment, this is my living room, a Hollywood Hills loft, 1930's spanish building with darker stained beams and floors, brick walls and two lighter coloured walls.  I have no interest in watching movies with the lights on or during the day without treating the windows.  To those of you debating, the Firehawk is just too dim of a picture.  With the lights on, the image doesn't wash out as much as other screens, but it's still not that watchable...  This was my hesitation all along and I was right.  Get the STK130 and treat your room as much as possible.


 

Thank you for that.  Good advice.  I'm actually not experiencing and hot-spotting or image degradation from the distance. Thank god.  Just the sparkling and dimness of the screen.  I have the Sony running on high lamp mode in the dark, with contrast on mid/high and contrast enhancement at full to get a bright picture.  I know from others feedback its not the projector..


----------



## Craig Peer

I am surprised you find it dim with that projector. Do you have a light meter to check your lumen output? I used a larger Firehawk G3 ( 128.2" diagonal ) and it was plenty bright enough with my Lumis. You should be getting at least as many lumens from your VW600 - maybe more. Get a calibrator in there. I can't imagine that 16:9 content looks dim, eh?


That said, white screens do tend to look brighter than gray screens.


----------



## hwoarang




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Craig Peer*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1680#post_24095345
> 
> 
> I am surprised you find it dim with that projector. Do you have a light meter to check your lumen output? I used a larger Firehawk G3 ( 128.2" diagonal ) and it was plenty bright enough with my Lumis. You should be getting at least as many lumens from your VW600 - maybe more. Get a calibrator in there. I can't imagine that 16:9 content looks dim, eh?
> 
> 
> That said, white screens do tend to look brighter than gray screens.


I don't have a light meter unfortunately.  Wouldn't know how to use it either!  This is a 120" 2:35 screen.  I dont see any uniformity or unevenness, just dimness overall and sparkles galore.  What's interesting is that when projecting partically onto the blank wall and the screen simultaneously, its about 3 times brighter on the blank wall, even with the lights on!  Just not sold on these grey screens.  I also remember walking into the 70mm IMAX at Universal City Walk and they had a grey screen too.  From memory, it was similarly darker too and I'm sure their projector is super bright to accommodate.  I'd bet it was a Stewart G3.  I watched Prometheus in 3D, Dark Knight Rises and Skyfall there.  All substantially dimmer than the same presentations on white screens.  There are no two ways about it.  Throw all the tech specs at it, but, the grey screens produce a dimmer picture and the projector has to go on high lamp mode to begin compensating.


----------



## Craig Peer

Then why did you get one I might ask?


----------



## Drexler

If the image is much dimmer on the screen vs wall you havent set it up at the right angle. To maximize gain the pj should be placed at the same angle Above the screen as you are placed below it. If you put a mirror at the screen you should be able to see the pj in the center of it from your viewing position. Regarding the sparklies, thats' s normal with high contrast screens. However if its excessive it might be something wrong with the coating.


----------



## hwoarang




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Craig Peer*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1680#post_24096188
> 
> 
> Then why did you get one I might ask?



After four months research and talking to techs at every major screen firm and multiple people on this forum, this was the direction most suggested. I had sent people photos of my room too..


----------



## hwoarang




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Drexler*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1680#post_24097401
> 
> 
> If the image is much dimmer on the screen vs wall you havent set it up at the right angle. To maximize gain the pj should be placed at the same angle Above the screen as you are placed below it. If you put a mirror at the screen you should be able to see the pj in the center of it from your viewing position. Regarding the sparklies, thats' s normal with high contrast screens. However if its excessive it might be something wrong with the coating.



Thanks, but not quite sure I follow. I've learnt that the center of the lens should be in line with the top of the viewable portion of the screen. I'm also being told by one gent in the VW600 thread that with screens of this type it would be beneficial to have the projector higher than normal...that goes against what everyone else has been saying... So confused...


----------



## Drexler

The 'not over screen top placement' recommendation is based on the optics being better if not too much lensshift is used since you avoid using the outer parts of the lens (lower than screen top is not a problem). However, the negative effects of lensshift are very slight in my experience. You also have several different parameters that depend on projector placement. If you have the option to adjust pj placement, screen placement and seating placement optimally you can get all to work out. However, if you're restricted in placement you have to compromize. Regarding image brightness, the gain particles work like tiny diffuse mirrors and you get maximum gain if you can place your setup so you have equal angles from the incident and exiting light beams to and from the screen. I.e. if your screen center is located 2' above your eyes and you projector is placed over your head the image will be brightest if its placed 4' over your head. If the pj is further back you can trace the placement by following the line that goes from the screen center to the 4' position over head to the distance the pj should be placed. The screen shouldnt be dimmer than a white wall if placed correct. Try viewing from the floor or when standing on a stool and see if the brightness changes. Imho the projector placement effect on screen artifacts on a firehawk type screen is much, much greater than any effect the lensshift has on the optics. And just to comment the advice to place the pj higher with fh screens. This very much depends on how high your screen is on the wall and your seating distance and eye hight. It's true in some cases but far from all! You will have to look at the angles in your particular situation.


----------



## hwoarang




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Drexler*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1680#post_24099558
> 
> 
> The 'not over screen top placement' recommendation is based on the optics being better if not too much lensshift is used since you avoid using the outer parts of the lens (lower than screen top is not a problem). However, the negative effects of lensshift are very slight in my experience. You also have several different parameters that depend on projector placement. If you have the option to adjust pj placement, screen placement and seating placement optimally you can get all to work out. However, if you're restricted in placement you have to compromize. Regarding image brightness, the gain particles work like tiny diffuse mirrors and you get maximum gain if you can place your setup so you have equal angles from the incident and exiting light beams to and from the screen. I.e. if your screen center is located 2' above your eyes and you projector is placed over your head the image will be brightest if its placed 4' over your head. If the pj is further back you can trace the placement by following the line that goes from the screen center to the 4' position over head to the distance the pj should be placed. The screen shouldnt be dimmer than a white wall if placed correct. Try viewing from the floor or when standing on a stool and see if the brightness changes. Imho the projector placement effect on screen artifacts on a firehawk type screen is much, much greater than any effect the lensshift has on the optics. And just to comment the advice to place the pj higher with fh screens. This very much depends on how high your screen is on the wall and your seating distance and eye hight. It's true in some cases but far from all! You will have to look at the angles in your particular situation.



Bloody hell. Thanks! Think I absorbed about 20% of that on first read, but I think get what you're saying.


The bottom of the viewable portion of the screen is 26" from the floor. The tip of the screen is 73" from the floor. The center of the projector lens is currently at 75.5" from the floor, suspended from exposed beams at approx 20' height by a 3-5', adjustable by 1", Chief Mount. My heating height is 17" from the floor. I think I'm going to raise it back up to 76.5" to get better aesthetics and decor spacing. Do you think I can or need to go higher to get better performance from the Firehawk? It's a 120' 2:35 screen.


Thanks for putting all that effort and time in.


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> This very much depends on how high your screen is on the wall and your seating distance and eye hight. It's true in some cases but far from all! You will have to look at the angles in your particular situation.



That is true. I had my Firehawk G3 mounted with eye level being about 1/3 up the screen from the bottom, and my projector lens is 5' 6" off the floor. I never saw " sparklies " with it in that setup. And, it was more than bright enough.


----------



## mark haflich




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hwoarang*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1680#post_24099644
> 
> 
> Bloody hell. Thanks! Think I absorbed about 20% of that on first read, but I think get what you're saying.
> 
> 
> The bottom of the viewable portion of the screen is 26" from the floor. The tip of the screen is 73" from the floor. The center of the projector lens is currently at 75.5" from the floor, suspended from exposed beams at approx 20' height by a 3-5', adjustable by 1", Chief Mount. My heating height is 17" from the floor. I think I'm going to raise it back up to 76.5" to get better aesthetics and decor spacing. Do you think I can or need to go higher to get better performance from the Firehawk? It's a 120' 2:35 screen.
> 
> 
> Thanks for putting all that effort and time in.



I just wrote a long post and my computer crashed. Please call me tonight. my cold istoo bad right now for me to sit and type.


Briefly, the G4 gain is only 1.1 and the G3 gain was 1.26. Raising the lens above center may increase your brightness slightly but hardly enough to be noticed. Further the ideal of equal above scren center to below center to your eyes only applies if the projector is right above your head. Moved back, the projector has to be even higher. Re sparkles, I would like to know if making the image less wide so your throw multiplier is 1.5 or higher helps reduce the sparkles.


Also is the material actually not level (screen bottom) to the case. Your floor or ceiling might be tilted slightly screwing up your measurements. Put a level on the top of the sacren case and on the bottom batten when the screen is deployed.Is the top of the case level and the batten not level or are they both off by the same tilt?


----------



## hwoarang

Mark, from beginning to end you'vebeen very ggracious with your time. Thank you. I'll follow all those notes and won't call you unless I need to. Thanks again. Fyi, the projector lens is about 2ft behind the couch, but we may move the couch back a ft or so when watching movies. In also using a chief ceiling mount that allows me to level out the extension despite having a slanted exposed beam ceiling so I think I'm good there. You are the man!


----------



## gdfein

Is anyone familiar with the Stewart Sabre frames? Haven't seen any posts on these here. Curious if there are any experiences with them and if the Sabre frame can be done in the usual materials, specifically FH G4 and STK 130 are the two I'm considering. Think I might like the slimmer profile screen as opposed to the Luxus Deluxe.


Appreciate any info.


----------



## Rick Johnson

Ok - looking for recommendations!


Getting a Sony VPL-VW600es. I currently have an Ultramatte 150 screen. Been very happy with it, but it was installed for a room with a lot of windows. I have since moved into a new home and have the media room in the basement.


Mostly DTV viewing, movies, gaming, and sports. Ambient is controllable, but in it's brightest format there's about 2 - 5 fc at the screen. Otherwise, it's closer to 1 fc. 5 is when the back of the room lights are on - as if we were hosting a sports event. Don't need perforated/acoustic.


Room is 30' 6" long and 17' 6" wide. Ceiling height is 8' 7". Current projector is mounted 10' 6" from screen (measured from lens). Throw distance will likely be 16' 1" - but variable - can put it anywhere on the ceiling.


Seating is 16' from screen - all within 30 degree viewing angle. Light walls now, but will do the black velvet treatment all the way around (ceiling and floor also).


Thinking about the StudioTek 130 - Luxus model A - I have a soffit and currently have a 111" Stewart screen in a Luxus Model A up there.


Thoughts on screens for this application? Also - what is the correct ceiling mount for this projector. Sony did have one listed, but it's not available anymore.


Also - what is the preferred black drop size? My current screen has a 6" drop but I can go all the way to a 12" drop. Guess I should do some measurements so I can determine what drop I need so the image is centered vertically on the wall...I assume that is the correct was to do it. Current screen is a 4:3 ratio - so wasn't as much of an issue.


Thanks!


----------



## henrich3

^^^

Request samples of ST130 from Stewart and High Power material from Da-Lite. Ask for sample sizes at least 1' square. Once your new pj is installed and you have samples in hand you should be able to see which you prefer. The HP material would definitely be desireable if you intend to watch 3D flicks. It can also extend useable lamp life as the lamp dims with age.


----------



## marc1006


One side of my Stewart motorized screen is 2.5mm higher than the other.   Will this be a big issue for me when trying to dial-in my new projector (JVC x500)?  I had to raise the blackdrop beyond the mfg. recommending settings and seems the tab-tension system is causing this unevenness.  

 

It is 102" Firehawk G3, is a 2.5mm unevenness in a screen being level from left to right a major issue, or one that I can get by with?


----------



## m Robinson

Hello,

How are the side cords doing in terms of tension? They should be snug, but not overly tight. For the side which is higher, try loosening that side cord a bit.

Cheers!


----------



## m Robinson

Sabre frames are available in all Stewart front projection fabrics.


----------



## marc1006




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1680#post_24150143
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> How are the side cords doing in terms of tension? They should be snug, but not overly tight. For the side which is higher, try loosening that side cord a bit.
> 
> Cheers!



Thank you for the reply. One of cords was really tight, I loosened it and nice I am only about 1 mm off...I can live with that - thanks!


----------



## Shepardos

Hi Experts,


I just read this threat because I currently build a home theatre with a *2.40:1 Cine W* Curved Screen from Stewart. My Screen size is *3,40m x 1,40m (2.40)* or a CW144 and throwing distance is *5m*. The projector is a *JVC-X500*.


It is my living room with *white walls and a lot of windows*. It is a light controlled room. The recommendation from my dealer was to choose a Grayhawk G3 over a Firehawk G3.


Can somebody clarify what is the main difference between the Grey- and the Firehawk in therms of picture quality? I read that the Grayhawk is the first reference grey screen and the Firehawk not, but which of this models would more fit in my environment? I think a ST130 would not fit because of the white walls…..


Reading the "negative" post about Firehawk makes me concern if the Greyhawk hast the same disadvantages as the Firehawk.


Appreciated any Feedback










Cheers

S.


----------



## wse




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Shepardos*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1680#post_24171190
> 
> 
> Hi Experts,I just read this threat because I currently build a home theatre with a *2.40:1 Cine W* Curved Screen from Stewart. My Screen size is *3,40m x 1,40m (2.40)* or a CW144 and throwing distance is *5m*. The projector is a *JVC-X500*.
> 
> 
> It is my living room with *white walls and a lot of windows*. It is a light controlled room. The recommendation from my dealer was to choose a Grayhawk G3 over a Firehawk G3.
> 
> 
> Can somebody clarify what is the main difference between the Grey- and the Firehawk in therms of picture quality? I read that the Grayhawk is the first reference grey screen and the Firehawk not, but which of this models would more fit in my environment? I think a ST130 would not fit because of the white walls…..
> 
> 
> Reading the "negative" post about Firehawk makes me concern if the Greyhawk hast the same disadvantages as the Firehawk.
> 
> 
> Appreciated any Feedback
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> S.



Well I have owned a FireHawk G3 for four years and I love it it is 2:35 10 feet wide screen







my room has very large bay windows and it works great after I pull the blackout drapes


----------



## wse




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1680#post_24150143
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> How are the side cords doing in terms of tension? They should be snug, but not overly tight. For the side which is higher, try loosening that side cord a bit.
> 
> Cheers!



I have one side of my electric 10 feet wide 2:35 FireHawk screen that is undulated once it come down! I have to wait twenty minutes for it to straighten out ! It did not used to do that before is there some thing wrong with it?


----------



## Drexler




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Shepardos*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1680#post_24171190
> 
> 
> Hi Experts,
> 
> 
> I just read this threat because I currently build a home theatre with a *2.40:1 Cine W* Curved Screen from Stewart. My Screen size is *3,40m x 1,40m (2.40)* or a CW144 and throwing distance is *5m*. The projector is a *JVC-X500*.
> 
> 
> It is my living room with *white walls and a lot of windows*. It is a light controlled room. The recommendation from my dealer was to choose a Grayhawk G3 over a Firehawk G3.
> 
> 
> Can somebody clarify what is the main difference between the Grey- and the Firehawk in therms of picture quality? I read that the Grayhawk is the first reference grey screen and the Firehawk not, but which of this models would more fit in my environment? I think a ST130 would not fit because of the white walls…..
> 
> 
> Reading the "negative" post about Firehawk makes me concern if the Greyhawk hast the same disadvantages as the Firehawk.
> 
> 
> Appreciated any Feedback
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> S.


I wouldn't touch the greyhawk. It's just a normal screen with a grey substrate that reduces your light output without any gain. You have a very large screen and will be a bit low on the brightness side already from the get go. To reduce that further with a negative gain screen is a bad move imo. The firehawk have an even darker substrate to absorb wall reflections but also gain particles that directs the projected light toward the viewer if its setup correctly which will bring the brightness up. Howver the fh also have drawbacks in hotspotting and a grainy texture due to the gain particles. Your throwing distance is also a bit short which will exaggerate the hotspotting. I'd recommend you to see the screens before purchasing as they are really expensive screens. I personally can't stand the fh drawbacks or the greyhawks low gain and would sacrifice a bit of blacklevel and go for the studiotek instead. Good luck!


----------



## Shepardos

If I understand the Grayhawk right, than it should also fit in a living room with white walls, as the Firehawk but having a negative gain. This would mean that *if* I have enough light, than the Grayhawk would benefit from better blacks and absorbing the reflecting light front the white walls?


The question is how the PQ is between the Firehawk, Grayhawk and ST130?


Did somebody had a chance, to compare this Screens?


----------



## GetGray

Incorrect. gh will wash out in that environ


----------



## Shepardos




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1710#post_24174184
> 
> 
> Incorrect. gh will wash out in that environ



and why?


----------



## GetGray

Because GH has almost no off-axis rejection capabilities. It is very unlike the FH. They are not just gray screens. The GH was not designed to be used in ambient light.


----------



## thomaco

I went through the same question when I installed my screen years ago. I have a similar room to yours and debated between the GH and FH. After talking to the Stewart rep. on here at the time and the Stewart distributor in Aus. they convinced me to go with the FH. It has worked very well for me. The main point is as GetGray indicates, the FH is designed to reject off-axis light. The GH was designed to increase contrast at the expensive of brightness but not to reject off-axis light.


----------



## Stan-Lee

Check out this review of the Firehawk G3 and new G4:
http://www.audioholics.com/projector-screen-reviews/stewart-filmscreen-firehawk-g4-screen-review


----------



## Shepardos

Thanks for the replay!


I read in an old review, that the GH also increase the *ANSI Contrast*. I wonder if I benefit form the curved screen to prevent some rejection of off-axis light, because the screen is not parallels to the sidewalls.


I have attached some pictures from my room. This was taken on the day, if it is night than only the white walls can reflect towards the screen.


----------



## baloo_btru

Its going to be tough getting a good picture in that room from a projector. Have you considered an 80"+ tv? Not trying to be a jerk, but I'm not sure how happy you will be with a projector in that type of setting. You may want to get something even darker than the firehawk, like a DNP or black diamond.


Which projector are you getting?


edit: just saw you are going with the JVC. And it looks like you already have a projector set up in there. Anyway, I have a firehawk g3 and its great however it does make the image a bit duller. You should also check out the other screens mentioned for your room.


----------



## GetGray

The DNP is no good at rejecting light from the sides, where most of your light comes from. It rejects mainly from vertical. A FW does a better job all around IMO. I don't recommend a curved GH due to it's 180 degree viewing cone unless the curve is for other reasons. It will have more of a detrimental effect than otherwise. Curved on a FH on the other hand works *very* well. You will need a very bright projector to overcome any ambient light. I'd consider full blackout drop down shades for a FP system in that room. Unless you live in the country where zero light comes in those windows at night. If I can help you with a screen, let me know via PM.


----------



## Shepardos




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1710#post_24178824
> 
> 
> The DNP is no good at rejecting light from the sides, where most of your light comes from. It rejects mainly from vertical. A FW does a better job all around IMO. I don't recommend a curved GH due to it's 180 degree viewing cone unless the curve is for other reasons. It will have more of a detrimental effect than otherwise. Curved on a FH on the other hand works *very* well. You will need a very bright projector to overcome any ambient light. I'd consider full blackout drop down shades for a FP system in that room. Unless you live in the country where zero light comes in those windows at night. If I can help you with a screen, let me know via PM.



Thanks for the Feedback. Why do you think the Curved Screen is not good with the GH? The Curved Screen is mainly a "future proof" investment, if I have in the future a lens to stretch to 2.40.


----------



## GetGray

Due to the viewing cone of the fabric with no directionality.


----------



## Shepardos




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1710#post_24180176
> 
> 
> Due to the viewing cone of the fabric with no directionality.



Sorry i Don't unterstand what you mean? Can you give me More Detail? I want to understand why the viewing cone prevent a curved screen? Sorry to bother you


----------



## GetGray

Light hits that material and scatters in every direction, even 90 degrees to the surface. The curved screen can actually intercept the light coming off the other areas of the screen and that can affect the contrast. In any case, there is no reason to use a GH in that room. Unless you have a high output, low CR DLP PJ that can use a boost on blacks and you are going to darken your walls. You'd be better off with a ST130 than a GH in that room. If you were my customer I'd spec a Firehawk.


----------



## TL5

Does anyone here have any idea how good the Stewart Cima Tiburon is with some ambient light?


----------



## m Robinson




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wse*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1710#post_24172294
> 
> 
> I have one side of my electric 10 feet wide 2:35 FireHawk screen that is undulated once it come down! I have to wait twenty minutes for it to straighten out ! It did not used to do that before is there some thing wrong with it?



Just exercise the screen more. Leave it down over night after use etc. The more the screen is deployed off the roller tube, the better it will look, flatter etc.

The screen material wants to be flat, was made flat, and we put it on a tube. The tabs make those undulating impressions on the sides. So use the screen more and it will look better.




For the last poster who inquired about Tiburon, it's more like Grayhawk RS, not like Firehawk at all. It is more aimed at situations where a screen is over illuminated at that size, as opposed to rejecting ambient light as a Firehawk does. It has a great surface uniformity, super wide viewing cone, and great color rendering, but it is washed out by stray light in the way that all matte screens are.


Thank you all for the enthusiasm for Stewart Filmscreen products, we appreciate your business!


----------



## wse




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1710#post_24186894
> 
> 
> Just exercise the screen more. Leave it down over night after use etc. The more the screen is deployed off the roller tube, the better it will look, flatter etc.
> 
> The screen material wants to be flat, was made flat, and we put it on a tube. The tabs make those undulating impressions on the sides. So use the screen more and it will look better.
> 
> 
> Thank you all for the enthusiasm for Stewart Filmscreen products, we appreciate your business!



Hello Mark,


I leave my screen down usually every night after watching a movie, and bring it up in the morning. Regardless, the screen takes over 20 minutes to flatten out completely! It did not used to do that. This is my second screen from StewartFilm Screen and I love it but this issue is getting a bit annoying!


The dealer I bought the screen from went belly up several years ago so I am not sure what to do?


----------



## m Robinson

As the fabric has aged, it's gained memory for the retracted position. Additional deployment is the only answer, and when it's warmer in the room it will flatten more rapidly.


----------



## wse




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1710#post_24189407 As the fabric has aged, it's gained memory for the retracted position. Additional deployment is the only answer, and when it's warmer in the room it will flatten more rapidly.


The screen is used every day! So I am not sure how it gained memory?  How long are your screens supposed to last before I should consider replacing it?


----------



## m Robinson

Our roller screens do not last as long as fixed frame screens but 10 years plus is quite common and sometimes quite a bit longer.


We took in a screen from 1986 the other day still looked pretty good.


The more they are left deployed the better. There may be a thermal interaction happening sometimes.


If the room is pretty warm and the screen gets rolled up while warm, then the tube up in the ceiling is colder in proximity to a cold roof etc., as the fabric cools it will contract and grip the roller tube a bit.


----------



## wse




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *m Robinson*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1710#post_24189939
> 
> 
> Our roller screens do not last as long as fixed frame screens but 10 years plus is quite common and sometimes quite a bit longer.
> 
> 
> We took in a screen from 1986 the other day still looked pretty good.
> 
> 
> The more they are left deployed the better. There may be a thermal interaction happening sometimes.
> 
> 
> If the room is pretty warm and the screen gets rolled up while warm, then the tube up in the ceiling is colder in proximity to a cold roof etc., as the fabric cools it will contract and grip the roller tube a bit.



10 years fair enough mine is four years old! I think I will leave it deployed more often, like every night! How about the motor how long do they last 10 years as well I hope?


----------



## Frohlich




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *TL5*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1710#post_24181127
> 
> 
> Does anyone here have any idea how good the Stewart Cima Tiburon is with some ambient light?



AVS science specifically recommended that screen to me after I told them that this was going into a dedicated basement but might be used at times with some lighting since the kids and their friends also use the basement. It's the only screen I have ever owned so I can't say it is worse or better then "XYZ" screen but that is what it was specifically designed for. I think it is just a good screen period and the how it handles light is just a bonus in my book. I have been very happy with it.


----------



## Shepardos




> Quote:
> What do we mean by “4k+”? Stewart Filmscreen has created the 4k+ symbol to represent this screen as being “4k (and more) ready”. For years, Stewart screens have been used in aerospace and other applications dealing in line pair resolution well in advance of 4k. All Stewart screens (including CIMATM by Stewart Filmscreen) are capable of handling this resolution. However, not all screens are optimal for applications for which you would consider a 4k projector. Therefore, we have created this logo to help you easily identify which screens should be considered for such applications.



If this is true, than the TIBURON Screen is the only screen for 4k? What is with all the other screens? Will there be an update or what is the official roadmap?


----------



## thomaco

The FireHawk G4 is also what Stewart is calling a 4K+ screen.


----------



## lpnaz480

Hi guys, wondering if the Neve would work for my setup. I have the rs57 in a non dedicated room but the screen wall is painted black, I have a black rug infront of the screen, and will be adding black velvet on the ceiling soon. I plan on only watching during the night. The side wall which is five feet away is a gray/blue. My throw is 15' and was looking into the 115" 2.35 and the 110" 16:9. I was originally looking into a 1.3 gain like the JKP line from Dalite but if the Neve Cima works I could save for that screen quicker.


----------



## Stan-Lee

Watching the Denver & San Diego game on a 120" fixed frame with a G4. Lots of ambient light in the living room!


----------



## Rick Johnson




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wse*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1700_100#post_24192230
> 
> 
> 10 years fair enough mine is four years old! I think I will leave it deployed more often, like every night! How about the motor how long do they last 10 years as well I hope?



I have had Stewart Luxus motorized screen with Ultramatte 150 for 12 years - never an issue. Motor runs like new and never had any fabric issues - even after a move and re-install and I roll the screen up every time I turn off the projector!


Love my Stewart and going to get a new one shortly!


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wse*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1710#post_24192230
> 
> 
> 10 years fair enough mine is four years old! I think I will leave it deployed more often, like every night! How about the motor how long do they last 10 years as well I hope?





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Rick Johnson*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1710#post_24203166
> 
> 
> I have had Stewart Luxus motorized screen with Ultramatte 150 for 12 years - never an issue. Motor runs like new and never had any fabric issues - even after a move and re-install and I roll the screen up every time I turn off the projector!
> 
> 
> Love my Stewart and going to get a new one shortly!



Have very few issues with Stewart screens. I don't think I have ever had a customer call me about a motor failure.


----------



## wse




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1710#post_24203245 Have very few issues with Stewart screens. I don't think I have ever had a customer call me about a motor failure.


That's good to know I hope my motor last 20 years


----------



## Craig Peer

I've never had a motor go out yet, or have a problem with screen material in my electric screens - although I've never kept a screen beyond about 7 1/2 years. I imagine I'll have my current screens longer than that though.


----------



## Rick Johnson

Well - I got my screen samples. I put them up on a stand in front of the current screen - Ultramatte 150 (12 years old) and put the StudioTek 130 and StudioTek 100 8 1/2" x 11" samples in front.


StudioTek 130 has true sparkles...when the picture is bright white it is like looking a fish scales! It's really noticeable. On the other hand, the Studio Tek 100 looked really good! The colors were better and the blacks really were darker. It was a noticeable difference. I compared while watching Elysium upscaled to 4k using a Sony BDP-S790. I then watched 1080p TV - Football game and shows. StudioTek 100 was still the best of the lot. I walked around the room and tried to see if I could notice any issues with angles - none!


Today, I waited until the middle of the day when the ambient is greatest in the basement (4 fL) and played Xbox and watched TV - still no issue with the StudioTek 100. Same sparkles apparent in the 130 sample. Interesting that the Ultramatte 150 is supposed to be a higher gain but I don't see any of the sparkles/glitter in that screen...


What I am thinking is since my Ultramatte 150 is 12 years old - perhaps it is now closer to 100 due to age/wear....is that even possible?!


Now I am really stuck. I thought the 130 was going to be the answer, but no way can I handle that glitter effect/sheen/sparkles.


I like to 100 but concerned about the warnings about it being for a post-production lab environment and the room must be blacked out for optimum effect...remember I am using an 8 1/2" x 11" sample...wondering what's going to happen with a 133" diagonal 1.78:1 screen. I do have the wife working on a WAF for black velvet...


Help!! Also - can Stewart give me a recommendation for a HT installer here in Phoenix? I'm not sure who is the best of the ones I have talked to so far (Lanza AV - Insight AI - Starpower). If my assessments are wrong - let me know - I liked everyone I met with - but just not comfortable with anyone yet...


Thanks!


----------



## Supernewf71

How did you make out with mounting your screen? My boss gave me his Stewart firehawk screen but no frame was going to make one


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> Well - I got my screen samples. I put them up on a stand in front of the current screen - Ultramatte 150 (12 years old) and put the StudioTek 130 and StudioTek 100 8 1/2" x 11" samples in front.
> 
> 
> StudioTek 130 has true sparkles...when the picture is bright white it is like looking a fish scales! It's really noticeable. On the other hand, the Studio Tek 100 looked really good! The colors were better and the blacks really were darker. It was a noticeable difference. I compared while watching Elysium upscaled to 4k using a Sony BDP-S790. I then watched 1080p TV - Football game and shows. StudioTek 100 was still the best of the lot. I walked around the room and tried to see if I could notice any issues with angles - none!
> 
> 
> Today, I waited until the middle of the day when the ambient is greatest in the basement (4 fL) and played Xbox and watched TV - still no issue with the StudioTek 100. Same sparkles apparent in the 130 sample. Interesting that the Ultramatte 150 is supposed to be a higher gain but I don't see any of the sparkles/glitter in that screen...
> 
> 
> What I am thinking is since my Ultramatte 150 is 12 years old - perhaps it is now closer to 100 due to age/wear....is that even possible?!
> 
> 
> Now I am really stuck. I thought the 130 was going to be the answer, but no way can I handle that glitter effect/sheen/sparkles.
> 
> 
> I like to 100 but concerned about the warnings about it being for a post-production lab environment and the room must be blacked out for optimum effect...remember I am using an 8 1/2" x 11" sample...wondering what's going to happen with a 133" diagonal 1.78:1 screen. I do have the wife working on a WAF for black velvet...



Split the difference with a Cima Neve 1.1 screen perhaps?


----------



## martinw

Hi All,

Been lurking around AVS forum for many years, finally have a question…


A few years ago did a major home addition/refirb and I finally could build a home theater space.

The room is above a garage, 31 ft long x 21 ft wide. Peaked ceiling at 12 ft and side walls that begin at 7ft high. Windows are covered with blackout roller shades. Bar in the rear. All room lighting is very controlled with no lighting on the screen end of the room. Mostly darkened night movie use, but occasional sports events with low rear room lighting.

My wife had a demand: the screen must be retractable; she felt the room would be used for other than movies/sports viewing. Never argue.


So I worked with the good folk at AV Science, purchased and installed a:

Stewart Filmscreen Luxus Model A 'Classic' Electriscreen

Image Size: 66" x 118" (135" diagonal)

Screen Material: FireHawk G2

Screen Control: InfraRed Remote Control -- Model#: IRR


Of course, I never retracted the screen for “other” things. Ever. (Other than to do a bit of work behind the screen on rare occasion. But you already knew that.

Projector is ceiling mounted 18 ft from screen and height is about 2 ft above the screen horizontal center-line and dead nuts centered on the vertical line. Major seating is at 15 ft but adjustable.

I have recently purchased an Epson 5030UB.

In setting things up, I zoomed out and realized I could fit a larger screen if I didn’t have all of the Electriscreen header stuff.

It appears that I could easily fit (Using a 3.375” edge Luxus Deluxe Screen Wall) a 76”x 135” (viewable area) screen. Wow.


My wife now agrees that we don’t really need a retractable screen. (!)

1. Can I grow the screen (Quality wise)?

2. Is it worth it to grow the screen? (Impact wise)

3. As G2 is no longer made, what should I use?

4. Is there any market to sell my existing screen? (I have kept all the original packaging.)


Really appreciate your sensible guidance!


----------



## GetGray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *martinw*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1700_100#post_24234193
> 
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> Been lurking around AVS forum for many years, finally have a question…
> 
> 
> A few years ago did a major home addition/refirb and I finally could build a home theater space.
> 
> The room is above a garage, 31 ft long x 21 ft wide. Peaked ceiling at 12 ft and side walls that begin at 7ft high. Windows are covered with blackout roller shades. Bar in the rear. All room lighting is very controlled with no lighting on the screen end of the room. Mostly darkened night movie use, but occasional sports events with low rear room lighting.
> 
> My wife had a demand: the screen must be retractable; she felt the room would be used for other than movies/sports viewing. Never argue.
> 
> 
> So I worked with the good folk at AV Science, purchased and installed a:
> 
> Stewart Filmscreen Luxus Model A 'Classic' Electriscreen
> 
> Image Size: 66" x 118" (135" diagonal)
> 
> Screen Material: FireHawk G2
> 
> Screen Control: InfraRed Remote Control -- Model#: IRR
> 
> 
> Of course, I never retracted the screen for “other” things. Ever. (Other than to do a bit of work behind the screen on rare occasion. But you already knew that.
> 
> Projector is ceiling mounted 18 ft from screen and height is about 2 ft above the screen horizontal center-line and dead nuts centered on the vertical line. Major seating is at 15 ft but adjustable.
> 
> I have recently purchased an Epson 5030UB.
> 
> In setting things up, I zoomed out and realized I could fit a larger screen if I didn’t have all of the Electriscreen header stuff.
> 
> It appears that I could easily fit (Using a 3.375” edge Luxus Deluxe Screen Wall) a 76”x 135” (viewable area) screen. Wow.
> 
> 
> My wife now agrees that we don’t really need a retractable screen. (!)
> 
> 1. Can I grow the screen (Quality wise)?
> 
> 2. Is it worth it to grow the screen? (Impact wise)
> 
> 3. As G2 is no longer made, what should I use?
> 
> 4. Is there any market to sell my existing screen? (I have kept all the original packaging.)
> 
> 
> Really appreciate your sensible guidance!


That's a huge jump in square footage. Have you considered what that's going to do to your image brightness? That's a big screen, maybe your PJ already has enough horsepower (lumens), but that's the #1 consideration I'd say.


Brightness (ftL) = Lumens / screen area (ft2) * screen gain (for you about 1.1 to 1.2)


That's a 31% larger screen. It will be roughly 75% as bright as it is now all other things equal.


If you are happy with the Firehawk, the G4 is basically the same screen. Not much difference properties wise IMO, so you can stick with that.


----------



## martinw

Good point GetGray,

I have been advised that one easy way to test the new image on a larger screen is to zoom out until I reach the "new" screen dimensions.

What would be viewed on my G2 screen would be the image quality/ brightness I would have with a larger screen.

Sounds reasonable?


----------



## GetGray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *martinw*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1700_100#post_24237078
> 
> 
> Good point GetGray,
> 
> I have been advised that one easy way to test the new image on a larger screen is to zoom out until I reach the "new" screen dimensions.
> 
> What would be viewed on my G2 screen would be the image quality/ brightness I would have with a larger screen.
> 
> Sounds reasonable?


Exactly. Zoom and focus as if your screen was the new size. That will demo the image brightness spread to the proposed dimensions. You lose some of the peripheral effects of having more light, albeit dimmer on screen luminance, but you'll get the feel for the overall brightness and if you'll be happy with it. There's also some effect of the screens directionality depending on the viewing angles from your side seats to the new, now more obtuse angle sides. I use a curved Firehawk which helps in that regard.


----------



## abominable1

Off topic: Does anyone here have the Cima "Below Ceiling" Electricscreen? I am close to ordering one, but since there is not much documentation available, I was wondering how they get mounted and what the electrical is like out of the box? Do these things plug directly into an outlet or come spliced?


----------



## martinw




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1740#post_24237220
> 
> 
> Exactly. Zoom and focus as if your screen was the new size. That will demo the image brightness spread to the proposed dimensions. You lose some of the peripheral effects of having more light, albeit dimmer on screen luminance, but you'll get the feel for the overall brightness and if you'll be happy with it. There's also some effect of the screens directionality depending on the viewing angles from your side seats to the new, now more obtuse angle sides. I use a curved Firehawk which helps in that regard.



Thanks for the reply.

Ok, did it.

Brightness still looks very good. Excited to see the size! Wow.

Do you recommend a curved screen? Is there a "standard" curve? Any disadvantages?


----------



## GetGray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *martinw*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1700_100#post_24237334
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1740#post_24237220
> 
> 
> Exactly. Zoom and focus as if your screen was the new size. That will demo the image brightness spread to the proposed dimensions. You lose some of the peripheral effects of having more light, albeit dimmer on screen luminance, but you'll get the feel for the overall brightness and if you'll be happy with it. There's also some effect of the screens directionality depending on the viewing angles from your side seats to the new, now more obtuse angle sides. I use a curved Firehawk which helps in that regard.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the reply.
> 
> Ok, did it.
> 
> Brightness still looks very good. Excited to see the size! Wow.
> 
> Do you recommend a curved screen? Is there a "standard" curve? Any disadvantages?
Click to expand...

Pros and cons. Shoot me a PM and I'll help.


----------



## shnxx


Is the Stewart Cima Neve 110" motorized for $2839.98 a good deal?


----------



## Stan-Lee




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *abominable1*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1740#post_24237255
> 
> 
> Off topic: Does anyone here have the Cima "Below Ceiling" Electricscreen? I am close to ordering one, but since there is not much documentation available, I was wondering how they get mounted and what the electrical is like out of the box? Do these things plug directly into an outlet or come spliced?



Power cord is wired up and ready to...plug n play. Mounted on a wall bracket. Hope that helps!


----------



## martinw




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1740#post_24237374
> 
> 
> Pros and cons. Shoot me a PM and I'll help.





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1740#post_24234346
> 
> 
> That's a huge jump in square footage. Have you considered what that's going to do to your image brightness? That's a big screen, maybe your PJ already has enough horsepower (lumens), but that's the #1 consideration I'd say.
> 
> 
> Brightness (ftL) = Lumens / screen area (ft2) * screen gain (for you about 1.1 to 1.2)
> 
> 
> That's a 31% larger screen. It will be roughly 75% as bright as it is now all other things equal.
> 
> 
> If you are happy with the Firehawk, the G4 is basically the same screen. Not much difference properties wise IMO, so you can stick with that.



Thank you GetGray!

I'm going to go with the larger screen.


Now will sell my existing set up:

Stewart Filmscreen Luxus Model A 'Classic' Electriscreen

Image Size: 66" x 118" (135" diagonal) FireHawk

InfraRed Remote Control -- Model#: IRR

Listing it in the classified section....


----------



## farsider3000

All,


I am about to purchase my first projector and screen. Looks like I will be buying a JVC X500 or X700 along with a Stewart electriscreen. I am still trying to determine which screen material to specify. My projector is about 18 ft from the screen and the screen will be 120" scope. First row of seating places eye to screen distance at 13.5ft.


I was originally looking at the Studiotek 100 but was concerned that the screen would reflect too much light onto my 14ft wide room since it has such a wide viewing angle (disperses light in a wide band).


What about the new Firehawk G4 or Studiotek 130? The room is a dedicated theater room with total light control. I don't want to see texture or sparkles. If possible it would be nice to be able to watch the screen (college football) with some light on but.... I don't want to sacrifice the quality of the full - lights out - movie experience as I can just watch sports on my existing plasma which is behind the drop down screen.


----------



## G-Rex

I have the Studiotek 130 G3 and rarely see sparkles...so that is a non factor for me. Lense height to screen may impact the degree sparkles are seen though. ST130 has a very fine texture surface so that's also a non factor (even for a 4k projector). Totally light controlled with no lights on viewing...I would go ST130. How dark are your walls and ceiling? The darker the better for the 130.


----------



## shnxx


How much are these G4 and studiotek 130?


----------



## G-Rex

Give Mike G. at AVS a call for prices.


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> I have the Studiotek 130 G3 and rarely see sparkles...so that is a non factor for me. Lense height to screen may impact the degree sparkles are seen though. ST130 has a very fine texture surface so that's also a non factor (even for a 4k projector). Totally light controlled with no lights on viewing...I would go ST130. How dark are your walls and ceiling? The darker the better for the 130.



Same here - screen texture and sheen are minimal on my ST 130 G3. Slightly less on the Neve 1.1 .


----------



## farsider3000




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *G-Rex*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1740#post_24251615
> 
> 
> I have the Studiotek 130 G3 and rarely see sparkles...so that is a non factor for me. Lense height to screen may impact the degree sparkles are seen though. ST130 has a very fine texture surface so that's also a non factor (even for a 4k projector). Totally light controlled with no lights on viewing...I would go ST130. How dark are your walls and ceiling? The darker the better for the 130.



G-Rex,

Walls and ceiling are a medium, matte blue and I will need to use most of the vertical offset for the RS57 or RS4910.


Anyone know if using more of the vertical offset will reduce the image sharpness? Surely it has some effect on the image.


I have been working with Mike at AVS and he recommended the Studiotek 130 as well.


----------



## G-Rex

Mike is right, the ST130 will perform very well in that theater...which is very nice by the way.


----------



## farsider3000

G-Rex,


Thanks for the nice comments. The movie room addition is one of the best things we have done to the house. I can't wait to get the projector up as I have lived with the "tiny" 65" plasma for two years now.










Any thoughts on whether the drop down electric screen will start to stretch over time and start to distort the image or approximately how long I can expect the screen to provide a tight, flat surface?


----------



## Craig Peer

I've owned nothing but electric screens and have never had one stretch or distort. You should expect it to last 15 or more years. You'll go through a couple of projectors in that time!


----------



## G-Rex

As Craig says, they last a long time. Stewart also uses very high quality (quiet) motors, so motors rarely fail here as evidenced by a lack of posts. I would also leave the screen down quite often. The more the screen is used/or in this unrolled position...the longer it will last without any wrinkles. So leave it down overnight at least 2 nights a week. I have a HP 2.4 electric that drops down 1" in front of the fixed ST130. Whenever I use the HP, I leave it down at least overnight. Not sure if this applies to tab tensioned screens as well, but I would figure it does. My HP is not tab tensioned.


Have you looked at the Sony 500/600 4K projector...I would consider it as well. It is a bit more future proof being 4K.


----------



## J.T. Guitar




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gdfein*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1680#post_24139306
> 
> 
> Is anyone familiar with the Stewart Sabre frames? Haven't seen any posts on these here. Curious if there are any experiences with them and if the Sabre frame can be done in the usual materials, specifically FH G4 and STK 130 are the two I'm considering. Think I might like the slimmer profile screen as opposed to the Luxus Deluxe.
> 
> 
> Appreciate any info.



I will let you know in a week... 


I was looking at "zero edge" models from SI and DnP, as I'm going to fly the screen. After much contemplation and searching I found the SFS Sabre. I ordered mine with the FH G4 material. FYI- The screen is shipped fully assembled, so transport cost was pretty significant.


----------



## ggo16


Hello:

 

I am interested in buying a *SONY VPL-VW500/600ES* projector (4k 3D) to work with a Stewart screen, either *Studiotek 130 G3* or *Firehawk G4*. I love 3D, although I do not have a lot of 3D movies to begin with. But I also have to deal with ambinent light, as I have a lot of windows and all walls and ceilings are matt white.

 

I have been told that for perfect 3D, you need a white high gain screen in a light controlled environment, which is not possible for me. I really love the *Firehawk G4* (note that this is a 4k-ready *G4* screen so I assume it is more advanced than Studiotek 130 *G3*). But I am not sure if the 500/600ES (marketed as *1800 lumen*) is bright enough for *Firehawk G4* with a gain of *1.1*? (Firehawk G3 has a gain of 1.3 but is no longer offered.)

 

My screen will be 16:9, 110" diaganol and 96" width. Your suggestion would be really important! Should I choose the newer generation *Firehawk G4* (1.1 gain), or 2005-launched *Studiotek 130 G3* (1.3 gain) screen?

 

Thank you very much!

 

PS: I need pull-down screen and SI's Black Diamond is too large to fit, so it is out of the question.


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> PS: I need pull-down screen and SI's Black Diamond is too large to fit, so it is out of the question.



You need an electric screen ( Stewart doesn't make a " pull down screen " )? If so, why not get one of each?


----------



## ggo16




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Craig Peer*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1740#post_24256720
> 
> 
> 
> You need an electric screen ( Stewart doesn't make a " pull down screen " )? If so, why not get one of each?


I am electric or manual pull-down screen. Actually, Stewart has a Luxus Communicator (under their commercial line) which is exactly the same with Luxus Model A except that it is manual. Due to space constraints, I cannot choose SI Black Diamond II, nor putting two screens.

 

Thank you Craig.


----------



## J.T. Guitar




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ggo16*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1740#post_24256653
> 
> 
> Hello:
> 
> 
> I am interested in buying a *SONY VPL-VW500/600ES* projector (4k 3D) to work with a Stewart screen, either *Studiotek 130 G3* or *Firehawk G4*. I love 3D, although I do not have a lot of 3D movies to begin with. But I also have to deal with ambinent light, as I have a lot of windows and all walls and ceilings are matt white.
> 
> 
> I have been told that for perfect 3D, you need a white high gain screen in a light controlled environment, which is not possible for me. I really love the *Firehawk G4* (note that this is a 4k-ready *G4* screen so I assume it is more advanced than Studiotek 130 *G3*). But I am not sure if the 500/600ES (marketed as *1800 lumen*) is bright enough for *Firehawk G4* with a gain of *1.1*? (Firehawk G3 has a gain of 1.3 but is no longer offered.)
> 
> 
> My screen will be 16:9, 110" diaganol and 96" width. Your suggestion would be really important! Should I choose the newer generation *Firehawk G4* (1.1 gain), or 2005-launched *Studiotek 130 G3* (1.3 gain) screen?
> 
> 
> Thank you very much!
> 
> 
> PS: I need pull-down screen and SI's Black Diamond is too large to fit, so it is out of the question.



This is the exact setup I'm getting... I'm throwing to a 113" screen at 17 ft. After much contemplation, research, and handwringing, I decided on the FH G4. I'll let you know how it works in a week or so. However, I'm not as concerned with 3D as you seem to be. I had narrowed my choices to SI- Black Diamond, DnP SuperNova, and the FH before going with the FH. Since you need a pull down, your choice is more limited. Although I think SI is doing a drop down BD now... I could be wrong.


Happy Hunting!


----------



## ggo16




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *J.T. Guitar*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1740#post_24259234
> 
> 
> 
> This is the exact setup I'm getting... I'm throwing to a 113" screen at 17 ft. After much contemplation, research, and handwringing, I decided on the FH G4. I'll let you know how it works in a week or so. However, I'm not as concerned with 3D as you seem to be. I had narrowed my choices to SI- Black Diamond, DnP SuperNova, and the FH before going with the FH. Since you need a pull down, your choice is more limited. Although I think SI is doing a drop down BD now... I could be wrong.
> 
> 
> Happy Hunting!


Great!! Thank you! I look forward to hearing from you when you have the gears setup and running!

 

I think among the three screens you've made the right choice...I'm quite skeptical about SI BD II...And seening Firehawk in person it was amazing. Your throw distance is a bit far I think? Mine would be around 145-150". I can do either pull down or electric, since the screen will be mounted to a place where I can easily reach, I just think that pull-down will save money and effort of running wiring...


----------



## J.T. Guitar




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ggo16*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1740#post_24259288
> 
> 
> Great!! Thank you! I look forward to hearing from you when you have the gears setup and running!
> 
> 
> I think among the three screens you've made the right choice...I'm quite skeptical about SI BD II...And seening Firehawk in person it was amazing. Your throw distance is a bit far I think? Mine would be around 145-150". I can do either pull down or electric, since the screen will be mounted to a place where I can easily reach, I just think that pull-down will save money and effort of running wiring...



Thanks bro, I will report back...


I'm a complete HT noob, but I read a lot. I think the FH G4 has a 1.5 recommended throw ratio. I believe if you have a 100" screen your recommended throw should be at least 150" to minimize sparkle and hot-spotting. I'm at about 200" throw for a 113" screen, which should work pretty good. I can't wait to get things together!


----------



## ggo16




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *J.T. Guitar*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1770#post_24259333
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks bro, I will report back...
> 
> 
> I'm a complete HT noob, but I read a lot. I think the FH G4 has a 1.5 recommended throw ratio. I believe if you have a 100" screen your recommended throw should be at least 150" to minimize sparkle and hot-spotting. I'm at about 200" throw for a 113" screen, which should work pretty good. I can't wait to get things together!


Is your 113" diaganol or width? Stewart recommends 1.5 times the width of the screen, not diaganol. I know that bringing the projector closer will yield brigher image. On the other hand, make it far away will yield better pictures because light interact with air paricles as it travels in space - I read it somewhere, not proven though.


----------



## J.T. Guitar

Totally agree... My screen is about 99 wide so 200 is well beyond the 1.5. But it right in the median of the Sony's recommendation. I'll report back and maybe post some pics. Talk soon!


----------



## shnxx


Do the electric screens need to be extended all the way down?

My ceiling is sloped so to get 11 feet of throw distance, i have to put the screen pretty low and I don't know if it's a good idea to have the screen so low to the ground.


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> Do the electric screens need to be extended all the way down?
> 
> 
> My ceiling is sloped so to get 11 feet of throw distance, i have to put the screen pretty low and I don't know if it's a good idea to have the screen so low to the ground.



Yes, electric screens should be fully extended.


----------



## C130


I have a Stewart Firehawk Mircroperf screen that needs cleaning and would like any first hand experiences and recommendations. I read the Stewart cleaning instructions but would like any recommendations on materials used to clean  ,soap type, etc. There are a couple of lines on the screen that are only noticeable in bright white scenes and want tro try and get those off is possible, not sure if it's a scratch or something that I can get off by cleaning.

 

Also, is it possible to just replace the screen material on a Stewart screen?


----------



## Craig Peer

It is possible to replace just the material. You will need to contact an authorized Stewart dealer ( hello - waving my hand here ) with the serial number of the screen.


----------



## C130




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Craig Peer*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1770#post_24311139
> 
> 
> It is possible to replace just the material. You will need to contact an authorized Stewart dealer ( hello - waving my hand here ) with the serial number of the screen.


Great, hopefully I won't have to replace it but was afraid it got scratched during our recent move. I cleaned it and it looks much better but there was one spot where it was noticeable during bright white scenes only. Looked like a scratch but looks much better after cleaning it and hopefully it won't be noticeable while watching any more. I'll definitely call AVS if I need one. Thanks for the information.


----------



## Craig Peer

We need to zap you with a memory erasing pen from Men In Black so you forget there was anything there !!


----------



## J.T. Guitar

Received my FH G4 today... Amazing screen, great packing job. Will post a pic or two tomorrow. No sparkle, no hotspots, no problems.


----------



## shnxx


I just bought a member's Stewart Luxus Model A Electriscreen, which came without a remote.

Does anyone know how to operate these things?


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> I just bought a member's Stewart Luxus Model A Electriscreen, which came without a remote.
> 
> 
> Does anyone know how to operate these things?



Does it not have a 3 position wall switch? That's what I use. 110 volt.


----------



## shnxx




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Craig Peer*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1770#post_24315875
> 
> 
> 
> Does it not have a 3 position wall switch? That's what I use. 110 volt.


What's the three position wall switch?

there doesn't seem to be any switch on the screen housing itself.

 

There is a hole which I think accepts the trigger input but I don't have the input.

The seller said that it works by trigger interface. He gave me the connection/ plug that goes to the side of the screen and apparently I need a wire to go from plug to the screen interface connection in the back of the projector. 

I am not sure how any of this works though or what parts I will need to order.


----------



## Craig Peer

You will need to contact an authorized Stewart dealer ( you can email me if your want ) with the serial number of your screen. The hole is the electrical connection. Why did he not send the switch and whatever he was using to control the screen with it?


----------



## Craig Peer

Maybe you have what you need - did he not give you an owners manual that came with the screen? Maybe you can download one from Stewart - http://stewartfilmscreen.com/


----------



## shnxx


oh yeah he did give the manual to me.

he said he connected it to his projector or something.


----------



## Craig Peer

If you can't make heads or tails from the manual, you might need to hire an installer or electrician. Don't fry it or yourself !


----------



## C130




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Craig Peer*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1770#post_24311740
> 
> 
> We need to zap you with a memory erasing pen from Men In Black so you forget there was anything there !!



True, love the screen and hopefully cleaning it took care of what I was seeing. My wife noticed it first then of course I noticed it and it was driving me nuts.


----------



## wse




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1740#post_24237374
> 
> 
> Pros and cons. Shoot me a PM and I'll help.



Please tell us what are the pros & cons of a curved screen I am looking at a twelve feet wide screen?


----------



## wse




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *J.T. Guitar*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1770#post_24313307
> 
> 
> Received my FH G4 today... Amazing screen, great packing job. Will post a pic or two tomorrow. No sparkle, no hotspots, no problems.



Is it smoother than the G3?


----------



## shnxx




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Craig Peer*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1770#post_24316678
> 
> 
> If you can't make heads or tails from the manual, you might need to hire an installer or electrician. Don't fry it or yourself !


 

Haha yes. that has been my intention all along.

All this installation stuff gives me the worst headaches.


----------



## ggo16




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *J.T. Guitar*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1770#post_24313307
> 
> 
> Received my FH G4 today... Amazing screen, great packing job. Will post a pic or two tomorrow. No sparkle, no hotspots, no problems.


Great!! Have you tried watching 3D?


----------



## J.T. Guitar




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *wse*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1770#post_24317175
> 
> 
> Is it smoother than the G3?



Hey there... No experience with the G3. I do know it looks pretty smooth to me. I decided on the FH after extensively researching it, the SI BD, and the DnP SuperNova. It may not be quite as "pop-y" as a Black Diamond, but it looks more natural to me. The colors seem truer, and it doesn't have the visible structure of the BD either. The coolest thing is not feeling like I have to mask for 2:35 movies... I'm very happy so far.


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ggo16*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1770#post_24318854
> 
> 
> Great!! Have you tried watching 3D?



Just popped in Polar Express 3D... It's the first time I've tried 3D with this projector. The best 3D experience I've ever had was in 04' at the imax at the mall in Edmonton, Alberta when I was on a layover. It was Polar Express. This projector/screen combo looks even better to me. I know the brighter the better seems to be the rule for 3D, but even at 1.1 gain this screen looks very good IMHO.


----------



## ggo16




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *J.T. Guitar*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1770#post_24318917
> 
> 
> 
> Hey there... No experience with the G3. I do know it looks pretty smooth to me. I decided on the FH after extensively researching it, the SI BD, and the DnP SuperNova. It may not be quite as "pop-y" as a Black Diamond, but it looks more natural to me. The colors seem truer, and it doesn't have the visible structure of the BD either. The coolest thing is not feeling like I have to mask for 2:35 movies... I'm very happy so far.
> 
> Just popped in Polar Express 3D... It's the first time I've tried 3D with this projector. The best 3D experience I've ever had was in 04' at the imax at the mall in Edmonton, Alberta when I was on a layover. It was Polar Express. This projector/screen combo looks even better to me. I know the brighter the better seems to be the rule for 3D, but even at 1.1 gain this screen looks very good IMHO.


That's great news! Congratulations!!

 

Have you tested with off-center viewing? Is there any dimming feel? Did you watch under ambient light or completely dark?


----------



## bondslex

Good afternoon all. I am about to purchase a new projector. The Sony HW30ES. How would this look with a Stewart Firehawk screen? I currently use a Sanyo z2000.


Thanks


----------



## J.T. Guitar




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *ggo16*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1770#post_24319813
> 
> 
> That's great news! Congratulations!!
> 
> 
> Have you tested with off-center viewing? Is there any dimming feel? Did you watch under ambient light or completely dark?



Here is a picture 45 degrees off axis. I notice no visible drop in brightness until you get beyond that. The black wash is from the iPhone trying to compensate for the dark.

 


Here is in full ambient light. There is a window on the left side of room which as you can see brightens the left side a bit... White ceiling, light blue walls and still very watchable.


----------



## Craig Peer

I never really saw any noticeable brightness difference sitting off axis with my Firehawk G3. The G4 should not be any different. In fact it should be better in all regards.


----------



## R Harkness

You guys don't notice the brightness drop from left side to right in the football image??


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1770#post_24327087
> 
> 
> You guys don't notice the brightness drop from left side to right in the football image??



I think I see what you are talking about. Assuming the photo is accurate I would say the drop off in light would not be acceptable for critical movie watching. For a football game? I'm less critical.


----


Separate topic: I know that years ago the mantra at Stewart, probably with good reason based on the choices available, was the perf screens were superior to woven screens.


I think that times and technologies and use cases have changed.


Does anyone know if a weave screen is on the roadmap for Stewart?


I have a 120" wide (horizontal) 2.35:1 screen (SDDQ130) with the Ultramatte 200 fabric. I would LOVE to buy a Stewart woven screen if one existed that could be used at a 9' viewing distance. I'd hit up AVS (where my screen originally came from) and buy the new fabric.


But unless something is going to be available this year, I'll follow through with my plan to sell my screen, and pick up a new one that I can do the AT duties in my space.


----------



## J.T. Guitar




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1770#post_24327087
> 
> 
> You guys don't notice the brightness drop from left side to right in the football image??



Those things will happen when you have a 6ft X 3ft uncovered window on the left side of the room in broad daylight. Still not unwatchable. It wasn't really visible, became visible on the iPhone photo. The iPhone might have flashed as well. Definitely not noticeable in the room.


----------



## J.T. Guitar

  


There is no inherent unevenness to the screen... IMHO


----------



## Drexler




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *J.T. Guitar*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1770#post_24327160
> 
> 
> Those things will happen when you have a 6ft X 3ft uncovered window on the left side of the room in broad daylight. Still not unwatchable. It wasn't really visible, became visible on the iPhone photo. The iPhone might have flashed as well. Definitely not noticeable in the room.


But the colors are more saturated on the left. If the brightness was due to the window or flash you would expect a more washed out image on the left, your picture shows the opposite and more what you would expect from hotspotting. And you don't see the wall getting brighter to the left either...


----------



## J.T. Guitar

All I can say is, there is no hot spotting or uniformity issues when viewing the screen in person.


If you want to evaluate a screen based on an image taken from a cell-phone, cool. To me, that is like evaluating high end speakers with MP3s played on your PC.


----------



## Drexler

All I'm saying is that hotspotting is an inherent nature of all angular reflective screens with gain particles including the Firehawk screen and it will always be there. To a smaller extent if you have a long throw ratio but still visible. Maybe you're not sensitive to it, which is great for you! It enables you to have a screen that preserve contrast in less ideal rooms. I have seen the Firehawk many times and am unfortunately very sensitive to it. In fact I have never seen a high contrast screen I can live with due to either hotspotting or grainy texture in bright picture elements except the retroreflective da-lite high contrast high power. This screen still has some graininess but no hotspotting. However it isn't as good at rejecting reflections or ambient light as the fh. There are always tradeoffs...


----------



## TL5

^^^ Very true. I just got a sample of the new Firehawk G4. (My first screen was the 2nd generation Firehawk) As soon as I put it up I could tell it wasn't for me - too many sparklies! Same with the new Slate from Screen Innovations. But my current screen, a Da-Lite Cinema Vision has a far worse grainy pattern than both of them. About the best sample of screen material that has SOME ambient light ability I have seen is the Stewart Cima Tiburon. For sure it won't work like a Firehawk or Screen Innovations BD or Slate with ambient light, but it has a smooth, grain free pattern. This will be my third screen - I know what I can and can't live with - and I want a smooth, grain free image first & foremost.


----------



## J.T. Guitar

I do notice some texture on very bright scenes. But it is definitely more manageable than the SI BDs tiny window pixcelation and sparkle. It is a trade off, but the image is crisp and works well in my brightly colored room. I do notice hot-spotting on some screens, but don't see it on this one.


----------



## karlsch

Since there seems to be a discussion about the Black Diamond and G4:


Recently I replaced my Black Diamond 0.8 screen with a G4. I had found the BD sparkles and hot spotting to be very objectionable. I saw them all of the time.


When I was considering this replacement I got a G4 screen sample and compared it and a white screen sample to the BD.


It appeared that the G4 had some sparkles but less than the BD. The same with the hot spot. The white sample had neither.


The G4 didn't seem to reject ambient light as well as the BD.


What really stood out was the color rendering was MUCH better with the G4, almost as good as the white sample. Colors on the BD were very muted in comparison.


I decided to get the G4 if only for the better colors.


What I now see on the full G4 screen is pretty much what I saw on the samples.


There are sparkles, but I don't really notice them that much. I do occasionally see some hot spotting - a little more than I would really like.


Although the screen seems to reflect more ambient light, the actual picture quality doesn't seem to be affected that much, at least in my viewing environment.


Overall, maybe mostly because of the better, more vivid and accurate colors, I consider the picture quality to be MUCH better than before.


Because I increased screen size, picture brightness is about the same even though the G4 gain is greater than the BD.


----------



## R Harkness

karlsch,


The more vivid colors you are seeing on your new G4 are most likely (I'd say almost certainly) due to the image being brighter on the G4 than the .8 BD screen.

The .8 gain BD screen is a tough screen to light up. The .8 gain, already below a neutral gain, would be measured at it's brightest point (likely center), but the aggressive optical coating means heavy hotspotting as you saw,

so brightness falls away from that brightest point. This means that a majority of the screen would actually be well below .8 gain, even viewed directly on, and look even darker off axis. So, like most screens using that technique

for maintaining contrast, the overall image will be darker than it's gain rating would suggest. It's not for nothing that SI normally sent dealers quite small screens for demo. I never did see that screen look bright with any projector.

(Not that there aren't some light canons that would do it at a reasonable size) (And all the above applies to the Firehawk material as well, except it will be brighter due to a lesser degree due to it's less aggressive optical focusing of brightness)


But...anyway...the main thing is that when you up the brightness of an image, all other things being equal, color saturation/intensity appears to increase as well.


----------



## R Harkness




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Drexler*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1800#post_24330532
> 
> 
> But the colors are more saturated on the left. If the brightness was due to the window or flash you would expect a more washed out image on the left, your picture shows the opposite and more what you would expect from hotspotting. And you don't see the wall getting brighter to the left either...



Yes I noticed that too, and it's pretty obvious it's hotspotting causing the change in brightness in that image - that is precisely what hot-spotting looks like on the Firehawk material.


But, it's very important to emphasize, as you have, that isn't a reason to diss the Firehawk material because it is terrific at what it does (maintain contrast in challenging conditions). And that even though the Firehawk material hotspots, for most people it's not an issue. We are generally not sensitive to this unless we learn to look for it. Unfortunately...some of us learned, and it becomes

obvious. I wish it didn't bug me, actually.


(I've seen some pretty amazing examples of screens having various artifacts, hot-spotting etc, that were blazingly obvious to me, but their owners never noticed once. Best not to know sometimes).


----------



## karlsch




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *R Harkness*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1800#post_24334417
> 
> 
> karlsch,
> 
> 
> The more vivid colors you are seeing on your new G4 are most likely (I'd say almost certainly) due to the image being brighter on the G4 than the .8 BD screen.
> 
> ..................



To keep my post to a reasonable length I didn't mention one thing.


Originally my BD screen had 1.4 gain screen material. I replaced it with 0.8 gain to lessen the sparkles/hot spotting.


When I did my screen sample comparison, I included the 1.4 gain.

Even with the higher gain material, the colors were muted compared to the G4.


----------



## J.T. Guitar




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *karlsch*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1800#post_24334347
> 
> 
> Since there seems to be a discussion about the Black Diamond and G4:
> 
> 
> Recently I replaced my Black Diamond 0.8 screen with a G4. I had found the BD sparkles and hot spotting to be very objectionable. I saw them all of the time.
> 
> 
> When I was considering this replacement I got a G4 screen sample and compared it and a white screen sample to the BD.
> 
> 
> It appeared that the G4 had some sparkles but less than the BD. The same with the hot spot. The white sample had neither.
> 
> 
> The G4 didn't seem to reject ambient light as well as the BD.
> 
> 
> What really stood out was the color rendering was MUCH better with the G4, almost as good as the white sample. Colors on the BD were very muted in comparison.
> 
> 
> I decided to get the G4 if only for the better colors.
> 
> 
> What I now see on the full G4 screen is pretty much what I saw on the samples.
> 
> 
> There are sparkles, but I don't really notice them that much. I do occasionally see some hot spotting - a little more than I would really like.
> 
> 
> Although the screen seems to reflect more ambient light, the actual picture quality doesn't seem to be affected that much, at least in my viewing environment.
> 
> 
> Overall, maybe mostly because of the better, more vivid and accurate colors, I consider the picture quality to be MUCH better than before.
> 
> 
> Because I increased screen size, picture brightness is about the same even though the G4 gain is greater than the BD.



Good Info... Glad to hear you are enjoying the FH. Color accuracy and more film-like were the reasons I went with the FH over the BD.


Don't take into account the cell phone camera's effect on the image in my picture. Looking at the screen and taking a cell phone picture of it does not produce the same image... I know what hot-spotting looks like, and you are right, it does look like that. But that was camera induced... I know some won't likely be convinced. No worries.


----------



## J.T. Guitar

Here are a couple more pictures by request of the G4 material with full sunlight in the side window and can lights full up... Taken with an iPhone


Impressive IMHO.


----------



## GetGray

It is still the most versatile material you can get IMO. Looks good.


----------



## Stan-Lee

LOOKS FABULOUS!!!

Thanks for sharing your G4 results!


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *J.T. Guitar*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1800#post_24343119
> 
> 
> Here are a couple more pictures by request of the G4 material with full sunlight in the side window and can lights full up... Taken with an iPhone
> 
> 
> Impressive IMHO.


----------



## J.T. Guitar

Thanks bro...


Oh... The lamp on the projector was in the low setting BTW.


----------



## baloo_btru

Very nice! which projector is that, and with how many hours on the bulb?


----------



## J.T. Guitar

A Sony 600es with about 100 hours on the lamp.


----------



## jwilliams860

I was just given a screen by my neighbor. He said his work was going to throw it away, and he brought it home because he knew I was in the process of getting a theater room started.

So I bring it home unwrap it, and it is a Stewart Studiotek 130.

Only problem is, it's only the screen, not the aluminum surround mounting hardware.

I emailed Stewart directly but haven't heard back.

Does anyone know where I could possibly get the needed parts hardware from?


Thanks


----------



## Craig Peer

You mean you have the screen material but no frame? What happened to the frame ?


----------



## jwilliams860




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Craig Peer*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1800#post_24357565
> 
> 
> You mean you have the screen material but no frame? What happened to the frame ?


Yes just the material, no frame. I asked him the same question, he said that he didn't see it, he thought they had already thrown it out. 

 

So I only have the screen, in may be useless, but I thought Id ask and see, since it was a nice screen.


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jwilliams860*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1800#post_24359405
> 
> 
> Yes just the material, no frame. I asked him the same question, he said that he didn't see it, he thought they had already thrown it out.
> 
> 
> So I only have the screen, in may be useless, but I thought Id ask and see, since it was a nice screen.



Read around in the DIY screen forum here for ideas about making a frame. Many people have done it. FYI, in that forum here they don't like to talk about commercial materials (very serious about DIY) but your project is pretty DIY!


FYI, Stewart screen material is GREAT! I am only selling off my ten foot wide panavision scope screen because I want an acoustically transparent screen and nothing Stewart makes works from a 10' seating distance.


----------



## jwilliams860


Thanks for the info, Ill check it out, IM all about some DIY, and the thought had already crossed my mind. 

 

A good friend of mine is a metal fab guy so might reach out to him as well. 

 

Im also not 100% that the screen can be saved it is pretty wrinkled in some areas, but Im not ready to throw it out yet.


----------



## Craig Peer

If the material has a serial number on it, email that to me and I can find out if they can make a new frame for it for you.


----------



## Stan-Lee




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *jwilliams860*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1800#post_24360171
> 
> 
> Thanks for the info, Ill check it out, IM all about some DIY, and the thought had already crossed my mind.
> 
> 
> A good friend of mine is a metal fab guy so might reach out to him as well.
> 
> 
> Im also not 100% that the screen can be saved it is pretty wrinkled in some areas, but Im not ready to throw it out yet.



I have had my Firehawk G3 snapper screen rolled up for 1 year and when I went to unroll and put back up, I saw that I had not rolled it up properly and it got seriously wrinkled. I put it up and after 2-3 mon the wrinkles were gone. But that's a fixed frame for ya.


----------



## gshawn

I'm looking at purchasing either a used 115" G3 Firehawk or a new 115" G4.


Are the G4 improvements over the G3 worth the price difference? I'm probably looking at paying twice as much for the new G4 as for the used G3.


Hopefully someone has seen both and can chime in...


I have an Epson 5020 projector that I'm looking to move into a room with quite a few windows (with blinds). Should make for a good match with the Firehawk, I think.


Thank you!!!


----------



## Stan-Lee




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gshawn*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1800#post_24376795
> 
> 
> I'm looking at purchasing either a used 115" G3 Firehawk or a new 115" G4.
> 
> 
> Are the G4 improvements over the G3 worth the price difference? I'm probably looking at paying twice as much for the new G4 as for the used G3.
> 
> 
> Hopefully someone has seen both and can chime in...
> 
> 
> I have an Epson 5020 projector that I'm looking to move into a room with quite a few windows (with blinds). Should make for a good match with the Firehawk, I think.
> 
> 
> Thank you!!!



I've seen both. I have both. 120 diag. The ONLY thing the G3 is better at.. is the 3D movies because the G3 has more gain. That's it. The G4 beats it in every other aspect.


----------



## Mikkle




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Stan-Lee*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1800#post_24378754
> 
> 
> I've seen both. I have both. 120 diag. The ONLY thing the G3 is better at.. is the 3D movies because the G3 has more gain. That's it. The G4 beats it in every other aspect.



I'd be interested to hear more about these differences, if you can expand on them a bit...


Looks like there are also quite a few used G3 screens available for much less than the new screen.


I don't care much about 3D one way or the other personally. I'm more curious to see hear about ambient light rejection and just 2D picture quality in general.


You wouldn't happen to be located in the Bay Area by chance? I'd love to see both screens in person


----------



## Stan-Lee




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikkle*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1800#post_24380984
> 
> 
> I'd be interested to hear more about these differences, if you can expand on them a bit...
> 
> 
> Looks like there are also quite a few used G3 screens available for much less than the new screen.
> 
> 
> I don't care much about 3D one way or the other personally. I'm more curious to see hear about ambient light rejection and just 2D picture quality in general.
> 
> 
> You wouldn't happen to be located in the Bay Area by chance? I'd love to see both screens in person




Here is my take on the FireHawk G3 vs G4 in my ambient lit living room.

White walls, floor, ceiling, etc.

JVC RS-56 Projector.

13' throw.


Excellent 2D viewing in any light. No doubt about it.

Off-axis viewing is better than G3. (Projector bulb in low mode) Movie or TV broadcast both look great!


Very impressive image quality.

Image seems A LOT sharper than G3, if that's possible. Noticed that it's like watching a 240 hz LED TV vs a standard TV. Image quality "appears" to be 3D, extremely impressive 2D viewing.


Color (without re-calibration): excellent color, no adjustment necessary.


Hotspotting is super minimal and not really noticeable with 13’ foot throw distance.


Sparkles: Some...nothing to complain about. Is noticeable with solid bright white or other bright color. But, you have to know what to look for to see it. Most people won't ever notice it.


Otherwise, noticed that the old 2007 G3 screen is relaxed, not as tight in the frame as the G4. Yet, the color and image quality are still stellar. New G4 screen is very tight since it is new.


----------



## Mikkle




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Stan-Lee*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1800#post_24381048
> 
> 
> Here is my take on the FireHawk G3 vs G4 in my ambient lit living room.
> 
> White walls, floor, ceiling, etc.
> 
> JVC RS-56 Projector.
> 
> 13' throw.
> 
> 
> Excellent 2D viewing in any light. No doubt about it.
> 
> Off-axis viewing is better than G3. (Projector bulb in low mode) Movie or TV broadcast both look great!
> 
> 
> Very impressive image quality.
> 
> Image seems A LOT sharper than G3, if that's possible. Noticed that it's like watching a 240 hz LED TV vs a standard TV. Image quality "appears" to be 3D, extremely impressive 2D viewing.
> 
> 
> Color (without re-calibration): excellent color, no adjustment necessary.
> 
> 
> Hotspotting is super minimal and not really noticeable with 13’ foot throw distance.
> 
> 
> Sparkles: Some...nothing to complain about. Is noticeable with solid bright white or other bright color. But, you have to know what to look for to see it. Most people won't ever notice it.
> 
> 
> Otherwise, noticed that the old 2007 G3 screen is relaxed, not as tight in the frame as the G4. Yet, the color and image quality are still stellar. New G4 screen is very tight since it is new.



Thanks, that's really helpful!


----------



## Stan-Lee




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Mikkle*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1800#post_24382049
> 
> 
> Thanks, that's really helpful!



No problem. That's just my opinion. Everybody's will be different. The G4 is not as bright due to the lower gain. 1.25 vs 1.1 does not seem like much but in 3D mode, it really matters.

Soooo, I took down the G4 and put the G3 back up on the wall because I have a few movies that I have not watched yet - that are 3D.


----------



## gshawn

awesome, thanks for the great info.


last question is with regards to the vertical alignment of the projector and the screen. I think I read earlier in this thread that the screen must not be placed lower than the projector and to avoid using vertical lens shift?


My projector would be mounted directly to the ceiling, so the lens is probably 6" from the ceiling. I was hoping to place the screen 18" down from the ceiling otherwise the screen is too high to watch comfortably. Ceilings are 9 ft high and viewing distance about 11-12 ft.


Will that cause the picture quality to go down? Should I buy a 12" extension column for the mount so that the top of the pj aligns with the top of the screen?


thanks again!!!


----------



## Stan-Lee




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *gshawn*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1830#post_24387755
> 
> 
> awesome, thanks for the great info.
> 
> 
> last question is with regards to the vertical alignment of the projector and the screen. I think I read earlier in this thread that the screen must not be placed lower than the projector and to avoid using vertical lens shift?
> 
> 
> My projector would be mounted directly to the ceiling, so the lens is probably 6" from the ceiling. I was hoping to place the screen 18" down from the ceiling otherwise the screen is too high to watch comfortably. Ceilings are 9 ft high and viewing distance about 11-12 ft.
> 
> 
> Will that cause the picture quality to go down? Should I buy a 12" extension column for the mount so that the top of the pj aligns with the top of the screen?
> 
> 
> thanks again!!!



Yup, get the extension.


----------



## Wendell R. Breland

Anyone using a Stewart screen with UltraMatte 150 and Microperf X2 material. If so, how do you like it? What size is your screen? Using a UHD (4K) projector?


----------



## Stan-Lee




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Wendell R. Breland*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1830#post_24429308
> 
> 
> Anyone using a Stewart screen with UltraMatte 150 and Microperf X2 material. If so, how do you like it? What size is your screen? Using a UHD (4K) projector?



Have a UM150 fixed 120" diag screen.

Not perf'd.

No 4k.

Great screen and wonderful image quality! Here's some snapshots from a old masters golf telecast.


----------



## nathan_h

U


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Wendell R. Breland*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1830#post_24429308
> 
> 
> Anyone using a Stewart screen with UltraMatte 150 and Microperf X2 material. If so, how do you like it? What size is your screen? Using a UHD (4K) projector?



Utramatte is a great material.


I'd still be using it instead of having mine listed for sale -- but at my viewing distance, 9ft, perfs were not an option. I needed a weave.


What is your distance? I assume you have a large screen because you want a positive gain material. And a large scream probably means a long seating distance? Many people report perfs disappear at about twenty feet.


----------



## Wendell R. Breland




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *nathan_h*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1800_60#post_24431384
> 
> 
> What is your distance? I assume you have a large screen because you want a positive gain material. And a large scream probably means a long seating distance? Many people report perfs disappear at about twenty feet.



Screen size will be 52 x 122 inches (2.35 ratio), masked to 52 x 92 for 1.78 ratio viewing. Seating distance is 15.5 feet. I intend to purchase a Sony VPL-VW600ES 4k projector. The 1.5 gain should help the brightness when using in 3D mode and may allow the use of low lamp in 2D mode.


I can not find a weave screen with a gain above 1.1. Some people are perfectly content to have the front speakers on a different horizontal plane but it does not work for me, so I must use a acoustically transparent screen.


Currently I have a Da-Lite screen with Audio Vision perf, I can see the perf *under certain conditions* at my seating distance, vision is 20-13 L & 20-15 R. The Audio Vision perf size is larger than Stewart Micro perf. The Stewart Micro perf size (.020") is 

I would like the Da-Lite HD Progressive 1.3 screen material with perforations but they have no plans to offer it with perfs, it is available in 1.1 gain.


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Wendell R. Breland*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1830#post_24433265
> 
> 
> Screen size will be 52 x 122 inches (2.35 ratio), masked to 52 x 92 for 1.78 ratio viewing. Seating distance is 15.5 feet. I intend to purchase a Sony VPL-VW600ES 4k projector. The 1.5 gain should help the brightness when using in 3D mode and may allow the use of low lamp in 2D mode.
> 
> 
> I can not find a weave screen with a gain above 1.1. Some people are perfectly content to have the front speakers on a different horizontal plane but it does not work for me, so I must use a acoustically transparent screen.
> 
> 
> Currently I have a Da-Lite screen with Audio Vision perf, I can see the perf *under certain conditions* at my seating distance, vision is 20-13 L & 20-15 R. The Audio Vision perf size is larger than Stewart Micro perf. The Stewart Micro perf size (.020") is
> 
> I would like the Da-Lite HD Progressive 1.3 screen material with perforations but they have no plans to offer it with perfs, it is available in 1.1 gain.



Your distance is much more optimum than mine.


I'd still be tempted to buy more lumens and go with a weave but at that distance you could definitely go either way.


----------



## tvolle




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *nathan_h*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1830#post_24431384
> 
> 
> U
> 
> Utramatte is a great material.
> 
> 
> I'd still be using it instead of having mine listed for sale -- but at my viewing distance, 9ft, perfs were not an option. I needed a weave.
> 
> 
> What is your distance? I assume you have a large screen because you want a positive gain material. And a large scream probably means a long seating distance? Many people report perfs disappear at about twenty feet.



20 feet? I wish I had their eye-sight!










I have a micro-perf screen and I cannot see the perfs at all from my closest 11.5 ft viewing distance.


----------



## dsteak

I will post this in the JVC X700 thread, but wanted to post here as well.


I am buying the X700 and was ready to go for the StudioTek 130 to go with it, but now Stewart is recommending the Firehawk G4 (to my dealer for me) and I have no idea why, not getting any feedback.


JVC X700

13.5-14' throw

12-13 seating distance

106" x 53" CIA screen

light controlled room


I was under the impression that the G4 was for rooms with ambient light.


Any thoughts appreciated.


----------



## Stan-Lee




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *dsteak*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1830#post_24474713
> 
> 
> I will post this in the JVC X700 thread, but wanted to post here as well.
> 
> 
> I am buying the X700 and was ready to go for the StudioTek 130 to go with it, but now Stewart is recommending the Firehawk G4 (to my dealer for me) and I have no idea why, not getting any feedback.
> 
> 
> JVC X700
> 
> 13.5-14' throw
> 
> 12-13 seating distance
> 
> 106" x 53" CIA screen
> 
> light controlled room
> 
> 
> I was under the impression that the G4 was for rooms with ambient light.
> 
> 
> Any thoughts appreciated.



True. Ambient light and G4 go together best. Seems like a light controlled room would be ideal with a St130. That x700 has 1300 ANSI lumens too. (Deleted mis-information. Thx AVS.)


Anyone else here have a similar (lumens) projector and lighting/room conditions?? What's your screen?


----------



## nathan_h

If by 'light controlled' you mean black ceiling and dark walls and floor and no windows, it's hard to believe the firehawk is necessary. I had one in a room with a white ceiling and it really helped.


But in my current bat cave, it would be silly and not look as good as the studiotek.


If by 'light controlled' you mean you have drapes over the windows and can turn off the lights, but the room is not painted very dark, I can understand their recommendation. I wouldn't want to use my white screen in such a room.


More important, you are paying a few thousand bucks to the dealer, they should be able to satisfactorily explain their recommendations....or you should consider patronizing someone who does...




To answer your question: Until two weeks ago I was using a ten foot wide ultramatte 200 with a slightly longer throw and a JVC in a bat cave and it worked very well. I hate to be selling it, in fact, but I am going with an AT weave.


And don't worry about black levels. That's what the iris is for.


----------



## dsteak

It's a cave, no windows, black velvet screen wall, etc. I ordered the StudioTek, thanks for your thoughts nathan_h and Stan-Lee.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Stan-Lee*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1830#post_24475676
> 
> 
> True. Ambient light and G4 go together best. Seems like a light controlled room would be ideal with a St130. That x700 has 1300 ANSI lumens too. *They're probably worried about your black levels and hotspotting with a semi short throw.*
> 
> 
> Anyone else here have a similar (lumens) projector and lighting/room conditions?? What's your screen?



That can't be it. The throw ratio for the G4 is 1.5. The throw ratio for the ST130 is 1.3. So short throw with the G4 is worse. A G4 is a high gain screen, even though it is only 1.1 gain, because it is starting with a base around 0.6 and the optical coatings make it 1.1. That is a huge percentage increase. Much larger than the 30% gain with an ST130.


----------



## Scott MS




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *J.T. Guitar*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1800#post_24343119
> 
> 
> Here are a couple more pictures by request of the G4 material with full sunlight in the side window and can lights full up... Taken with an iPhone
> 
> 
> Impressive IMHO.



I'm going to have pretty much the same setup as you. Thanks for posting photos.


It will be a Sony VPL-VW600ES projector mounted with a 1.4 throw distance in a room with a 110" fixed frame screen and about 1/2 the ambient light you have in the photo above (which is the worst case scenario during the day). I have also installed directional can lights that wash the wall and do not hit the screen at all for night viewing. Ceiling is bone white, walls are a medium tan color.


I was pretty much set on a Stewart FireHawk G4, but wondering if one of Stewart's other two gray screens would be a better choice for less sparkling and unevenness off axis than the G4, given I don't have as much ambient light.


Would a *GreyHawk RS G3* be a good choice in this situation (some ambient daylight from the side) or even the *Cima Tiburon* which is gray, with lower gain, less screen sparkling, and higher viewing angle?


----------



## GetGray

No, neither are designed for ambient. The GH in particular will wash, badly.


----------



## nathan_h




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Scott MS*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1830#post_24505162
> 
> 
> I'm going to have pretty much the same setup as you. Thanks for posting photos.
> 
> 
> It will be a Sony VPL-VW600ES projector mounted with a 1.4 throw distance in a room with a 110" fixed frame screen and about 1/2 the ambient light you have in the photo above (which is the worst case scenario during the day). I have also installed directional can lights that wash the wall and do not hit the screen at all for night viewing. Ceiling is bone white, walls are a medium tan color.
> 
> 
> I was pretty much set on a Stewart FireHawk G4, but wondering if one of Stewart's other two gray screens would be a better choice for less sparkling and unevenness off axis than the G4, given I don't have as much ambient light.
> 
> 
> Would a *GreyHawk RS G3* be a good choice in this situation (some ambient daylight from the side) or even the *Cima Tiburon* which is gray, with lower gain, less screen sparkling, and higher viewing angle?



Without light control (ie, light walls, let alone windows etc) you want more gain/narrower viewing cone -- to reject as much of the room light as possible. Firehawk is usually the best bet. You could try something like the Ultramatte 200, but I've had both and in a room like yours, I prefer the FIrehawk. (Actually in a room like yours, these days, I prefer a large direct view set, but that is a whole different topic!)


----------



## J.T. Guitar

All I can say is, after two months I still Iove my FH... The small amount of sparkle I notice during the brightest white scenes are a small trade off for the wonderful image it reflects with lights on or off. I have no regrets at all. Haven't seen the other material so can't comment on the differences.


FWIW- I believe the FH G4 has very good off axis viewing to beyond 30 degrees. IMHO


----------



## TL5

After getting samples of the Stewart Firehawk G4, Stewart Cima Tiburon & Screen Innovations Slate, I went with the Cima Tiburon. My room has pretty decent light control but does have a light colored ceiling. Screen is on the smallish size, though: 100" diagonal. I realize it won't have the ambient light rejection of the G4 or Slate, but by far it had the most uniform, smooth surface.


Going into the selection process, I already knew what I didn't want: Sparkles, grain or anything showing up in large light colored areas of the picture. My previous screen, a Da-lite Cinema Vision had this in spades - and it drove me crazy!!


The funny thing is when looking at the samples: although the gain of the Tiburon is rated at .95, and the G4 at 1.1 and the Slate at 1.2 - the Tiburon looked brighter than both of them. I'll report on it when I put it up in about a week or so. Cine4home had a really great review of the Cima Tiburon on their site.


----------



## Scott MS

Thanks for the feedback. Looks like I'll be going with the Firehawk G4. It would be nice if they made a lower gain version with less sparkles.


Is the cost for custom sizes (like 115", 16:9) that much more than the standard sizes (like 110" 16:9)?


----------



## Scott MS




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *TL5*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1830#post_24506509
> 
> 
> After getting samples of the Stewart Firehawk G4, Stewart Cima Tiburon & Screen Innovations Slate, I went with the Cima Tiburon. My room has pretty decent light control but does have a light colored ceiling. Screen is on the smallish size, though: 100" diagonal. I realize it won't have the ambient light rejection of the G4 or Slate, but by far it had the most uniform, smooth surface.
> 
> 
> Going into the selection process, I already knew what I didn't want: Sparkles, grain or anything showing up in large light colored areas of the picture. My previous screen, a Da-lite Cinema Vision had this in spades - and it drove me crazy!!
> 
> 
> The funny thing is when looking at the samples: although the gain of the Tiburon is rated at .95, and the G4 at 1.1 and the Slate at 1.2 - the Tiburon looked brighter than both of them. I'll report on it when I put it up in about a week or so. Cine4home had a really great review of the Cima Tiburon on their site.



I'd like to hear more about the Tiburon. I realize it doesn't have the light rejection of the FH G4, but perhaps it's a compromise between a FH G4 and a ST 130 in a room with some ambient light that can be controlled. How were the sparkles with the Cima Tiburon vs. the FH G4?


Here's a photo of the Cima Tiburon in action in the review:


----------



## TL5




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Scott MS*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1830#post_24507435
> 
> 
> I'd like to hear more about the Tiburon. I realize it doesn't have the light rejection of the FH G4, but perhaps it's a compromise between a GH G4 and a ST 130 in a room with some ambient light that can be controlled. How were the sparkles with the Cima Tiburon vs. the FH G4?
> 
> 
> Here's a photo of the Cima Tiburon in action in the review:



On the samples of the Tiburon & G4 I had (about 8" x 10"), as far as the sparkles it was no contest - They were basically non existent on the Tiburon, and I could easily see them on the Firehawk G4. After living with my Da-Lite Cinema Vision, I knew I didn't want a screen like that. But the G4 is MUCH darker than the Tiburon, and I'm sure it's much better at handling ambient light. What I'm surprised at is even though the gain on the Tiburon is lower than the G4 (.95 vs. 1.1) the Tiburon looked brighter to me. I should put mine up in about a week or so - can't wait!


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Scott MS*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1830#post_24507389
> 
> 
> Thanks for the feedback. Looks like I'll be going with the Firehawk G4. It would be nice if they made a lower gain version with less sparkles.
> 
> 
> Is the cost for custom sizes (like 115", 16:9) that much more than the standard sizes (like 110" 16:9)?



Not a big difference in price, since Stewart custom builds each screen in the regular line. Part of the savings, when going to the Cima line is the lack of customization. If we can help you, give us a call. My signature just lists a small portion of the companies we carry.


----------



## eagle011

Can I please get pricing on the Cima 110" Neve and also the 110" Luxus Deluxe with studiotek130?


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *eagle011*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1830#post_24512712
> 
> 
> Can I please get pricing on the Cima 110" Neve and also the 110" Luxus Deluxe with studiotek130?



Sent you a PM.


----------



## Gn0m4

Anyone has a 128" or 138", 2.35:1 or 2.40:1, Luxus Screenwall or Luxus Deluxe Screenwall with Firehawk G3 surface?

I would see photos of this screen and to share impressions.


----------



## Gn0m4




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Gn0m4*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1830#post_24604838
> 
> 
> Anyone has a 128" or 138", 2.35:1 or 2.40:1, Luxus Screenwall or Luxus Deluxe Screenwall with Firehawk G3 surface?
> 
> I would see photos of this screen and to share impressions.



Anyone?


----------



## drummermitchell

  
















Stewart Luxus 128" FH G-3


----------



## Craig Peer

Nice room there ! I like the ceiling color.


----------



## drummermitchell

Thanks Craig,

It's called Midnight Sky(Behr or Benjamin Moore paint).

It's a drop ceiling and I primed (grey)and painted the tiles plus the grid.

The wifey liked this house so we bought it,the room is 12 x19 x7,wish she was a tad bigger,but I'm not buying another house just for theatre.

Actually all those Gik panels I sold and went with RT traps.

Seems before when I had 244's at my reflections and then tried RT's HF Mondos there was a huge improvement,so I'm finishing off the room with Real Traps.


----------



## drummermitchell

Craig just seen your HT picts,now were talkin,now that's a ROOM,very nice indeed.


----------



## Craig Peer

Thanks. My room has it's own compromises, but having two electric Stewart screens isn't one of them. I love both my StudioTek 130 G3 and my Cima Neve !!


----------



## dan30306

Just ordered a G4 with Sabre frame 120".... can't wait to see it.


----------



## Stan-Lee




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Gn0m4*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1830#post_24604838
> 
> 
> Anyone has a 128" or 138", 2.35:1 or 2.40:1, Luxus Screenwall or Luxus Deluxe Screenwall with Firehawk G3 surface?
> 
> I would see photos of this screen and to share impressions.



I have a 120" diag G3 FireHawk and I LOVE it. Don't want to change it. Results are stellar and it is a 2007 screen!!


----------



## Tnedator

Whats the story on Studiotek 130 G3 and 4k? In the near future I will be installing one of these, but Stewart doesn't list this as one of their 4k ready screen materials. It will be a perfed screen.


----------



## Stan-Lee




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Tnedator*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1860#post_24673680
> 
> 
> Whats the story on Studiotek 130 G3 and 4k? In the near future I will be installing one of these, but Stewart doesn't list this as one of their 4k ready screen materials. It will be a perfed screen.



I asked a salesman there and he said all Stewart screens are considered 4K ready. It just isn't specified on the website.


----------



## BillY2KFRC

Hi, I am planning to do a combo flat screen/drop down electric projection screen setup in my living room when I move next month. I will be wall mounting my Elite 70" (which I love) and having a 120-130" screen (need to measure everything after I move in) drop down in front of it. I am planning to go with a JVC RS49 projector. I used to have an RS1 years ago and loved that, so figure the 49 will be amazing for me. I'll post a picture of the living room from the MLS site below. I will have different furniture, plan to keep the light colored back wall, but the side walls and ceiling are nice and dark due to the log construction. They also have wooden blinds and dark, thick curtains for the slider to the deck on the other side of the kitchen you cannot see in the pic. This is the main reason I decided to go this route rather than finishing the basement and making a dedicated space. But, I watch mostly during the day, so I will still have some ambient light to deal with I'm sure.


Here is my question, from looking at my room, during the day, do I need something like a G4? Or could I get away with something more conventional? Can anybody compare the sparkles on the G4 to a Mitsubishi rear projection set? I had a 75" Laservue and COUNT NOT STAND the sparkles, they were the main reason I sold it for the Elite. So if white scenes look anything like that I will need to look for other options. Projector will be mounted about 20-25' away from the screen and just above eye level, if that matters.

 


Any suggestions are much appreciated!!! Thank you!


----------



## hwoarang

  


I've barely had the G4 for a few months, and not used it all that much. When I received it, I mentioned to Stewart that the ride side retracted higher than the left. I was told that was acceptable (?!). I didn't think that was reasonable for a $5k screen. I let it be as I just didn't have any more energy left. Now it's already rippling up on that side. How can they charge this much and have these issues so soon? That on top of major sparkles which again I was told I have to accept...


----------



## ben38




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hwoarang*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1860#post_24720372
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've barely had the G4 for a few months, and not used it all that much. When I received it, I mentioned to Stewart that the ride side retracted higher than the left. I was told that was acceptable (?!). I didn't think that was reasonable for a $5k screen. I let it be as I just didn't have any more energy left. Now it's already rippling up on that side. How can they charge this much and have these issues so soon? That on top of major sparkles which again I was told I have to accept...


Did anyone at Stewart see the picture you just posted? Those are fairly serious ripples. I can't believe a top company like Stewart would not try to make it right.


----------



## GetGray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hwoarang*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1800_100#post_24720372
> 
> 
> I've barely had the G4 for a few months, and not used it all that much. When I received it, I mentioned to Stewart that the ride side retracted higher than the left. I was told that was acceptable (?!). I didn't think that was reasonable for a $5k screen. I let it be as I just didn't have any more energy left. Now it's already rippling up on that side. How can they charge this much and have these issues so soon? That on top of major sparkles which again I was told I have to accept...


Why are you working with Stewart directly? Why isn't your dealer handling this? They should be. I would have.


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Tnedator*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1860#post_24673680
> 
> 
> Whats the story on Studiotek 130 G3 and 4k? In the near future I will be installing one of these, but Stewart doesn't list this as one of their 4k ready screen materials. It will be a perfed screen.





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Stan-Lee*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1860#post_24679621
> 
> 
> I asked a salesman there and he said all Stewart screens are considered 4K ready. It just isn't specified on the website.



Correct


----------



## Mike Garrett




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *hwoarang*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1860#post_24720372
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've barely had the G4 for a few months, and not used it all that much. When I received it, I mentioned to Stewart that the ride side retracted higher than the left. I was told that was acceptable (?!). I didn't think that was reasonable for a $5k screen. I let it be as I just didn't have any more energy left. Now it's already rippling up on that side. How can they charge this much and have these issues so soon? That on top of major sparkles which again I was told I have to accept...



That does not look good. I assume you brought this to your dealers attention? Will your dealer not go to bat for you? As for sparkly, that unfortunately is one of the trade-offs to this high gain screen. Though it is only 1.1 gain, it is still high gain, because it is starting out at around 0.6 gain before optical coatings. It may or may not have been the best choice for your set up. Some dealers just recommend FireHawk and call it a day.


----------



## hwoarang




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1860#post_24721819
> 
> 
> Why are you working with Stewart directly? Why isn't your dealer handling this? They should be. I would have.





> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *AV Science Sales 5*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1860#post_24722147
> 
> 
> That does not look good. I assume you brought this to your dealers attention? Will your dealer not go to bat for you? As for sparkly, that unfortunately is one of the trade-offs to this high gain screen. Though it is only 1.1 gain, it is still high gain, because it is starting out at around 0.6 gain before optical coatings. It may or may not have been the best choice for your set up. Some dealers just recommend FireHawk and call it a day.



My guy is in NJ and I did a self install with the paid help of a local installer from yelp. I would have to pay him to come out again. I haven't told my dealer yet as this has been getting progressively worse more recently. I did mention the retractable issue earlier but was told by a Stewart Tech that, that was acceptable. Obviously it's not as its affecting the physics of the screen. There is also a roller line going across the screen when it's down too. I'm convinced this screen is a dud. I just have no way to get this thing back to them as I'm on the top floor in a loft, with a small elevator, and this thing is installed high up, just below the exposed beams of the ceiling. Just a ton of hassle, and why should I have to pay for the work to have a new one installed....


----------



## GetGray

I install screens and I warrant the installation. And I charge retail prices for same. I also sell them as cheap as anyone else to compete with internet resellers, but only if I'm confident the customer understands the risks associated with a self install, particularly without the same experience that I or my installers have. Especially with a motorized screen. If I installed it, I'd be going back and fixing it. If the customer installed it, I'd still get it worked out for them, but the labor and work of the repalcement is on them. There are only a few things that can screw one up, but it can be done. In my experience its the most solid product out there, in every way. I've only had a couple of issues over the years that I've sold them, self installed or by me, and Stewart took care of the issue every time. But it was the dealers (my) responsibility to work out the logistics (which would include a remove and replace). You really need to have your dealer engage Stewart. I've never had anyone at Stewart tell me a screen coming down crooked was OK, either. Your dealer should be able to work it out for you. Sorry you are having trouble with yours.


----------



## hwoarang




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *GetGray*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1860#post_24724437
> 
> 
> I install screens and I warrant the installation. And I charge retail prices for same. I also sell them as cheap as anyone else to compete with internet resellers, but only if I'm confident the customer understands the risks associated with a self install, particularly without the same experience that I or my installers have. Especially with a motorized screen. If I installed it, I'd be going back and fixing it. If the customer installed it, I'd still get it worked out for them, but the labor and work of the repalcement is on them. There are only a few things that can screw one up, but it can be done. In my experience its the most solid product out there, in every way. I've only had a couple of issues over the years that I've sold them, self installed or by me, and Stewart took care of the issue every time. But it was the dealers (my) responsibility to work out the logistics (which would include a remove and replace). You really need to have your dealer engage Stewart. I've never had anyone at Stewart tell me a screen coming down crooked was OK, either. Your dealer should be able to work it out for you. Sorry you are having trouble with yours.



Thanks for the support and feedback. I don't see how the product failing is the responsibility of the installer. I definitely believe this should be handled by Stewart. I'm going to put a message together for my dealer in Nj and request a service call from Stewart. I'll let you guys know how it goes!


----------



## drlopezmdfacp


Trying to get educated on screens and projectors as I am a first time buyer.  Was hoping to get a really good screen for under $2000.  Initial budget came back with this, Stewart Filmscreen CAB100HFHG4MG-4-2-5 100" Motorized, perforated 16x9 screen with a sleek housing designed to blend into interiors. $7,715.00".  Can anyone tell me if this makes sense?  Labor is extra.


----------



## GetGray




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *drlopezmdfacp*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1800_100#post_24763996
> 
> 
> Trying to get educated on screens and projectors as I am a first time buyer.  Was hoping to get a really good screen for under $2000.  Initial budget came back with this, Stewart Filmscreen CAB100HFHG4MG-4-2-5 100" Motorized, perforated 16x9 screen with a sleek housing designed to blend into interiors. $7,715.00".  Can anyone tell me if this makes sense?  Labor is extra.


DOn't know your requirements (apologies if posted recently and I missed). You have about every feature box there is checked though. That's a nice screen. Won't be $2k.


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *drlopezmdfacp*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1860#post_24763996
> 
> 
> Trying to get educated on screens and projectors as I am a first time buyer.  Was hoping to get a really good screen for under $2000.  Initial budget came back with this, Stewart Filmscreen CAB100HFHG4MG-4-2-5 100" Motorized, perforated 16x9 screen with a sleek housing designed to blend into interiors. $7,715.00".  Can anyone tell me if this makes sense?  Labor is extra.



That's a high priced screen for a first time buyer. Give us a call at A V Science and maybe we can help. I was once a first time buyer too.


----------



## jimmy12

Im interested in the firehawk g4 material, but cant seem to find consistency in terms of pj mounting location requirements.


The throw distance minimum of 1.5xscreen width is clear to reduce hotspotting, but what impact on gain and image uniformity does mounting the pj on the ceiling 2ft above the top of the g4 material have? I am sure that theoreticaly a perfectly centered lens on the screen will give the best image possible, but how much are you losing if you have to ceiling mount (only in terms of screen performance, I am aware of the impacts lens shift can have on pj sharpness)?


My hope is the impact is negligible, given that it seems like the g4 material is best at rejecting incident light from the side and not from the the top/bottom.


And thanks to everyone for all the pics and discussion of the good off axis performance of this material. The narrower viewing cone on this type of screen was a concern, but it seems like the consensus is there is little observable difference within reason. Hotspotting was another concern which seems negligible, leaving only texture and sparkles/shimmer which seem to be pretty minor and a good tradeoff for a better image during the day with a side window and lights on.


----------



## Scott MS

Here's my experience on Stewart screen selection. I have a room that has decent light control, but it is painted a medium brown with bone white ceiling. It is not a bat cave, but it is not a white room either. I have shutters on one side of the room that I can partially close and block out most of the light during the daytime. I consider myself to be a videophile who can usually quickly spot clouding, unevenness, hotspotting, poor color temp, etc. on TVs and other video devices.


I was choosing between a Firehawk, GrayHawk, and Cima Tiburon screen. I ended up purchasing a 118" Firehawk and a Sony VPL-VW600ES projector, which has good brightness. Stewart mistakenly shipped me the wrong screen, which was a GrayHawk. I didn't realize this until I was putting it together. At one point I had both a full size 118" Firehawk and 100" Grayhawk screen in my possession, at the same time, for comparison. I actually preferred the GrayHawk over the FireHawk. The blacks were blacker in the daylight with the Firehawk, but the Grayhawk had better whites, less screen sparkling texture, and better colors -- at the expense of some brightness. In the end, I purchased a Cima Tiburon and I love it. Both my dealer and Stewart sales rep tried to tell me that the premier line of screens (non-Cima) would be better and I was taking a step back in performance. To me, the Cima had the most even screen, least amount of sparkles, and some ambient light rejection. In the end, I am willing to make room accomodations to improve the picture rather than buy a "Band-Aid" screen.


Here's my opinions on each of these screens:


Firehawk G4 -- Amazing black levels and good color saturation in ambient light. I liked this screen, but it performs poorly on whites. I found that white scenes were slightly blue in tint and had a visible sparkle texture, kind of like the old silkscreen effect. This effect is not visible with darker colors. I also did not care for the hotspotting and poor viewing cone. I had the projector at 1.5x the screen width. In general, a good screen but with compromises.


GrayHawk -- The lighter and more neutral color of the grayhawk screen material (less blue and more gray) resulted in better whites at the compromise of some brightness. I also felt the sparkles were much less, but still visible. On the screen I had, the sparkles were unevenly applied. I saw some vertical sections on the screen where the sparkles were more intense. Sparkles were visible when panning across an ice hockey game, which was extremely annoying.


Cima Tiburon -- The least gray of three screens, limited amount of sparkles, and a 0.95 gain. I felt I had enough light from the VW600ES to light this screen at the expense of some additional washing during the daytime. At night this screen shines because it doesn't do anything to the picture. Some slight sparkling if you look very close at the screen, but the picture is very even, little hotspotting, and nice wide viewing cone. In general, this screen does the best job at preserving the fantastic image that is projected from the VW600ES without adding hotspotting or artificial sparkling.


----------



## jimmy12

Thanks Scott MS. I have to admit, I was sold on the Firehawk G4 until seeing your post.


Viewing cone, hotspotting, texture, off-whites, and shimmer/sparklies were of course my concerns when considering an ambient light screen, but most of what I have read from reviews and owner's feedback is that these issues are very minimal and well worth the tradeoff for the solid ambient light performance with the G4 material.


I don't have a lot of flexibility for light control in the room I am working on. And seeing what the wall looked like in the room in the day time viewing conditions showed me what blacks would look like, and it's bad. Having said that though, I know that sparkles and texture would bother me.


I'm setting this room up for someone else and I'm not sure which phone call I'd rather get - hey, this screen has this weird sparkle that I don't like or hey, this screen looks terrible in the day time??? I guess if I get the latter I can at least say, yes, but you save $4k on your screen and it looks better at night?


Any other thoughts on the mounting height of the pj relative to the screen and its impact on the G4's gain/uniformity? Any other thoughts on the G4 material in general? Thanks.


----------



## DavidHir

I pulled the trigger on the StudioTek 100. My room is a batcave painted with Rosco black velour and carpeted black. I am also going to probably use Protostar around the surrounding walls and ceiling 30" from the screen (this stuff comes 30" wide).


----------



## dan30306

I have compared them all. Cima Neve, Firehawk G4, Black Diamond, etc. I put them all side by side. Settled on Firehawk G4- couldn't be happier. I even spent double the normal price for a custom frame (Sabre). See thread my thread in this forum about that. My challenges are a lot more demanding than most beyond just ambient light. It really does come down to they are all great screens- its just viewer preference.


----------



## Scott MS

It does come down to viewer preference and no single screen will satisfy all demands. For instance, if you want black blacks with some ambient light, the Firehawk wins hands down. If you can't stand seeing what appears to be screen texture and sparkles (which really is the gain coating on the screen), then some screens with a high gain coating may not be for you.


I also had samples of the Studiotek 130 and Studiotek 100. Both of those screens had the best colors. Nothing beats a white screen. I felt the 130 probably had too much gain for my room and projector. If I had a dark and light controlled room, I would go with the Studiotek 100 and never look back. Both Studioteks washed pretty badly in my room.


----------



## Craig Peer




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Scott MS*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1860#post_24775054
> 
> 
> It does come down to viewer preference and no single screen will satisfy all demands. For instance, if you want black blacks with some ambient light, the Firehawk wins hands down. If you can't stand seeing what appears to be screen texture and sparkles (which really is the gain coating on the screen), then some screens with a high gain coating may not be for you.
> 
> 
> I also had samples of the Studiotek 130 and Studiotek 100. Both of those screens had the best colors. Nothing beats a white screen. I felt the 130 probably had too much gain for my room and projector. If I had a dark and light controlled room, I would go with the Studiotek 100 and never look back. Both Studioteks washed pretty badly in my room.



I've owned both Firehawk G3, and now a StudioTek 130 G3 ( love it ) and a Cima Neve screen ( love it too ). IMO, your room conditions partially determine which screen will work better. Here's a write up I did some time ago to explain why I switched from the Firehawk to the StudioTek 130 -


" When I first got into home theater over 10 years ago, not only were projectors not that great contrast wise, I also never had a dedicated theater space. It was always a " media room ". Compromises had to be made. The décor wasn't dark, there was occasionally light in the room. The picture suffered. I started using grey screens pretty early on. Overall they just looked better. DLP projectors at least looked like they had better contrast, and what little on / off contrast they had was preserved by the screen, rather than washing out due to reflections from white walls etc. The picture looked pretty good. I was happy.


Then, when I came back to work for AV Science I decided to see what I could do to improve my home theater. I have a dedicated theater, but it was setup more like a media room. My SIM Lumis throws an outstanding picture. Could I make it look even better? I owe a lot of this to Rich Harkness. I read his theater build thread and realized I'd become complacent regarding my theater. Rich explained how and why he had picked the Stewart StudioTek 130 G3 screen over the Firehawk G3 screen. I was using a Firehawk screen myself. So I got a sample of StudioTek 130 and devised a screen sample holder that would allow me to put the sample in front of my Firehawk. The blacks / contrast on the StudioTek looked terrible compared to my Firehawk. I grabbed a big " police " type flashlight ( lots of D cells - bright ) and stood at the screen. I did the " flashlight test ". Lots of things in the room reflected back onto the screen. First I decided to cover the beige carpet with black carpet rugs from Walmart. That worked well, but the ST 130 still didn't look as good as the FH. Then I had a giant rug made that covered the entire front 2/3's of the theater. Better. Next, I re-painted the ceiling and the side walls darker grey. Now the ST was starting to look as good or better overall than the FH. I then painted the back walls much darker, put a black MDF board in front of the popcorn machines glass case, hung black curtains and Protostar material on part of the back wall, and hung another red velvet curtain over a white closet door. Now the blacks on space movies etc. looked as good on the StudioTek 130 sample as they did on the Firehawk. I then switched screens. I first replaced my 2.35:1 Firehawk with a 2.35:1 StudioTek, and I also replaced my 16:9 High Contrast Cinema Vision screen with a 16:9 Neve 1.1. The Lumis looks totally awesome on these screens ! Making my room décor and walls dark and switching to white screens was one of the best things I've done to improve my picture in my theater "!


----------



## Scott MS

I agree that both the room conditions and projector will certainly impact the screen that you select. I found that the Sony VPL-VW600ES provides a great deal of light and I can get away with a lighter colored screen. I have also programmed the Cinema 1 and Cinema 2 picture settings into my home automation controller so that it is automatically set or changed to Cinema 1 during daytime and then Cinema 2 after sundown (will either switch picture mode if the projector is currently on or will turn to the correct picture mode if the projector is powered on.)


So rather than trying to buy a screen that accommodates both daytime and nighttime, I'm changing the projector brightness through automation.


----------



## TL5




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *Scott MS*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1860#post_24772922
> 
> 
> Here's my experience on Stewart screen selection. I have a room that has decent light control, but it is painted a medium brown with bone white ceiling. It is not a bat cave, but it is not a white room either. I have shutters on one side of the room that I can partially close and block out most of the light during the daytime. I consider myself to be a videophile who can usually quickly spot clouding, unevenness, hotspotting, poor color temp, etc. on TVs and other video devices.
> 
> 
> I was choosing between a Firehawk, GrayHawk, and Cima Tiburon screen. I ended up purchasing a 118" Firehawk and a Sony VPL-VW600ES projector, which has good brightness. Stewart mistakenly shipped me the wrong screen, which was a GrayHawk. I didn't realize this until I was putting it together. At one point I had both a full size 118" Firehawk and 100" Grayhawk screen in my possession, at the same time, for comparison. I actually preferred the GrayHawk over the FireHawk. The blacks were blacker in the daylight with the Firehawk, but the Grayhawk had better whites, less screen sparkling texture, and better colors -- at the expense of some brightness. In the end, I purchased a Cima Tiburon and I love it. Both my dealer and Stewart sales rep tried to tell me that the premier line of screens (non-Cima) would be better and I was taking a step back in performance. To me, the Cima had the most even screen, least amount of sparkles, and some ambient light rejection. In the end, I am willing to make room accomodations to improve the picture rather than buy a "Band-Aid" screen.
> 
> 
> Here's my opinions on each of these screens:
> 
> 
> Firehawk G4 -- Amazing black levels and good color saturation in ambient light. I liked this screen, but it performs poorly on whites. I found that white scenes were slightly blue in tint and had a visible sparkle texture, kind of like the old silkscreen effect. This effect is not visible with darker colors. I also did not care for the hotspotting and poor viewing cone. I had the projector at 1.5x the screen width. In general, a good screen but with compromises.
> 
> 
> GrayHawk -- The lighter and more neutral color of the grayhawk screen material (less blue and more gray) resulted in better whites at the compromise of some brightness. I also felt the sparkles were much less, but still visible. On the screen I had, the sparkles were unevenly applied. I saw some vertical sections on the screen where the sparkles were more intense. Sparkles were visible when panning across an ice hockey game, which was extremely annoying.
> 
> 
> Cima Tiburon -- The least gray of three screens, limited amount of sparkles, and a 0.95 gain. I felt I had enough light from the VW600ES to light this screen at the expense of some additional washing during the daytime. At night this screen shines because it doesn't do anything to the picture. Some slight sparkling if you look very close at the screen, but the picture is very even, little hotspotting, and nice wide viewing cone. In general, this screen does the best job at preserving the fantastic image that is projected from the VW600ES without adding hotspotting or artificial sparkling.



I couldn't agree with you more on the Cima Tiburon. I have a 100" fixed frame Tiburon with a Sony 55ES - what a great combo! I also got screen samples of the Firehawk G4, Grayhawk, as well as the SI Black Diamond 1.4 & Slate. To me the Tiburon had the best combo of attributes that were important to me in my room - some capability with ambient light, a wide viewing area and a minimum of grain & sparkles in light colored screens.


----------



## J.T. Guitar

6 month user of a FH G4... Very pleased. Some noticeable texture on the brightest of scenes, but great ambient light rejection in day and sport watching environments.


----------



## DavidHir

I've joined the Stewart club. My Studiotek 100 should be here in a couple of weeks and Chad B will be here to calibrate my RS4810 to it. Cannot wait.


----------



## cemo62




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *DavidHir*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1860#post_24803762
> 
> 
> I've joined the Stewart club. My Studiotek 100 should be here in a couple of weeks and Chad B will be here to calibrate my RS4810 to it. Cannot wait.



dont forget to add comment about it, espeacilly about texture sparklies and vertical lines.


sorry for my english


----------



## DavidHir




> Quote:
> Originally Posted by *cemo62*  /t/585541/the-official-stewart-film-screen-thread/1860#post_24803807
> 
> 
> dont forget to add comment about it, espeacilly about texture sparklies and vertical lines.
> 
> 
> sorry for my english



No problem and I will definitely post my thoughts. From every credible source, it sounds like this IS the gold standard material for viewing in a batcave.


----------



## stephenbr

What is the minimum viewing distance suggested from a microperf screen?


----------



## Stan-Lee

stephenbr said:


> What is the minimum viewing distance suggested from a microperf screen?


I cannot see the perforation at 10 feet but then again, my eyesight is not perfect!


----------



## GetGray

stephenbr said:


> What is the minimum viewing distance suggested from a microperf screen?


Pretty sure the MRVD is 10'


----------



## stephenbr

Thx Stan-Lee and GetGray, that is what I thought (and my eyes aren't the sharpest either).


----------



## Craig Peer

Stan-Lee said:


> Check this out! Stewart Filmscreen has launched a new website and there is a sweepstake entry at the bottom of the home page for a FREE snapper screen! Pretty cool.
> http://stewartfilmscreen.com


Wow - great new website! I'll have to poke around it a bit more.


----------



## Tnedator

Stan-Lee said:


> Quote:Originally Posted by *Tnedator*
> 
> Whats the story on Studiotek 130 G3 and 4k? In the near future I will be installing one of these, but Stewart doesn't list this as one of their 4k ready screen materials. It will be a perfed screen.
> 
> 
> I asked a salesman there and he said all Stewart screens are considered 4K ready. It just isn't specified on the website.


Strange, even after their site facelift they don't show Studiotek 130 as a 4k material.


----------



## dan30306

Interesting.... I have a Sabre model and can't find it anywhere on the website. Maybe its exclusive or "limited edition" or something, lol


----------



## avsform1

I'm looking to replace my Zero Edge Black Diamond 1.4. I blacked out my room and it doesn't look as good. The reason I want a Edgeless screen is because the my room is very narrow and want to maximize my screen as much as possible. I am thinking of going with the Sabre , are there any cons with the a Sabre w/ StudioTek 130/JVC 4810 in a blacked out room?

It is weird that it they don't advertise this screen on there website.


----------



## Craig Peer

The one advantage of a regular style frame vs the Sabre is that you can replace the screen surface if it gets damaged - I don't think you can do that with the Sabre.


----------



## Tnedator

Craig Peer said:


> The one advantage of a regular style frame vs the Sabre is that you can replace the screen surface if it gets damaged - I don't think you can do that with the Sabre.


I sent a question into Stewart last week and haven't heard back. maybe you know. 

Can you replace the surface material on the vertical Electrimast screen? 

I'm curious both in the case of damage, but also since they don't list the Studiotek 130 G3 as 4K ready (even though I know in this thread it's been stated it is), and then they come out with a similar screen that is better for 4k or 8k down the road, I'm curious if just replacing the surface is possible?


----------



## SamothUK

*Screen choice advice*

Having moved from my old, much smaller, dedicated HT room (which was a total batcave) to a new place with a much much larger room but with worse light control, I'm after advice on what screen to put up here.

Dimensions are: 

Seating distance: 15'5"
Projector distance: 18'7"
Projector height: 8'1"

Projector is a JVC HD950 (RS25 in the US?)

Room is fairly light coloured - side walls floor to ceiling dark red velvet drapes (to cover huge windows), ceiling is light coloured, but 14'9" high. Floor is fairly light too. Seating is about 13' wide in one row (room is 19' ft wide)

I'm not looking to watch with the drapes open, use is going to generally be at night with them closed, but light control won't be perfect from that.

I'm thinking of a 135" diagonal wallmount electric screen.

Given what I've got, I think I'm looking at the Firehawk G4 as being my best choice to deal with the less than ideal light control, and I think I need what help with the gain I can get as my projector is going to be on the dim side with that size screen - I think I just about make 16ftL. I think the viewing angle of the G4 should be ok since I make the viewing angle 35 degrees assuming I'm calculating it right?

Anyone got any comments or suggestions?


----------



## dan30306

Craig Peer said:


> The one advantage of a regular style frame vs the Sabre is that you can replace the screen surface if it gets damaged - I don't think you can do that with the Sabre.


You can replace the screen if there is damage- its just going to be expensive. The frame and screen are held together by screws. The best way to explain the screen is that it looks like a really big piece of 1/4 inch thick hard plastic that was dipped in screen material (like latex almost). That piece slides into the frame, and there is another insert in the frame channel that wedges it in. The inner frame channel wedge thing is screwed to the back of the outer frame every 6 inches. There are 4 inner channel pieces that run the entire length of the frame all the way around. Its almost like a frame within the frame. Very well built.


----------



## Craig Peer

dan30306 said:


> You can replace the screen if there is damage- its just going to be expensive. The frame and screen are held together by screws. The best way to explain the screen is that it looks like a really big piece of 1/4 inch thick hard plastic that was dipped in screen material (like latex almost). That piece slides into the frame, and there is another insert in the frame channel that wedges it in. The inner frame channel wedge thing is screwed to the back of the outer frame every 6 inches. There are 4 inner channel pieces that run the entire length of the frame all the way around. Its almost like a frame within the frame. Very well built.



Good to know - thanks. I've had folks change the material on their Luxus Deluxe QuickSnap screens ( which is easy ), just never had an occasion to inquire whether it could be done with the Sabre screen. I do like the Sabre screen look!


----------



## Stan-Lee

Tnedator said:


> I sent a question into Stewart last week and haven't heard back. maybe you know.
> 
> Can you replace the surface material on the vertical Electrimast screen?
> 
> I'm curious both in the case of damage, but also since they don't list the Studiotek 130 G3 as 4K ready (even though I know in this thread it's been stated it is), and then they come out with a similar screen that is better for 4k or 8k down the road, I'm curious if just replacing the surface is possible?


Yes, the screen is replaceable.


----------



## DavidHir

I received my ST100 last Friday and had Chad B out to calibrate my JVC RS4810 to it.

Having only watched a few movies on it so far, if I had to choose one word to describe it: *gorgeous*.

The image just takes on such a natural, organic look. It takes on a different look compared to the other screens I tried out. It's basically looking at _pure image_ - with nothing annoying such as sparkles, artifacts, etc. The edge to edge brightness of the screen is also very balanced which is nice for off-axis seating.

I went with the Luxus Deluxe fixed frame which was very easy to put together and the fact the bottom of the frame uses magnet pucks behind it to secure it to the wall is a very nice touch and actually improved my image geometry slightly on the bottom compared to the previous Da-Lite I had been using which the bottom hung off the wall just a bit. The frame also looks classy for sure.

Another thing I liked is the lack of odor. I realize all new screens have a chemical-like odor to them. The odor was very slight on the ST100 and almost gone after a few days. The Da-Lite smell was very strong to me and my girlfriend - and even after several weeks it remained strong.

By the way, I am not trying to knock Da-Lite. Their screens were still very impressive and I would recommend them, but I feel like the ST100 is a step above especially for my application.

I was also impressed with how well everything was packed and very secure. The screen also comes in a very strong tube.
























All in all, highly recommended. If anyone has any questions at all, feel free to ask.

I also want to say Mike Garrett of AVS is just great work with!


----------



## Mike Garrett

DavidHir said:


> I received my ST100 last Friday and had Chad B out to calibrate my JVC RS4810 to it.
> 
> Having only watched a few movies on it so far, if I had to choose one word to describe it: *gorgeous*.
> 
> The image just takes on such a natural, organic look. It takes on a different look compared to the other screens I tried out. It's basically looking at _pure image_ - with nothing annoying such as sparkles, artifacts, etc. The edge to edge brightness of the screen is also very balanced which is nice for off-axis seating.
> 
> I went with the Luxus Deluxe fixed frame which was very easy to put together and the fact the bottom of the frame uses magnet pucks behind it to secure it to the wall is a very nice touch and actually improved my image geometry slightly on the bottom compared to the previous Da-Lite I had been using which the bottom hung off the wall just a bit. The frame also looks classy for sure.
> 
> Another thing I liked is the lack of odor. I realize all new screens have a chemical-like odor to them. The odor was very slight on the ST100 and almost gone after a few days. The Da-Lite smell was very strong to me and my girlfriend - and even after several weeks it remained strong.
> 
> By the way, I am not trying to knock Da-Lite. Their screens were still very impressive and I would recommend them, but I feel like the ST100 is a step above especially for my application.
> 
> I was also impressed with how well everything was packed and very secure. The screen also comes in a very strong tube.
> 
> View attachment 135305
> 
> 
> View attachment 135313
> 
> 
> View attachment 135321
> 
> All in all, highly recommended. If anyone has any questions at all, feel free to ask.
> 
> I also want to say Mike Garrett of AVS is just great work with!


You are welcome. Also with the addition of the Prostar material, you room looks like a nice place to view a movie.


----------



## BrutaleZEN

Gents,

I have a StudioTek G130 with Microperf material. When I play a movie, especially on the dark scenes, I can see a ghost image. It bothers me a lot. I look close to the screen and it looks like some light go through the perfs and are projected on the back of my false wall. Is it possible ? Can a black backing cancel this ghost image ? Is Stewart do a black backing for my screen ?

Thanks a lot for your help and input.


----------



## Hawk-eye

*Retractable vs Fixes*

I've decided on the Firehawk for my basement. Anyone have experience with Stewart retractable screens? The main reason I'm considering this option is that I have 3 little kids at home. Do the screens develop issues secondary to being retracted more often than deployed for movie/TV watching?


----------



## marswill

*Retractable Firehawk G3*



Hawk-eye said:


> I've decided on the Firehawk for my basement. Anyone have experience with Stewart retractable screens? The main reason I'm considering this option is that I have 3 little kids at home. Do the screens develop issues secondary to being retracted more often than deployed for movie/TV watching?


I've had a 100" retractable Firehawk G3 since October 2007. This screen has been deployed and retracted almost every day since then and it still performs a well as when it was new. Occasionally a bug (insect) gets caught and squashed during retraction but it is easy to remove with gentile use of a rag and clean water.


----------



## vector54

*FIrehawk LS vs Firehawk G4*

Hi All,


New poster to forum. 


Looking at 120" wide 2.35 screen, and am being told that is Firehawk LS (supposedly the same as G4 but used on larger screens). Can someone tell me if this is correct. I cannot seem to find any info on LS.


Thanks in advance.


Vector


----------



## Stan-Lee

vector54 said:


> Hi All,
> 
> 
> New poster to forum.
> 
> Looking at 120" wide 2.35 screen, and am being told that is Firehawk LS (supposedly the same as G4 but used on larger screens). Can someone tell me if this is correct. I cannot seem to find any info on LS.
> 
> Thanks in advance.
> Vector


Absolutely 100% correct. LS = Large Screen. G4 is for the smaller sized screens. Sounds like a nice screen! Keep us posted!


----------



## vector54

Thanks Stan for the quick confirmation!


Still a couple of months away from a completed HT build, but will be using it with a Sony VW600ES. I will report back how they work together.


Regards,
Vector


----------



## Stan-Lee

BrutaleZEN said:


> Gents,
> 
> I have a StudioTek G130 with Microperf material. When I play a movie, especially on the dark scenes, I can see a ghost image. It bothers me a lot. I look close to the screen and it looks like some light go through the perfs and are projected on the back of my false wall. Is it possible ? Can a black backing cancel this ghost image ? Is Stewart do a black backing for my screen ?
> 
> Thanks a lot for your help and input.


I'm not an expert, but I would think you should try putting a black cloth of some sort behind the screen and see what happens.


----------



## BrutaleZEN

Stan-Lee,

thanks for the recommendation. As it is an acoustically transparent screen, my speakers are behind the screen and my false wall is totally black. Can I use speaker cloth for this (to keep the sound properties) ? How far from the screen should I put it ? Just at the back of the screen fabric or further ?

Thanks


----------



## Stan-Lee

BrutaleZEN said:


> Stan-Lee,
> 
> thanks for the recommendation. As it is an acoustically transparent screen, my speakers are behind the screen and my false wall is totally black. Can I use speaker cloth for this (to keep the sound properties) ? How far from the screen should I put it ? Just at the back of the screen fabric or further ?
> 
> Thanks


Well, like I confessed, I am no expert but I would try a few locations until the right location or answer is figured out. One of them being directly behind the screen for sure.


----------



## Stan-Lee

vector54 said:


> Thanks Stan for the quick confirmation!
> 
> 
> Still a couple of months away from a completed HT build, but will be using it with a Sony VW600ES. I will report back how they work together.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Vector


Just curious....you are going with the FireHawk due to too much ambient light conditions beyond your control?


----------



## LJG

Stewart 4-Way Screenwall Elecrimask problem. The 2 vertical masking panels got extended over the rod about 3 feet longer so when in the fully retracted position they are still 3' of material from top to bottom, when the vertical panel is extended the mask goes 3' past the bottom of the screen.

Is it possible to just rotate the rod counterclockwise to adjust the panels. I am having a dickens of a time trying to adjust the limit stops through the little openings located on the left side of screen frame.

Any suggestions?


----------



## Bagis

m Robinson said:


> If the side cords are too tight, you may get diagonal wrinkling in the lower corners. If the side cords are too loose, you might see vertical undulation in the fabric.
> 
> Most of the time the screen material elongates a little bit, the side cords don't stretch as much, and it's good to lengthen the side cords, using the adjustable thimbles on the batten ends. From underneath, you insert a philips #2 screwdriver, turning the screw as if to loosen, will lengthen the side cord. Good luck with it!


I have a 5 months old Model Luxus A Firehawk that has all the indications that the side cord on the left side is too tight. The bottom corner has the diagonal wrinkle, it moves 3 mm longer into the housing compared with the right side, it does not get as flat on the black side bar and the top and botton cord loops are leaning backwards.

I now feel ready to lengten the side cord, but the only problem is that I do not have the philips head on my screws. They are instead bolts screwed into the holes of the plastic leaving little to no room for a socket wrench. Are the side cords fixed in my model or is there another way to adjust the side cord length?



BR//Bagis


----------



## m Robinson

Bagis said:


> I have a 5 months old Model Luxus A Firehawk that has all the indications that the side cord on the left side is too tight. The bottom corner has the diagonal wrinkle, it moves 3 mm longer into the housing compared with the right side, it does not get as flat on the black side bar and the top and botton cord loops are leaning backwards.
> 
> I now feel ready to lengten the side cord, but the only problem is that I do not have the philips head on my screws. They are instead bolts screwed into the holes of the plastic leaving little to no room for a socket wrench. Are the side cords fixed in my model or is there another way to adjust the side cord length?
> 
> 
> 
> BR//Bagis


Hello Mr. Bagis,
First, Thank you very much for selecting Stewart Filmscreen for your display! We appreciate the business!

Here is what I would do.
Deploy the screen
Lift the batten on the end you wish to about an inch, or 30 millimeters.
The ferrule which anchors the side cord, is spring loaded. Push it gently down into the batten.
The hex-head bolt will emerge from the bottom of the batten. It's usually easy to move by hand, but if not, use a 5/16" wrench, or a pair of pliers to turn it. 
Loosen that hex head about six full turns. 
Allow the batten to drop to its normal position.

The side cord should be noticeably looser. If not, repeat the steps. 
At the end of the process, you want the side cords to be just tight enough to hold the sides out in position, but no tighter. 

If you need more assistance call (800)762-4999,and our Customer Service folks will walk you through it. If you are calling from an international location, use (310)784-5300. Extention 145.


----------



## m Robinson

LJG said:


> Stewart 4-Way Screenwall Elecrimask problem. The 2 vertical masking panels got extended over the rod about 3 feet longer so when in the fully retracted position they are still 3' of material from top to bottom, when the vertical panel is extended the mask goes 3' past the bottom of the screen.
> 
> Is it possible to just rotate the rod counterclockwise to adjust the panels. I am having a dickens of a time trying to adjust the limit stops through the little openings located on the left side of screen frame.
> 
> Any suggestions?


Hello LJG,
Thank you for being a long term Stewart Filmscreen Customer! We appreciate the business. 

Does the fabric deploy too far at the bottom of the travel, as well as stopping short at the top? 

If not then we only have to address the top stop. Of the two holes you have there, the up stop should be in the lower hole. Run the fabric down to the lower stop. Take a 5/32" tee handle hex wrench and insert it in the hole. Turning the limit switch counter clockwise will increase the travel, therefore allowing more material retraction up into the fascia. Turn that screw counterclockwise two full turns. Run the panel up, leaving your t-handle hex wrench in position. When the panel stops, you can keep creeping the limit upward, by continuing to turn counter clockwise.

Check the bottom limit too. The Somfy progressive limits always require a counter clockwise turn to increase motor travel in the direction you are adjusting. 

If a satisfactory solution continues to elude you, call our factory Customer Service line at (800) 762-4999 extension 145. Good Luck!


----------



## Bagis

m Robinson said:


> Hello Mr. Bagis,
> First, Thank you very much for selecting Stewart Filmscreen for your display! We appreciate the business!
> 
> Here is what I would do.
> Deploy the screen
> Lift the batten on the end you wish to about an inch, or 30 millimeters.
> The ferrule which anchors the side cord, is spring loaded. Push it gently down into the batten.
> The hex-head bolt will emerge from the bottom of the batten. It's usually easy to move by hand, but if not, use a 5/16" wrench, or a pair of pliers to turn it.
> Loosen that hex head about six full turns.
> Allow the batten to drop to its normal position.
> 
> The side cord should be noticeably looser. If not, repeat the steps.
> At the end of the process, you want the side cords to be just tight enough to hold the sides out in position, but no tighter.
> 
> If you need more assistance call (800)762-4999,and our Customer Service folks will walk you through it. If you are calling from an international location, use (310)784-5300. Extention 145.


 
Great, thanks for your quick response M Robinson. I have applied it and it works, no more worries for me!


BR//Bagis from Sweden


----------



## LJG

m Robinson said:


> Hello LJG,
> Thank you for being a long term Stewart Filmscreen Customer! We appreciate the business.
> 
> Does the fabric deploy too far at the bottom of the travel, as well as stopping short at the top?
> 
> If not then we only have to address the top stop. Of the two holes you have there, the up stop should be in the lower hole. Run the fabric down to the lower stop. Take a 5/32" tee handle hex wrench and insert it in the hole. Turning the limit switch counter clockwise will increase the travel, therefore allowing more material retraction up into the fascia. Turn that screw counterclockwise two full turns. Run the panel up, leaving your t-handle hex wrench in position. When the panel stops, you can keep creeping the limit upward, by continuing to turn counter clockwise.
> 
> Check the bottom limit too. The Somfy progressive limits always require a counter clockwise turn to increase motor travel in the direction you are adjusting.
> 
> If a satisfactory solution continues to elude you, call our factory Customer Service line at (800) 762-4999 extension 145. Good Luck!


Unfortunately turning the limit switches did not increase or decrease the travel. I have call into tech support


----------



## dvzzz

*Need an opinion on the projector placement for Firehawk G4*

Appreciate an advise from Stewart owners or experts on the placement for JVC X-3 projector against Firehawk G4. I have a JVC X-3 that is sitting 12 feet away from the screen on the 27-inch tall coffee table about 10-inch to the right of the screen's center so I am using shift on it, my head is 39-inch from the floor. Screen that I need is 105". I keep reading that Firehawk will lose a lot of light output if I place it against my setup? I am trying to validate if this is the case with G4 as well. 

Thank you!


----------



## BrutaleZEN

Hey Guys,

do you know where I can buy a Quick Snap Wall Mount for my 100" Studio Tek 130 Luxus Deluxe screen ?

Thanks a lot for your help.

Regards


----------



## Craig Peer

BrutaleZEN said:


> Hey Guys,
> 
> do you know where I can buy a Quick Snap Wall Mount for my 100" Studio Tek 130 Luxus Deluxe screen ?
> 
> Thanks a lot for your help.
> 
> Regards



If you are in Bangkok, maybe it would be easier to fabricate something locally ?


----------



## BrutaleZEN

Hey Craig,

I already did, but frankly the job done is far from great, and my screen hang on a false wall, there is a false window at the back of my false wall that I have to unscrew to access the actual window that allow me to service the compressor for my air conditioner (yep, not a simple set up). 

The thing is with the brackets that I have, it took me 1 or 2 hours to try to hang the screen ... kind of frustrating. I want the original Stewartfilm stuff that was designed by professionasl .... So I don't get aggravated when I want to service the air con compressor ...

I have an address in California, so not difficult to order stuff from the US.

Thanks again.

Regards


----------



## Tnedator

A couple questions related my upcoming (in progress actually) room build. 

Right now, what is spec'd by Dennis Erskine is an Electrivertimask with a Studiotek 130 microperf screen (132" wide 2:35)

1. Previously, everything I've read is that past 10-11' feet, you don't see the microperfs. However, in my build thread, a number of people have talked about seeing them far past 11', including talking about seeing them more like in the 15-17' range. Also, that on very light scenes of movies they are more visible than in dark scenes. So, what's the story on visibility. I have a sample coming, but as my room isn't constructed, I don't have a real accurate way have testing this. I'm leaning towards the Stewart, but don't want to get into a situation of seeing the perfs all the time and regretting it (my primary seating row will be between 12-13' (still a couple minor details left that will decide exactly how far from eyes to screen). 

2. This will be an aperture mount install into a screen wall. There will be zero access behind the screen (such as to work on speakers) other than through the screen frame. I was assuming one of the advantages to the Stewart was being able to unsnap the screen (or part of it) to be able to get back to the speakers if I need to make any tweaks. Someone pointed out that this is not as easy as I seemed to think. 

Anyway, any thoughts on either of my two points above would be appreciated.


----------



## GetGray

Stewart says 10' and Erskine says that's the screen form your theater; You've hired a pro to tell you what to use, opinions here should not come into it much IMO. Say 3 guys here say you can see them, 6 say you can't. Then what? And the bigger question, what are you gong to use otherwise? Your choices move to woven screen options that suck light. Now your projector isn't sized properly, or you need a different screen size, and it dominos from there to other theater issues. Work with your designer. He knows what he's doing.


----------



## Craig Peer

BrutaleZEN said:


> Hey Craig,
> 
> I already did, but frankly the job done is far from great, and my screen hang on a false wall, there is a false window at the back of my false wall that I have to unscrew to access the actual window that allow me to service the compressor for my air conditioner (yep, not a simple set up).
> 
> The thing is with the brackets that I have, it took me 1 or 2 hours to try to hang the screen ... kind of frustrating. I want the original Stewartfilm stuff that was designed by professionasl .... So I don't get aggravated when I want to service the air con compressor ...
> 
> I have an address in California, so not difficult to order stuff from the US.
> 
> Thanks again.
> 
> Regards



Send me an email and I'll see what I can do.


----------



## tanwn1

I have black wall n ceiling and would like to go for 130inch diagonal 2.35 screen. Should I go for studiotek 1.3 or use a lower gain screen 1.1? Any issue with hotspotting? Using jvc x700


----------



## Craig Peer

tanwn1 said:


> I have black wall n ceiling and would like to go for 130inch diagonal 2.35 screen. Should I go for studiotek 1.3 or use a lower gain screen 1.1? Any issue with hotspotting? Using jvc x700


Hot spotting is related to throw distance. What is your throw distance ?


----------



## drlopezmdfacp

I have a brand new motorized stewart screen and I just noticed some marks on one of the sides as if the screening is rubbing against the roller. I am concerned because I have had the screen for less than a month. Sent same inquiry to installer. Is this fixable? Suggestions?


----------



## towns01

*Stewart Studiotek 130 G3*

Hello, kind of a newbie here. Iam trying to decide on what size screen to go with in my dedicated HT. I like the ST 130 because of all the reviews i have read. My room is roughly 14' wide by 28' depth, drop ceiling is 7' 8" from floor. Iam considering 1.78 or 2.35 screen. I would like to get the biggest screen size i can get without going too big. My problem is the height from floor to ceiling. The wall the fixed screen will be mounted on is 14' wide. Any suggestions on how high the bottom of screen needs to be from floor. I had taped off for a 130" 16x9 screen on wall, ended up being 20" from floor & that was coming off ceiling 2". Might be better off going with a 2.35 screen...any suggestions would be highly grateful.


----------



## Craig Peer

towns01 said:


> Hello, kind of a newbie here. Iam trying to decide on what size screen to go with in my dedicated HT. I like the ST 130 because of all the reviews i have read. My room is roughly 14' wide by 28' depth, drop ceiling is 7' 8" from floor. Iam considering 1.78 or 2.35 screen. I would like to get the biggest screen size i can get without going too big. My problem is the height from floor to ceiling. The wall the fixed screen will be mounted on is 14' wide. Any suggestions on how high the bottom of screen needs to be from floor. I had taped off for a 130" 16x9 screen on wall, ended up being 20" from floor & that was coming off ceiling 2". Might be better off going with a 2.35 screen...any suggestions would be highly grateful.



The bottom of my 122" diagonal 1.78:1 screen is 17" off the floor ( bottom of viewing surface ). It's perfect height wise.


----------



## Ryan Rosser Byorick

I have the opportunity to buy a used G2 123' Firehawk that I believe is about 6-7 years old, but only used for 3-4. I'm struggling to find a good asking price. Also, how long do screens usually last.... assuming it was well taken care of?


----------



## Mike Garrett

towns01 said:


> Hello, kind of a newbie here. Iam trying to decide on what size screen to go with in my dedicated HT. I like the ST 130 because of all the reviews i have read. My room is roughly 14' wide by 28' depth, drop ceiling is 7' 8" from floor. Iam considering 1.78 or 2.35 screen. I would like to get the biggest screen size i can get without going too big. My problem is the height from floor to ceiling. The wall the fixed screen will be mounted on is 14' wide. Any suggestions on how high the bottom of screen needs to be from floor. I had taped off for a 130" 16x9 screen on wall, ended up being 20" from floor & that was coming off ceiling 2". Might be better off going with a 2.35 screen...any suggestions would be highly grateful.


Mounted low like 20" is great, as long as your feet do not block your view, when reclined.


----------



## Craig Peer

Ryan Rosser Byorick said:


> I have the opportunity to buy a used G2 123' Firehawk that I believe is about 6-7 years old, but only used for 3-4. I'm struggling to find a good asking price. Also, how long do screens usually last.... assuming it was well taken care of?



Easily 15 - 20 years I would think. Sort of depends on the environment - cool, clean, dark - maybe 25 years.


----------



## Craig Peer

AV Science Sales 5 said:


> Mounted low like 20" is great, as long as your feet do not block your view, when reclined.


As always, everything depends on ones theater layout. I for one do not have recliners. Folks just pass out in them and fall asleep.................I'm running a home theater, not a motel !


----------



## Mike Garrett

Craig Peer said:


> As always, everything depends on ones theater layout. I for one do not have recliners. Folks just pass out in them and fall asleep.................I'm running a home theater, not a motel !


With 10,000 watts on tap, nobody falls asleep in my theater.


----------



## Frohlich

AV Science Sales 5 said:


> With 10,000 watts on tap, nobody falls asleep in my theater.



I have 10,001


----------



## Mike Garrett

Frohlich said:


> I have 10,001


I know your set up and I bet nobody falls asleep in it.


----------



## HTmarket

*Stewart Screen Material Guide*

We did a comparison between Umatte 150, ST 130 and Firehawk. I thought this would be helpful for stewart owners who want to upgrade their screens or new people interested in stewart, This addresses the most common question we get on Stewart.





Regards,
Alan Hutchinson
HTmarket.com


----------



## David Shapiro

8 year old Stewart screen, ceiling mounted, retracted up mid-show and now won't come down. Since it retracted, can I assume that the motor still works and it is a cable issue? I'm going to call my installer tomorrow.

Thanks,
David


----------



## HTmarket

*Try Stewart Tech support*

I would try Stewart Tech support on it, they may have seen the issue before.

Alan Hutchinson
HTmarket.com


----------



## R Harkness

Just a couple quibbles from that video since there are a few parts that could be misleading...

1.  The gentleman in the video talks of "losing detail" when using the Firehawk sample compared to the ST130. That could make someone who didn't know any better believe that the Firehawk actually causes images to lose detail. "Well, I don't want to lose image detail, so why would I use a Firehawk?" The Firehawk material doesn't inherently lose detail. It simply makes the image more dim, making some detail a little harder to see. But any screen with a lower gain would do the same. Simply adding brightness to the projected image (e.g. moving the projector closer, using a brighter projector, opening up a manual iris if one is employed) to equalise brightness would make the detail just as visible as on a white screen. So it's just a function of brightness.

2. * "I still think the Firehawk G3 was made for improving the contrast on projectors vs dealing with light." *

There's been a long history of people presuming gray-based screens somehow magically improve the contrast of projectors, simply by virtue of being gray based or whatever. They don't.

A screen, whether it's a firehawk or a neutral white screen, does not improve the native contrast image of a projector. That's not possible as the screen simply reflects back whatever contrast the projector is putting out. The Firehawk was designed to improve the projected image contrast in situations where it could be compromised by ambient light and/or reflective room surfaces. (It does so by using a darker substrate material that helps lower the level of stray light on the screen, while using an optical coating to focus light more directly back to the viewer vs a neutral screen, 
to maintain decent image brightness at the viewer location, and to direct less light on to adjacent room surfaces to mitigate reflections). 

Cheers,


----------



## Craig Peer

R Harkness said:


> Just a couple quibbles from that video since there are a few parts that could be misleading...
> 
> 1. The gentleman in the video talks of "losing detail" when using the Firehawk sample compared to the ST130. That could make someone who didn't know any better believe that the Firehawk actually causes images to lose detail. "Well, I don't want to lose image detail, so why would I use a Firehawk?" The Firehawk material doesn't inherently lose detail. It simply makes the image more dim, making some detail a little harder to see. But any screen with a lower gain would do the same. Simply adding brightness to the projected image (e.g. moving the projector closer, using a brighter projector, opening up a manual iris if one is employed) to equalise brightness would make the detail just as visible as on a white screen. So it's just a function of brightness.
> 
> 2. * "I still think the Firehawk G3 was made for improving the contrast on projectors vs dealing with light." *
> 
> There's been a long history of people presuming gray-based screens somehow magically improve the contrast of projectors, simply by virtue of being gray based or whatever. They don't.
> 
> A screen, whether it's a firehawk or a neutral white screen, does not improve the native contrast image of a projector. That's not possible as the screen simply reflects back whatever contrast the projector is putting out. The Firehawk was designed to improve the projected image contrast in situations where it could be compromised by ambient light and/or reflective room surfaces. (It does so by using a darker substrate material that helps lower the level of stray light on the screen, while using an optical coating to focus light more directly back to the viewer vs a neutral screen,
> to maintain decent image brightness at the viewer location, and to direct less light on to adjacent room surfaces to mitigate reflections).
> 
> Cheers,



You can't compare gray and white screens very fairly together like that - your eye is always drawn to the brightest image. And everything you said Rich is spot on. With a full sized Firehawk, your eyes would adjust to the brightness.


----------



## mike123abc

I am considering a new screen. My room is not a dedicated home theater. During most viewing the lights are all off and the windows are blacked out, but the walls are very light, the ceiling is white and most of the furniture is white. So, ambient light is not the problem, reflected light is the problem. Currently I have elite screens 92" (diagonal) cinegrey, and a new Sony VPL-HW40ES. The Sony is 3x brighter than my previous projector. I would like to go to 100", or maybe 110". The projector lens is 12' 8" back from the screen and cannot go further back (currently about 5" off the back wall).

Looking through the Stewart Screen's offerings it looks like perhaps the Grayhawk RS G4 may be the best option for my room. The main problem I see is that the projector may be too close for a larger screen, given the 1.5x screen to projector Stewart specs.

So, my basic questions are:

1. Is this screen a good match for my room conditions? Or would a different one be better?

2. Is the projector too close for hotspots with 110" screen?

3. My projector is fairly centered, about 4" below the top of the 92" screen. I could drop it down lower probably a foot, and a larger screen would actually be mounted higher on the wall, so the projector would be effectively lower, would that improve hot spotting?


----------



## GetGray

mike123abc said:


> I am considering a new screen. My room is not a dedicated home theater. During most viewing the lights are all off and the windows are blacked out, but the walls are very light, the ceiling is white and most of the furniture is white. So, ambient light is not the problem, reflected light is the problem. Currently I have elite screens 92" (diagonal) cinegrey, and a new Sony VPL-HW40ES. The Sony is 3x brighter than my previous projector. I would like to go to 100", or maybe 110". The projector lens is 12' 8" back from the screen and cannot go further back (currently about 5" off the back wall).
> 
> Looking through the Stewart Screen's offerings it looks like perhaps the Grayhawk RS G4 may be the best option for my room. The main problem I see is that the projector may be too close for a larger screen, given the 1.5x screen to projector Stewart specs.
> 
> So, my basic questions are:
> 
> 1. Is this screen a good match for my room conditions? Or would a different one be better?
> 
> 2. Is the projector too close for hotspots with 110" screen?
> 
> 3. My projector is fairly centered, about 4" below the top of the 92" screen. I could drop it down lower probably a foot, and a larger screen would actually be mounted higher on the wall, so the projector would be effectively lower, would that improve hot spotting?


Do not get the GH fo rthis application. It's not what it's designed for. It will wash badly with any ambient or reflected light. Firehawk is best for rejecting reflected or ambient light. PM me if you need help getting one or choosing the right one. Scott


----------



## Stan-Lee

I agree. Firehawk G4 or LA is the screen you need. It's what I have in similar conditions!


----------



## mike123abc

The issue I see with the firehawk is the off axis viewing. The Firehawk looks to be 35 degrees to 50% vs 77% with the Grayhawk. The gain is not really an issue, given how bright the projector is (too bright really for 92" screen even in gray, find myself squinting on bright scenes). This is not a dedicated home theater, so off axis viewing is something that happens quite a bit.

Also with further researching I see mention of samples. Do these come from dealers or the manufacturer? Perhaps having a grayhawk and a firehawk samples to evaluate could be the way to go. Probably have to go to Dallas or Oklahoma City to find a dealer (both about 120 miles away).

As a side note I am also looking forward to getting a 4k projector, hopefully towards the end of next year when the whole HDMI 2.0, HDCP 2.2 and Rec 2020 colorspace issues are worked out (I know next year could be dreaming). I assume both the Firehawk and the Grayhawk would do well with a 4k picture.

From my understanding of Stewart screens essentially there is 100->grayhawk->firehawk in order of no rejection of ambient/reflected to most rejected.


----------



## Stan-Lee

New photos of late afternoon sunlight coming in the living room and right at the screen from an angle. I took 3 pics. From the left side (light behind me), Straight on at screen (light coming from left to the screen), and From the right side, camera pointed at screen with the sunlight coming from the left and onto the screen image and into the camera slightly.


----------



## GetGray

mike123abc said:


> The issue I see with the firehawk is the off axis viewing. The Firehawk looks to be 35 degrees to 50% vs 77% with the Grayhawk. The gain is not really an issue, given how bright the projector is (too bright really for 92" screen even in gray, find myself squinting on bright scenes). This is not a dedicated home theater, so off axis viewing is something that happens quite a bit.
> 
> Also with further researching I see mention of samples. Do these come from dealers or the manufacturer? Perhaps having a grayhawk and a firehawk samples to evaluate could be the way to go. Probably have to go to Dallas or Oklahoma City to find a dealer (both about 120 miles away).
> 
> As a side note I am also looking forward to getting a 4k projector, hopefully towards the end of next year when the whole HDMI 2.0, HDCP 2.2 and Rec 2020 colorspace issues are worked out (I know next year could be dreaming). I assume both the Firehawk and the Grayhawk would do well with a 4k picture.
> 
> From my understanding of Stewart screens essentially there is 100->grayhawk->firehawk in order of no rejection of ambient/reflected to most rejected.


No, the Grayhawk has no ambient rejection, none, nada. It is gray for different reasons. Any ambient rejection will come with some narrower viewing cone. When we did some side by side tests a few years ago, the GH washed worse than any material because of it's low (negative) gain. It is for a different purpose. Your dealer should be helping you pick the right screen. If you don't have one helping you, hire me  before you make a mistake.


----------



## Stan-Lee

But, at night, no lights, the image looks the same from any angle. At least to my eyes it looks the same. 
Projector is a JVC RS56 (1200 lumens)

This is nearly straight on, but at slightly off-center.


Approx: severe angle (viewing from the right)


Approx: closer to 45 deg (viewing from the left)


----------



## mike123abc

GetGray said:


> No, the Grayhawk has no ambient rejection, none, nada. It is gray for different reasons. Any ambient rejection will come with some narrower viewing cone. When we did some side by side tests a few years ago, the GH washed worse than any material because of it's low (negative) gain. It is for a different purpose. Your dealer should be helping you pick the right screen. If you don't have one helping you, hire me  before you make a mistake.


I have not been to a dealer yet. I was just going by Stewart's web site where they list the Grayhawk as:



> Superior performance in environments with ambient light
> Ambient Light Front Reflectance Value	49% per foot candle
> Ambient Light Resistance	Moderate performance in ambient light


and the FireHawk as: 



> Ambient Light Front Reflectance Value	27% per foot candle
> Ambient Light Resistance	Excellent performance in ambient light


I also considered the gray screen since my projector does not have a dynamic iris, so it could help bring down the black floor.


The pictures that Stan-Lee has provided of off axis and ambient performance of the Firehawk sure look good.


----------



## Craig Peer

mike123abc said:


> I have not been to a dealer yet. I was just going by Stewart's web site where they list the Grayhawk as:
> 
> 
> 
> and the FireHawk as:
> 
> 
> 
> I also considered the gray screen since my projector does not have a dynamic iris, so it could help bring down the black floor.
> 
> 
> The pictures that Stan-Lee has provided of off axis and ambient performance of the Firehawk sure look good.


 
Off axis performance is perfectly fine. I had a Firehawk G3 for 5 years in my theater - 118" wide, with one row of seating - 14' wide. I frequently sat in an off axis seat when guests were there. No problems !


----------



## DavidHir

A bit off-topic from the current conversation, but I just want to say I love my ST100 screen. I've got it in a painted/carpeted dedicated black pit theater room, but it's such a nice screen.


----------



## Craig Peer

DavidHir said:


> A bit off-topic from the current conversation, but I just want to say I love my ST100 screen. I've got it in a painted/carpeted dedicated black pit theater room, but it's such a nice screen.



Great screen for use in a perfect room like yours.


----------



## DavidHir

craig peer said:


> great screen for use in a perfect room like yours.


----------



## Craig Peer

That room is pretty much a requirement for the ST100 to look its best. For the rest of us without perfect black rooms, there's the ST130 and the Cima Neve !!


----------



## DavidHir

While I am able to achieve the light output I prefer with the ST100 paired with my JVC RS4810 (even considering some lamp aging), if I wanted anything notably brighter I would have to move up to the Neve or ST130 even in this room - or move to a brighter projector, but I don't like real bright images - my eyes don't tolerate them well. And I love the contrast/blacks of the JVC.

Just to add: my screen is 46"x108", 14ft projector throw


----------



## DavidHir

I also really like the Luxus Deluxe frame. The magnet clips for the bottom of the frame (behind it) do a really nice job of keeping the entire screen frame flat against the wall.


----------



## Stan-Lee

More pics of my FireHawk. The room is not completely dark in reality. The other post shows the darker room but these pretty much show actual lighting at night. The screen lights up the room but as you can see, any angle is viewable with FireHawk.


----------



## DavidHir

Those pics are impressive given the angle and lighting in the room!


----------



## R Harkness

I'm always fascinated by the differing perceptions of hot-spotting. A lot of people just don't notice it, and I suppose they are the lucky ones.
The Firehawk is truly a great screen for it's intended function.

But the obvious (IMO) hotspotting prevalent in Stan-Lee's photos is the main reason I had to give up considering the firehawk and go with an ST-130, choosing to treat my room instead of having the screen try to fix the problem.


----------



## redwest8

I was hoping to check in with those of you who have chosen the Tiburon. It seemed from this thread that everyone was pleased, but then I was reading Accu Cal's screen report (can't link - sorry) that many seem to hold in high regard and was a little surprised with the findings on the Tiburon. I had originally planned on getting the SI Black Diamond because of the ambient light capabilities and (especially) the zero edge design, but after seeing it in person it seems - unfortunately - that I am one of those people who notice the shimmering. It did not jump out at me, but my room's light control is not terrible and I refuse to pay 4 grand for something that might grow to drive me insane.

The Tiburon seemed like a good compromise with its slight ambient light capabilities, price, and lack of shimmer. Before I read the previously mentioned report, the only downside for me was the lack of a zero edge type frame. I wish I could get the aesthetics of the small frame, but will gladly give that up for a better picture. 

So I guess all of that breaks down to this: have you Tiburon owners remained pleased with your image and have you noticed a lot/any sparkles? I can deal with a small amount. If this screen does in fact have the shimmering qualities mentioned at the levels given in the report, I will likely just go with a Da-lite UTB Contour (don't know what screen materials yet) to get the thin bezel look and pocket the savings. 

I will have either an Epson 5030ub or Sony HW40ES, 110 inch screen, around 13ft throw (not installed yet, could be increased if necessary), and 14ft main viewing distance. I really appreciate your impression and/or advice.


----------



## Stan-Lee

R Harkness said:


> I'm always fascinated by the differing perceptions of hot-spotting. A lot of people just don't notice it, and I suppose they are the lucky ones.
> The Firehawk is truly a great screen for it's intended function.
> 
> But the obvious (IMO) hotspotting prevalent in Stan-Lee's photos is the main reason I had to give up considering the firehawk and go with an ST-130, choosing to treat my room instead of having the screen try to fix the problem.



Well, the camera does exaggerate the hotspot as you see it. It really is not as prevalent in person. 
I could have photoshopped it out but decided to just leave the image as-is. Not everyone has the cash to do what you have done.


----------



## R Harkness

Stan-Lee said:


> Well, the camera does exaggerate the hotspot as you see it. It really is not as prevalent in person.
> I could have photoshopped it out but decided to just leave the image as-is. Not everyone has the cash to do what you have done.


I think one reason the camera may seem to exagerate hotspotting is:

1. You are going more off-axis than you usually are viewing content.
2. The image is frozen, making it more obvious. Usually image content is changing continually making the hotspotting harder to see, and you are watching the content, so you just aren't concentrating on any hot-spotting issues to notice it.

That said, I do not see your photos as exaggerating the issue, as I find the same hotspotting when viewing the Firehawk in person.

But, like I said, we each tend to be more sensitive to different compromises. 

I"m not putting the Firehawk down, it's an incredible screen. I've seen it work wonders in so many different set ups. Sure I went with the ST-130, but it's compromise is that it doesn't maintain contrast in nearly the variety of room situations as the Firehawk, and so it demands more effort from the owner to darken the room reflections. That's a major compromise for many people in terms of effort and possibly expense, which is why gray screens like the Firehawk are so popular.


----------



## Stan-Lee

Only 3 of the 9 images were frozen. Those were the set of 3 of the same image. All the others were live TV. I only used a small pocket camera rather than a DSLR. The camera did influence some of the photos. But I was trying to show a real world simulation of the FireHawk with a 13' throw distance in a non-perfect theater room. Once you're immersed in a movie, you don't really notice the hotspotting. It's only when there is a constant or dominant color that you notice it. Ice hockey for instance...it's noticeable.


----------



## Craig Peer

R Harkness said:


> I think one reason the camera may seem to exagerate hotspotting is:
> 
> 1. You are going more off-axis than you usually are viewing content.
> 2. The image is frozen, making it more obvious. Usually image content is changing continually making the hotspotting harder to see, and you are watching the content, so you just aren't concentrating on any hot-spotting issues to notice it.
> 
> That said, I do not see your photos as exaggerating the issue, as I find the same hotspotting when viewing the Firehawk in person.
> 
> But, like I said, we each tend to be more sensitive to different compromises.
> 
> I"m not putting the Firehawk down, it's an incredible screen. I've seen it work wonders in so many different set ups. Sure I went with the ST-130, but it's compromise is that it doesn't maintain contrast in nearly the variety of room situations as the Firehawk, and so it demands more effort from the owner to darken the room reflections. That's a major compromise for many people in terms of effort and possibly expense, which is why gray screens like the Firehawk are so popular.


It's extremely difficult to get accurate photos of screen shots. I don't even bother - I don't have anywhere near a good enough camera. And while many ( any ? ) screen can hotspot, that is dependent on having your projector at the correct throw distance for the screen. Stewart has a screen system calculator to find the proper minimum throw distance for their different screen materials. I had a 118" wide Firehawk G3 in my theater with a 14' throw distance. Too close and not recommended. It did exhibit some hot spotting, but it never bothered me, and wasn't visible most of the time. If I had a more normal throw distance ( like the minimum recommended throw of 15.75' or greater ) there would be no hot spotting. So it's not that the Firehawk is prone to hot spotting - you just need the projector to be at the correct distance. I'd hate to see what a 120" wide Vutec Silverstar would have looked like with my Lumis mounted at 14' !!


----------



## R Harkness

Stan-Lee said:


> Only 3 of the 9 images were frozen.


I mean that taking a photo (whether the on screen action is moving or not) obviously freezes the image.
Take a photo of a tennis game on your screen and obviously the picture freezes the action. Since the screen-shot-photo is frozen, you don't have any moving images and scene-lighting changes to distract the eye, hence easier to notice hot-spotting.

I hope that's more clear.

Craig,

I was seriously considering the Firehawk for years for my projection screen, and since it's the single most popular screen in the AV stores (or used to be) I've seen it in all manner of set-ups, screen sizes, throw distances, height from screen etc. I was aware of the advice about how the Firehawk is best employed, with some saying as you have that if used as advised it would not hotpsot (though I don't think even Stewart makes that claim, only minimizing it). 

Yet I always have seen it hot-spotting. I've seen it in perfect set ups that, on the principles you've mentioned, it would not hot-spot. It's hot-spotted the same pretty much every time. Upon learning more about how screens work, I realised why that is the case. That is simply the nature of how the screen is designed, what it's optical coating does - it focuses light slightly more like a mirror does, vs a screen without the gain. That's why the projector hot-spot follows you as you move around, just as it would if it were shining in a mirror. It's literally impossible (I believe) for the Firehawk not to hotspot - The Firehawk simply can not even do what it is supposed to do (reduce influence of light reflections and raise image brightness at the viewer location) _without_ hotspotting, because that's how it works. 

Not for a moment would I suggest others not look at the Firehawk because of this issue because most just don't notice or care as much as I do about that particular artifact.


----------



## GetGray

My personal screen is a 11.5' wide curved FHG3. I'm sensitive to hotspotting, you don't see any on my screen. Well, no one besides you can. Don't measure any either.


----------



## TK Doom

I just wanted to put some kudos the Stewart Filmscreen company.

My Cinecurve 181 was installed by a HT installer per their instructions and it had a few issues on the ends, tension issues.

They came out on 2 separate occassions free of charge to correct the problems and everything is perfect.


Not sure how other companies stand behind their screens, especially when installed by someone else, but they stood behind theirs.


----------



## Eksohek

I have a dilemma. I am trying to take down my screen and cant dismantle it. 
I have a Stewart Screen Rigid Firehawk. The fabric is held by push button, so easy to remove, however I notice the frame itself has two holes/screws at each end, but I'm not sure how to dismantle it 
Any tips ?


----------



## bytebuster

Guys,
Is the glassy finish on the cabaret frames an issue. I would have imagined that it would reflect some light off the screen

Also, is it ceiling mountable?


----------



## Craig Peer

bytebuster said:


> Guys,
> Is the glassy finish on the cabaret frames an issue. I would have imagined that it would reflect some light off the screen
> 
> *Also, is it ceiling mountable*?



Yes it is. Send me an email and I can send you a drawing. Whether the case reflecting light bothers you might depend on how much black drop you have etc.


----------



## DavidHir

What's everyone's thought on this new near edge-less Stewart frame? Looks very cool.

http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/shop/product/luminesse-(lum)

In theory, this screen would allow me about 10" more width to my viewing if I end up getting a future projector with more throw.


----------



## Craig Peer

DavidHir said:


> What's everyone's thought on this new near edge-less Stewart frame? Looks very cool.
> 
> http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/shop/product/luminesse-(lum)
> 
> In theory, this screen would allow me about 10" more width to my viewing if I end up getting a future projector with more throw.



I haven't seen one in person yet, but I like the thin bezel screen idea for a lot of applications.


----------



## etc6849

Are there any drawbacks to buying a used original (not G2, G3 or G4) Firehawk screen (from 2002-2003 time frame)? I believe the gain was originally 1.35 on axis for the first version. Did the original material have any aging issues?

http://www.projectorcentral.com/news_story_379.htm

I'm just looking for something that's 2.35:1 (as I bought a used UH480 kit) and there is a very reasonably priced screen available that's small enough to fit in my room (can't go larger than 107" wide including frame thickness).

My projector is a VPL-VW200 and has 800 lumens of output.


----------



## Mike Garrett

etc6849 said:


> Are there any drawbacks to buying a used original (not G2, G3 or G4) Firehawk screen (from 2002-2003 time frame)? I believe the gain was originally 1.35 on axis for the first version. Did the original material have any aging issues?
> 
> http://www.projectorcentral.com/news_story_379.htm
> 
> I'm just looking for something that's 2.35:1 (as I bought a used UH480 kit) and there is a very reasonably priced screen available that's small enough to fit in my room (can't go larger than 107" wide including frame thickness).
> 
> My projector is a VPL-VW200 and has 800 lumens of output.


Will be a little more sparkle on the older screens. Need to make sure the screen and velvet on the frame are in good condition. Usually after that long, there will be a few blemishes, just from being handled a few times.


----------



## Brian Hampton

Hi,

I always wanted a Stewart screen and today I scored 2 used screens for $100 with frame. 

The down side is they are 4:3 but I will mask them to 16:9. (The other down side is the resulting screen will be small at 77 inches but I am used to 80 and it's not a big deal.

One says Firehawk the other says Studiotec 130... I don't know which one to try first.

I use a Sony HW30ES in a fully light controlled room so I believe the Studiotec is the better choice..... I've never tried a grey screen though so I may have to start with that one for curiosity sake.

-Brian


----------



## Craig Peer

Brian Hampton said:


> Hi,
> 
> I always wanted a Stewart screen and today I scored 2 used screens for $100 with frame.
> 
> The down side is they are 4:3 but I will mask them to 16:9. (The other down side is the resulting screen will be small at 77 inches but I am used to 80 and it's not a big deal.
> 
> One says Firehawk the other says Studiotec 130... I don't know which one to try first.
> 
> I use a Sony HW30ES in a fully light controlled room so I believe the Studiotec is the better choice..... I've never tried a grey screen though so I may have to start with that one for curiosity sake.
> 
> -Brian



I'd try the StudioTek first myself.


----------



## Brian Hampton

Agreed and can't wait......I have to run errands now for a while but I still can't wait.


----------



## wse

TK Doom said:


> I just wanted to put some kudos the Stewart Filmscreen company. My Cinecurve 181 was installed by a HT installer per their instructions and it had a few issues on the ends, tension issues. They came out on 2 separate occassions free of charge to correct the problems and everything is perfect. Not sure how other companies stand behind their screens, especially when installed by someone else, but they stood behind theirs.


I had the same issue order a FHG3 in ceiling years ago when it was delivered the screen had urine stain on it RAT"! They sent back a replacement the dealer who is ow OOB did a crappy job and broke a string. Stewart send on of their tech to fix the problems!

That' why you pay premium for their screen, the tech who came to my house was currently working on Keanu Reeves HT !


----------



## Brian Hampton

The Stewart screen I bought used has been an adventure so far. 

I'm using the Studiotec 130 which wasn't even supposed to be in the ad I responded to... but I got lucky there.

I thought it was clean... till I cleaned it and it made a big difference. I don't think it was from a smoker's home but it still have a hazy muck to the surface that wasn't visible to me till I started to remove it.

There's a lot of wrinkles in it and at first they were very visible from my seating position. They have relaxed a bit and I don't think I can still spot them but looking at the screen sideways with the lights on it looks like it has viens running through it. I hope these wrinkles continue to relax.

Finally there's a small shadow looking somewhat upside down V shape near the center.... I thought this was something on the screen until I moved the screen and noticed it doesn't seem to be on the screen. This was good and bad news. Good because maybe the screen will have no visible damages and wear but bad because I have no idea what's causing that... no idea at all. I tried adjusting the focus... I will also try a lot of other great stuff once I think it up.

I wouldn't recommend anyone buy a used screen that isn't currently setup and being demo-ed. The risks of finding trouble later and huge. I may have found a bit of a diamond in the rough but I still am not sure yet.

-Brian


----------



## Ellebob

Used screens may be a gamble but at that price if the frame is in good condition you can always get new material for it. It would still end up being less expensive than a new screen.


----------



## Stan-Lee

^^what Ellebob said. Yup. You only need the serial number from the screen backside to order a replacement.


----------



## Brian Hampton

Well that's fun,

I have had my used screen up for a while and I can't see the creases and wrinkles... There is one spot that I still can see but I think it's possible it will repair itself.

If not... The other screen that came with the deal looks good ... I may setup that one someday just to compare the two anyhow.

=Brian


----------



## Brian Hampton

Hey,

I did decide to try out the "other" screen I picked up used. It's Firehawk and if I had to guess it's the original version ... not the current forth generation.

There isn't really a reason for me to use a Firehawk screen since I have a fully light controlled HT with black screen wall and ceiling and dark red and black on the other walls. 

However,... It's the best image I've seen yet in my years of HT. So, I keep reading more and more about Firehawk... doesn't make much sense for me to use one but it looks fantastic and I think I'm going to keep using it anyway.

If I eventually buy a new screen ... it likely would not be the Firehawk but I'll have to burn that bridge when I come to it.

-Brian


----------



## Stan-Lee

You can always request screen samples from your local Stewart rep so you can try other types.


----------



## orangele

*Replacing Vutec Silverstar with ST130*

I recently upgraded my projector from an Epson 5010 to a Sony VPL-VW1100ES. The current screen is a 133" diagonal 16:9 Silver star screen. Actually all I know for sure is that the screen was purchased about 3 yrs ago for approximately $2300 and the invoice says Vutec 133" diagonal. It has a fixed metal frame covered in black velvet. The room is used almost exclusively for movie watching in the evening hours and there are no windows and one sliding glass door which has black-out drapes and at most gets indirect moonlight during evening hours. In other words during viewing hours, I have good light control. The projector was recently professionally calibrated. I find now that several things about the current screen are becoming very distracting to me. Firstly the texture of the screen is very apparent in areas where there is alot of brightness projected in the image. Secondly I can see some apparent streaks/smudges in the screen again visible when the image is very bright. I have called Vutec about the streaks, and they recommended trying to lightly use a microfiber cloth to clean; that helped but did not eliminate the problem. 

So I have decided to replace the screen with a ST130. My questions are is there any market for a used projection screen like mine? Everyone tells me that it is easy to install the ST130, but I am very apprehensive about tearing, smudging, scraping mis-ordering, incorrectly installing the new screen since I think that I am the world's worse handyman. There are no Stewart dealers in Las Vegas where I live and would prefer to have a dealer do everything to take down the old screen, measure, order the new screen and install it. Am I really being too paranoid, and is it possible for the worlds worst handyman to install a fixed frame Stewart screen without damaging it? Are there any dealers in the Las Vegas area who can handle this replacement for me?

Photo shows the current screen.

Thanks!!


----------



## Craig Peer

orangele said:


> I recently upgraded my projector from an Epson 5010 to a Sony VPL-VW1100ES. The current screen is a 133" diagonal 16:9 Silver star screen. Actually all I know for sure is that the screen was purchased about 3 yrs ago for approximately $2300 and the invoice says Vutec 133" diagonal. It has a fixed metal frame covered in black velvet. The room is used almost exclusively for movie watching in the evening hours and there are no windows and one sliding glass door which has black-out drapes and at most gets indirect moonlight during evening hours. In other words during viewing hours, I have good light control. The projector was recently professionally calibrated. I find now that several things about the current screen are becoming very distracting to me. Firstly the texture of the screen is very apparent in areas where there is alot of brightness projected in the image. Secondly I can see some apparent streaks/smudges in the screen again visible when the image is very bright. I have called Vutec about the streaks, and they recommended trying to lightly use a microfiber cloth to clean; that helped but did not eliminate the problem.
> 
> So I have decided to replace the screen with a ST130. My questions are is there any market for a used projection screen like mine? Everyone tells me that it is easy to install the ST130, but I am very apprehensive about tearing, smudging, scraping mis-ordering, incorrectly installing the new screen since I think that I am the world's worse handyman. There are no Stewart dealers in Las Vegas where I live and would prefer to have a dealer do everything to take down the old screen, measure, order the new screen and install it. Am I really being too paranoid, and is it possible for the worlds worst handyman to install a fixed frame Stewart screen without damaging it? Are there any dealers in the Las Vegas area who can handle this replacement for me?
> 
> Photo shows the current screen.
> 
> Thanks!!



I've had dozens of customers like you put together and install fixed Stewart screens themselves. It really isn't too hard. And the StudioTek 130 is a great screen - I love mine !


----------



## DavidHir

orangele,

I'm not very mechanically inclined, but had zero problems putting together my fixed frame (Luxus Deluxe) Stewart ST100 screen. It might have taken me 30-40 minutes or so to put together the frame and button the screen material to it. It's pretty straight forward - just follow the directions.

I would also suggest the EZ-Mount bracket for mounting the screen to the wall. At your screen size it might require two brackets, but a leveler will help get the height nice and even.

For a 1.3 gain screen, the ST130 is the best. If I had to go the next step above 1.0 gain, that would be the screen.


----------



## Brian Hampton

I can't believe there are no Stewart dealers in Las Vegas.

Barring that though.... there has to be HT speciality places. If so they have experience (hopefully) in installing screens... look one up and you're good to go.

However easy it is, if you don't want the liability of damage there's no problem paying someone.

I only visited Las Vegas but the whole place seems entertainment-centric. I just can't believe there isn't a long list of people and shops that could help.

(Edit = If you plan to keep the white seating and light colored walls, maybe have a look into Firehawk. I understand you can request free screen samples.)


----------



## Stan-Lee

Orangele, 
Go to http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/downloads/manuals

And click on the SNDQ manual to see how it can be assembled.


----------



## DavidHir

Need some advice. This is kind of hard to explain.

I have the Luxus fixed frame and ez mount bracket on wall for mounting.

I want to raise my screen so it's about 1/4" higher (a little more height above speakers mounted below it), but I don't want to go through the hassle or unscrewing, re-measuring, re-leveling, and re-screwing the bracket (which the frame sits on) onto the wall. Plus the studs are really weird in the wall not every 16" at the same height. Not sure what the builder did. lol

Any ideas of something that is thin (probably about the thickness of a penny or quarter? would have to verify) that I can slide into the bracket so the frame will sit on it and move upward about 1/4" higher - if that makes sense? 

I just want to take the screen off the bracket - insert this real thin piece into the bracket - and then re-hang the screen on it so its 1/4" higher up.

I cannot think of anything to use for this. Anything cheap I grab at Home Depot, Lowes, or a hardware store?

It would need to be real thin (to be able to slide into the bracket), only a 1/4" higher and probably close to the length of the ez mount bracket if you're following me.

Thanks!


----------



## Mike Garrett

DavidHir said:


> Need some advice. This is kind of hard to explain.
> 
> I have the Luxus fixed frame and ez mount bracket on wall for mounting.
> 
> I want to raise my screen so it's about 1/4" higher (a little more height above speakers mounted below it), but I don't want to go through the hassle or unscrewing, re-measuring, re-leveling, and re-screwing the bracket (which the frame sits on) onto the wall. Plus the studs are really weird in the wall not every 16" at the same height. Not sure what the builder did. lol
> 
> Any ideas of something that is thin (probably about the thickness of a penny or quarter? would have to verify) that I can slide into the bracket so the frame will sit on it and move upward about 1/4" higher - if that makes sense?
> 
> I just want to take the screen off the bracket - insert this real thin piece into the bracket - and then re-hang the screen on it so its 1/4" higher up.
> 
> I cannot think of anything to use for this. Anything cheap I grab at Home Depot, Lowes, or a hardware store?
> 
> It would need to be real thin (to be able to slide into the bracket), only a 1/4" higher and probably close to the length of the ez mount bracket if you're following me.
> 
> Thanks!


I guess you could use a table saw and rip a strip of wood that was very thin and 1/4" in height. Would only need two of them a few inches long.


----------



## DavidHir

AV Science Sales 5 said:


> I guess you could use a table saw and rip a strip of wood that was very thin and 1/4" in height. Would only need two of them a few inches long.


I still have plywood left over from when you gave me *very* helpful advice on ceiling mounting my projector to the joists in the closet. I think with my saw I could probably do this, thanks!


----------



## Mike Garrett

DavidHir said:


> I still have plywood left over from when you gave me *very* helpful advice on ceiling mounting my projector to the joists in the closet. I think with my saw I could probably do this, thanks!


A small piece of hardwood would be better. Just be careful, cutting small pieces like this. There are ways to do it, without getting your fingers real close to the blade.


----------



## DavidHir

Maybe I will just have one of the guys at Home Depot or Lowes cut the exact size?


----------



## Mike Garrett

DavidHir said:


> Maybe I will just have one of the guys at Home Depot or Lowes cut the exact size?


If you are not used to cutting small pieces with a table saw, that might be a good idea.


----------



## chadamir

The masking around the sides of my screen aren't black enough and I can see the overshoot. What can I do? 

Also, I have a couple of indentations in the screen, presumably from dirt. Will they come out faster if the screen is down or up?


----------



## Ron

get a 50% off coupon to joann fabrics and then go there and buy black velvet - works great for light "absorbtion"...hopefully you can find a way to mount/pin it to the frame.

wait...I guess you're talking about a retractable screen. I only have experience with fixed screens, not sure what you can do with that. maybe strips of black velvet can be attached to the edges with velcro? just a wild thought.

I have heard that if you leave it open that it can work out wrinkles.


----------



## Mike Garrett

chadamir said:


> The masking around the sides of my screen aren't black enough and I can see the overshoot. What can I do?
> 
> Also, I have a couple of indentations in the screen, presumably from dirt. Will they come out faster if the screen is down or up?


You may be running your image brighter than what is recommended and that is why it is showing up. But you also may now be used to this and not like a dimmer image, so lowering the light output may not be appealing.


----------



## chadamir

AV Science Sales 5 said:


> You may be running your image brighter than what is recommended and that is why it is showing up. But you also may now be used to this and not like a dimmer image, so lowering the light output may not be appealing.


I'll try lowering the brightness. I wish there were a way to just crop the image.


----------



## jh901

ST 100 alternatives with very similar quality but lower cost? My room is going to be a velvet "black hole" (at least around the screen area), so I'm not looking for gain. Going for 120" scope (diagonal). Long term investment I hope!


----------



## Craig Peer

jh901 said:


> ST 100 alternatives with very similar quality but lower cost? My room is going to be a velvet "black hole" (at least around the screen area), so I'm not looking for gain. Going for 120" scope (diagonal). Long term investment I hope!



You might get a sample ( send me a PM and I can send you one ) of the Cima Neve - it's more an alternative to the Studiotek 130 G3 screen, but less expensive. I love mine - it's in my avatar photo even !


----------



## console

I have an existing Stewart Luxus LX 1.78:1 retractable screen. Like Craig Peer, I would like to add a second dedicated 2.35:1 screen. The best size for my space @ 12' viewing distance and projector (600ES) is 117.5" wide (127.5" diagonal). 

When I look at specs on Stewart's site I see that this size may require going from an LX model to an LXC model. I see that the case size is different. What are the other differences? More powerful motor for larger screens? What is the actual cutoff point for going from LX to LXC? 

Thank you!


----------



## PaulG

*Damaged my Firehawk - Replace screen and keep frame?!*

Dumb, dumb, dumb.

Well I just damaged my Stewart Firehawk, and I'm not entirely sure how. I was working on a crown molding above my screen today. Somewhere in the process, my sweaty forearm touched the screen material in two spots near the top. I gently dabbed and wiped the spots with a paper towel. After drying, I now seem to have two "smears" on the screen material. I'm guessing I damaged the reflective material a bit. Confirmed this by watching a bright scene...the "smears" are pretty faint, but I can see them...and worse- I now know to look for them. 

Questions:
1. Suggestions to clean or fix without making it worse?

2. Can I keep my SNDQ fixed mount frame and replace the screen material only? If so, any sense for cost on something like this? Screen viewing size (inside the frame) is 92"w x 51.5"h. (106" diag).

3. If I did replace the screen but kept the frame, is Firehawk still a good material choice? I ask because I was sprucing up the theater today as I'm about to replace my old Marantz VP12-S2 (700 lumens) with a Sony HW55ES (1700lumens), so I'm going from a candle to a light cannon - and the theater is completely light controlled. If I choose to replace the Firehawk, I might as well get an appropriate material if the Firehawk isn't. 

Thanks!


----------



## Ellebob

1. Call Stewart for cleaning instructions.


2. You can replace the screen material


3. You can use a different Stewart screen material. You viewing condition would determine which is best.


I'd either call a local Stewart dealer if you don't want to change out the screen yourself or give Mike at AVS a call he will be able to help determine which screen material is best for your situation and get you pricing.


----------



## PaulG

Ellebob said:


> 1. Call Stewart for cleaning instructions.
> 
> 
> 2. You can replace the screen material
> 
> 
> 3. You can use a different Stewart screen material. You viewing condition would determine which is best.
> 
> 
> I'd either call a local Stewart dealer if you don't want to change out the screen yourself or give Mike at AVS a call he will be able to help determine which screen material is best for your situation and get you pricing.


Thanks! I will follow the steps above, including calling Stewart and then Mike. I put the screen in myself, so I can do a material replacement myself if that's where this lands. Attached are a couple of pics of the offending smudges. They're pretty faint in these pics (and even with a bright image painted on them), but sadly, they're there and I fear may be more pronounced with a brighter PJ in the near future. Firehawk made sense 12 years ago (G1?) with my Marantz, but in a fully light controlled theater room and a 1700 lumen PJ at close range, there may be other/better materials. Honestly, I had given this no thought before yesterday's incident.


----------



## Ellebob

The Firehawk is still a good choice if you want to watch with some lights on or you have light colored walls. If you mostly watch with no lights and it looks like your walls and ceiling are dark you could go with a Studiotek 100. The Sony 55 puts about 900 lumens in its best picture quality mode, which is still plenty for your size screen in a dark environment. And while 900 doesn't sound like much more than 700, in reality the Marantz S2 only puts out about 300 lumens in its theater mode so it will be 3 times brighter.


----------



## Craig Peer

console said:


> I have an existing Stewart Luxus LX 1.78:1 retractable screen. Like Craig Peer, I would like to add a second dedicated 2.35:1 screen. The best size for my space @ 12' viewing distance and projector (600ES) is 117.5" wide (127.5" diagonal).
> 
> When I look at specs on Stewart's site I see that this size may require going from an LX model to an LXC model. I see that the case size is different. What are the other differences? More powerful motor for larger screens? What is the actual cutoff point for going from LX to LXC?
> 
> Thank you!



I have a 118" wide ( 128" diagonal ) 2.35:1 screen. Which screen case you wind up with could also depend on how much black drop you need. Shoot me a PM and maybe I can help.


----------



## PaulG

I talked with Stewart Film Screen this morning. Helpful conversation.
Turns out paper towels are deadly to their reflective surface(s)...like "sand paper". Fantastic.
I did get some instructions on how to try and clean the marks. 

In case it may benefit someone else here, the cleaning instructions were as follows:
1. Create a 50/50% solution of water and water-based de-greaser (409, Fantastik or similar)
2. Using a clean sponge, dab the solution onto the smudge using a "soak and lift" motion (vs. wiping)
3. Leave any remaining water/wet spot to naturally air dry vs. attempting to dry it. Walk away and let it dry. 

He was optimistic, therefore, so am I. The results of my cleaning effort will determine to what extent I just spread the smudge around vs. creating any damage to the screen. Will try this tonight to see what improvements I get and will report back.


----------



## console

PaulG said:


> I talked with Stewart Film Screen this morning. Helpful conversation.
> Turns out paper towels are deadly to their reflective surface(s)...like "sand paper". Fantastic.
> I did get some instructions on how to try and clean the marks.
> 
> In case it may benefit someone else here, the cleaning instructions were as follows:
> 1. Create a 50/50% solution of water and water-based de-greaser (409, Fantastik or similar)
> 2. Using a clean sponge, dab the solution onto the smudge using a "soak and lift" motion (vs. wiping)
> 3. Leave any remaining water/wet spot to naturally air dry vs. attempting to dry it. Walk away and let it dry.
> 
> He was optimistic, therefore, so am I. The results of my cleaning effort will determine to what extent I just spread the smudge around vs. creating any damage to the screen. Will try this tonight to see what improvements I get and will report back.


Paul G - thank you for sharing the cleaning instructions. I didn't know about paper towels being a no-no so you may have saved me from from future disaster.. 

Best of luck with this process. I look forward to hearing your results.


----------



## PaulG

*Screen saved!*

GREAT news!
I followed the instructions above to the letter (including walking away to let it dry when done). I did add a step at the end where I dabbed at the smudges with just clean water on the sponge to pick up any remaining cleaning solution.

Screen is FULLY restored and as new. Smudges are 100% gone. What a relief!!

Could be I over-reacted last night, but the smartest thing I did was to stop, do nothing and call Stewart. The tech who helped me wanted an update call tomorrow. I'm looking forward to calling and saying thank you!

Now I can return my attention to the next projector! 

Cheers!
-Paul


----------



## R Harkness

PaulG said:


> GREAT news!
> I followed the instructions above to the letter (including walking away to let it dry when done). I did add a step at the end where I dabbed at the smudges with just clean water on the sponge to pick up any remaining cleaning solution.
> 
> Screen is FULLY restored and as new. Smudges are 100% gone. What a relief!!
> 
> Could be I over-reacted last night, but the smartest thing I did was to stop, do nothing and call Stewart. The tech who helped me wanted an update call tomorrow. I'm looking forward to calling and saying thank you!
> 
> Now I can return my attention to the next projector!
> 
> Cheers!
> -Paul


Wow, glad it worked for you.

When I followed the same instructions (a bug landed on my screen and left some marks) the smudge only got bigger instead of going away. 

(BTW, that's not to impune the recommendations. I guess the delicacy of these screens is just a fact of life).


----------



## Mike Garrett

jh901 said:


> ST 100 alternatives with very similar quality but lower cost? My room is going to be a velvet "black hole" (at least around the screen area), so I'm not looking for gain. Going for 120" scope (diagonal). Long term investment I hope!


Keep in mind the screen is the long time purchase in your HT. Long after the projector you purchased is replaced, you will still be using the same screen, as long as you get the right screen the first time. My projection screen has seen multiple projectors.


----------



## Jeffg8

*Screen Thoughts*

I have a 110" 16x9 FireHawk from 2006. Originally paired with a Sony Ruby and now the Epson 6010. As I wait to see projector wise what's coming (4K etc) I'm thinking about 2.35, should I keep this screen and figure out a way to add a retractable 2.35. Or go for an all in one with some type of masking. My other consideration is I finally purchased my "dream" speakers and a wider/larger screen would be partially obstructed in the corners from the left/right. The room is 14' wide and the main seating and the projector are 15' away. Just looking for some comments.


----------



## Mike Garrett

Jeffg8 said:


> I have a 110" 16x9 FireHawk from 2006. Originally paired with a Sony Ruby and now the Epson 6010. As I wait to see projector wise what's coming (4K etc) I'm thinking about 2.35, should I keep this screen and figure out a way to add a retractable 2.35. Or go for an all in one with some type of masking. My other consideration is I finally purchased my "dream" speakers and a wider/larger screen would be partially obstructed in the corners from the left/right. The room is 14' wide and the main seating and the projector are 15' away. Just looking for some comments.


I use a constant heigh screen with powered masking and like it very much. Would be happy to discuss the merits of masking vs no masking vs dual screens with you.


----------



## Craig Peer

Jeffg8 said:


> I have a 110" 16x9 FireHawk from 2006. Originally paired with a Sony Ruby and now the Epson 6010. As I wait to see projector wise what's coming (4K etc) I'm thinking about 2.35, should I keep this screen and figure out a way to add a retractable 2.35. Or go for an all in one with some type of masking. My other consideration is I finally purchased my "dream" speakers and a wider/larger screen would be partially obstructed in the corners from the left/right. The room is 14' wide and the main seating and the projector are 15' away. Just looking for some comments.


I love my 2 screen setup. Sort of the best of both worlds.  Might work for you depending on the size of those new " dream speakers ".


----------



## Jmouse007

Mike Garrett said:


> Keep in mind the screen is the long time purchase in your HT. Long after the projector you purchased is replaced, you will still be using the same screen, as long as you get the right screen the first time. My projection screen has seen multiple projectors.


The above advice is probably the finest piece of advice you will find on AVS regarding purchasing a screen. I live by the adage: 

"Buy it right the first time so you don't have to buy it again" (for a very long time). 

Spend the money upfront for an exceptional screen; DON'T skimp on the screen by sacrificing quality for the sake of initial cost because in the long run the longevity of the screen will more than cover the initial cost of a more expensive screen over time. Just make sure you purchase the right screen to meet your needs the first time. 

Case in point: I had never owned or used a front projector and screen before. When we were initially in the market for a screen, a number of seasoned front projector aficionados on AVS gave me the exact same advice as you received above. I followed their advice and (like several other AVS members have mentioned in answering your question) also purchased a STEWART screen back in 2007 and have been using it ever since. 

The STEWART screen was initially VERY expensive and cost substantially more than a multitude of other screen options available at the time. However, it was the perfect screen for our needs so I bit the proverbial bullet and spent the extra money and I am very glad I did! Over time our STEWART film screen has been worth every penny because it has more than paid for itself. 

It is an electronically retractable 100 inch tab-tensioned STEWART Firehawk SST screen. Since we do not have a TV; our SONY high def front projector and STEWART electriscreen serve in that capacity as well as use for Blu-ray movies and occasional on screen computer gaming. Therefore the screen has been lowered, used and retracted almost every day for EIGHT YEARS! While we have, like others, changed projectors over time, the screen remains. It has worked flawlessly without a single problem the entire time and the screen looks just as good and functions just as well today as it did the day we installed it.

Remember: "Buy it right the first time so you don't have to buy it again" (for a very long time). 

If you do your AV research/homework and follow this advice concerning the purchase of a screen and all of your home theater equipment you will save yourself a ton of money over time, and have equipment that will faithfully serve your HT audio video needs for years to come. It also helps in avoiding A/V "upgradeItus".


----------



## PaulG

Jmouse007 said:


> Remember: "Buy it right the first time so you don't have to buy it again" (for a very long time).


Amen to that....exactly why I started with Stewart as my first HT screen 15 years ago. I changed screens from a Studiotek to a Firehawk 12 years ago when I went from CRT to DLP. In another week, I'll move to a new projector and (aside from the self-induced mishap chronicled in the thread above) I have never considered changing screens. Its that good....and so is Stewart - they've been very good to me.


----------



## DavidHir

I had to return a couple of (non Stewart) screens before getting the ST100 which finally met my wants.


----------



## breadvan

As a Stewart screen user, and I guess hopelessly biased, after 8 years of purchasing a then 'used' StudioTek 100 electric screen, it remains the most reliable piece of equipment, outlasting all other items in my small home theater.


----------



## Mike Garrett

Jmouse007 said:


> The above advice is probably the finest piece of advice you will find on AVS regarding purchasing a screen. I live by the adage:
> 
> "Buy it right the first time so you don't have to buy it again" (for a very long time).
> 
> Spend the money upfront for an exceptional screen; DON'T skimp on the screen by sacrificing quality for the sake of initial cost because in the long run the longevity of the screen will more than cover the initial cost of a more expensive screen over time. Just make sure you purchase the right screen to meet your needs the first time.
> 
> Case in point: I had never owned or used a front projector and screen before. When we were initially in the market for a screen, a number of seasoned front projector aficionados on AVS gave me the exact same advice as you received above. I followed their advice and (like several other AVS members have mentioned in answering your question) also purchased a STEWART screen back in 2007 and have been using it ever since.
> 
> The STEWART screen was initially VERY expensive and cost substantially more than a multitude of other screen options available at the time. However, it was the perfect screen for our needs so I bit the proverbial bullet and spent the extra money and I am very glad I did! Over time our STEWART film screen has been worth every penny because it has more than paid for itself.
> 
> It is an electronically retractable 100 inch tab-tensioned STEWART Firehawk SST screen. Since we do not have a TV; our SONY high def front projector and STEWART electriscreen serve in that capacity as well as use for Blu-ray movies and occasional on screen computer gaming. Therefore the screen has been lowered, used and retracted almost every day for EIGHT YEARS! While we have, like others, changed projectors over time, the screen remains. It has worked flawlessly without a single problem the entire time and the screen looks just as good and functions just as well today as it did the day we installed it.
> 
> Remember: "Buy it right the first time so you don't have to buy it again" (for a very long time).
> 
> If you do your AV research/homework and follow this advice concerning the purchase of a screen and all of your home theater equipment you will save yourself a ton of money over time, and have equipment that will faithfully serve your HT audio video needs for years to come. It also helps in avoiding A/V "upgradeItus".


It took me a couple screens, before I learned my own advise.


----------



## AMartin56

I suppose the only problem with the buy quality the first time approach is when you have a toddler. I think I'll buy a cheap screen until her and her crayons age a bit.


----------



## PaulG

AMartin56 said:


> I suppose the only problem with the buy quality the first time approach is when you have a toddler. I think I'll buy a cheap screen until her and her crayons age a bit.


Bah!! 
I had nine month old triplets when I bought my first Stewart screen!


----------



## smd

I am having issues with my Stewart Below-Ceiling CIMA screen and I'm running out of ideas. I'm using the 12V trigger connection from a JVC DLAX35. The screen would come down and up as I power cycled the JVC projector like clockwork for over a year. Then, the screen randomly started to deploy itself with the projector in standby mode. Sometimes it would fully deploy, and other times it would partially deploy and then immediately reverse itself. I contacted both Stewart and the local store that installed it. Stewart supplied a replacement controller (Converging Systems STI-100) and the service folks from the store installed it. It worked a few times while the service guy was here, but that night it stopped working. The issue now is that the screen stays in the fully deployed position when I power off the projector and won't retract unless I unplug the trigger wire from the back of the screen. Then, if I plug it back in, the screen deploys to the full position and stays there. About the only thing I'm sure of at this point is that its not the JVC projector as I have disconnected the trigger wire from it and the same thing happens. I'm currently stuck using the manual wall switch to operate the screen which, while inconvenient, works. I'm just frustrated that nobody (including apparently Stewart themselves) seems to know what's causing this problem and I've already spent quite a bit of money to solve it. Any ideas would be appreciated.


----------



## wse

I have had two screen both StewartFilmscreen the latest one is 8 years old and I love it


----------



## Swolephile

wse said:


> I have had two screen both StewartFilmscreen the latest one is 8 years old and I love it


Anyone seen both a G2-G4 Firehawk and a Black Diamond screen? Is a Firehawk a lighter shade than a 1.4 Black Diamond. Also does it perform similarly in a room with moderate ambient light?


----------



## Ellebob

SMD, I'm wondering if the problem is with JVCs trigger or the screen itself. I've never had a screen do that. I might consider put a logging multi-meter on the JVC and test the trigger voltage over time. I would also check the volts and amps of the trigger output. Does the screen work fine without the trigger connected?


----------



## Ellebob

We install both and in general I like the Firehawk more than the Black Diamond as it has a cleaner picture with less artifacts. But, I think the BD does a better job with ambient light especially with light coming from above the screen. The FH does better with light and reflections coming from the side. Both are good screens and I would pick the one that works better for your situation.


----------



## Swolephile

Ellebob said:


> We install both and in general I like the Firehawk more than the Black Diamond as it has a cleaner picture with less artifacts. But, I think the BD does a better job with ambient light especially with light coming from above the screen. The FH does better with light and reflections coming from the side. Both are good screens and I would pick the one that works better for your situation.


Thank you for your reply Ellebob.


----------



## smd

Ellebob said:


> SMD, I'm wondering if the problem is with JVCs trigger or the screen itself. I've never had a screen do that. I might consider put a logging multi-meter on the JVC and test the trigger voltage over time. I would also check the volts and amps of the trigger output. Does the screen work fine without the trigger connected?


I appreciate the response. The technician and I checked the voltage/amps coming out of the JVC trigger and it checked out OK. That's why Stewart decided to send the replacement controller. The screen does the same thing whether the trigger wire is hooked up to the JVC or not. If I plug the trigger wire into the screen with the JVC end disconnected, the screen fully deploys and stays there. The only way to get it to retract is to unplug the trigger wire from the screen. It doesn't respond to any signals from the projector when I power it on or off. I can only think that the replacement controller is also faulty, maybe a stuck relay or internal short. But what is strange is that the manual controller seems to operate the screen normally when I plug that in. It might help if I could get a wiring schematic of the controller to see the internal configuration, but Stewart doesn't provide any of that. The replacement controller they sent didn't have any documentation in the box. That makes troubleshooting difficult to say the least.


----------



## marswill

smd said:


> I appreciate the response. The technician and I checked the voltage/amps coming out of the JVC trigger and it checked out OK. That's why Stewart decided to send the replacement controller. The screen does the same thing whether the trigger wire is hooked up to the JVC or not. If I plug the trigger wire into the screen with the JVC end disconnected, the screen fully deploys and stays there. The only way to get it to retract is to unplug the trigger wire from the screen. It doesn't respond to any signals from the projector when I power it on or off. I can only think that the replacement controller is also faulty, maybe a stuck relay or internal short. But what is strange is that the manual controller seems to operate the screen normally when I plug that in. It might help if I could get a wiring schematic of the controller to see the internal configuration, but Stewart doesn't provide any of that. The replacement controller they sent didn't have any documentation in the box. That makes troubleshooting difficult to say the least.


I know this sounds obvious, but have you checked the interconnect wire between the projector and the screen for any opens, shorts, or intermittents?


----------



## smd

marswill said:


> I know this sounds obvious, but have you checked the interconnect wire between the projector and the screen for any opens, shorts, or intermittents?


Yes, we checked this as we were testing the output from JVC projector. Because the screen is doing something different than it was the first time (stuck in the down position instead of randomly deploying), I think the issue is most likely still with the screen. I'm going to try and call Stewart to see if they have any suggestions.


----------



## smd

I was able to figure out and fix my screen issue thanks to the great help from Stewart Technical Support. They sent me a wiring diagram and it turns out that the trigger wire splicing was not done correctly by the original installer. The trigger wire wasn't spliced to the correct pins on the connector that attaches to the screen. When the installer came out last week, he tested the voltage at the splices and not at the connector so everything appeared correct and that the screen was receiving the 12V trigger. It was receiving the 12V trigger, but not at the correct pin in the connector. It took me about five minutes to redo the splice myself. Kudos to Stewart's customer service.


----------



## Don Stewart

R Harkness said:


> When I followed the same instructions (a bug landed on my screen and left some marks) the smudge only got bigger instead of going away.
> .


It has been a while since I have posted on AVS but I have to respond to this one. The best way to remove Fly Poop or a squashed bug that got rolled up in a retractable screen is to blot stain with the sticky side of masking tape. *Important:* Do not substitute other types of tape such as duct or Scotch tape.
Even in our factory, there are occasions when a fly will land on screen material that has been layed out on the tables being readied for final fabrication.
Sometimes they leave poop on the optical surface and we remove it as noted above.


----------



## R Harkness

Don Stewart said:


> It has been a while since I have posted on AVS but I have to respond to this one. The best way to remove Fly Poop or a squashed bug that got rolled up in a retractable screen is to blot stain with the sticky side of masking tape. *Important:* Do not substitute other types of tape such as duct or Scotch tape.
> Even in our factory, there are occasions when a fly will land on screen material that has been layed out on the tables being readied for final fabrication.
> Sometimes they leave poop on the optical surface and we remove it as noted above.


Good to know thanks. BTW, does the "painter's tape" type of masking tape work as well? (Usually comes in bright colors). The adhesive of painter's tape seems to me even more gentle than standard masking tape.


----------



## Don Stewart

R Harkness said:


> Good to know thanks. BTW, does the "painter's tape" type of masking tape work as well? (Usually comes in bright colors). The adhesive of painter's tape seems to me even more gentle than standard masking tape.


I can't speak for the different brands of painter's tape. We have always had success with standard 3M masking tape.


----------



## console

*Centering 2 Electriscreens*



Craig Peer said:


> QuoteS: I need pull-down screen and SI's Black Diamond is too large to fit, so it is out of the question.
> 
> 
> You need an electric screen ( Stewart doesn't make a " pull down screen " )? If so, why not get one of each?


Craig - in your 2 screen set up - was it critical for each screen to have the exact same centerline - to make zooming easier?


----------



## Craig Peer

console said:


> Craig - in your 2 screen set up - was it critical for each screen to have the exact same centerline - to make zooming easier?



It helps to get them close. Usually electric screens can be adjust 2 inches in either direction, so with 2 electric screens, I can adjust one or both. With my Lumis for instance I never need to do anything but zoom. The screens are at the exact perfect height every time.


----------



## jaychatbonneau

What kind of quality difference would i see between Carada's Classic Cinema White and Stewart's ST100?


----------



## Don Stewart

For anyone interested Stewart just launched a new website. I could not stand our old one as even I could not find what I wanted on it. Anyway, I personally worked on the new one for hundreds of hours and will continue to update as required. Thanks for taking a look.

http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/


Warmest Regards,
Don Stewart.


----------



## Vidop

Don Stewart said:


> For anyone interested Stewart just launched a new website. I could not stand our old one as even I could not find what I wanted on it. Anyway, I personally worked on the new one for hundreds of hours and will continue to update as required. Thanks for taking a look.
> 
> http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/
> 
> 
> Warmest Regards,
> Don Stewart.


Thanks for the update. It's been a while since I've checked your website. I agree that your new layout is MUCH easier to navigate and find information. The chart you have giving specs/comparisons all in one place is very nice. Thanks for the change!


----------



## Craig Peer

It was great seeing the Stewart crew at Cedia. I love the new Luminess thin bezel screen !


----------



## DavidHir

I have a feeling Stewart is going to see more orders placed in the next year for the ST100 and ST130 fabric given the new JVCs are going to be 50% brighter.


----------



## DavidHir

jaychatbonneau said:


> What kind of quality difference would i see between Carada's Classic Cinema White and Stewart's ST100?


I have the ST100 and compared it closely to the CCW.

The ST100 is a step brighter even though both are virtually the same gain (1.0). Colors and light just come off the ST100 more vibrantly. There's just more "life" if you will. The ST100 is the very best screen material you can get if you have the proper room for it because you are getting virtually no artifacts and just complete smoothness.


----------



## Don Stewart

With a heavy heart we post this obituary of Grant Stewart, Stewart's CEO.
http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/ab...screen-president-grant-stewart-60-passes-away


----------



## GetGray

Bad news indeed. A true industry leader. RIP Grant.


----------



## David Giles

Don Stewart said:


> With a heavy heart we post this obituary of Grant Stewart, Stewart's CEO.
> http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/ab...screen-president-grant-stewart-60-passes-away


I'm very sorry to hear about this. I got to meet Grant at an industry training event several years ago in Copper Colorado. He was incredibly gracious, and my wife and I really enjoyed talking shop with him over dinner. He was a good man!


----------



## Craig Peer

Don Stewart said:


> With a heavy heart we post this obituary of Grant Stewart, Stewart's CEO.
> http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/ab...screen-president-grant-stewart-60-passes-away



I'm very sorry for your loss.


----------



## jaykay0222

I'm looking for a 100-inch fixed screen and came across this one on ebay - www.ebay.com/itm/Stewart-Filmscreen...116140?hash=item1ea62efcec:g:9hAAAOSwhcJWLOMb

It is a Stewart Filmscreen Grayhawk G3 screen

Looking for inputs from any owners on this screen.


----------



## DavidHir

Don Stewart said:


> With a heavy heart we post this obituary of Grant Stewart, Stewart's CEO.
> http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/ab...screen-president-grant-stewart-60-passes-away


All my condolences to your family.


----------



## Ellebob

So sorry for your loss. He was such a nice guy. I'm glad I had the chance to meet him years ago. Truly a loss to the industry.


----------



## Mike Garrett

Very sorry for your loss.


----------



## JSKMDWK

jaykay0222 said:


> I'm looking for a 100-inch fixed screen and came across this one on ebay - www.ebay.com/itm/Stewart-Filmscreen...116140?hash=item1ea62efcec:g:9hAAAOSwhcJWLOMb
> 
> It is a Stewart Filmscreen Grayhawk G3 screen


That is a great price on a screen, but the serial number SNDQ100HFHG3WEZ indicates that it is a FireHawk Gen 3 (FHG3), not a Grayhawk screen. Should be good in a theater with some minor light.


----------



## GetGray

jaykay0222 said:


> I'm looking for a 100-inch fixed screen and came across this one on ebay - www.ebay.com/itm/Stewart-Filmscreen-Grayhawk-Fixed-Wall-G3-Home-Theatre-Projection-Screen-SNDQ-/131637116140?hash=item1ea62efcec:g:9hAAAOSwhcJWLOMb
> 
> It is a Stewart Filmscreen Grayhawk G3 screen
> 
> Looking for inputs from any owners on this screen.


If it is the size you are looking for and you can go get it, that's a really good price on a nice screen. I agree the SN implies Firehawk, which is a popular, very versatile screen. Does great if you want to have a little (indirect) light on in the theater for sporting events, etc, or you don't have a fully light controlled room.

Lay it on the floor viewing side up, unsnap it, roll it up carefully, 4 bolts take the frame apart, go home and put it back together.


----------



## jaykay0222

GetGray said:


> If it is the size you are looking for and you can go get it, that's a really good price on a nice screen. I agree the SN implies Firehawk, which is a popular, very versatile screen. Does great if you want to have a little (indirect) light on in the theater for sporting events, etc, or you don't have a fully light controlled room.
> 
> Lay it on the floor viewing side up, unsnap it, roll it up carefully, 4 bolts take the frame apart, go home and put it back together.





JSKMDWK said:


> That is a great price on a screen, but the serial number SNDQ100HFHG3WEZ indicates that it is a FireHawk Gen 3 (FHG3), not a Grayhawk screen. Should be good in a theater with some minor light.


Thanks. My room is completely light controlled room and I will be using Benq W1070 projector. I guess I could use grey screen even though the room is completely dark for viewing

Do you still recommend in light controlled room


----------



## GetGray

jaykay0222 said:


> Thanks. My room is completely light controlled room and I will be using Benq W1070 projector. I guess I could use grey screen even though the room is completely dark for viewing
> 
> Do you still recommend in light controlled room


If I were starting with you as a customer, from scratch, and I knew a) you have 100% light control, b) non reflective walls, and c) never will use any lights on at all, then I woudl prescribe a different screen. If any one of those answers were no, then the FH would be an option. If budget is no issue and all the answers are yes, then call me, we can get you a different screen. If abc are yes, but the budget is snug it's a good screen.


----------



## jaykay0222

GetGray said:


> If I were starting with you as a customer, from scratch, and I knew a) you have 100% light control, b) non reflective walls, and c) never will use any lights on at all, then I woudl prescribe a different screen. If any one of those answers were no, then the FH would be an option. If budget is no issue and all the answers are yes, then call me, we can get you a different screen. If abc are yes, but the budget is snug it's a good screen.


My budget is around $600 and I was looking at Carada screen; but came across this one

Since it is local pickup, I would have a look at the screen before making decision

thanks once again for your inputs


----------



## wse

Don Stewart said:


> With a heavy heart we post this obituary of Grant Stewart, Stewart's CEO.
> http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/ab...screen-president-grant-stewart-60-passes-away


My sincere condolence, I have been a proud owner of Stewart Film Screen Owner since 2001. I now have two of them.


----------



## Don Stewart

Don Stewart 
Senior Member

 

Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Stewart Filmscreen Corporation. USA
Posts: 373 
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 13

Just came across this photo today of a custom Torus compound curved screen we recently built for filmmaker Douglas Trumbull. (2001, Blade Runner, Star Trek, the Motion Picture, Close Encounters Of The Third Kind, Brain Storm, Show Scan, etc). This photo was taken on his private sound stage, an old converted textile mill, in the Berkshire mountains in western Massachusetts. The screen material is a fully seamless silver screen, gain of 3.0, for passive 3D projection. In the background is a green screen for special effects compositing with about the same scale and AR as the Torus screen. One of Mr. Trumbull's passions is developing specialty venue theaters and ride films. This is a mock up of a project is working on.
Anyway, I thought it as a cool photo worthy of posting for those interested in these type of things.
Regards,
Don.


----------



## GetGray

Thanks for posting Don. Very cool.


----------



## console

*Replacing Screen Material in a Model A LXC Electriscreen*

Is it possible to replace screen material (including masking) in an existing Stewart Model A LXC Electriscreen? Can I keep my existing case, hardware and accessories and just order new screen material? Is this in any way able to be installed by the customer, or does the entire case and existing screen have to be shipped back to Stewart? Or is the whole thing a loss and you have to order everything new? 

My screen is almost new but I made a mistake on the aspect ratio I chose and want to keep my same case and order new material with new masking dimensions. 

Thanks!


----------



## Don Stewart

console said:


> Is it possible to replace screen material (including masking) in an existing Stewart Model A LXC Electriscreen? Can I keep my existing case, hardware and accessories and just order new screen material? Is this in any way able to be installed by the customer, or does the entire case and existing screen have to be shipped back to Stewart? Or is the whole thing a loss and you have to order everything new?
> 
> My screen is almost new but I made a mistake on the aspect ratio I chose and want to keep my same case and order new material with new masking dimensions.
> 
> Thanks!


 Yes, the screen case can be reused and re-screened like new. It is highly recommended that the the case be shipped back to the factory for this task. Factory technicians will then make a new screen to your size new specifications and attach screen to the internal roller tube assembly. They will then test the screen in its upright natural position for at least 24 hours to assure the the screen material lays completely flat. If not they will make another one. The new screen material will also come with the full Stewart warranty.
Please contact Mr. Scott Kimber at 1 800-762-4999 between 7:30 and 3:30PT if you would like to make arrangements. Please tell him that you were advised to call him by Don. 
Edit: Also, please have screen's serial number ready for Scott. It can be found on the back of the bottom screen batten.


----------



## console

Don Stewart said:


> Yes, the screen case can be reused and re-screened like new. It is highly recommended that the the case be shipped back to the factory for this task. Factory technicians will then make a new screen to your size new specifications and attach screen to the internal roller tube assembly. They will then test the screen in its upright natural position for at least 24 hours to assure the the screen material lays completely flat. If not they will make another one. The new screen material will also come with the full Stewart warranty.
> Please contact Mr. Scott Kimber at 1 800-762-4999 between 7:30 and 3:30PT if you would like to make arrangements. Please tell him that you were advised to call him by Don.
> Edit: Also, please have screen's serial number ready for Scott. It can be found on the back of the bottom screen batten.


Thanks Don. I figured it would have to be shipped back but I was hoping that somehow a customer would be able to re-screen. 

Would Stewart send me a new shipping carton in this transaction? Is this something I would need to go through my local dealer or can I work direct with Stewart?


----------



## R Harkness

*Question about calculating change in Stewart Screen Materials: *

I've been extremely happy with my large ST-130 screen material, and when I originally bought it in 2009 I felt I needed that extra bit of gain for the JVC projectors of the time (e.g. RS20, then RS55, currently RS57). (_I use 4-way automated masking to alter the image size/AR to my taste, per content, which means I'll watch anywhere from around 100" 16:9 diagonal to 135" diagonal, and 99" - 125" wide for 2:35:1_)

However, since I'm buying one of the new JVC RS600 projectors which are much higher brightness (about double the calibrated brightness of the previous JVC projectors) I'm now considering swapping for the Stewart ST100 material. I've always had the goal of having the most invisible screen I could manage, in terms of hot-spotting and screen texture, and the ST100 is about as good as that gets.

I've started to crunch the screen brightness numbers between the ST-130 and ST100 and I'm left a bit puzzled. The ST-130 is rated at 1.3 gain, the ST100 a neutral 1.0 gain. Stewart ratings are normally quite accurate so I've plugged those numbers into the Accupel Screen Set Up Calculator.

However, I noticed in his shoot-out review of the ST-130/ST100 screens, in Sound and Vision, Tom Norton measured only
a 2.2 fL difference in brightness at the screen centers of the two screens. And of course the ST100 measured more uniform than the ST-130, so the ST100 is closer in brightness outside of the hot-spotting area. 

http://www.soundandvision.com/conte...d-studiotek-130-g3-page-3#0l5cyzY9Qjqq3UtD.97

If I go with those measurements, the difference in brightness becomes fairly negligible, in terms of the demand it puts on my projector - about a 100 more lumens difference to achieve the same screen brightness. I also notice that Kris Deering, who swapped his ST-130 for the ST100 material mentioned he only had to raise brightness a couple clicks of is JVC iris to get the same brightness, and that the screens looked similar in brightness to him generally. And my sample of ST100 looks quite close (though slightly lower) brightness to the ST-130 (though testing can be tricky - if you are holding up the ST100 while being off angle you aren't getting the ST-130's full gain, so they can look the same). A 2.2 fL difference in the center, combined with more even illumination of the ST100, suggests to me they will look closer in brightness.

Ok, so all this is to ask: Is the difference in real-world-use brightness somewhat less, all things considered, than the strict rated gain would suggest (and which a screen calculator based on rated gains would suggest)?

The new JVCs are way brighter - hitting around 1700 - 1800 lumens in high lamp mode, 1200 - 1300 low lamp - so I'm not really worried about losing brightness for 2D. But I have wanted a brighter image for 3D and want some headroom for HDR, which is why I'm trying to get a sense of the real world difference in using these screens.

Many thanks.


----------



## Don Stewart

console said:


> Thanks Don. I figured it would have to be shipped back but I was hoping that somehow a customer would be able to re-screen.
> 
> Would Stewart send me a new shipping carton in this transaction? Is this something I would need to go through my local dealer or can I work direct with Stewart?


Your choice. 
If you plan on having the dealer remove and reinstall your unit, then it would be best to keep the dealer in the loop and have him make the arrangements with the factory. If your plans are to do that work yourself, then it would be more efficient for you to contact factory service directly. Also, arrangements can be made to send you an empty shipping carton.


----------



## console

Don Stewart said:


> Your choice.
> If you plan on having the dealer remove and reinstall your unit, then it would be best to keep the dealer in the loop and have him make the arrangements with the factory. If your plans are to do that work yourself, then it would be more efficient for you to contact factory service directly. Also, arrangements can be made to send you an empty shipping carton.


i would remove, pack and ship the screen myself and will contact factory service. Thank you!


----------



## Don Stewart

R Harkness said:


> *Question about calculating change in Stewart Screen Materials: *
> 
> I've been extremely happy with my large ST-130 screen material, and when I originally bought it in 2009 I felt I needed that extra bit of gain for the JVC projectors of the time (e.g. RS20, then RS55, currently RS57). (_I use 4-way automated masking to alter the image size/AR to my taste, per content, which means I'll watch anywhere from around 100" 16:9 diagonal to 135" diagonal, and 99" - 125" wide for 2:35:1_)
> 
> However, since I'm buying one of the new JVC RS600 projectors which are much higher brightness (about double the calibrated brightness of the previous JVC projectors) I'm now considering swapping for the Stewart ST100 material. I've always had the goal of having the most invisible screen I could manage, in terms of hot-spotting and screen texture, and the ST100 is about as good as that gets.
> 
> I've started to crunch the screen brightness numbers between the ST-130 and ST100 and I'm left a bit puzzled. The ST-130 is rated at 1.3 gain, the ST100 a neutral 1.0 gain. Stewart ratings are normally quite accurate so I've plugged those numbers into the Accupel Screen Set Up Calculator.
> 
> However, I noticed in his shoot-out review of the ST-130/ST100 screens, in Sound and Vision, Tom Norton measured only
> a 2.2 fL difference in brightness at the screen centers of the two screens. And of course the ST100 measured more uniform than the ST-130, so the ST100 is closer in brightness outside of the hot-spotting area.
> 
> http://www.soundandvision.com/conte...d-studiotek-130-g3-page-3#0l5cyzY9Qjqq3UtD.97
> 
> If I go with those measurements, the difference in brightness becomes fairly negligible, in terms of the demand it puts on my projector - about a 100 more lumens difference to achieve the same screen brightness. I also notice that Kris Deering, who swapped his ST-130 for the ST100 material mentioned he only had to raise brightness a couple clicks of is JVC iris to get the same brightness, and that the screens looked similar in brightness to him generally. And my sample of ST100 looks quite close (though slightly lower) brightness to the ST-130 (though testing can be tricky - if you are holding up the ST100 while being off angle you aren't getting the ST-130's full gain, so they can look the same). A 2.2 fL difference in the center, combined with more even illumination of the ST100, suggests to me they will look closer in brightness.
> 
> Ok, so all this is to ask: Is the difference in real-world-use brightness somewhat less, all things considered, than the strict rated gain would suggest (and which a screen calculator based on rated gains would suggest)?
> 
> The new JVCs are way brighter - hitting around 1700 - 1800 lumens in high lamp mode, 1200 - 1300 low lamp - so I'm not really worried about losing brightness for 2D. But I have wanted a brighter image for 3D and want some headroom for HDR, which is why I'm trying to get a sense of the real world difference in using these screens.
> 
> Many thanks.


Actually, your StudioTek 130 will be approximately 30 percent brighter peak gain (give or take a few percent) on the brightest spot on the screen than the StudioTek 100. With that said, the discrepancy you mention is quite common because of a testing error many make when measuring angular reflective gain screens. When measuring screen brightness, most technicians position the light meter on both the horizontal and vertical screen centerlines. In most real life room scenarios, the projector lens is offset from the vertical screen centerline with a ceiling mount or table top mount. Therefore, the incident light ray is not striking the vertical screen centerline perpendicular to the screen surface and will give one a lower FL reading. In the case of a ceiling mount light source, the light meters needs to be slowly lowered, utilizing a seek and search test protocol, until highest screen output reading is witnessed. See sketch I drew up for you.


----------



## console

Don Stewart said:


> Yes, the screen case can be reused and re-screened like new. It is highly recommended that the the case be shipped back to the factory for this task. Factory technicians will then make a new screen to your size new specifications and attach screen to the internal roller tube assembly. They will then test the screen in its upright natural position for at least 24 hours to assure the the screen material lays completely flat. If not they will make another one.


What I actually need is to change my screen's aspect ratio from 2.35 to 2.39. This can be done by increasing the top (or bottom) black masking border by about 2.5". Can this simply be done by re-spraying one border ... And not require all new screen material?

Another idea I have is to apply Protostar material (super thin velvet like material with a sticky backer) to the bottom border and into the white area by the required inches. Since this would be at the bottom it wouldn't roll much up into the screen case and my issue might be solved. 

Anyone ever try something like this?


----------



## R Harkness

Don Stewart said:


> Actually, your StudioTek 130 will be approximately 30 percent brighter peak gain (give or take a few percent) on the brightest spot on the screen than the StudioTek 100. With that said, the discrepancy you mention is quite common because of a testing error many make when measuring angular reflective gain screens. When measuring screen brightness, most technicians position the light meter on both the horizontal and vertical screen centerlines. In most real life room scenarios, the projector lens is offset from the vertical screen centerline with a ceiling mount or table top mount. Therefore, the incident light ray is not striking the vertical screen centerline perpendicular to the screen surface and will give one a lower FL reading. In the case of a ceiling mount light source, the light meters needs to be slowly lowered, utilizing a seek and search test protocol, until highest screen output reading is witnessed. See sketch I drew up for you.


Thanks Don, that makes a lot of sense.

Now I'm wondering if my seating position is getting me the full gain from my ST-130.
My projector is about 6 feet off the ground, my screen is 67" tall and about 1 1/2' off the ground.


----------



## Don Stewart

R Harkness said:


> Thanks Don, that makes a lot of sense.
> 
> Now I'm wondering if my seating position is getting me the full gain from my ST-130.
> My projector is about 6 feet off the ground, my screen is 67" tall and about 1 1/2' off the ground.


Figuring your eye point is somewhere between 36" to 42" off the floor, at some point in the vertical axis you are getting full peak gain with the numbers you stated.
This may be TMI, but you can draw your room profile in scale and do a light ray trace between your projector, screen and seating eye point. At some point the angle of incident light hitting the screen and the angle of reflected light coming back to your eye point will be equal. This is where you will witness peak gain.
Here is an example of a ray trace below to give you an idea. It was for a very high 3.5 curved gain screen and the ray trace had to be done to predict the white field uniformity at the viewers eye point. If you decided to go with StudioTek 100 then all this is a none issue as your white field uniformity will be near equal in any position in your theater. Of course this is only good if your room is finished in dark color values. If not, we have created a new problem of cross reflections which can deteriorate your black levels. Got to go as wife is calling me to dinner now.


----------



## GetGray

Don Stewart said:


> Figuring you eye point is somewhere between 36" to 42" off the floor, at some point in the vertical axis you are getting full peak gain with the numbers you stated.
> This may be TMI, but you can draw your room profile in scale and do a light ray trace between your projector, screen and seating eye point. At some point the angle of incident light hitting the screen and the angle of reflected light coming back to your eye point will be equal. This is where you will witness peak gain.
> Here is an example of a ray trace below to give you an idea. It was for a very high 3.5 curved gain screen and the ray trace had to be done to predict the white field uniformity at the viewers eye point. If you decided to go with StudioTek 100 then all this is no issue as your white field uniformity will be near equal in any position in your theater which is good only if your room is finished in dark color values. If not, we have created a new problem of cross reflections which can deteriorate your black levels. Got to go as wife is calling me to dinner now.


Cool. Would like to have tested that screen


----------



## R Harkness

Don Stewart said:


> Figuring your eye point is somewhere between 36" to 42" off the floor, at some point in the vertical axis you are getting full peak gain with the numbers you stated.
> This may be TMI, but you can draw your room profile in scale and do a light ray trace between your projector, screen and seating eye point. At some point the angle of incident light hitting the screen and the angle of reflected light coming back to your eye point will be equal. This is where you will witness peak gain.
> Here is an example of a ray trace below to give you an idea. It was for a very high 3.5 curved gain screen and the ray trace had to be done to predict the white field uniformity at the viewers eye point. If you decided to go with StudioTek 100 then all this is a none issue as your white field uniformity will be near equal in any position in your theater. Of course this is only good if your room is finished in dark color values. If not, we have created a new problem of cross reflections which can deteriorate your black levels. Got to go as wife is calling me to dinner now.


Thanks very much again Don for your input. I'm going to do some measuring of my screen height, viewing height, and see what I come up with.

My room for watching movies can be made into an almost perfect black pit: dark rug, dark sofa, black velvet covering every bit of all the walls, black velvet on the ceiling. Projectors look amazing in this environment.


----------



## Craig Peer

R Harkness said:


> Thanks very much again Don for your input. I'm going to do some measuring of my screen height, viewing height, and see what I come up with.
> 
> My room for watching movies can be made into an almost perfect black pit: dark rug, dark sofa, black velvet covering every bit of all the walls, black velvet on the ceiling. Projectors look amazing in this environment.



As soon as my new RS600 arrives, I may be moving my seating closer to my ST 130 G3 screen yet again, for a slightly more immersive movie watching experience !


----------



## DavidHir

Craig Peer said:


> As soon as my new RS600 arrives, I may be moving my seating closer to my ST 130 G3 screen yet again, for a slightly more immersive movie watching experience !


And what I have found, just moving the couch forward 1-2 inches can actually make the image notably more immersive. One wouldn't think so, but when we're dealing with larger screens that take up so much field of view, small changes make notable differences.


----------



## R Harkness

DavidHir said:


> And what I have found, just moving the couch forward 1-2 inches can actually make the image notably more immersive. One wouldn't think so, but when we're dealing with larger screens that take up so much field of view, small changes make notable differences.


Yes, I've found that too. Also, expanding my projected image size even a few inches makes a noticeable difference as well.


----------



## Craig Peer

DavidHir said:


> And what I have found, just moving the couch forward 1-2 inches can actually make the image notably more immersive. One wouldn't think so, but when we're dealing with larger screens that take up so much field of view, small changes make notable differences.



I may be forced to sell my Lumis if I fully implement my plan to switch my electric screen positions so that the 2.35:1 StudioTek 130 is in front, with the 16:9 Cima Neve in back, and move the seating 4" closer. That would put my 2.35:1 ST 130 10" closer, and make the 2.35:1 screen seem a little larger in relation to my 16:9 than it is now - about 9' 10" from my 118" wide screen. I can only do this by replacing the Lumis with the new JCV RS600 and using that and the VW600 ( smaller pixels - I can almost see pixel grid now on the Lumis ). And doing a bit of re-framing to move the projectors back 7" ! Oh the never ending quest for " bigger and better " continues !!


----------



## R Harkness

I spent quite a while at a high end AV store looking at the latest flat screens and some projection. This store had a number of set ups in dedicated rooms, etc. I saw Panasonic, Samsung and Sony LCD screens of all types and sizes (up to 80" 16:9). All of course playing exemplary sources, usually 4k.

I also saw an Epson projector and a Sony 4K projector (couldn't see which one) in a dedicated room, lights out (which also had a flat panel playing the same source). The experience re-enforced two things:

1. For whatever reason, while the flat panels produce a very vivid image, I rarely get the sense of amazing depth perception as I do at home from my projector, and also from the Sony projector I saw today. That sense of seeing way off to the horizon, or the sense of a shot in a dark house in a horror movie, of just seeing INTO the room more like you are there, is hard to get from the flat panels. Overhead store lighting is part of it. But even in the dark, comparing a flat panel to the projected image, the difference seemed similar.

2. I truly, really can't stand hot-spotting and obvious screen texture!!!! As soon as I saw the first projector, Epson, in a room with a bit of lights on, clearly using an ALR type screen, I could immediately see the scrim of speckly, dirty texture over the image and the really bad hot-spot.
When I saw the Sony projector in the dedicated room, on a larger screen, once again, the impact of the screen texture and hot-spot was just hard to ignore. It really took away IMO from the quality, sharpness and realism of the image. At first I was wondering what was going on, as this place usually used Stewart screens, usually the Firehawk, and I'd never seen the issues this bad. But then, even before I looked at the label I realized I knew they'd switched screen brands, to one I recognized just from the artifacts I mention. Too bad, because IMO the presentation took a hit in dropping the Stewart screens.

I certainly understand and fully support ALR screens for their intended purpose, but it's really become clear to me that in an appropriate room, smoother screens with even illumination, without aggressive optical coating, are the way to go for realizing the best image quality. I love my ST-130, and it is mercifully a very smooth, subtle screen. But in my quest for as smooth a screen as possible, I keep hearing the siren call of the ST100.... perhaps it is....my destiny!


----------



## DavidHir

I love the ST100 screen having tried out two HD Pro screens (the 0.9 and 1.1).

I was at Best Buy Magnolia and they have a Black Diamond screen (not sure which one) used with a lower end Epson on display. I don't think I could use a projector if I had to use that screen - the screen texture was just incredibly distracting to my eyes and greatly diminished the overall image quality. It looked terrible.


----------



## R Harkness

Yeah, I truly wonder if I'd stick with projection if I had to use such screens.

That said, I often watch movies at my friend's place who has a cheap projection set up. He buys my cast-off JVC projectors and uses a small 94" cheap pulldown Optoma Graywolf ALR screen. It definitely has screen texture that I notice sometimes. Though I think it helps that it's retro-reflective so it doesn't hot-spot the same way as an angular reflective screen. My critical faculties tend to be put on the shelf when I view at his place and I have no problem watching there. But for my own set up, I don't know that I could put up with the artifacts. One thing I notice is that none of my projectors look as good on that screen as they do at home. And the image never looks quite as sharp - the screen surface seems to have a very slight blurring effect. 

Actually, I remember trying to help him focus the projector on his screen. Up close the pixels were so blurry due to the heavy optical coating I literally couldn't focus the projector. I had to hold up a sheet of white paper on the screen to do so.


----------



## Swolephile

DavidHir said:


> I love the ST100 screen having tried out two HD Pro screens (the 0.9 and 1.1).
> 
> I was at Best Buy Magnolia and they have a Black Diamond screen (not sure which one) used with a lower end Epson on display. I don't think I could use a projector if I had to use that screen - the screen texture was just incredibly distracting to my eyes and greatly diminished the overall image quality. It looked terrible.


I've seen a Stewart ST100 and 130 in person. I don't see what the fuss is about them. They are decent screens. However they were not noticeably better than any budget white screen I've seen from Silver Ticket and Elite Screens.

I would take a Screen Innovations Zero Edge Pure White screen over a Stewart screen.


----------



## R Harkness

Swolephile said:


> I've seen a Stewart ST100 and 130 in person. I don't see what the fuss is about them. They are decent screens. However they were not noticeably better than any budget white screen I've seen from Silver Ticket and Elite Screens.
> 
> I would take a Screen Innovations Zero Edge Pure White screen over a Stewart screen.


We tend to vary in how sensitive we are to various screen artifacts. I really dislike hot-spotting and screen texture, and having tested out many, many different screen materials, I found the ST-130 to be the best screen-with-gain I could find (because I needed a tiny bit of gain) in terms of lack of artifacts, and the ST-100 samples I have seem to beat other brands I've tried in terms of minimizing artifacts. Pretty much every test of the ST-130/ST100 by reviewers seems to confirm the same. Which isn't to say a budget white screen wouldn't produce an excellent image. And plenty of people would likely be just as happy with a budget screen, which is good on the wallet to be sure.

I haven't seen the SI 1.3 gain white screen. My experience having seen many Screen Innovation products leads me to be skeptical that their 1.3 gain screen would be low in artifacts compared to the Stewart screens. Every SI screen I've seen that employs gain coating has had just about the most aggressive screen texture and hot-spotting that I've seen. 

Unfortunately, screens are really something we have to see for ourselves. For virtually every screen out there with visible artifacts, you'll have plenty of people saying _"What are you talking about? Looks great to me!"_


----------



## Don Stewart

The reason StudioTek 100 has such a smooth non textured, no gloss matte finish is the material is actually cast on hugh 40 X 90 foot molds. Other screen materials by other manufactures are extruded between rollers which is called a calender process. Our mold process also allows us to to produce completely seamless screens up to 40 X 90 feet. That is one of the reasons that most Hollywood film studios and post production facilities use StudioTek 100. Yes, this process is a lot more expensive to do, but the results are there. The goal of a perfect screen is to become completely invisible when in use. Just sayin.

Edit Note: Any surface gloss, (sheen) on a so called matte screen surface becomes what we call, "False Gain". This can lead to hot spotting and poor white field uniformity. Some screen manufactures add surface texture to their matte finish in an attempt to reduce screen's surface sheen and gloss. The rollers that extrude the material have a texture which embosses that same texture on the screen material. This process is a lot less expensive to produce but will have a surface finish that can produce undesirable image artifacts when under projection.
Calendering process.


----------



## Swolephile

R Harkness said:


> We tend to vary in how sensitive we are to various screen artifacts. I really dislike hot-spotting and screen texture, and having tested out many, many different screen materials, I found the ST-130 to be the best screen-with-gain I could find (because I needed a tiny bit of gain) in terms of lack of artifacts, and the ST-100 samples I have seem to beat other brands I've tried in terms of minimizing artifacts. Pretty much every test of the ST-130/ST100 by reviewers seems to confirm the same. Which isn't to say a budget white screen wouldn't produce an excellent image. And plenty of people would likely be just as happy with a budget screen, which is good on the wallet to be sure.
> 
> I haven't seen the SI 1.3 gain white screen. My experience having seen many Screen Innovation products leads me to be skeptical that their 1.3 gain screen would be low in artifacts compared to the Stewart screens. Every SI screen I've seen that employs gain coating has had just about the most aggressive screen texture and hot-spotting that I've seen.
> 
> Unfortunately, screens are really something we have to see for ourselves. For virtually every screen out there with visible artifacts, you'll have plenty of people saying _"What are you talking about? Looks great to me!"_


Understood. This is why I brought up the S.I. Pure White Zero Edge screen. It's calling card is supposed to be a zero texture that makes the screen pretty much invisible when the lights dim. It's nothing like the Black Diamond which is full of artifacts.


----------



## R Harkness

Fascinating, Don, thanks.


----------



## DavidHir

Swolephile said:


> I've seen a Stewart ST100 and 130 in person. I don't see what the fuss is about them. They are decent screens. However they were not noticeably better than any budget white screen I've seen from Silver Ticket and Elite Screens.
> 
> I would take a Screen Innovations Zero Edge Pure White screen over a Stewart screen.


I would not find the same and neither has Jeff Meier (screen report) as well as other professional production settings and a countless number of other people. The ST100 and ST130 are regarded as top in their class. 

There are people out there also claiming the HD Pro has zero sparkles which couldn't be further from the truth. But, some people don't see some things as mentioned.


----------



## Swolephile

DavidHir said:


> I would not find the same and neither has Jeff Meier (screen report) as well as other professional production settings and a countless number of other people. The ST100 and ST130 are regarded as top in their class.
> 
> There are people out there also claiming the HD Pro has zero sparkles which couldn't be further from the truth. But, some people don't see some things as mentioned.


People are falling in love with the name. Line a ST130 screen up with twenty other white screens and remove the brand names, I bet only a limited number of people could pick out which one is the Stewart screen.


----------



## R Harkness

Swolephile said:


> People are falling in love with the name. Line a ST130 screen up with twenty other white screens and remove the brand names, I bet only a limited number of people could pick out which one is the Stewart screen.


I don't see any reason to give us so little credit.

I've owned different screens, both high gain ALR-type screens. I've also owned the "bargain version" of Stewart screens from Carada (they were great). I did extensive evaluating and testing of both full size and screen samples from most manufacturers. Given my experience with various screen artifacts and the size of screen I wanted, I ended up with a specific goal: a large white screen, with some gain to ensure my JVC projectors could produce adequately bright images, but with as minimal screen artifacts - hot-spotting/screen texture - as I could find. It was simply the case that in my evaluations, the Stewart screen materials met this criteria better than any other I checked out. I certainly didn't want to spend that money. I tested lower cost alternatives. But the Stewart screens won out.

A lot of us here have critical faculties beyond that of a lemming, really.


----------



## Swolephile

R Harkness said:


> I don't see any reason to give us so little credit.
> 
> I've owned different screens, both high gain ALR-type screens. I've also owned the "bargain version" of Stewart screens from Carada (they were great). I did extensive evaluating and testing of both full size and screen samples from most manufacturers. Given my experience with various screen artifacts and the size of screen I wanted, I ended up with a specific goal: a large white screen, with some gain to ensure my JVC projectors could produce adequately bright images, but with as minimal screen artifacts - hot-spotting/screen texture - as I could find. It was simply the case that in my evaluations, the Stewart screen materials met this criteria better than any other I checked out. I certainly didn't want to spend that money. I tested lower cost alternatives. But the Stewart screens won out.
> 
> A lot of us here have critical faculties beyond that of a lemming, really.


I understand sir. However I do think that consumer bias plays a part in it. If one were to have ten white screens with an image on them, and no brand name I would be interested to see the results. Its just like listening tests where people always choose the most expensive speakers as crowd favorites. However results tend to be across the board with blind listening tests.
With that being said, if guys had a chance to observe ten white screens side by side with an image and search for screen artifacts, then pick the one with the least amount of screen artifacts, I bet results would be across the board if the brand logos were removed.


----------



## Craig Peer

Swolephile said:


> I understand sir. However I do think that consumer bias plays a part in it. If one were to have ten white screens with an image on them, and no brand name I would be interested to see the results. Its just like listening tests where people always choose the most expensive speakers as crowd favorites. However results tend to be across the board with blind listening tests.
> With that being said, if guys had a chance to observe ten white screens side by side with an image and search for screen artifacts, then pick the one with the least amount of screen artifacts, I bet results would be across the board if the brand logos were removed.



Uniformity across the entire screen, lack of flaws and meeting published screen gains are all what make better screens like Stewart worth the expense. I've owned Da Lite and Stewart - I'm on my 6th and 7th screens right now ( I own two Stewart screens - a StudioTek 130 G3 and a Cima Neve ). For your test, one would have to keep each screen and watch a variety of things on it for at least 7 days. Screens are like dating someone - it can take awhile for the flaws to become apparent.


----------



## DavidHir

Swolephile said:


> People are falling in love with the name. Line a ST130 screen up with twenty other white screens and remove the brand names, I bet only a limited number of people could pick out which one is the Stewart screen.


Yeah, sure. 

You remind me of the same kind of guy in another thread who claims his BenQ 1070 is just as good as any JVC even for 2D.

Just curious, what kind of projector are you using?


----------



## DavidHir

Swolephile said:


> I understand sir. However I do think that consumer bias plays a part in it. If one were to have ten white screens with an image on them, and no brand name I would be interested to see the results. Its just like listening tests where people always choose the most expensive speakers as crowd favorites. However results tend to be across the board with blind listening tests.
> With that being said, if guys had a chance to observe ten white screens side by side with an image and search for screen artifacts, then pick the one with the least amount of screen artifacts, I bet results would be across the board if the brand logos were removed.


I purchased and sampled out a number of screen materials and could have gotten any screen I wanted. The ST100 was the smoothest, sheen-free, artifact-free material I tried. The Carada Classic Cinema White would be the next best in that regard, but I liked the extra vibrancy of the ST100 in comparison.

As I said earlier, I was really distracted by the sparklies on the HD Pros (especially the 1.1) but I've talked to some people who don't see any at all.


----------



## Swolephile

DavidHir said:


> Yeah, sure.
> 
> You remind me of the same kind of guy in another thread who claims his BenQ 1070 is just as good as any JVC even for 2D.
> 
> Just curious, what kind of projector are you using?


Sony HW40es. I had it paired with a Stewart ST130 briefly. But I sold the Stewart screen after a week of owning it.


----------



## R Harkness

Swolephile said:


> Sony HW40es. I had it paired with a Stewart ST130 briefly. But I sold the Stewart screen after a week of owning it.


That's quite unusual. Why did you ditch the Stewart screen so fast? (And what replaced that screen?)

As for the blind test scenario, a lot of that will have to do with how experienced, interested or sensitive any individual is to screen behavior. My friend, for instance, is so indifferent to image or screen flaws, that he failed to notice his projector had gone bad and 1/3 of his image had turned purple. I'm helping him choose a new screen - and it's going to be as cheap as he can get, because he's not one to pay attention to these things. 

When I recently visited the high end AV store I mentioned in my previous posts, they always had a Stewart Firehawk screen in the same room, so I was very familiar with it's character. When I walked in a few days ago to see the Sony projector the lights were down and I'd just assumed it was the same screen. But I quickly noticed more pronounced speckling than I'd seen before. Then I checked hot-spotting/off-axis performance and could see it was different from the Firehawk - I immediately recognized the type of screen just from it's artifacts. When I whipped out my phone, turned on it's flashlight to see the screen name, yep as I inferred, they'd swapped out the Firehawk for an SI screen.

It's not necessarily that I could guess every screen I'm looking at without knowing the brand like that. But screens DO look different in measurable, perceptible ways.


----------



## Ellebob

I used to think that all basic white screens were pretty close but I was wrong. Many, many years ago I had put a bunch of white samples up and compared them. There were slight differences and it made me think why someone would pay the extra for a Stewart or other reference screen for only a slight improvement. Then I had the opportunity to compare full screens that were on stands and casters. You could move any screen you wanted in front of the projector or do a 50/50 with each showing half the picture. When you start comparing white screens using the whole screen, those slight differences on the samples are now big differences when you see the whole picture. The better screens just look crisper and more detailed and it is easily noticed.


One other thing about using samples is it is tough to get a good idea of the screen. The samples are too small to really evaluate uniformity or hot spotting. You might get an idea of some artifacts with a sample but even those are much more prevalent on a full screen. Every screen has its pros and cons and you have to pick the screen that is right for your situation. But if you have the opportunity try to compare full screens where you can move one in and the other out of the way, you will pick up a lot more than you do with samples or just being able to view on screen at a time. We try to do this at our company when possible.


----------



## Craig Peer

Swolephile said:


> I understand sir. However I do think that consumer bias plays a part in it. If one were to have ten white screens with an image on them, and no brand name I would be interested to see the results. Its just like listening tests where people always choose the most expensive speakers as crowd favorites. However results tend to be across the board with blind listening tests.
> *With that being said, if guys had a chance to observe ten white screens side by side with an image and search for screen artifacts, then pick the one with the least amount of screen artifacts, I bet results would be across the board if the brand logos were removed*.



Funny you should mention a test like this. At Stewart's training in Torrance, CA, they had some competitors screens - logos removed - and the screens had problems / flaws that were pretty obvious !


----------



## Don Stewart

Hey guys. The first test to do when evaluating any full size screen material is to project 100% IRE white light. Most sins/artifacts will show up to the trained eye immediately. Just sayin.


----------



## MikeUKman

Hi 


I am virgin when becomes to projectors and screens.
I have a vpl 65es.
I am from uk and here is the problem.
For you guys from USA its easy to get the best screen as all major manufacturers are from USA or Canada( i guess goo paint is from Canada).
I am looking to buy a stewart tiburon G2.
Here in UK tiburon g2 100diagonal is for 1440 pounds , but when i asked for for firehawk g4 then i have been told that it will be 2,4 k plus vat ( i am talking about fixed frames and waiting time is from 6-8 weeks in both cases)
so 2,4 k plus vat in pounds is a Lot comparing to tiburon g2 in fixed frame for half price.
In Manchester where i come from there is no display rooms , no chance for any samples , actually i found one in next town with only one screen in bat cave and one ambient light screen, i couldn't compare anything. 
The point is that my room is not perfect , white ceiling , a lot of reflections , so i am looking for something ambient light rejection screen , and as far i know the Germans review are pointing the Stewart screens as top pick.


Can you pleas at least advice anything ?


----------



## Don Stewart

MikeUKman said:


> Hi
> 
> 
> I am virgin when becomes to projectors and screens.
> I have a vpl 65es.
> I am from uk and here is the problem.
> For you guys from USA its easy to get the best screen as all major manufacturers are from USA or Canada( i guess goo paint is from Canada).
> I am looking to buy a stewart tiburon G2.
> Here in UK tiburon g2 100diagonal is for 1440 pounds , but when i asked for for firehawk g4 then i have been told that it will be 2,4 k plus vat ( i am talking about fixed frames and waiting time is from 6-8 weeks in both cases)
> so 2,4 k plus vat in pounds is a Lot comparing to tiburon g2 in fixed frame for half price.
> In Manchester where i come from there is no display rooms , no chance for any samples , actually i found one in next town with only one screen in bat cave and one ambient light screen, i couldn't compare anything.
> The point is that my room is not perfect , white ceiling , a lot of reflections , so i am looking for something ambient light rejection screen , and as far i know the Germans review are pointing the Stewart screens as top pick.
> 
> 
> Can you pleas at least advice anything ?


Thank you Mike for your interest in Stewart Filmscreen.
We do have two distributors in the UK. Perhaps they can help you with arranging samples.
Please see the following links.

*Custom AV Distribution Ltd*
Heynes Green
MaidenheadSL6 3NA
Berkshire United Kingdom
[email protected]


*Invision UK Ltd*
Alexander House
3 Hillside Business Park
IP32 7EA Suffolk 
[email protected]


Happy Holidays.
Regards,


----------



## razevents

Happy New Year to all. 

I've been doing quite a lot of research among all screen manufacturers to meet the needs of our space and needs. I don't have the ability to design and build a dedicated black hole (someday). Instead I have a finished walk out basement which is a multi purpose media room/family room. Compromise with the Wife. Given the space restrictions for the screen wall and moderate light, I've been having a heck of a time deciding between a small 92" screen and speakers flanking it, or a full wall 120-125" screen ALR, which means I can't have my cake and eat it too (have to lose ALR and go matte)

My sliding glass door and side windows are going to be treated for blackout. Most likely ambient light will be from dimmed overhead cans at 7' height. Screen wall is 10' by 7' high. Really want to fill it with a screen. Viewing is 15' back. 

So in addition to being the foremost builder of screens in the industry, I'm here for I guess two, well maybe three reasons:

1. Have my cake and eat it too (Firehawk G4 Perf'd- ALR and AT)
2. Buy once buy right
3. Seems the owner of this organization also suffers from the same illness I do and have for decades: unyielding desire to take a metal tube, make it go 500mph at 8 miles over the earth and back again. 

Looking to go with a 2.35 110-115 wide G4 Perforated or a 16:9 120-125" diagonal. 

I'm a big fan of the masking panels for the Seymour Premiere, to black out for 16:9. I don't see this as an affordable option with this product, only expensive motorized masking? 

Thanks in advance..

Feedback from those running the G4?
How far back does speaker front need to be from perf material to be effective (I don't have much depth either)

Any other thoughts appreciated. 







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## console

razevents said:


> Happy New Year to all.
> 
> I've been doing quite a lot of research among all screen manufacturers to meet the needs of our space and needs. I don't have the ability to design and build a dedicated black hole (someday). Instead I have a finished walk out basement which is a multi purpose media room/family room. Compromise with the Wife. Given the space restrictions for the screen wall and moderate light, I've been having a heck of a time deciding between a small 92" screen and speakers flanking it, or a full wall 120-125" screen ALR, which means I can't have my cake and eat it too (have to lose ALR and go matte)
> 
> My sliding glass door and side windows are going to be treated for blackout. Most likely ambient light will be from dimmed overhead cans at 7' height. Screen wall is 10' by 7' high. Really want to fill it with a screen. Viewing is 15' back.
> 
> So in addition to being the foremost builder of screens in the industry, I'm here for I guess two, well maybe three reasons:
> 
> 1. Have my cake and eat it too (Firehawk G4 Perf'd- ALR and AT)
> 2. Buy once buy right
> 3. Seems the owner of this organization also suffers from the same illness I do and have for decades: unyielding desire to take a metal tube, make it go 500mph at 8 miles over the earth and back again.
> 
> Looking to go with a 2.35 110-115 wide G4 Perforated or a 16:9 120-125" diagonal.
> 
> I'm a big fan of the masking panels for the Seymour Premiere, to black out for 16:9. I don't see this as an affordable option with this product, only expensive motorized masking?
> 
> Thanks in advance..
> 
> Feedback from those running the G4?
> How far back does speaker front need to be from perf material to be effective (I don't have much depth either)
> 
> Any other thoughts appreciated.


 The view from 15' requires as big a screen as possible. Don't even think about 92". 

Go 100% full width either AT or horizontal LCR below 2.35 screen.

But don't go 2.35. Go 2.39, which is the true AR of (almost) all recent wide movies, to avoid top + bottom letterbox slivers. 

If you have the budget, side masking panels would be wonderful for CIH and watching 1.78 TV.


----------



## Ellebob

The G4 is a great material and one of my favorites for ALR. It has less artifacts than most of the other brands, its tradeoff is its ALR capabilities. Some other screens will do better with ambient light but have more artifacts. Since you have some control over that I think this is a good choice. Ideally, speakers should be about 1 foot behind the perf screen but they can be a little closer.


16:9 vs. 2.35 comes down to what type of material you like to watch. I am a movie watcher so I prefer 2.35 and that is what I own but I install all types. If most of your material is 16:9 like sports, gaming, TV and only watch an occasional movie than a 16:9 screen makes sense. It also depends on how you are going to do 2.35, zoom vs. anamorphic lens. Some installs I do use an anamorphic lens all the time and just stretch their 16:9 material. I have tried this at home to try it and no one seems to notice, except me of course. I find it a little more noticeable on TV than sports and for gaming it doesn't bother me at all. But, most people will never notice and some prefer it that way to fill the screen, YMMV. Masking would of course would be preferred but it does add to the cost quite a bit.


----------



## Don Stewart

The Stewart Microperf screen perforation pattern has over 30,000 .024 diameter holes per square foot. The total open area is 10.2 percent of the surface area. Most installations place the speakers 2-3 inches behind the screen surface. With that said, the optimum is 12 inches when measured by audio test equipment. For me, when testing, I can not hear the different but I do not have golden ears.
Also, when speakers are going to be placed close to screen it is recommended to use a speaker design with hi frequency horns instead of a single dome tweeter. High frequency horns distribute the sound waves over a larger screen area which allows better high frequency response to the listener.

The graph below is the audio sound pressure with dome tweeter speaker positioned two inches away from screen. This is prior to EQ of system.


----------



## razevents

Thanks to all that have commented and provided me feedback and to Mr. Stewart for the info on speaker placement behind the perf. Unfortunately, I got the quote today for a Perf'd G4. I was good up until the perf part on cost, then out of the ballpark the ball sailed. So much for eating the cake. Thanks again all. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Don Stewart

Just like to say that Stewart Filmscreen is honored to be featured in February's "Scott Wilkinson's AVS Home Theater of the Month". 
The room designer and integrator is by the highly respected Dennis Erskine. Here is the link to the thread and video.
http://www.avsforum.com/forum/92-co...658-ht-month-barber-theater.html#post41033618


----------



## chappieman

Id like a bit of advice please (if possible)
I'm based in the Uk & there's not really much in the way of reviews over here for the Stewart screens..
Our viewing distance will be around 14 foot, so I'm contemplating perhaps around a 135" diagonal screen (electric), my problem is whether to get a Grey or a White screen?
It will be for film watching only & in the evenings, the windows will all be blacked out & hopefully the walls will also be on the dark side.
Only the ceilings & flooring will be a light colour, with this in mind can anyone please recommend a screen?
Thanks


----------



## Don Stewart

chappieman said:


> Id like a bit of advice please (if possible)
> I'm based in the Uk & there's not really much in the way of reviews over here for the Stewart screens..
> Our viewing distance will be around 14 foot, so I'm contemplating perhaps around a 135" diagonal screen (electric), my problem is whether to get a Grey or a White screen?
> *It will be for film watching only & in the evenings, the windows will all be blacked out & hopefully the walls will also be on the dark side.
> Only the ceilings & flooring will be a light colour, with this in mind can anyone please recommend a screen?*
> Thanks


I would consider a white screen, StudioTek 130 to be more specific if you considering a Stewart Filmscreen product, with the room and viewing conditions you state above.


----------



## chappieman

Don Stewart said:


> I would consider a white screen, StudioTek 130 to be more specific if you considering a Stewart Filmscreen product, with the room and viewing conditions you state above.


Thanks for the advice, been advised towards the Stewart Cima with Tiburan from a UK dealer?

All this is driving me nuts, i sometimes wish i had a more straightforward hobby


----------



## joaquin

Hi Don,


What's your thoughts on Tela vs ST130 Microperf 144" wide for JVC RS600? 


Thanks.


----------



## Don Stewart

joaquin said:


> Hi Don,
> 
> 
> What's your thoughts on Tela vs ST130 Microperf 144" wide for JVC RS600?
> 
> 
> Thanks.


Hi Joaquin, 
Pretty much no contest with a screen that wide. I would go for more gain to get the image brightness plus a little headroom. Your JVC is rated at 1900 lumens. When I calculate predicted screen brightness, I take a conservative approach. I discount projector published lumens by 40% allowing for some PJ image calibration, lamp brightness fall off, and sometimes over stated marketing lumen spec. With Tela 80 your screen foot lamberts would only be in the neighborhood 11.2 fL. With the StudioTek 130 AT, the net gain after perforations is about 1.2 gain and would give around 16.5 fL. If this were my room in my house, I would consider Ultramatte 150 material. This material is basically StudioTek 130 on steroids with and extra optical gain coating and you have closer to 20 fL.
The Utramatte 150 prefers a longer throw distance than the fore-mentioned materials. A minimum of 18 feet would be required.
See material comparison chart link.: http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/screen-materials/flexible-front-projection

Edit: Please be advised that Tela 80 name is being revised to, "Harmony AT woven screen." The gain specs are the same. Just a little tighter weave.


----------



## rboster

Mr Stewart, I wanted to drop you a note of thanks for the Cima line of screens from Stewart. I recently switched from an A-lens set up, which included an SMX Procurv 2.35 Scope screen. When conducting my research and seeking advice from others that I respect (including the AVS sales staff of Mike and Craig), I was introduced to the Cima line. The price and performance ratio looks fantastic. I placed my order last week and am really looking forward to seeing the Cima screen performance in my room. 

Stewart, CIMA® Fixed Wall Screen [00900], Model# CIF125SNEVEWX
Image Size: 49in x 115in (125in diag.) Aspect Ratio 2.35:1
Material: Neve -Front Projection Seamless
Screen Material Outside Diameter: 52in x 118in
Frame Overall Dimension: 54.125in x 120.125in
Finish: VeLux
Mounting: WallMount

My room would be considered a black hole (Light absorbent velvet panels creating a shadow box around the screen and screen wall. Black carpeting with dark gray walls and black ceiling (beyond the shadow box). I am mating the screen with the JVC RS500 projector, which is mounted 14.5 ft from the screen. 

I am very excited to see the results. 

Thanks again
Ron


----------



## Don Stewart

rboster said:


> Mr Stewart, I wanted to drop you a note of thanks for the Cima line of screens from Stewart. I recently switched from an A-lens set up, which included an SMX Procurv 2.35 Scope screen. When conducting my research and seeking advice from others that I respect (including the AVS sales staff of Mike and Craig), I was introduced to the Cima line. The price and performance ratio looks fantastic. I placed my order last week and am really looking forward to seeing the Cima screen performance in my room.
> 
> Stewart, CIMA® Fixed Wall Screen [00900], Model# CIF125SNEVEWX
> Image Size: 49in x 115in (125in diag.) Aspect Ratio 2.35:1
> Material: Neve -Front Projection Seamless
> Screen Material Outside Diameter: 52in x 118in
> Frame Overall Dimension: 54.125in x 120.125in
> Finish: VeLux
> Mounting: WallMount
> 
> My room would be considered a black hole (Light absorbent velvet panels creating a shadow box around the screen and screen wall. Black carpeting with dark gray walls and black ceiling (beyond the shadow box). I am mating the screen with the JVC RS500 projector, which is mounted 14.5 ft from the screen.
> 
> I am very excited to see the results.
> 
> Thanks again
> Ron


 Hi Ron,
Thank you for your purchase of a Cima Neve Fixed screen. Your room sounds perfect for a flat finish matte white screen. Please report after install and you have a few movies on the new screen under your belt. Again, thank you.


----------



## rboster

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Ron,
> Thank you for your purchase of a Cima Neve Fixed screen. Your room sounds perfect for a flat finish matte white screen. Please report after install and you have a few movies on the new screen under your belt. Again, thank you.


More than happy to share my thoughts. My only current problem now it putting off certain movies in anticipation of seeing them on my new Stewart Screen.


----------



## DavidHir

It sounds like you made a great choice, Ron. From everything I've heard and read, anyone who needs the best, nearest step up in gain from 1.0/ST100, the Cime Neve is it!


----------



## drummermitchell

Been thinking of upgrading my Stewart Fire hawk G-3(235.1)
She's 49'x 128" I believe.
The room is pretty much a black pit,my concern would be light from the screen spilling onto the speakers(about one foot from screen face and most of the speaker cabinet is a light wood finish(ash)
Oops my pict went to the bottom.
I use a Jvc rs-600 and projector is 13' from screen.
​






















Was thinking Studiotek 130 or Studiotek 100
Have read 130 has some sparkle which can be seen at times
Wonder if my speakers would reflect to much light back onto the screen,THX.


----------



## rboster

DavidHir said:


> It sounds like you made a great choice, Ron. From everything I've heard and read, anyone who needs the best, nearest step up in gain from 1.0/ST100, the Cime Neve is it!


That was what my research showed me too. BTW: never get a chance to say thanks to you...you are a terrific contributor at AVS. I appreciate the knowledge and good will you bring to the table. 

Ron


----------



## Craig Peer

rboster said:


> Mr Stewart, I wanted to drop you a note of thanks for the Cima line of screens from Stewart. I recently switched from an A-lens set up, which included an SMX Procurv 2.35 Scope screen. When conducting my research and seeking advice from others that I respect (including the AVS sales staff of Mike and Craig), I was introduced to the Cima line. The price and performance ratio looks fantastic. I placed my order last week and am really looking forward to seeing the Cima screen performance in my room.
> 
> Stewart, CIMA® Fixed Wall Screen [00900], Model# CIF125SNEVEWX
> Image Size: 49in x 115in (125in diag.) Aspect Ratio 2.35:1
> Material: Neve -Front Projection Seamless
> Screen Material Outside Diameter: 52in x 118in
> Frame Overall Dimension: 54.125in x 120.125in
> Finish: VeLux
> Mounting: WallMount
> 
> My room would be considered a black hole (Light absorbent velvet panels creating a shadow box around the screen and screen wall. Black carpeting with dark gray walls and black ceiling (beyond the shadow box). I am mating the screen with the JVC RS500 projector, which is mounted 14.5 ft from the screen.
> 
> I am very excited to see the results.
> 
> Thanks again
> Ron


I think you will be very pleased. I;ve had mine since Sept. of 2013 ! Love it !


----------



## rboster

Craig Peer said:


> I think you will be very pleased. I;ve had mine since Sept. of 2013 ! Love it !


I think so too. Hopefully it ships early next week. I would love to have it in place before next weekend.


----------



## Mike Garrett

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Joaquin,
> Pretty much no contest with a screen that wide. I would go for more gain to get the image brightness plus a little headroom. Your JVC is rated at 1900 lumens. When I calculate predicted screen brightness, I take a conservative approach. I discount projector published lumens by 40% allowing for some PJ image calibration, lamp brightness fall off, and sometimes over stated marketing lumen spec. With Tela 80 your screen foot lamberts would only be in the neighborhood 11.2 fL. With the StudioTek 130 AT, the net gain after perforations is about 1.2 gain and would give around 16.5 fL. If this were my room in my house, I would consider Ultramatte 150 material. This material is basically StudioTek 130 on steroids with and extra optical gain coating and you have closer to 20 fL.
> The Utramatte 150 prefers a longer throw distance than the fore-mentioned materials. A minimum of 18 feet would be required.
> See material comparison chart link.: http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/screen-materials/flexible-front-projection
> 
> Edit: Please be advised that Tela 80 name is being revised to, "Harmony AT woven screen." The gain specs are the same. Just a little tighter weave.


Don, I agree with most projectors, discounting 40% is about right, but not with the JVC's. JVC is pretty good with their specs. 60% of 1,900 lumens is 1,140 lumens. An RS600 can do around 1,300 Rec709 calibrated lumens in low lamp and around 1,700 Rec709 calibrated lumens in high lamp.


----------



## Don Stewart

Mike Garrett said:


> Don, I agree with most projectors, discounting 40% is about right, but not with the JVC's. JVC is pretty good with their specs. 60% of 1,900 lumens is 1,140 lumens. An RS600 can do around 1,300 Rec709 calibrated lumens in low lamp and around 1,700 Rec709 calibrated lumens in high lamp.


You are absolutely right. I have not tested a JVC PJ in over five years in our lab to check lumen output.. But the JVC PJ's I did test in the past were very close to published specs. I know quite a few of the engineering guys from JVC and many of them came from the Aerospace industry where accurate specs are everything. 
It is good to hear that JVC is still practicing honest specs ethics. Thank you Mike for pointing that out.


----------



## Don Stewart

drummermitchell said:


> Been thinking of upgrading my Stewart Fire hawk G-3(235.1)
> She's 49'x 128" I believe.
> The room is pretty much a black pit,my concern would be light from the screen spilling onto the speakers(about one foot from screen face and most of the speaker cabinet is a light wood finish(ash)
> Oops my pict went to the bottom.
> I use a Jvc rs-600 and projector is 13' from screen.​
> Was thinking Studiotek 130 or Studiotek 100
> Have read 130 has some sparkle which can be seen at times
> Wonder if my speakers would reflect to much light back onto the screen,THX.



Hi Mitchell. 
Are the very back of your speakers that face the screen factory finished in matte black or do the have a wood finish? If they have a shinny wood finish you could always black them out with some self adhesive black matte material to reduce cross reflection. Just sayin.

BTW. Nice Theater!


----------



## rboster

drummermitchell said:


> Been thinking of upgrading my Stewart Fire hawk G-3(235.1)
> She's 49'x 128" I believe.
> The room is pretty much a black pit,my concern would be light from the screen spilling onto the speakers(about one foot from screen face and most of the speaker cabinet is a light wood finish(ash)
> Oops my pict went to the bottom.
> I use a Jvc rs-600 and projector is 13' from screen.
> ​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Was thinking Studiotek 130 or Studiotek 100
> Have read 130 has some sparkle which can be seen at times
> Wonder if my speakers would reflect to much light back onto the screen,THX.





Don Stewart said:


> Hi Mitchell.
> Are the very back of your speakers that face the screen factory finished in matte black or do the have a wood finish? If they have a shinny wood finish you could always black them out with some self adhesive black matte material to reduce cross reflection. Just sayin.
> 
> BTW. Nice Theater!


My LCR speakers sit close to the screen. I place painters tape on the top (outline) of the speakers. Then I put double sided tape between the painters tape and prostar (light absorption material).

http://www.fpi-protostar.com/hitack.htm

The prostar was created to use inside of telescopes (flocking) for it's light absorption properties). I use the non-adhesive version. The reason for the painters tape is that it doesn't leave adhesive on the speaker's finish. 

The results are great-light absorption and still maintains the speakers finished appearance. There is a terrific discussion in the 3k plus projector forum about taming light reflections in a room. I'll add the link to this post.

Update with link: http://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-di...read-once-you-go-black-you-never-go-back.html


----------



## Mike Garrett

Don Stewart said:


> You are absolutely right. I have not tested a JVC PJ in over five years in our lab to check lumen output.. But the JVC PJ's I did test in the past were very close to published specs. I know quite a few of the engineering guys from JVC and many of them came from the Aerospace industry where accurate specs are everything.
> It is good to hear that JVC is still practicing honest specs ethics. Thank you Mike for pointing that out.


Yes, JVC like Stewart tries to put out honest specs. I think honesty in the specs should be applauded. Not too many companies give honest specs.


----------



## drummermitchell

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Mitchell.
> Are the very back of your speakers that face the screen factory finished in matte black or do the have a wood finish? If they have a shinny wood finish you could always black them out with some self adhesive black matte material to reduce cross reflection. Just sayin.
> 
> BTW. Nice Theater!


Thanks Don,
they have a flat black finish half way on the sides and back.
As mentioned above I have the Firehawk G-3 in there now.
Any thoughts on the Studiotek 130/100 for this room with the JVC rs-600.
The room is very dark as there are no windows ect,Thanks.


----------



## drummermitchell

rboster said:


> My LCR speakers sit close to the screen. I place painters tape on the top (outline) of the speakers. Then I put double sided tape between the painters tape and prostar (light absorption material).
> 
> http://www.fpi-protostar.com/hitack.htm
> 
> The prostar was created to use inside of telescopes (flocking) for it's light absorption properties). I use the non-adhesive version. The reason for the painters tape is that it doesn't leave adhesive on the speaker's finish.
> 
> The results are great-light absorption and still maintains the speakers finished appearance. There is a terrific discussion in the 3k plus projector forum about taming light reflections in a room. I'll add the link to this post.
> 
> Update with link: http://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-di...read-once-you-go-black-you-never-go-back.html


Thanks for the link,
I can see other area of use for this,THX.


----------



## Don Stewart

drummermitchell said:


> Thanks Don,
> they have a flat black finish half way on the sides and back.
> As mentioned above I have the Firehawk G-3 in there now.
> Any thoughts on the Studiotek 130/100 for this room with the JVC rs-600.
> The room is very dark as there are no windows ect,Thanks.


Your room certainly meets the recommended "Theater Dark" criteria for utilizing a white screen. If you decide to go down that path please note that your existing frame can be retrofitted with new material. But with that said, if on occasion you do watch sports and like some room lighting on, then I would stick with your existing FireHawk.


----------



## drummermitchell

Don Stewart said:


> Your room certainly meets the recommended "Theater Dark" criteria for utilizing a white screen. If you decide to go down that path please note that your existing frame can be retrofitted with new material. But with that said, if on occasion you do watch sports and like some room lighting on, then I would stick with your existing FireHawk.


Hi Don,
the reason for the Firehawk was my dealer preferred it to the 130 was the FH looked more film like.Strictly concerts and movies.
Any thoughts on ST-130 or the ST-100 with the JVC-rs-600 in this room.
Will be going with either one,just not sure which would be better for this room
I believe I'm 9-10' from screen seating wise.
Thanks for heads up on retro fitting the screen.
Will chat with my dealer and perhaps I could trade the FH in on a 130 or 100.


----------



## Craig Peer

drummermitchell said:


> Hi Don,
> the reason for the Firehawk was my dealer preferred it to the 130 was the FH looked more film like.Strictly concerts and movies.
> *Any thoughts on ST-130 or the ST-100 with the JVC-rs-600 in this room*.
> Will be going with either one,just not sure which would be better for this room
> I believe I'm 9-10' from screen seating wise.
> Thanks for heads up on retro fitting the screen.
> Will chat with my dealer and perhaps I could trade the FH in on a 130 or 100.


I love my RS600 and StudioTek 130 G3 combo. You might want to throw a big piece of matte black carpet over that white carpet though. Best thing I ever did in my theater to improve contrast.


----------



## drummermitchell

Hi Craig,
nice space you have,nice and open.
Was reading through go black and never go back thread.
I believe I will do something over the carpet,THX.
I'm wondering if the ST-100(lower gain)might be a bit to low for the 600 as the 130 is 1.3


----------



## Frank Derks

Just saw the Harmony AT screen material at ISE2016 and it delivers a really great image.


----------



## Craig Peer

drummermitchell said:


> Hi Craig,
> nice space you have,nice and open.
> Was reading through go black and never go back thread.
> I believe I will do something over the carpet,THX.
> I'm wondering if the ST-100(lower gain)might be a bit to low for the 600 as the 130 is 1.3


I myself enjoy the added punch of the ST130, and the Cima Neve too !


----------



## drummermitchell

Craig,
thanks for the conversation and other tricks.
Will be going with the Studiotek-130 G-3.
I believe Home depot has a black area rug that should almost fit the front area..
will call my carpet guy and see if he can get it cheaper.


----------



## Don Stewart

Frank Derks said:


> Just saw the Harmony AT screen material at ISE2016 and it delivers a really great image.


Frank....you have one up on me.. I have not even been able to see the new Harmony AT screen under projection yet. Been stuck at home for past three weeks waiting to get over illness. Good to hear that you like the image quality.


----------



## jrod9707

Don,

I was in a a few theatre stores the other day here in north dallas and most of them were pushing screen innovations products. But one store rep was adamant about the value the CIMA has compared to others. To me CIMA looked way better than all the $4-5 k SI black diamond,zero edge, etc, screens that SI offered. Even with a Sony 65ES match with a SI zero edge(or something like that it costed $4500) I was not impressed as the sharpness seemed just a tad off compared with how the CIMA looked when it was paired with a Sony 40 ES at another theatre store(Modia in Southlake).

So with that all said I'm definitely going to get a CIMA screen.

My 3 variables are:
1 - Sony 40ES or 65ES(depends on budget)
2 - CIMA 100" or 110"
3 - Neve or Tiburon 

I dont expect anyone to answer the first question in regards to what projector I'm going to buy!

But I dont know what I should get for the other 2.

The details are the Windows face WEST, then you see light coming in from the other photo and that window faces south. Primarily video in here will be watched when its dark out. But football games during season. I can put these chinese paper fans in the top parts of the windows to take away additional brightness. Which is why there is so much light coming through on the second photo as there is nothing blocking the upper window.

Length across room is 12'11"

11'4" would be the projector short throw. Which according to Projector Central I should be able to throw a 110" image with either projector.

Sitting distance would be against the wall roughly 12' away.

These pictures were taken at 12:30 PM. When the evening comes, the sun is further east which makes the room even darker. You cant see in the photos but the kitchen and another living room are further to the right.

--So with this information and photos, what size screen would you recommend 100" or 110"(i prefer bigger).

--What material would you recommend and why.

Sorry for the information overload but I wanted to portray as much information as I could.
Thank you!!

We just moved in which is why things arent setup permanently.


----------



## Frank Derks

Don,


I wish you a speedy recovery.


----------



## Don Stewart

jrod9707 said:


> Don,
> 
> I was in a a few theatre stores the other day here in north dallas and most of them were pushing screen innovations products. But one store rep was adamant about the value the CIMA has compared to others. To me CIMA looked way better than all the $4-5 k SI black diamond,zero edge, etc, screens that SI offered. Even with a Sony 65ES match with a SI zero edge(or something like that it costed $4500) I was not impressed as the sharpness seemed just a tad off compared with how the CIMA looked when it was paired with a Sony 40 ES at another theatre store(Modia in Southlake).
> 
> So with that all said I'm definitely going to get a CIMA screen.
> 
> My 3 variables are:
> 1 - Sony 40ES or 65ES(depends on budget)
> 2 - CIMA 100" or 110"
> 3 - Neve or Tiburon
> 
> I dont expect anyone to answer the first question in regards to what projector I'm going to buy!
> 
> But I dont know what I should get for the other 2.
> 
> The details are the Windows face WEST, then you see light coming in from the other photo and that window faces south. Primarily video in here will be watched when its dark out. But football games during season. I can put these chinese paper fans in the top parts of the windows to take away additional brightness. Which is why there is so much light coming through on the second photo as there is nothing blocking the upper window.
> 
> Length across room is 12'11"
> 
> 11'4" would be the projector short throw. Which according to Projector Central I should be able to throw a 110" image with either projector.
> 
> Sitting distance would be against the wall roughly 12' away.
> 
> These pictures were taken at 12:30 PM. When the evening comes, the sun is further east which makes the room even darker. You cant see in the photos but the kitchen and another living room are further to the right.
> 
> --So with this information and photos, what size screen would you recommend 100" or 110"(i prefer bigger).
> 
> --What material would you recommend and why.
> 
> Sorry for the information overload but I wanted to portray as much information as I could.
> Thank you!!
> 
> We just moved in which is why things arent setup permanently.


Hi Jrod,
After reviewing your photos and other technical information above I can not in good conscience recommend any white screen for your theater. Your room finishing colors are very light plus walls and windows are fairly close to screen position. Even when viewing movies at night in a darkened room you will have a considerable amount of cross reflection between walls, ceiling, floor carpets and screen. If this room was for myself, I would go with a gray screen that brings some ALR values to your project.. My first choice would be FireHawk, but the FH requires a bare minimum throw distance of 1.6 times screen width to assure decent white field uniformity, (minimum hot spotting) and you don't have that distance available. My second choice would be a GrayHawk 90, a less aggressive lighter gray ALR screen material but requires only a minimum TD of 1.3 times screen width. Currently, with our Cima screen line, we have not been happy with our last two manufacturing runs of the Cima Tiburon gray screens. The material failed our optical QC specifications and the runs were scrapped. So to fill current Cima orders for Tiburon, we have been upgrading the customer to our premium Stewart GrayHawk screen material at no extra charge. The GrayHawk has higher gain and also has a darker ND Gray value than the Tiburon which gives it superior ALR properties. (See gray value chart attached). As far as screen size goes, I just want to state that the 100 inch size will net you near 20% more brightness than the 110" screen. Also, if you elect to go with the 100" screen size, it would increase you throw distance ratio to over 1.5 which will add better white field uniformity to your image fidelity.

Hope that helps.


----------



## jrod9707

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Jrod,
> After reviewing your photos and other technical information above I can not in good conscience recommend any white screen for your theater. Your room finishing colors are very light plus walls and windows are fairly close to screen position. Even when viewing movies at night in a darkened room you will have a considerable amount of cross reflection between walls, ceiling, floor carpets and screen. If this room was for myself, I would go with a gray screen that brings some ALR values to your project.. My first choice would be FireHawk, but the FH requires a bare minimum throw distance of 1.6 times screen width to assure decent white field uniformity, (minimum hot spotting) and you don't have that distance available. My second choice would be a GrayHawk 90, a less aggressive lighter gray ALR screen material but requires only a minimum TD of 1.3 times screen width. Currently, with our Cima screen line, we have not been happy with our last two manufacturing runs of the Cima Tiburon gray screens. The material failed our optical QC specifications and the runs were scrapped. So to fill current Cima orders for Tiburon, we have been upgrading the customer to our premium Stewart GrayHawk screen material at no extra charge. The GrayHawk has higher gain and also has a darker ND Gray value than the Tiburon which gives it superior ALR properties. (See gray value chart attached). As far as screen size goes, I just want to state that the 100 inch size will net you near 20% more brightness than the 110" screen. Also, if you elect to go with the 100" screen size, it would increase you throw distance ratio to over 1.5 which will add better white field uniformity to your image fidelity.
> 
> Hope that helps.


Thank you Don for the information. This will make things much easier to decide when the time comes.


----------



## jrod9707

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Jrod,
> After reviewing your photos and other technical information above I can not in good conscience recommend any white screen for your theater. Your room finishing colors are very light plus walls and windows are fairly close to screen position. Even when viewing movies at night in a darkened room you will have a considerable amount of cross reflection between walls, ceiling, floor carpets and screen. If this room was for myself, I would go with a gray screen that brings some ALR values to your project.. My first choice would be FireHawk, but the FH requires a bare minimum throw distance of 1.6 times screen width to assure decent white field uniformity, (minimum hot spotting) and you don't have that distance available. My second choice would be a GrayHawk 90, a less aggressive lighter gray ALR screen material but requires only a minimum TD of 1.3 times screen width. Currently, with our Cima screen line, we have not been happy with our last two manufacturing runs of the Cima Tiburon gray screens. The material failed our optical QC specifications and the runs were scrapped. So to fill current Cima orders for Tiburon, we have been upgrading the customer to our premium Stewart GrayHawk screen material at no extra charge. The GrayHawk has higher gain and also has a darker ND Gray value than the Tiburon which gives it superior ALR properties. (See gray value chart attached). As far as screen size goes, I just want to state that the 100 inch size will net you near 20% more brightness than the 110" screen. Also, if you elect to go with the 100" screen size, it would increase you throw distance ratio to over 1.5 which will add better white field uniformity to your image fidelity.
> 
> Hope that helps.


Thank you Don for the information. This will make things much easier to decide when the time comes.


----------



## [Europe]Boogiem

*Corner hook mounting*

How do I attach the corner hooks on a Stewart Cine -w screen mounted with bungee cord?
I attached 4 different ways that could be logical but of course there are more options. Which is the right one?

I just bought a 4m wide 2.35:1 cine-w and read entire manual but no info on the only odd mounting on the screen?

The screen is not very tight and I had no issues mounting the hooks.
I would rather guess it needs to be tighter since there are wrinkles especially in the corners.

I have mounted the screen lying down since it was second hand and rolled on a tube but of course no strings that held it in place if putting it vertical.

I know that wrinkles disappear over time (3weeks on my old 2m wide fire hawk 16:9) but it just seems too much on this one. 

Thanks
Boogie


----------



## [Europe]Boogiem

Will those wrinkles go away you think (screen from post above)
It has been rolled up and stored on a non std roll (roll for a pull down screen) for a year or two.


----------



## Don Stewart

[Europe]Boogiem said:


> Will those wrinkles go away you think (screen from post above)
> It has been rolled up and stored on a non std roll (roll for a pull down screen) for a year or two.


Since you bought the screen used it is kind of difficult to know the history. It appears from photos that it was not rolled up with caution or care when put into storage and may take a while for wrinkles go away. What model screen material is it?. There will be a a label in the corner.


----------



## [Europe]Boogiem

Don Stewart said:


> Since you bought the screen used it is kind of difficult to know the history. It appears from photos that it was not rolled up with caution or care when put into storage and may take a while for wrinkles go away. What model screen material is it?. There will be a a label in the corner.


Thanks for the reply.

I know the history since I bought it from a friend.
It was bought 2007 or 2009 (don't remember right now)custom made curve to fit a panamorph lens and p.d. projector.

I guess it is tough to roll the screen perfect since there are eyelets, but it was pretty straight wound and secured with zip ties in each end by two grommets to prevent unrolling. Then kept safe from harm in a layer of an old pulldown screen. No roll unfortunately.
But there were no protective paper layers intra layered in the winding. 

It's a studiotek reference screen 130 (basically a g3 (g1.3))

Got it up on a 5m wall today, its huge  coming from a 2m fh g3 the contrast sucks but colours ar so well rendered I can take the trade off (have no choice really). Ill add some velvet curtains in ceiling and side wall half way down the room and contrast should increase quite a bit


----------



## spider33

New here. I have a Stewart screen from 2000 or 2001. It is motorized screen I believe greyhawk or something hawk ha. I can't remember exactly. Anyway the system is obviously old and the sharp vision dlp projector just died. I replaced with a sony vplhw40es. I use this as my main tv as well.

My question is two fold: 

1) I believe the screen was powered by the sharp 12v (output) so now I am not able to get the screen to drop down. Not sure what to do. I have the new projector but no way to get the screen to descend. 
2) For quite sometime the screen has dropped past the point to stop and hits the shelving below. Not sure how or who to have fix. 

Any help is appreciated and I realize I don't know anything about setting up the system.


----------



## Don Stewart

spider33 said:


> New here. I have a Stewart screen from 2000 or 2001. It is motorized screen I believe greyhawk or something hawk ha. I can't remember exactly. Anyway the system is obviously old and the sharp vision dlp projector just died. I replaced with a sony vplhw40es. I use this as my main tv as well.
> 
> My question is two fold:
> 
> 1) I believe the screen was powered by the sharp 12v (output) so now I am not able to get the screen to drop down. Not sure what to do. I have the new projector but no way to get the screen to descend.
> 2) For quite sometime the screen has dropped past the point to stop and hits the shelving below. Not sure how or who to have fix.
> 
> Any help is appreciated and I realize I don't know anything about setting up the system.


Call Scott Kimber, our customer service tech, on Wednesday, the 17th. (800 762-4999) He can help you with the screen trigger. Also, it sounds like your bottom stop limit switch needs adjusting. Since you live in Manhattan Beach, you are only 15 or 20 minutes from our factory. It may even be beneficial to have a factory person do a service call.


----------



## spider33

Don Stewart said:


> Call Scott Kimber, our customer service tech, on Wednesday, the 17th. (800 762-4999) He can help you with the screen trigger. Also, it sounds like your bottom stop limit switch needs adjusting. Since you live in Manhattan Beach, you are only 15 or 20 minutes from our factory. It may even be beneficial to have a factory person do a service call.


Awesome. Thanks Don I will contact Scott. Yes I am just around the corner from Torrance where I think your facility is located.


----------



## Don Stewart

[Europe]Boogiem said:


> Thanks for the reply.
> 
> I know the history since I bought it from a friend.
> It was bought 2007 or 2009 (don't remember right now)custom made curve to fit a panamorph lens and p.d. projector.
> 
> I guess it is tough to roll the screen perfect since there are eyelets, but it was pretty straight wound and secured with zip ties in each end by two grommets to prevent unrolling. Then kept safe from harm in a layer of an old pulldown screen. No roll unfortunately.
> But there were no protective paper layers intra layered in the winding.
> 
> It's a studiotek reference screen 130 (basically a g3 (g1.3))
> 
> Got it up on a 5m wall today, its huge  coming from a 2m fh g3 the contrast sucks but colours ar so well rendered I can take the trade off (have no choice really). Ill add some velvet curtains in ceiling and side wall half way down the room and contrast should increase quite a bit


Since it was rolled up a year or two, it may take quite a while for the material to recall its lay flat memory. All I can say is be patient and hope for the best.


----------



## lancenell

See attached picture of my basement HT at the bottom of this post to see what I'm dealing with.

I converted my basement to a home theater, although dedicated, not ideal. I can mostly control light, however due to 7 1/2' white decorative stamped ceiling, that would be the biggest drawback, however I do plan to tack up some black velvet in front of the screen. Seating & PJ throw distance from screen about 13 1/2'.

I recently bought the Epson LS10000, a much higher lumen output PJ, replacing a 10 year old Sim2 HT300. I'm using 16:9 110" Vutec Silverstar 6.0 (2.8'ish gain screen) and have enjoyed the punchy plasma look which worked fine for my last house (couldn't control light). With the new projector, and dark basement, the sparkling artifacts even in ECO mode with IRIS near fully clamped is overwhelming and distracting. I never saw this with the Sim2 DLP. 

I want to go with a 2.35 133" Stewart screen, that way I can also maintain a large 1.78 AR which is about 40-50% of my viewing, not by choice, but due to HD On Demand and BluRay movie content in 1.78 AR . My viewing preference is for movie watching with 2.35 AR sources. I also like watching NFL games, and also would like to get into some 3D viewing. I really don't want to go with the 125" primarily because it'll be a big drop in size for 1.78 AR viewing. Just to clarify, watching movies represents 95% of viewing, and 95% of time it's just me and girlfriend, and sometimes her daughter joins us.

I've been talking with Craig Peer who sent me a sample of the Cima Neve 1.1 which after much discussion sounded like the best solution. However, after running my specs through Projector Central calculator, is calculates image brightness at 13 ftL, which is 1 fL from the minimum brightness floor (of 12 fL). According to Jeff Meier (Accu-Cal Report), he personally finds images below 12 fL begin to lose detail at 1080p along with color richness. In a dark room above 18 fL the light from the screen can start being fatiguing.

I don't know what lumen output Projector Central used for my Espon LS10000, and not aware of the calculator's accuracy and margin of error. I'm used to a bright screen, I should really be shooting for 14-17 ftL for good color saturation, brightness, and immersive viewing experience. On top of this, I'm having my LS10000 calibrated March 16th, which means I'll lose some lumen output as a result. I need to get my new screen installed before the calibration, so that the PJ is calibrated to the Stewart screen.

Based on the Accucal report, although the Neve is rated at 1.1 gain, the On Axis Gain was measured at closer to 1.25. The StudioTek 130 GS was measured at 1.27. If this is correct, they measure approximately the same gain, and perhaps the key difference between the screens is off-axis viewing? It's mostly me and 1-2 other viewers, and I'm not too worried about the 2 other seating positions that are off axis.

My goal is to have a nice bright accurate screen with absolute minimal grain & sparkling artifacts. I would love to get the ST100, but I know it's just not the best choice for my room. That's why I decided on the Neve 1.1 because it has some needed gain, very color neutral, but minimal sparkling elements. However, I'm afraid that I may have to move up to the StudioTek 130, or even a higher gain screen, but hoping I can avoid that.

I PM'd Don Stewart, and he suggested that I post here for all to see, and join in.

I have a sample of the Stewart Cima Neve 1.1, and did some sampling yesterday, and will provide some of my observations in a proximate post.


----------



## Craig Peer

lancenell said:


> See attached picture of my basement HT at the bottom of this post to see what I'm dealing with.
> 
> I converted my basement to a home theater, although dedicated, not ideal. I can mostly control light, however due to 7 1/2' white decorative stamped ceiling, that would be the biggest drawback, however I do plan to tack up some black velvet in front of the screen. Seating & PJ throw distance from screen about 13 1/2'.
> 
> I recently bought the Epson LS10000, a much higher lumen output PJ, replacing a 10 year old Sim2 HT300. I'm using 16:9 110" Vutec Silverstar 6.0 (2.8'ish gain screen) and have enjoyed the punchy plasma look which worked fine for my last house (couldn't control light). With the new projector, and dark basement, the sparkling artifacts even in ECO mode with IRIS near fully clamped is overwhelming and distracting. I never saw this with the Sim2 DLP.
> 
> I want to go with a 2.35 133" Stewart screen, that way I can also maintain a large 1.78 AR which is about 40-50% of my viewing, not by choice, but due to HD On Demand and BluRay movie content in 1.78 AR . My viewing preference is for movie watching with 2.35 AR sources. I also like watching NFL games, and also would like to get into some 3D viewing. I really don't want to go with the 125" primarily because it'll be a big drop in size for 1.78 AR viewing. Just to clarify, watching movies represents 95% of viewing, and 95% of time it's just me and girlfriend, and sometimes her daughter joins us.
> 
> I've been talking with Craig Peer who sent me a sample of the Cima Neve 1.1 which after much discussion sounded like the best solution. However, after running my specs through Projector Central calculator, is calculates image brightness at 13 ftL, which is 1 fL from the minimum brightness floor (of 12 fL). According to Jeff Meier (Accu-Cal Report), he personally finds images below 12 fL begin to lose detail at 1080p along with color richness. In a dark room above 18 fL the light from the screen can start being fatiguing.
> 
> I don't know what lumen output Projector Central used for my Espon LS10000, and not aware of the calculator's accuracy and margin of error. I'm used to a bright screen, I should really be shooting for 14-17 ftL for good color saturation, brightness, and immersive viewing experience. On top of this, I'm having my LS10000 calibrated March 16th, which means I'll lose some lumen output as a result. I need to get my new screen installed before the calibration, so that the PJ is calibrated to the Stewart screen.
> 
> Based on the Accucal report, although the Neve is rated at 1.1 gain, the On Axis Gain was measured at closer to 1.25. The StudioTek 130 GS was measured at 1.27. If this is correct, they measure approximately the same gain, and perhaps the key difference between the screens is off-axis viewing? It's mostly me and 1-2 other viewers, and I'm not too worried about the 2 other seating positions that are off axis.
> 
> My goal is to have a nice bright accurate screen with absolute minimal grain & sparkling artifacts. I would love to get the ST100, but I know it's just not the best choice for my room. That's why I decided on the Neve 1.1 because it has some needed gain, very color neutral, but minimal sparkling elements. However, I'm afraid that I may have to move up to the StudioTek 130, or even a higher gain screen, but hoping I can avoid that.
> 
> I PM'd Don Stewart, and he suggested that I post here for all to see, and join in.
> 
> I have a sample of the Stewart Cima Neve 1.1, and did some sampling yesterday, and will provide some of my observations in a proximate post.
> View attachment 1255569
> 
> 
> View attachment 1255609


Have you measured your actual lumen output with a light meter ? If so, how many lumens are you getting ?


----------



## Don Stewart

Craig Peer said:


> Have you measured your actual lumen output with a light meter ? If so, how many lumens are you getting ?


Hi Greg,
I just did fL calcs by hand and I am getting 47fL in 16 X 9 and 39fL in scope prior to discounting published rated lumens. I am also assuming for
switching between scope and 16 x9 customer is utilizing lens zoom technique. Got to run now but will check back later.


----------



## lancenell

Craig Peer said:


> Have you measured your actual lumen output with a light meter ? If so, how many lumens are you getting ?


I do not have a light meter, but willing to purchase one. Am I incorrect in assuming that Foot Lumens is a calculation (an algorithm) based on a lux readings on specific spots on the projection screen? If that's the case, it wouldn't make sense to calculate fL on my Silverstar (approx 2.8 gain), because I need to know the fL for the new screen with its screen material (its gain) & larger dimensions. If you're saying that I use a light meter that's taking a measurement directly from the Projector (not the screen), what light meter should I use? Also, as I understand, calculating fL for lasers is less accurate (up to 9% error margin), while calcuations of LED's is upwards to 5% error, and even lower error margins for DLP. I probably should have brought this up in another discussion, but my point is that there's apt to be some error margin trying to calculate fL with a standard light meter especially for laser sources. On the other hand, the error margin may not be enough to get excited about, and will be able to give me a ballpark reading. 

Chad is coming out March 16th to calibrate the projector, and I'll ask him to calculate fL before & after calibration. Of course these measurements will be made on the new screen I plan to get, which brings me back to the beginning -- which screen to get?


----------



## Craig Peer

lancenell said:


> See attached picture of my basement HT at the bottom of this post to see what I'm dealing with.
> 
> I converted my basement to a home theater, although dedicated, not ideal. I can mostly control light, however due to 7 1/2' white decorative stamped ceiling, that would be the biggest drawback, however I do plan to tack up some black velvet in front of the screen. Seating & PJ throw distance from screen about 13 1/2'.
> 
> I recently bought the Epson LS10000, a much higher lumen output PJ, replacing a 10 year old Sim2 HT300. I'm using 16:9 110" Vutec Silverstar 6.0 (2.8'ish gain screen) and have enjoyed the punchy plasma look which worked fine for my last house (couldn't control light). With the new projector, and dark basement, the sparkling artifacts even in ECO mode with IRIS near fully clamped is overwhelming and distracting. I never saw this with the Sim2 DLP.
> 
> I want to go with a 2.35 133" Stewart screen, that way I can also maintain a large 1.78 AR which is about 40-50% of my viewing, not by choice, but due to HD On Demand and BluRay movie content in 1.78 AR . My viewing preference is for movie watching with 2.35 AR sources. I also like watching NFL games, and also would like to get into some 3D viewing. I really don't want to go with the 125" primarily because it'll be a big drop in size for 1.78 AR viewing. Just to clarify, watching movies represents 95% of viewing, and 95% of time it's just me and girlfriend, and sometimes her daughter joins us.
> 
> I've been talking with Craig Peer who sent me a sample of the Cima Neve 1.1 which after much discussion sounded like the best solution. However, after running my specs through Projector Central calculator, is calculates image brightness at 13 ftL, which is 1 fL from the minimum brightness floor (of 12 fL). According to Jeff Meier (Accu-Cal Report), he personally finds images below 12 fL begin to lose detail at 1080p along with color richness. In a dark room above 18 fL the light from the screen can start being fatiguing.
> 
> I don't know what lumen output Projector Central used for my Espon LS10000, and not aware of the calculator's accuracy and margin of error. I'm used to a bright screen, I should really be shooting for 14-17 ftL for good color saturation, brightness, and immersive viewing experience. On top of this, I'm having my LS10000 calibrated March 16th, which means I'll lose some lumen output as a result. I need to get my new screen installed before the calibration, so that the PJ is calibrated to the Stewart screen.
> 
> Based on the Accucal report, although the Neve is rated at 1.1 gain, the On Axis Gain was measured at closer to 1.25. The StudioTek 130 GS was measured at 1.27. If this is correct, they measure approximately the same gain, and perhaps the key difference between the screens is off-axis viewing? It's mostly me and 1-2 other viewers, and I'm not too worried about the 2 other seating positions that are off axis.
> 
> My goal is to have a nice bright accurate screen with absolute minimal grain & sparkling artifacts. I would love to get the ST100, but I know it's just not the best choice for my room. That's why I decided on the Neve 1.1 because it has some needed gain, very color neutral, but minimal sparkling elements. However, I'm afraid that I may have to move up to the StudioTek 130, or even a higher gain screen, but hoping I can avoid that.
> 
> I PM'd Don Stewart, and he suggested that I post here for all to see, and join in.
> 
> I have a sample of the Stewart Cima Neve 1.1, and did some sampling yesterday, and will provide some of my observations in a proximate post.
> View attachment 1255569
> 
> 
> View attachment 1255609


Here are lumen measurements - http://www.projectorreviews.com/ace...ew-performance/#pro-cinema-ls10000-brightness

So if you set your projector on the THX setting, medium power - you'll have about 942 lumens ( based on a mid throw mounting position like Projector Review ). But with a 2.35:1 screen, you lose 20% to the black bars. That takes you down to 754 lumens. On a 133" diagonal 2.35:1 Cima Neve, that should give you around 18 foot lamberts by my calculations.


----------



## lancenell

Craig Peer said:


> Here are lumen measurements - http://www.projectorreviews.com/ace...ew-performance/#pro-cinema-ls10000-brightness
> 
> So if you set your projector on the THX setting, medium power - you'll have about 942 lumens ( based on a mid throw mounting position like Projector Review ). But with a 2.35:1 screen, you lose 20% to the black bars. That takes you down to 754 lumens. On a 133" diagonal 2.35:1 Cima Neve, that should give you around 18 foot lamberts by my calculations.


18 fL is too bright. I guess I'll have to go with the ST100.  HaHa That actually should work great! In Thx mode, it makes the Silverstar dim in comparison to the preferred Natural mode. That's a good thing!! I may have even more fL in Natural mode, but it'll be interesting to see the fL drop after the calibration.

Thanks for doing the calculation for me. You're the best!


----------



## Craig Peer

lancenell said:


> 18 fL is too bright. I guess I'll have to go with the ST100.  HaHa That actually should work great! In Thx mode, it makes the Silverstar dim in comparison to the preferred Natural mode. That's a good thing!! I may have even more fL in Natural mode, but it'll be interesting to see the fL drop after the calibration.
> 
> Thanks for doing the calculation for me. You're the best!


If 18 foot lamberts is too bright ( I watch at 18 - 20 ), run it in low power.


----------



## Don Stewart

Looks like Graig has it covered with actual real lumens info for your PJ. Lance.
You said you still might be looking for StudioTek 130 samples in your PM. If you do request samples, ask fro an Utramatte 150 sample also.


----------



## chappieman

Don Stewart said:


> I would consider a white screen, StudioTek 130 to be more specific if you considering a Stewart Filmscreen product, with the room and viewing conditions you state above.


Hi, why would the UK dealer recommend the Grey screen as opposed to the White one you recommend?

Getting more & more confused with conflicting advice.


----------



## Don Stewart

chappieman said:


> Hi, why would the UK dealer recommend the Grey screen as opposed to the White one you recommend?
> 
> Getting more & more confused with conflicting advice.


I have no idea. I gave my reasons. Perhaps you should ask them.


----------



## lancenell

Craig Peer said:


> If 18 foot lamberts is too bright ( I watch at 18 - 20 ), run it in low power.


I was trying to be funny. The higher the number, the more flexibility it gives me. I prefer to use ECO mode & adjust IRIS for foot lamberts I'm desiring. Thank you again Craig.


----------



## lancenell

Don Stewart said:


> Looks like Graig has it covered with actual real lumens info for your PJ. Lance.
> You said you still might be looking for StudioTek 130 samples in your PM. If you do request samples, ask fro an Utramatte 150 sample also.


That's a really good idea. Although it appears the Neve will work, it could make my decision easier by comparing samples of the StudioTek 130 & Ultramatte 150 also. I sent a PM to Craig. Thanks!


----------



## Mike Garrett

drummermitchell said:


> Hi Don,
> the reason for the Firehawk was my dealer preferred it to the 130 was the FH looked more film like.Strictly concerts and movies.
> Any thoughts on ST-130 or the ST-100 with the JVC-rs-600 in this room.
> Will be going with either one,just not sure which would be better for this room
> I believe I'm 9-10' from screen seating wise.
> Thanks for heads up on retro fitting the screen.
> Will chat with my dealer and perhaps I could trade the FH in on a 130 or 100.


In an earlier post I read that you had a 49" x 128" screen. Are you sure on that size, it would be an odd (2.61) aspect ratio. Also the JVC can't shoot a 128" wide image using lens memory from 13'. Another problem, if your screen is 128" wide, then the minimum throw using a FireHawk is 16', to avoid hotspotting. If the 49" height is correct, then I would guess that your image is 118" wide and you have a 2.40 aspect ratio. With a black pit of a room, I would change the fabric over to ST100. I still question the throw, because the JVC can't shoot 118" wide from 13' either. Can you remeasure screen size and throw distance. If screen is 118" wide, then 14'-9" is minimum recommended throw, using FireHawk and I would not use the minimum.


----------



## Craig Peer

Don Stewart said:


> Looks like Graig has it covered with actual real lumens info for your PJ. Lance.
> You said you still might be looking for StudioTek 130 samples in your PM. If you do request samples, ask fro an Utramatte 150 sample also.


Don, any chance on getting the Cima electric screens with a black case now ?


----------



## Don Stewart

Craig Peer said:


> Don, any chance on getting the Cima electric screens with a black case now ?


I will be in office later today and will check for you.


----------



## drummermitchell

Mike Garrett said:


> In an earlier post I read that you had a 49" x 128" screen. Are you sure on that size, it would be an odd (2.61) aspect ratio. Also the JVC can't shoot a 128" wide image using lens memory from 13'. Another problem, if your screen is 128" wide, then the minimum throw using a FireHawk is 16', to avoid hotspotting. If the 49" height is correct, then I would guess that your image is 118" wide and you have a 2.40 aspect ratio. With a black pit of a room, I would change the fabric over to ST100. I still question the throw, because the JVC can't shoot 118" wide from 13' either. Can you remeasure screen size and throw distance. If screen is 118" wide, then 14'-9" is minimum recommended throw, using FireHawk and I would not use the minimum.


Hi Mike,
Thanks for the reply.
The screen is 15' from projector
The FireHawk G-3 is OD:53-1/4"x121"
Model #SNDQ128SFHG3WezX 
Found my screen manual with the sticker on the back.

Have been messing with the lens memory and with 2.40 movies,I can cover the whole screen and have 1.5"lack bar all around screen area.
I'm sure I could zoom it out more but for me that's close enough.
Superb feature and maybe not as good as a 6000.00 Anamorphic lens,but the JVC works great for me.
Will check the ST100


----------



## spider33

Don Stewart said:


> Call Scott Kimber, our customer service tech, on Wednesday, the 17th. (800 762-4999) He can help you with the screen trigger. Also, it sounds like your bottom stop limit switch needs adjusting. Since you live in Manhattan Beach, you are only 15 or 20 minutes from our factory. It may even be beneficial to have a factory person do a service call.


Spoke to Scott at Stewart. From talking to him he explained I need to get a 12v transformer of some sort. I guessed that but just curious if anyone had any specific suggestions on brands or set up to accomplish this trigger device. I am a newbie at dealing with this stuff and the company that installed my stuff was back in 2001. I think they may still be around but they moved farther away and don't seem like they want to help out atleast in years past. any suggestions are appreciated. 

thanks,


----------



## Don Stewart

Craig Peer said:


> Don, any chance on getting the Cima electric screens with a black case now ?





Don Stewart said:


> I will be in office later today and will check for you.


Yes, we can as a special order. The lead time will be a little longer than usual though.


----------



## Mike Garrett

drummermitchell said:


> Hi Mike,
> Thanks for the reply.
> The screen is 15' from projector
> The FireHawk G-3 is OD:53-1/4"x121"
> Model #SNDQ128SFHG3WezX
> Found my screen manual with the sticker on the back.
> 
> Have been messing with the lens memory and with 2.40 movies,I can cover the whole screen and have 1.5"lack bar all around screen area.
> I'm sure I could zoom it out more but for me that's close enough.
> Superb feature and maybe not as good as a 6000.00 Anamorphic lens,but the JVC works great for me.
> Will check the ST100


Your throw is a little longer and your screen is a little smaller than listed earlier, so you are okay on the minimum throw for the FireHawk. In a good light controlled room ST100 would give you the best 1080P 2D image. If planning on going with UHD BD, then ST130 may ultimately end up being a better choice. Just do not know enough information on how HDR is going to play into this with front projector systems. We are just now starting to find out.


----------



## drummermitchell

Mike Garrett said:


> Your throw is a little longer and your screen is a little smaller than listed earlier, so you are okay on the minimum throw for the FireHawk. In a good light controlled room ST100 would give you the best 1080P 2D image. If planning on going with UHD BD, then ST130 may ultimately end up being a better choice. Just do not know enough information on how HDR is going to play into this with front projector systems. We are just now starting to find out.


Thanks Mike, Appreciate it.
Usually we upgrade something and then along comes a piece we maybe should have waited for.
I still have time,so for sure will be the ST-130 or ST-100,perhaps the UHD will be settled.
Hoping OPPO will have a new player also,I use a 95.Thanks to you and Craig,we narrowed my indecision down to the two.


----------



## rboster

I received my Cima Scope screen with Neve screen material. I had to wait till this week to install. My handyman (ie teenage son) was in Philly visiting Drexel with my wife), so no help taking down current screen and installing the new Stewart.


I replaced an SMX Procurv (yes, curved) Scope screen that I matched up with my ISCO lens (which I'll be putting up for sale). WIth the new JVC's increased brightness, I decided to go the zoom route, which meant revisiting a flat screen and new screen material. After reviewing a lot of options, I went with Stewart. 

I've had my fair share of screens over the years: Used Stewart, Dalite (2), Carada, Prismasonic Scope screen and lastly the SMX. Coming full circle again to Stewart.

The box arrived with some damage, but due to the fact Stewart does such an outstanding job of packing with quality materials, even with a damaged box everything was unharmed and intact. As instructed, I took my time unpacking the box and used their quality control checklist to insure everything was present. ...and it was.


Putting the frame together was a breeze. 4 screws with the supplied wrench and it was done in no time. I could tell right away the fit and finish was what you'd expect from Stewart, even in their entry level line of screens. 

Next step was attaching the screen material. This part of the process keeps me up at night...and to be honest has kept me from swapping out screens...cause you never know how hard it maybe. Prismasonic and SMX gave me nightmares. How does Stewart rank...right in the middle. Not as easy as Carada, but nothing compared to Prism. and SMX. 

When I first snapped the top portion the screen material onto the top of the frame, it was tough at times, but manageable. I decide to see if working from the other corner into the middle might be easier...that's when I saw about a two inch gap between the material and the frame...did they cut the material too short? Nope, it's necessary to create the smooth as ice tension for the material. After attaching the top corner to corner, that's where the sweat and elbow grease came in. Sitting the screen upright helped. To be honest, I was nervous about pulling the material too far to get the snap to line up for fear of stretching or tearing the material. Once it was snapped in place, I also feared that the material would tear around the snap due to the concentrated tension (until all snaps are in place). I would work 3 or 4 snaps and wait till felt ready to jump in again. I don't know how long it took to get the material attached to the screen, but it was longer and tougher than I would have thought. That being said, it was smooth and wrinkle free right off the bat. I don't remember any screen not having some wrinkles or waves to work through. This is a testament to the packing and application of screen to frame. It was worth the sweat and swearing. 

Mounting the frame was a snap. I followed the instructions exactly...testing the frame on the wall with each step and no issues. Now for one of my favorite features (besides performance), the addition of the magnets at the bottom of the screen. The frame as movable magnets already attached to the frame. You then mount two discs to the wall that will align with the frame's magnets to keep the frame flat to the wall. Fantastic feature and well implemented. I've not had that on any other flat screen.

On the performance side, I've only had a hour or so to test films on the new screen. The first film was Fury Road, which has terrific details, sharpness and interesting color pallet. The very first impression was OMG the detail and sharpness was apparent right away. Having just watched the film that weekend, I revisited certain scenes and was amazed by the additional detail, dimensionality and sharpness of the image. I have an OPPO 103D with darbee tech built in. I was able to take it down several notches. I didn't need to additional "enhancements" the darbee provided. 

I also popped in Bridge of Spies, which I hadn't seen since the theater, but remember as being a film with a dark color pallet. The blacks were inky, but one could make out the jackets material vs a black coat. Color me impressed.

I'm looking forward to tweaking my projector settings over the next several weeks and seeing how best to pair the JVC with the new screen. I am really excited about getting to know the Cima screen. My initial impressions are what a great advancement to my system. Now I just need a sick day (cough cough) to enjoy it without interruptions. 

Thanks to Stewart Screens for a terrific experience, that I'm sure I will enjoy for a long time.


Ron


----------



## DavidHir

Ron,

Glad to hear you're happy. How do you like the image zooming vs not using an a-lens? I am a very happy zoomer myself.


----------



## Craig Peer

rboster said:


> I received my Cima Scope screen with Neve screen material. I had to wait till this week to install. My handyman (ie teenage son) was in Philly visiting Drexel with my wife), so no help taking down current screen and installing the new Stewart.
> 
> 
> I replaced an SMX Procurv (yes, curved) Scope screen that I matched up with my ISCO lens (which I'll be putting up for sale). WIth the new JVC's increased brightness, I decided to go the zoom route, which meant revisiting a flat screen and new screen material. After reviewing a lot of options, I went with Stewart.
> 
> I've had my fair share of screens over the years: Used Stewart, Dalite (2), Carada, Prismasonic Scope screen and lastly the SMX. Coming full circle again to Stewart.
> 
> The box arrived with some damage, but due to the fact Stewart does such an outstanding job of packing with quality materials, even with a damaged box everything was unharmed and intact. As instructed, I took my time unpacking the box and used their quality control checklist to insure everything was present. ...and it was.
> 
> 
> Putting the frame together was a breeze. 4 screws with the supplied wrench and it was done in no time. I could tell right away the fit and finish was what you'd expect from Stewart, even in their entry level line of screens.
> 
> Next step was attaching the screen material. This part of the process keeps me up at night...and to be honest has kept me from swapping out screens...cause you never know how hard it maybe. Prismasonic and SMX gave me nightmares. How does Stewart rank...right in the middle. Not as easy as Carada, but nothing compared to Prism. and SMX.
> 
> When I first snapped a portion the screen onto the frame, it was tough at times, but manageable. I decide to see if working from the other corner into the middle might be easier...that's when I saw about a two inch gap between the material and the frame...did they cut the material too short? Nope, it's necessary to create the smooth as ice tension for the material. After attaching the top corner to corner, that's where the sweat and elbow grease came in. Sitting the screen upright helped. To be honest, I was nervous about pulling the material too far to get the snap to line up for fear of stretching or tearing the material. Once it was snapped in place, I also feared that the material would tear around the snap due to the concentrated tension (until all snaps are in place). I would work 3 or 4 snaps and wait till felt ready to jump in again. I don't know how long it took to get the material attached to the screen, but it was longer and tougher than I would have thought. That being said, it was smooth and wrinkle free right off the bat. I don't remember any screen not having some wrinkles or waves to work through. This is a testament to the packing and application of screen to frame. It was worth the sweat and swearing.
> 
> Mounting the frame was a snap. I followed the instructions exactly...testing the frame on the wall with each step and no issues. Now for one of my favorite features (besides performance), the addition of the magnets at the bottom of the screen. The frame as movable magnets already attached to the frame. You then mount two discs to the wall that will align with the frame's magnets to keep the frame flat to the wall. Fantastic feature and well implemented. I've not had that on any other flat screen.
> 
> On the performance side, I've only had a hour or so to test films on the new screen. The first film was Fury Road, which has terrific details, sharpness and interesting color pallet. The very first impression was OMG the detail and sharpness was apparent right away. Having just watched the film that weekend, I revisited certain scenes and was amazed by the additional detail, dimensionality and sharpness of the image. I have an OPPO 103D with darbee tech built in. I was able to take it down several notches. I didn't need to additional "enhancements" the darbee provided.
> 
> I also popped in Bridge of Spies, which I hadn't seen since the theater, but remember as being a film with a dark color pallet. The blacks were inky, but one could make out the jackets material vs a black coat. Color me impressed.
> 
> I'm looking forward to tweaking my projector settings over the next several weeks and seeing how best to pair the JVC with the new screen. I am really excited about getting to know the Cima screen. My initial impressions are what a great advancement to my system. Now I just need a sick day (cough cough) to enjoy it without interruptions.
> 
> Thanks to Stewart Screens for a terrific experience, that I'm sure I will enjoy for a long time.
> 
> 
> Ron


Thanks for the assembly and install description. As I own an electric Cima screen, I've never actually assembled one of these. This will help folks curious about installing a fixed Cima Neve screen !


----------



## rboster

Craig Peer said:


> Thanks for the assembly and install description. As I own an electric Cima screen, I've never actually assembled one of these. This will help folks curious about installing a fixed Cima Neve screen !


Happy to provide any info someone may need about my experience. Seeing your post reminds me to give a shout out to you and Mike Garrett for your input and service relative to my purchase through AVS,

Thanks again

Ron


----------



## rboster

DavidHir said:


> Ron,
> 
> Glad to hear you're happy. How do you like the image zooming vs not using an a-lens? I am a very happy zoomer myself.


I'm actually a big lens fan. I am going to hate selling my ISCO lens and TechHT mount. But, the new JVC shorten the performance gap between my previous JVC/lens combo. Right now I am avoiding the rough waters of the new Samsung HDR player.....and feeling content with upgrades coming from the Stewart and JVC performance. 

David, just don't tell the member (forget his AVS name) who turned into a Zoom Zealot, that I have abandoned my A-lens (for now).


----------



## R Harkness

rboster said:


> I'm actually a big lens fan. I am going to hate selling my ISCO lens and TechHT mount. But, the new JVC shorten the performance gap between my previous JVC/lens combo.


I'm curious in what sense you feel there would be any performance gap from the A-lens to zooming image. The best one can generally say about an A-lens is that it doesn't harm the image, you mostly risk adding distortion that you have to minimize. It's a sort of "kludge" we've had to introduce in order to introduce a presentation style that was not part of the design for Blu-Ray/home display. Pixel density was perhaps a previous selling point for an A-lens, but not anymore with JVC projectors. So I don't see any advantage for A-lenses in terms of image quality, mostly just potential for added distortion. I am very impressed by the image quality using my A-lens, but my zoomed image looks somewhat better, more precise.


----------



## Craig Peer

rboster said:


> I'm actually a big lens fan. I am going to hate selling my ISCO lens and TechHT mount. But, the new JVC shorten the performance gap between my previous JVC/lens combo. Right now I am avoiding the rough waters of the new Samsung HDR player.....and feeling content with upgrades coming from the Stewart and JVC performance.
> 
> David, just don't tell the member (forget his AVS name) who turned into a Zoom Zealot, that I have abandoned my A-lens (for now).


I'm another zoomer !


----------



## Mike Garrett

R Harkness said:


> I'm curious in what sense you feel there would be any performance gap from the A-lens to zooming image. The best one can generally say about an A-lens is that it doesn't harm the image, you mostly risk adding distortion that you have to minimize. It's a sort of "kludge" we've had to introduce in order to introduce a presentation style that was not part of the design for Blu-Ray/home display. Pixel density was perhaps a previous selling point for an A-lens, but not anymore with JVC projectors. So I don't see any advantage for A-lenses in terms of image quality, mostly just potential for added distortion. I am very impressed by the image quality using my A-lens, but my zoomed image looks somewhat better, more precise.


1. No black bars to deal with.
2. Added brightness.
3. Aspect ratio changing movies work. (do not get image above and below screen when aspect ratio movie goes to 16:9)
4. Exact aspect ratio changes. (hits the same exact spot every time)
5. Quicker aspect ratio changes.
6. Can throw a larger image from a shorter distance. (really requires a curved screen to do this properly)


----------



## DavidHir

Mike Garrett said:


> 1. No black bars to deal with.
> 2. Added brightness.
> 3. Aspect ratio changing movies work. (do not get image above and below screen when aspect ratio movie goes to 16:9)
> 4. Exact aspect ratio changes. (hits the same exact spot every time)
> 5. Quicker aspect ratio changes.
> 6. Can throw a larger image from a shorter distance. (really requires a curved screen to do this properly)


Can anyone see black bars on their JVC? I cannot see them for the life of me.


----------



## R Harkness

Ok since you dared ;-)



Mike Garrett said:


> 1. No black bars to deal with.


I've never seen any black bars when zooming 2:35:1 with any JVC I've owned. As for the sides, for 16:9 I use masking, which is what you'd want with an A-lens if possible anyway.



Mike Garrett said:


> 2. Added brightness.


This is variable, and with the JVCs the brightness advantage seems pretty negligible to begin with, and now with the bright JVC projectors it's not like everyone needs that teeny bit of brightness with an A-lens. It only takes opening up the aperture a notch or three to match or exceed what you'd get with the A-lens. Unless you are running an aperture almost wide open, which few are I think, certainly not me. I'm on a 125" wide 1.3 gain screen and I've yet to even open up the aperture 1/2 way on low lamp!



Mike Garrett said:


> 3. Aspect ratio changing movies work. (do not get image above and below screen when aspect ratio movie goes to 16:9)


Same with zooming if you have a JVC, since you can make a customized masking pre-set for just such use.




Mike Garrett said:


> 4. Exact aspect ratio changes. (hits the same exact spot every time)


I find lens memories very reliable. Yes, need tweaking after a while, but, especially if one is just switching between 16:9 and 2:35:1 that's an incredibly tiny amount of "work" - just a few minutes every few months or so I'd guess.



Mike Garrett said:


> 5. Quicker aspect ratio changes.


I haven't found that to be the case. I have the Panamorph automated lens slide on macro commands, and my lens memories on macro commands with my masking. They take pretty much the same time, sometimes the zooming is actually faster depending on what AR I'm changing to. (I'd add, that once you have the direct code commands for lens memories, it seems to work faster).



Mike Garrett said:


> 6. Can throw a larger image from a shorter distance. (really requires a curved screen to do this properly)


The only reason I still have mine. 

All that said, I'd figured rboster meant a picture quality performance gap, in which case it still seems a zoomed image is most likely to come out ahead.


----------



## jjordache

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Jrod,
> After reviewing your photos and other technical information above I can not in good conscience recommend any white screen for your theater. Your room finishing colors are very light plus walls and windows are fairly close to screen position. Even when viewing movies at night in a darkened room you will have a considerable amount of cross reflection between walls, ceiling, floor carpets and screen. If this room was for myself, I would go with a gray screen that brings some ALR values to your project.. My first choice would be FireHawk, but the FH requires a bare minimum throw distance of 1.6 times screen width to assure decent white field uniformity, (minimum hot spotting) and you don't have that distance available. My second choice would be a GrayHawk 90, a less aggressive lighter gray ALR screen material but requires only a minimum TD of 1.3 times screen width. Currently, with our Cima screen line, we have not been happy with our last two manufacturing runs of the Cima Tiburon gray screens. The material failed our optical QC specifications and the runs were scrapped. So to fill current Cima orders for Tiburon, we have been upgrading the customer to our premium Stewart GrayHawk screen material at no extra charge. The GrayHawk has higher gain and also has a darker ND Gray value than the Tiburon which gives it superior ALR properties. (See gray value chart attached). As far as screen size goes, I just want to state that the 100 inch size will net you near 20% more brightness than the 110" screen. Also, if you elect to go with the 100" screen size, it would increase you throw distance ratio to over 1.5 which will add better white field uniformity to your image fidelity.
> 
> Hope that helps.


Don -
I'm in a similar situation (light walls, very little light control) as the OP for this question and I have a few questions.
I got to the point where I'm ready to install a screen for our family room HT and my last round of research pointed me towards a Cima Tiburon G2 123" (00930-2123H)
but now I run into this post which indicates that the current batch of Tiburon has some issues.

The room is ~19' x 12', throw distance ~16' and my projector is a JVC RS400U (thanks Mike, awesome projector!).
We're mostly watching movies at night when it's completely dark, but the light walls do scatter the light quite a bit.

Would you still recommend Grayhawk 0.9 vs Tiburon for my application ? 
Is a white 1.0 gain screen out of the question for this room?
Is the Grayhawk available in the Cima package or is it a custom built order ?

And lastly, do you know of any places in the Bay Area where I could go and demo a Stewart screen in person ?
The Norcal dealer in San Rafael seems to be more of a distributor than a residential service provider.


----------



## lancenell

I have a small sample of the Stewart Neve 1.1. When I placed it against my Vutec Silverstar 6.0 high gain screen, the Neve looked as if a shadow came over it. I never realized how much brightness you get from a high gain screen. At first I thought, whoa, I don't know if I'll like this new material.

*1st observation* - the sparkly artifacts disappeared. I cannot stand sparkling. It's very distracting for me. A big smile came over me 
*2nd observation* - darks looked darker, and whites looked darker, but I'm guessing they retained the same contrast; maybe better. At first I was hoping that the darks looked darker, and the whites retained their brilliance. It excites me that the Neve will give blacks an inky feel, which is what I want. After about an hour of messing around, I started to notice the brightness of the Silverstar was starting to cause eyestrain, only because I started to pay attention to how my eyes were reacting to the brightness. I never noticed this before, but I found my eyes wanting to watch the small Neve patch as it was easier on the eyes.
*3rd observation* - the Neve seemed to show details better. My girlfriend, who joined me in this experiment was the one that brought it to my attention. I surmised whether the dispersion qualities of the Silverstar, during extreme pixel brightness, may be potentially bleeding over to the pixel next to it. I questioned, is this what is happening? Don't get me wrong, the Silverstar looks very detailed, but the Neve seemed to add slight more detail. Edge detail also appeared more accurate, it was smoother, and less grain.
*4th observation *-- colors looked richer. The brightness of the silverstar seems to wash the colors out slightly. For instance, in watching Tomorrow Land, the little boy (George Clooney as a boy) was wearing a brown jacket. It looked like a light brown jacket, until I placed the Neve over it, and it became a richer, warmer, shall I say, medium colored brown jacket.
*5th observation* -- I placed the Neve center screen, stood up, and slowly walked from one extreme side of the seating area to the other. Dead on, the Neve had that shaded look. As I walked left or right, the Neve started to become brighter. Once I got to about even or just past the border of the screen, the Neve and Silverstar became one. I could not tell a difference. My question is whether viewing from this angle gives me a good idea how it might look if I was watching a Neve screen? As I step further out, the Neve became brighter than the Silverstar, really bright, washed out, and could hardly make out any details at all. When I did this, I was paying attention to how the Neve contrasted to the Silverstar. Then I walked back & forth this time focusing on the Silverstar. It obviously dimmed, but I was surprised how subtle it dimmed, and actually had never noticed it before. I noticed that the end I stood closest to was slightly brighter, and the opposite end was slightly dimmer. I would never have noticed that if I hadn't tried this test. I will say, for a high gain screen, they sure did an excellent job at increasing the viewing angle. Pretty impressive. This is a great screen for watching sports with some external lighting. I wonder how the Neve will perform with some lighting, and watching a sporting event. My guess is the Neve will be more demanding, and having more problems in low ambient light conditions.
*6th observation* -- 3D! This really isn't an observation of the Neve material, but of the Silverstar material. Obviously, when watching 3D, especially with active 3D glasses, the brightness drops immensely. I was very impressed how 3D looked on the Silverstar. I haven't even watch true 3D source content. I used the Epson 2D to 3D conversion, & I must say, wow!!, it is much better than I ever imagined. I watched BluRay Gravity & Avatar, and both looked excellent, and then I tried Comcast On Demand, the Hobbit: Battle of Five Armies, uhhhhh, not so good. Source material counts big to a 3D experience, and Cable broadcast just doesn't cut it. But I was watching it with a 12 year old who wasn't so critical, and really enjoyed the 3D experience. Long story short, I'm concerned. Will the Neve 1.1 be able to provide a bright enough picture for 3D viewing? I'm going to a 233" 2.35 screen, 13 1/2 throw. I sure hope so, because I do enjoy 3D viewing once in a while, and prefer not to be limited to strictly 2D viewing.

I realize I'm making various points why I'm seemingly liking the Neve over the Silverstar, but at the same time, I've had the Silverstar screen for 10 yrs. I am very acquainted with this screen. It worked great with my DLP projector, albeit horrible native contrast, but with the Epson LS10000, this screen is just not a good match for the reasons explained above. I will say that I may have developed a certain fondness, and appreciation of the Silverstar. I wish I could keep it too, for more specific viewing, perhaps sporting events with ambient light, or maybe even 3D viewing but I sure hope the Neve works even better. I will say that there were a few scenes that I watched, then froze, & rewatched, and will say that for certain scenes & objects (running the Neve over the Silverstar, back and forth), that I gave a thumbs up to the Silverstar over the Neve. However, I cannot say that conclusively without being able to see the whole Neve screen, versus just a little patch. So take this with a grain of salt. Again, this is why I am very curious whether the Neve screen will look more like how the Silverstar looked from a wider angle, such as when the Neve brightness matched the Silverstars brightness exactly, to the point I couldn't tell the difference.


----------



## Mike Garrett

R Harkness said:


> Ok since you dared ;-)
> 
> 
> 
> I've never seen any black bars when zooming 2:35:1 with any JVC I've owned. As for the sides, for 16:9 I use masking, which is what you'd want with an A-lens if possible anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> This is variable, and with the JVCs the brightness advantage seems pretty negligible to begin with, and now with the bright JVC projectors it's not like everyone needs that teeny bit of brightness with an A-lens. It only takes opening up the aperture a notch or three to match or exceed what you'd get with the A-lens. Unless you are running an aperture almost wide open, which few are I think, certainly not me. I'm on a 125" wide 1.3 gain screen and I've yet to even open up the aperture 1/2 way on low lamp!
> 
> 
> 
> Same with zooming if you have a JVC, since you can make a customized masking pre-set for just such use.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I find lens memories very reliable. Yes, need tweaking after a while, but, especially if one is just switching between 16:9 and 2:35:1 that's an incredibly tiny amount of "work" - just a few minutes every few months or so I'd guess.
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't found that to be the case. I have the Panamorph automated lens slide on macro commands, and my lens memories on macro commands with my masking. They take pretty much the same time, sometimes the zooming is actually faster depending on what AR I'm changing to. (I'd add, that once you have the direct code commands for lens memories, it seems to work faster).
> 
> 
> 
> The only reason I still have mine.
> 
> All that said, I'd figured rboster meant a picture quality performance gap, in which case it still seems a zoomed image is most likely to come out ahead.


Have had a few customers over the years complain about black bars cast on the ceiling of their room. This is because they had the scope screen mounted close to the ceiling and the white ceiling really showed the black bars. Have had the same thing with customers that had light colored walls. Granted, in a good room, the black bars are usually not a problem. 

With my cylindrical lens vs zooming, I certainly do not give the image nod to the zoomed image in my room. I have compared zoomed to A-lens in my room, using a stack on a paused image, going back and forth, covering one lens.


----------



## Mike Garrett

jjordache said:


> Don -
> I'm in a similar situation (light walls, very little light control) as the OP for this question and I have a few questions.
> I got to the point where I'm ready to install a screen for our family room HT and my last round of research pointed me towards a Cima Tiburon G2 123" (00930-2123H)
> but now I run into this post which indicates that the current batch of Tiburon has some issues.
> 
> The room is ~19' x 12', throw distance ~16' and my projector is a JVC RS400U (thanks Mike, awesome projector!).
> We're mostly watching movies at night when it's completely dark, but the light walls do scatter the light quite a bit.
> 
> Would you still recommend Grayhawk 0.9 vs Tiburon for my application ?
> Is a white 1.0 gain screen out of the question for this room?
> Is the Grayhawk available in the Cima package or is it a custom built order ?
> 
> And lastly, do you know of any places in the Bay Area where I could go and demo a Stewart screen in person ?
> The Norcal dealer in San Rafael seems to be more of a distributor than a residential service provider.


Sent you an email.


----------



## Mike Garrett

lancenell said:


> I have a small sample of the Stewart Neve 1.1. When I placed it against my Vutec Silverstar 6.0 high gain screen, the Neve looked as if a shadow came over it. I never realized how much brightness you get from a high gain screen. At first I thought, whoa, I don't know if I'll like this new material.
> 
> *1st observation* - the sparkly artifacts disappeared. I cannot stand sparkling. It's very distracting for me. A big smile came over me
> *2nd observation* - darks looked darker, and whites looked darker, but I'm guessing they retained the same contrast; maybe better. At first I was hoping that the darks looked darker, and the whites retained their brilliance. It excites me that the Neve will give blacks an inky feel, which is what I want. After about an hour of messing around, I started to notice the brightness of the Silverstar was starting to cause eyestrain, only because I started to pay attention to how my eyes were reacting to the brightness. I never noticed this before, but I found my eyes wanting to watch the small Neve patch as it was easier on the eyes.
> *3rd observation* - the Neve seemed to show details better. My girlfriend, who joined me in this experiment was the one that brought it to my attention. I surmised whether the dispersion qualities of the Silverstar, during extreme pixel brightness, may be potentially bleeding over to the pixel next to it. I questioned, is this what is happening? Don't get me wrong, the Silverstar looks very detailed, but the Neve seemed to add slight more detail. Edge detail also appeared more accurate, it was smoother, and less grain.
> *4th observation *-- colors looked richer. The brightness of the silverstar seems to wash the colors out slightly. For instance, in watching Tomorrow Land, the little boy (George Clooney as a boy) was wearing a brown jacket. It looked like a light brown jacket, until I placed the Neve over it, and it became a richer, warmer, shall I say, medium colored brown jacket.
> *5th observation* -- I placed the Neve center screen, stood up, and slowly walked from one extreme side of the seating area to the other. Dead on, the Neve had that shaded look. As I walked left or right, the Neve started to become brighter. Once I got to about even or just past the border of the screen, the Neve and Silverstar became one. I could not tell a difference. My question is whether viewing from this angle gives me a good idea how it might look if I was watching a Neve screen? As I step further out, the Neve became brighter than the Silverstar, really bright, washed out, and could hardly make out any details at all. When I did this, I was paying attention to how the Neve contrasted to the Silverstar. Then I walked back & forth this time focusing on the Silverstar. It obviously dimmed, but I was surprised how subtle it dimmed, and actually had never noticed it before. I noticed that the end I stood closest to was slightly brighter, and the opposite end was slightly dimmer. I would never have noticed that if I hadn't tried this test. I will say, for a high gain screen, they sure did an excellent job at increasing the viewing angle. Pretty impressive. This is a great screen for watching sports with some external lighting. I wonder how the Neve will perform with some lighting, and watching a sporting event. My guess is the Neve will be more demanding, and having more problems in low ambient light conditions.
> *6th observation* -- 3D! This really isn't an observation of the Neve material, but of the Silverstar material. Obviously, when watching 3D, especially with active 3D glasses, the brightness drops immensely. I was very impressed how 3D looked on the Silverstar. I haven't even watch true 3D source content. I used the Epson 2D to 3D conversion, & I must say, wow!!, it is much better than I ever imagined. I watched BluRay Gravity & Avatar, and both looked excellent, and then I tried Comcast On Demand, the Hobbit: Battle of Five Armies, uhhhhh, not so good. Source material counts big to a 3D experience, and Cable broadcast just doesn't cut it. But I was watching it with a 12 year old who wasn't so critical, and really enjoyed the 3D experience. Long story short, I'm concerned. Will the Neve 1.1 be able to provide a bright enough picture for 3D viewing? I'm going to a 233" 2.35 screen, 13 1/2 throw. I sure hope so, because I do enjoy 3D viewing once in a while, and prefer not to be limited to strictly 2D viewing.
> 
> I realize I'm making various points why I'm seemingly liking the Neve over the Silverstar, but at the same time, I've had the Silverstar screen for 10 yrs. I am very acquainted with this screen. It worked great with my DLP projector, albeit horrible native contrast, but with the Epson LS10000, this screen is just not a good match for the reasons explained above. I will say that I may have developed a certain fondness, and appreciation of the Silverstar. I wish I could keep it too, for more specific viewing, perhaps sporting events with ambient light, or maybe even 3D viewing but I sure hope the Neve works even better. I will say that there were a few scenes that I watched, then froze, & rewatched, and will say that for certain scenes & objects (running the Neve over the Silverstar, back and forth), that I gave a thumbs up to the Silverstar over the Neve. However, I cannot say that conclusively without being able to see the whole Neve screen, versus just a little patch. So take this with a grain of salt. Again, this is why I am very curious whether the Neve screen will look more like how the Silverstar looked from a wider angle, such as when the Neve brightness matched the Silverstars brightness exactly, to the point I couldn't tell the difference.


All around, other than brightness the Neve will provide the better image, with the exception of 3D. If you had enough brightness, the Neve would provide the better 3D image as well. Keep in mind those improvements that you see with the Neve sample will be greatly increased, when viewing a full size image on the Neve.


----------



## R Harkness

Mike Garrett said:


> Have had a few customers over the years complain about black bars cast on the ceiling of their room. This is because they had the scope screen mounted close to the ceiling and the white ceiling really showed the black bars. Have had the same thing with customers that had light colored walls. Granted, in a good room, the black bars are usually not a problem.
> 
> With my cylindrical lens vs zooming, I certainly do not give the image nod to the zoomed image in my room. I have compared zoomed to A-lens in my room, using a stack on a paused image, going back and forth, covering one lens.


Interesting Mike. What did you find better about the A-lens image?


----------



## Mike Garrett

R Harkness said:


> Interesting Mike. What did you find better about the A-lens image?


Do not know that I really found it better, other than a gain in brightness, but it definitely was not worse. I need the lens to fill my screen.


----------



## Craig Peer

lancenell said:


> I have a small sample of the Stewart Neve 1.1. When I placed it against my Vutec Silverstar 6.0 high gain screen, the Neve looked as if a shadow came over it. I never realized how much brightness you get from a high gain screen. At first I thought, whoa, I don't know if I'll like this new material.
> 
> *1st observation* - the sparkly artifacts disappeared. I cannot stand sparkling. It's very distracting for me. A big smile came over me
> *2nd observation* - darks looked darker, and whites looked darker, but I'm guessing they retained the same contrast; maybe better. At first I was hoping that the darks looked darker, and the whites retained their brilliance. It excites me that the Neve will give blacks an inky feel, which is what I want. After about an hour of messing around, I started to notice the brightness of the Silverstar was starting to cause eyestrain, only because I started to pay attention to how my eyes were reacting to the brightness. I never noticed this before, but I found my eyes wanting to watch the small Neve patch as it was easier on the eyes.
> *3rd observation* - the Neve seemed to show details better. My girlfriend, who joined me in this experiment was the one that brought it to my attention. I surmised whether the dispersion qualities of the Silverstar, during extreme pixel brightness, may be potentially bleeding over to the pixel next to it. I questioned, is this what is happening? Don't get me wrong, the Silverstar looks very detailed, but the Neve seemed to add slight more detail. Edge detail also appeared more accurate, it was smoother, and less grain.
> *4th observation *-- colors looked richer. The brightness of the silverstar seems to wash the colors out slightly. For instance, in watching Tomorrow Land, the little boy (George Clooney as a boy) was wearing a brown jacket. It looked like a light brown jacket, until I placed the Neve over it, and it became a richer, warmer, shall I say, medium colored brown jacket.
> *5th observation* -- I placed the Neve center screen, stood up, and slowly walked from one extreme side of the seating area to the other. Dead on, the Neve had that shaded look. As I walked left or right, the Neve started to become brighter. Once I got to about even or just past the border of the screen, the Neve and Silverstar became one. I could not tell a difference. My question is whether viewing from this angle gives me a good idea how it might look if I was watching a Neve screen? As I step further out, the Neve became brighter than the Silverstar, really bright, washed out, and could hardly make out any details at all. When I did this, I was paying attention to how the Neve contrasted to the Silverstar. Then I walked back & forth this time focusing on the Silverstar. It obviously dimmed, but I was surprised how subtle it dimmed, and actually had never noticed it before. I noticed that the end I stood closest to was slightly brighter, and the opposite end was slightly dimmer. I would never have noticed that if I hadn't tried this test. I will say, for a high gain screen, they sure did an excellent job at increasing the viewing angle. Pretty impressive. This is a great screen for watching sports with some external lighting. I wonder how the Neve will perform with some lighting, and watching a sporting event. My guess is the Neve will be more demanding, and having more problems in low ambient light conditions.
> *6th observation* -- 3D! This really isn't an observation of the Neve material, but of the Silverstar material. Obviously, when watching 3D, especially with active 3D glasses, the brightness drops immensely. I was very impressed how 3D looked on the Silverstar. I haven't even watch true 3D source content. I used the Epson 2D to 3D conversion, & I must say, wow!!, it is much better than I ever imagined. I watched BluRay Gravity & Avatar, and both looked excellent, and then I tried Comcast On Demand, the Hobbit: Battle of Five Armies, uhhhhh, not so good. Source material counts big to a 3D experience, and Cable broadcast just doesn't cut it. But I was watching it with a 12 year old who wasn't so critical, and really enjoyed the 3D experience. Long story short, I'm concerned. Will the Neve 1.1 be able to provide a bright enough picture for 3D viewing? I'm going to a 233" 2.35 screen, 13 1/2 throw. I sure hope so, because I do enjoy 3D viewing once in a while, and prefer not to be limited to strictly 2D viewing.
> 
> I realize I'm making various points why I'm seemingly liking the Neve over the Silverstar, but at the same time, I've had the Silverstar screen for 10 yrs. I am very acquainted with this screen. It worked great with my DLP projector, albeit horrible native contrast, but with the Epson LS10000, this screen is just not a good match for the reasons explained above. I will say that I may have developed a certain fondness, and appreciation of the Silverstar. I wish I could keep it too, for more specific viewing, perhaps sporting events with ambient light, or maybe even 3D viewing but I sure hope the Neve works even better. I will say that there were a few scenes that I watched, then froze, & rewatched, and will say that for certain scenes & objects (running the Neve over the Silverstar, back and forth), that I gave a thumbs up to the Silverstar over the Neve. However, I cannot say that conclusively without being able to see the whole Neve screen, versus just a little patch. So take this with a grain of salt. Again, this is why I am very curious whether the Neve screen will look more like how the Silverstar looked from a wider angle, such as when the Neve brightness matched the Silverstars brightness exactly, to the point I couldn't tell the difference.


Remember that your eyes are always drawn towards the brighter image. That's why demo TV's at Best Buy and Costco are frequently set hot. The Cima will seem plenty bright on it's own.


----------



## Craig Peer

R Harkness said:


> Interesting Mike. What did you find better about the A-lens image?


I've never been willing to spend the kind of money a really good A lens costs. Cheaper lenses have just had too many compromises picture wise for my taste. Unlike Mike though, if I used an A lens in my theater, the screen would be too big. My wife would tell me it needs to go !


----------



## lancenell

Mike Garrett said:


> All around, other than brightness the Neve will provide the better image, with the exception of 3D. If you had enough brightness, the Neve would provide the better 3D image as well. Keep in mind those improvements that you see with the Neve sample will be greatly increased, when viewing a full size image on the Neve.


Thank you Mike. I think you're right that once I see the full image on the Neve that I will truly experience a significant improvement.

The latest news is that my throw is at 13' and for a 133" screen, turns out 13.04' is the absolute minimum throw distance for my PJ. If I can fit the full image in the screen, I'll get max brightness , but will miss out on better contrast . I may have to move the PJ back to about 14 1/2 or 16' back, which isn't the ideal location to avoid traffic behind the seating area. I'm also not too excited about exposing large bolt holes in the ceiling, but I'm sure I can repair them. What to do? What to do?

Boy, isn't this hobby FUN!!!


----------



## lancenell

Craig Peer said:


> Remember that your eyes are always drawn towards the brighter image. That's why demo TV's at Best Buy and Costco are frequently set hot. The Cima will seem plenty bright on it's own.


I guess I'm just the typical Costco customer Ha!! I do love Costco, but can't get out of that place without spending $100's of dollars.


----------



## Mike Garrett

lancenell said:


> I guess I'm just the typical Costco customer Ha!! I do love Costco, but can't get out of that place without spending $100's of dollars.


Hard to pass up a bulk deal, even if it will take you two years to use all of the product.


----------



## microwiz

lancenell said:


> Thank you Mike. I think you're right that once I see the full image on the Neve that I will truly experience a significant improvement.
> 
> The latest news is that my throw is at 13' and for a 133" screen, turns out 13.04' is the absolute minimum throw distance for my PJ. If I can fit the full image in the screen, I'll get max brightness , but will miss out on better contrast . I may have to move the PJ back to about 14 1/2 or 16' back, which isn't the ideal location to avoid traffic behind the seating area. I'm also not too excited about exposing large bolt holes in the ceiling, but I'm sure I can repair them. What to do? What to do?
> 
> Boy, isn't this hobby FUN!!!


My RS400 is 14ft and Zooms to a Stewart 133 Neve. I also have my DI closed all the way to -15 running on eco mode and it's perfect. I've never had an anamorphic lens but the Neve material is so good I can't really tell the difference sitting from 14 ft.

I also think having extra brightness even at the expense of contrast is a bonus because it gives you the ability to run on eco mode most of the time or boost the bright ness when you got company over for the big game.


----------



## lancenell

microwiz said:


> My RS400 is 14ft and Zooms to a Stewart 133 Neve. I also have my DI closed all the way to -15 running on eco mode and it's perfect. I've never had an anamorphic lens but the Neve material is so good I can't really tell the difference sitting from 14 ft.
> 
> I also think having extra brightness even at the expense of contrast is a bonus because it gives you the ability to run on eco mode most of the time or boost the bright ness when you got company over for the big game.


I hear, and like what you're saying. It's comforting to know that you are having a good experience with what looks to be my experience soon.  At first I thought I'd move the PJ before the new screen arrives, but now I plan to see how it looks with the PJ where it's at. If it looks good, and can operate it in ECO mode, that would be great. If I notice issues that I can't live with (sparkling, contrast too low, poor black levels, etc), I'll try moving the PJ back. I will also give 3D a weighting into my decision.


----------



## drummermitchell

*Stewart Studiotek 100*

Just got off the phone with my dealer and went and ordered the Studiotek 100
Traded in my Firehawk G3(235.1)
Totally surprised from my as he is giving me one heck of a trade in value on mine $1100 difference,plus have had it for a few yrs,so I'm quite thrilled.
The 100 will be the same size as the Firehawk OD 53 1/4"x121"
Just have to sneak it in when the wife is working and of course if she notices,it'll be too late.......
FOR ME that is.


----------



## Don Stewart

drummermitchell said:


> Just got off the phone with my dealer and went and ordered the Studiotek 100
> Traded in my Firehawk G3(235.1)
> Totally surprised from my as he is giving me one heck of a trade in value on mine $1100 difference,plus have had it for a few yrs,so I'm quite thrilled.
> The 100 will be the same size as the Firehawk OD 53 1/4"x121"
> Just have to sneak it in when the wife is working and of course if she notices,it'll be too late.......
> FOR ME that is.


Thank you for your purchase. If she notices, just tell the wife you painted the screen white. 


Edit: Helpful hint. Since the screens are the same size, probably best for your dealer to use the packing from the new screen to pack up your trade in. Screens are most vulnerable to damage during installation, removal and transit. Just sayin.


----------



## drummermitchell

Don Stewart said:


> Thank you for your purchase. If she notices, just tell the wife you painted the screen white.
> 
> 
> Edit: Helpful hint. Since the screens are the same size, probably best for your dealer to use the packing from the new screen to pack up your trade in. Screens are most vulnerable to damage during installation, removal and transit. Just sayin.


Hi Don,
Trouble is I live a 3 hr drive from his store.
When she comes in I'll mention to him and that you mentioned the swap.
Dang is it here yet.
From US to Alberta Canada(Edmonton)I imagine 3-4 weeks give or take.


----------



## Craig Peer

drummermitchell said:


> Hi Don,
> Trouble is I live a 3 hr drive from his store.
> When she comes in I'll mention to him and that you mentioned the swap.
> Dang is it here yet.
> From US to Alberta Canada(Edmonton)I imagine 3-4 weeks give or take.


Just put " The Notebook " on for your wife. If she notices the screen, say " look how great this movie I got for you looks " !


----------



## drummermitchell

Well ,well ,well,
Went to the city today to pick up a Harmony remote(backup)for my RS-600 and the Studiotek 100 235.1 will be here next week.
Stewart is fast at shipping as I only ordered her last week.
Have to tell my Imported China Doll(WIFEY)that is was a swap straight across.
Sides like Craig says she'll love the picture,least that's my excuse LOL.
She didn't know I swapped the rs-60 for the 600 as she was working and I slipped into the city.
Thank god they look identical otherwise she'd hit me again with her wok and it's a #8OUCH.


----------



## lancenell

I have decided to go with the Stewart Cima Neve 1.1 2.35 133" screen. It's being shipped as we speak, and I hope to see it this week.

One of the biggest reasons why I decided to swap out my Silverstar High Gain screen was due to sparkling artifacts. My screen was designed more for a low lumen projector and less than optimal room conditions. With the LS10000, it's just way to bright for this screen, and the sparkling artifacts in many scenes is disrupting. I think the Neve will mostly take care of this problem.

There is another issue I am also having, that I don't believe I've shared it: Dithering / Color Banding. I used to see some with my last DLP (Sim2), but I see it all the time with the Epson. I was more than surprised. It is most evident watching HD movies on Xfinity Comcast cable, which is mostly compressed 1080i from my understanding. It is not near as noticeable on BluRay, and almost none existent with the highest quality BluRays. I am speculating that a lot of the issues with dithering is due to the Silverstar screen. I was told by a Vutec Rep that said he understood that with 3D viewing, color banding could be an issue. It is in 2D viewing that it's evident. 

I'm wondering how much dithering effects are due to the screen, the PJ and/or the source material.


----------



## lancenell

So my Neve screen showed up at the Spokane warehouse last night. They called today to ask when to drop it off, tomorrow or Thursday. Tomorrow I'm having neck surgery, and won't be able to lift more than 5-10 lbs for 7-10 days, as I'm told. So I thought I'd run out to pick it up myself today, and get it installed tonight. At 135" X 10" X 10" I won't be able to fit it into my car. Dabnabit! Next Wednesday I'm having my PJ calibrated and need to get the screen installed before then. Anyone wish to help?  Just kidding. My son will come out to help me. If only it showed up 1 day earlier!! Ok, no more dwelling. Beautiful day out, huh?


----------



## Don Stewart

lancenell said:


> So my Neve screen showed up at the Spokane warehouse last night. They called today to ask when to drop it off, tomorrow or Thursday. Tomorrow I'm having neck surgery, and won't be able to lift more than 5-10 lbs for 7-10 days, as I'm told. So I thought I'd run out to pick it up myself today, and get it installed tonight. At 135" X 10" X 10" I won't be able to fit it into my car. Dabnabit! Next Wednesday I'm having my PJ calibrated and need to get the screen installed before then. Anyone wish to help?  Just kidding. My son will come out to help me. If only it showed up 1 day earlier!! Ok, no more dwelling. Beautiful day out, huh?


The shipping weight of the screen in the carton will be around 50-60 pounds exceeding your weight limit so please get some help with the screen. It is not worth risking your health for a material item. Just sayin. Also, wishing you the best with your upcoming surgery.


----------



## rboster

lancenell said:


> So my Neve screen showed up at the Spokane warehouse last night. They called today to ask when to drop it off, tomorrow or Thursday. Tomorrow I'm having neck surgery, and won't be able to lift more than 5-10 lbs for 7-10 days, as I'm told. So I thought I'd run out to pick it up myself today, and get it installed tonight. At 135" X 10" X 10" I won't be able to fit it into my car. Dabnabit! Next Wednesday I'm having my PJ calibrated and need to get the screen installed before then. Anyone wish to help?  Just kidding. My son will come out to help me. If only it showed up 1 day earlier!! Ok, no more dwelling. Beautiful day out, huh?


Ditto Don's advice. I just installed our screen. Interms of getting it into the house...you'll want a second person just because it's so damn long. As far as mounting it on the wall....I'll admit, I took it on and off the wall (prior to adding the screen material) myself. But, added a second hand when I mounted it with the material attached. 

BUT, I just didn't have neck surgery....in that case, get your son to bring a friend over and you can instruct them. They get to chose the first movie and you'll supply the pizza (and beer if of age). 

good luck with the surgery...the screen can wait


----------



## Craig Peer

lancenell said:


> So my Neve screen showed up at the Spokane warehouse last night. They called today to ask when to drop it off, tomorrow or Thursday. Tomorrow I'm having neck surgery, and won't be able to lift more than 5-10 lbs for 7-10 days, as I'm told. So I thought I'd run out to pick it up myself today, and get it installed tonight. At 135" X 10" X 10" I won't be able to fit it into my car. Dabnabit! Next Wednesday I'm having my PJ calibrated and need to get the screen installed before then. Anyone wish to help?  Just kidding. My son will come out to help me. If only it showed up 1 day earlier!! Ok, no more dwelling. Beautiful day out, huh?


At least you will have a new screen to watch movies on while you heal up. Wishing you a speedy recovery !


----------



## lancenell

Thank you all for your kind words.

The surgery went well. Phew!! I'm doing better than I had anticipated. The doctor said that I can lift more than 10 lbs, but just to be careful I don't get into any awkward positions. Except for some throat soreness, my neck feels strong and normal especially due to the Hydro's.  I'm not even remotely considering to put this screen up myself. I have a handyman friend that said he'd come out tomorrow morning to help me install it. My girlfriend will assist with a few things also. I will basically supervise the installation. 

The box is HUGE!! I will have to move all my seating against the back wall to create enough room hopefully to put this monster together. Wow! Well, not me, but my helpers.


----------



## Don Stewart

lancenell said:


> Thank you all for your kind words.
> 
> The surgery went well. Phew!! I'm doing better than I had anticipated. The doctor said that I can lift more than 10 lbs, but just to be careful I don't get into any awkward positions. Except for some throat soreness, my neck feels strong and normal especially due to the Hydro's.  I'm not even remotely considering to put this screen up myself. I have a handyman friend that said he'd come out tomorrow morning to help me install it. My girlfriend will assist with a few things also. I will basically supervise the installation.
> 
> The box is HUGE!! I will have to move all my seating against the back wall to create enough room hopefully to put this monster together. Wow! Well, not me, but my helpers.


Glad to hear your surgery went well.
One suggestion since you are supervising the install. Please have your handyman, or anyone else who will be involved, wash their hands well just prior to handling and installing the screen fabric the frame. Just sayin from s few past experiences I have had with handymen.


----------



## lancenell

Don Stewart said:


> Glad to hear your surgery went well.
> One suggestion since you are supervising the install. Please have your handyman, or anyone else who will be involved, wash their hands well just prior to handling and installing the screen fabric the frame. Just sayin from s few past experiences I have had with handymen.


Very good point!! I will be sure that everyone's hands are squeaky clean before touching the screen fabric. Thank you for reminding me!!


----------



## rboster

lancenell said:


> Very good point!! I will be sure that everyone's hands are squeaky clean before touching the screen fabric. Thank you for reminding me!!


My son and I wore rubber gloves (I dabble with my smoker and have a box of gloves when handling meat/pork etc). When I attached the material to the frame, I wore some thin runners gloves so I wouldn't get my sweat or body oil on the material or frame. Better to be safe than sorry.


----------



## lancenell

rboster said:


> My son and I wore rubber gloves (I dabble with my smoker and have a box of gloves when handling meat/pork etc). When I attached the material to the frame, I wore some thin runners gloves so I wouldn't get my sweat or body oil on the material or frame. Better to be safe than sorry.


I have some thin disposable gloves. That's a good idea!

Is there a viewable side of the fabric, or can either side be used? If there is a coating to help create the 1.1 gain, I would think one side is the front and the other the back.


----------



## rboster

lancenell said:


> I have some thin disposable gloves. That's a good idea!
> 
> Is there a viewable side of the fabric, or can either side be used? If there is a coating to help create the 1.1 gain, I would think one side is the front and the other the back.


I assume your screen material will attach via snaps? The directions that come with the screen will be very detailed, so no worries about how it all comes together.


----------



## lancenell

rboster said:


> I assume your screen material will attach via snaps? The directions that come with the screen will be very detailed, so no worries about how it all comes together.


I figured as much. Thanks.

When I received the sample Neve, I couldn't tell whether there was 1 viewable side. I couldn't tell a viewable difference between the 2 sides with such a small sample to be honest. Ha Ha! I hope the instructions are detailed because I've read other instructions before that left a lot of guesswork in between steps. I'm optimistic that putting the screen together will be straightforward, and I'm preparing myself for some achy fingers after all the fabric snaps are in place.


----------



## lancenell

I haven't unpacked the frame & screen yet. In preparation, I was thinking to attach the wall mounting hanging bar & magnetic disks to the wall, and make sure the frame fit perfectly before attaching the fabric. That way, once the screen is all put together, the fabric snapped into place, I will know exactly how to mount it to the wall. I want to avoid my second biggest fear, which is damaging the fabric while trying to mount it on the wall. I'm assuming that the frame will be secure enough without the fabric attached to do this, but if the frame wobbles and bends, then this may not be such a great idea.


----------



## rboster

lancenell said:


> I figured as much. Thanks.
> 
> When I received the sample Neve, I couldn't tell whether there was 1 viewable side. I couldn't tell a viewable difference between the 2 sides with such a small sample to be honest. Ha Ha! I hope the instructions are detailed because I've read other instructions before that left a lot of guesswork in between steps. I'm optimistic that putting the screen together will be straightforward, and I'm preparing myself for some achy fingers after all the fabric snaps are in place.


Here's the manual 

http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/Ad...-Download/Cima-Owners-Manual-Fixed-Frame-.pdf


----------



## lancenell

rboster said:


> Here's the manual
> 
> http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/Ad...-Download/Cima-Owners-Manual-Fixed-Frame-.pdf


Thank you


----------



## Craig Peer

lancenell said:


> Thank you


We want pictures of the finished screen you know !


----------



## lancenell

Craig Peer said:


> We want pictures of the finished screen you know !


Here is a picture of my new Stewart Neve 1.1 2.35 133" screen!! Thank you Craig!! It replaced my Vutec Silverstar 16:9 110" high gain screen. Just got it up on Saturday. I have a few more cosmetic items to work on, but getting there.  The screen takes up nearly the entire wall. It looks fantastic! I just got the PJ & Sound systems calibrated yesterday by Chad B. I love seeing things come together!

I'll post more about the Stewart Cima Neve 1.1 screen later.


----------



## Don Stewart

lancenell said:


> Here is a picture of my new Stewart Neve 1.1 2.35 133" screen!! Thank you Craig!! It replaced my Vutec Silverstar 16:9 110" high gain screen. Just got it up on Saturday. I have a few more cosmetic items to work on, but getting there.  The screen takes up nearly the entire wall. It looks fantastic! I just got the PJ & Sound systems calibrated yesterday by Chad B. I love seeing things come together!
> 
> I'll post more about the Stewart Cima Neve 1.1 screen later.


Boy, that looks like one comfortable home theater! The bar, the fireplace... and the overstuffed chairs. Oh....and lets not forget that new CinemaScope screen.
What more does one need? Looks great!


----------



## Craig Peer

lancenell said:


> Here is a picture of my new Stewart Neve 1.1 2.35 133" screen!! Thank you Craig!! It replaced my Vutec Silverstar 16:9 110" high gain screen. Just got it up on Saturday. I have a few more cosmetic items to work on, but getting there.  The screen takes up nearly the entire wall. It looks fantastic! I just got the PJ & Sound systems calibrated yesterday by Chad B. I love seeing things come together!
> 
> I'll post more about the Stewart Cima Neve 1.1 screen later.


Looks great ! Time for some movie watching !


----------



## DavidHir

Looks great and I can see where that black velvet would be beneficial.


----------



## lancenell

DavidHir said:


> Looks great and I can see where that black velvet would be beneficial.


Notice that the first 4 feet of the ceiling in front of the screen is covered with black velvet. I stopped at 4 feet due to the light canisters. It really helped. I just ordered 10 yards of velvet, and have plans for more room treatments. The velvet scraps that are temporarily draped over the speakers & equipment rack were a test, and make a great improvement. I will cut and fit the velvet to look better, like it's supposed to be there. I'm also on the lookout for a black (or really dark) area rug. If anyone has any ideas, shoot your ideas my way.

I just got the PJ calibrated 2 days ago. Chad B. (ISF Calibrator) came through clear out to Spokane, WA from OHIO! He spent hours on my Epson LS10000. It was his first, and he plans to post a review next week. So be on the look-out! My CR was 6,000:1, but after calibration he got it to 19,000:1 - threefold  That was a pleasant surprise. He did a fabulous job!!

It's movie time!! Time to be lazy, sit back, and Enjoy!!


----------



## DavidHir

Chad B rocks! Highly recommend to anyone reading looking for a projector cal - and he can do wonders with audio beyond the typical receiver auto cal (Audyssey, MCACC, etc.) on the receiver.


----------



## lancenell

DavidHir said:


> Chad B rocks! Highly recommend to anyone reading looking for a projector cal - and he can do wonders with audio beyond the typical receiver auto cal (Audyssey, MCACC, etc.) on the receiver.


Chad B. spent hours on the Epson. He worked on it into the late hours, partly because he wanted to thoroughly evaluate the LS10000 and present his observations in a review. After he was done, I mentioned to him that I was having difficulty getting the audio system to perform the way I had hoped. He was ready to leave after a hard day's work, but was kind enough to stay longer and work on the audio system. After he finished, he said, "You have a great audio system. Are you ready to come downstairs and hear how it sounds now?" I said, "Sure." I was curious whether it would really be THAT noticeable of an improvement. "Noticeable" is not the proper word of the transformation in audio that he was able to create. It was a Night & Day difference!! I couldn't be more excited and impressed! All I could think was "WOW!!!"

As much as I tinkered with the audio system by ear, I could never get the results I was after. It was always good & pleasing. But OMG! I had no idea what I was missing. It was like he installed a brand new audio system. The acoustics are now so immersive, spacial, tonally accurate, 3D audio, and for lack of better words, unbelievable! The room is full of dimension, sounds appearing right where they need to be in space & time, the headroom expanded, the speakers having virtually disappeared. Bass is no longer boomy, and the percussion is clean, accurate and snappy, full of energy. Voices are clear, distinguishable and easy to understand. No need for CC.  It brings a whole new realism to movie watching. With the volume up, it no longer hurts the ears, but brings the viewer into the movie experience. If you have never had your audio system calibrated, consider it!

I will add more comments about the Stewart Neve 1.1 screen later. I want to spend more time with more material before I present my observations. For now I will just say, I am thoroughly pleased that I decided to go with this new screen.


----------



## drummermitchell

Quick install of my Stewart Studiotek -100
Pict 2,older Firehawk G-3


----------



## WilliamG

I got my Studiotek 100 115" Diagonal, 16:9, Luminesse with LED kit this weekend. It's absolutely incredible. Absolutely no shimmer/sparkles, which I'm SO sensitive to. It's just amazing, and without doubt the best screen I've ever seen, cinema or otherwise. The super tiny 3/8" bezels really seal the deal. Can't imagine going back to huge borders again. 

I'm not completely done with the movie room setup, but I set things up temporarily just to test - in my bat cave (black screen wall, grey ceilings and side walls - blackout curtains to the side. It's just... yeah.... I couldn't stop gawking. The LED kit is a lot of fun.

It showed up in a crate weighing 330lbs.


----------



## Craig Peer

WilliamG said:


> I got my Studiotek 100 115" Diagonal, 16:9, Luminesse with LED kit this weekend. It's absolutely incredible. Absolutely no shimmer/sparkles, which I'm SO sensitive to. It's just amazing, and without doubt the best screen I've ever seen, cinema or otherwise. The super tiny 3/8" bezels really seal the deal. Can't imagine going back to huge borders again.
> 
> I'm not completely done with the movie room setup, but I set things up temporarily just to test - in my bat cave (black screen wall, grey ceilings and side walls - blackout curtains to the side. It's just... yeah.... I couldn't stop gawking. The LED kit is a lot of fun.
> 
> It showed up in a crate weighing 330lbs.


Nice! Studiotek 100 is the go to screen material for the cleanest image, if you hate any screen artifacts. Enjoy some movies now !


----------



## Don Stewart

WilliamG said:


> I got my Studiotek 100 115" Diagonal, 16:9, Luminesse with LED kit this weekend. It's absolutely incredible. Absolutely no shimmer/sparkles, which I'm SO sensitive to. It's just amazing, and without doubt the best screen I've ever seen, cinema or otherwise. The super tiny 3/8" bezels really seal the deal. Can't imagine going back to huge borders again.
> 
> I'm not completely done with the movie room setup, but I set things up temporarily just to test - in my bat cave (black screen wall, grey ceilings and side walls - blackout curtains to the side. It's just... yeah.... I couldn't stop gawking. The LED kit is a lot of fun.
> 
> It showed up in a crate weighing 330lbs.


Hi William,
Thanks for purchasing a Stewart Filmscreen product. Now you can watch your movies on the very same screen material that the Hollywood professionals do.
Anyway, I am happy you recognize and appreciate the image quality of your new screen. Postings like yours always makes my day.


----------



## A7mad78

Hi folks 

I would like to get ur valuable comment i have the sony vpl-520es and the throw distance is about 16 feet and i love to go with the studiotek 130 and i'd love to have ur suggest about the bigger size i can go with the 520 and not dropped the quality 

Thx


----------



## DavidHir

Don Stewart said:


> Hi William,
> Thanks for purchasing a Stewart Filmscreen product. Now you can watch your movies on the very same screen material that the Hollywood professionals do.
> Anyway, I am happy you recognize and appreciate the image quality of your new screen. Postings like yours always makes my day.


I love the ST100. I tried out the Da-lite HD Pro 0.9 and 1.1 and they are just not the same.


----------



## Don Stewart

A7mad78 said:


> Hi folks
> 
> I would like to get ur valuable comment i have the sony vpl-520es and the throw distance is about 16 feet and i love to go with the studiotek 130 and i'd love to have ur suggest about the bigger size i can go with the 520 and not dropped the quality
> 
> Thx


 Do you have a size in mind? The first check is to make sure your throw distance is at least 1.3 times new screen size width. The second is to calculate screen brightness in Foot Lamberts. Once I know the size I can calculate that for you.


----------



## A7mad78

Don Stewart said:


> Do you have a size in mind? The first check is to make sure your throw distance is at least 1.3 times new screen size width. The second is to calculate screen brightness in Foot Lamberts. Once I know the size I can calculate that for you.


Thx don,

Previously they recomand for me 125" cinemascope in cima , now i chose to go with ST 130 for the high gain and i think to go with 165" cinemascope ST 130 or 152" 

The exact throw distance is 4629 mm


----------



## Don Stewart

A7mad78 said:


> Thx don,
> 
> Previously they recomand for me 125" cinemascope in cima , now i chose to go with ST 130 for the high gain and i think to go with 165" cinemascope ST 130 or 152"
> 
> The exact throw distance is 4629 mm



Since your throw distance is 15'-2", the maximum scope screen size is 153" diagonal. (60" by 141" image size)
Your 4K Sony PJ specs are 1800 lumens. I am assuming you will be utilizing the zooming feature to switch between scope and 1.78 aspect ratios.
With the StudioTek 130 reference screen, your maximum fL's are as follows:

CinemaScope AR. Theoretical @ 1800 lumens, 30 fL. Real life estimate after calibration and lamp burn. 17 to 20 fL.
1.78 AR. Theoretical @ 1800 lumens, 52.fL. Real life estimate after calibration and lamp burn. 32 to 38 fL. 
Note: Recommend to use economy lamp mode when viewing 1.78 material in theater dark environment.
Hope that helps.


----------



## A7mad78

Don Stewart said:


> Since your throw distance is 15'-2", the maximum scope screen size is 153" diagonal. (60" by 141" image size)
> Your 4K Sony PJ specs are 1800 lumens. I am assuming you will utilizing the zooming featuring to switch between scope and 1.78 aspect ratios.
> With the StudioTek 130 reference screen, your maximum fL's are as follows:
> 
> CinemaScope AR. Theoretical @ 1800 lumens, 30 fL. Real life estimate after calibration and lamp burn. 17 to 20 fL.
> 1.78 AR. Theoretical @ 1800 lumens, 52.fL. Real life estimate after calibration and lamp burn. 32 to 38 fL.
> Note: Recommend to use economy lamp mode when viewing 1.78 material in theater dark environment.
> Hope that helps.


Thx a lot can't wait to place order


----------



## A7mad78

Don,

Just to ensure if i go with the max 153"AR the quality performance will not dropped down with 520 PJ of course with ST 130 G3 

Thx a lot for ur great comment


----------



## zenoc

Hi guys, I need your help to choose the best ST screen material for my setup: I’ve a small room, throw distance will be 2.6m (8.53ft) and I’ll go with a 92" screen (16:9 AR) using the BenQ HT3050 projector (with 1.18x zoom).

*I’m hesitating between the StudioTek 100 and StudioTek 130 G3*. It’s going to be expensive for me (the screen will need to ship overseas) so I want to make the best possible choice here.

Since I have very good dark control in the room, I was thinking the ST 100 might be the best (also because I get pretty good black level with my DLP and I thought the 1.3 gain of the ST 130 might "damage" that by making the blacks more "grey blacks"?). But then today I did a side-by-side comparaison with my 65" LED TV and the image (projected on wall) was clearly not as bright as the one on the TV and lacking pop. I'm expecting the ST screen to help making the image "pop". So now I'm leaning towards the ST 130 G3 and I say to myself maybe if gain is too much I can always use economy lamp mode, which is actually good (for noise and lamp lifetime)...

I'm in an infinite loop, any advice to help me getting out of it would be very welcome


----------



## Craig Peer

zenoc said:


> Hi guys, I need your help to choose the best ST screen material for my setup: I’ve a small room, throw distance will be 2.6m (8.53ft) and I’ll go with a 92" screen (16:9 AR) using the BenQ HT3050 projector (with 1.18x zoom).
> 
> *I’m hesitating between the StudioTek 100 and StudioTek 130 G3*. It’s going to be expensive for me (the screen will need to ship overseas) so I want to make the best possible choice here.
> 
> Since I have very good dark control in the room, I was thinking the ST 100 might be the best (also because I get pretty good black level with my DLP and I thought the 1.3 gain of the ST 130 might "damage" that by making the blacks more "grey blacks"?). But then today I did a side-by-side comparaison with my 65" LED TV and the image (projected on wall) was clearly not as bright as the one on the TV and lacking pop. I'm expecting the ST screen to help making the image "pop". So now I'm leaning towards the ST 130 G3 and I say to myself maybe if gain is too much I can always use economy lamp mode, which is actually good (for noise and lamp lifetime)...
> 
> I'm in an infinite loop, any advice to help me getting out of it would be very welcome


The ST 130 G3 does add some " pop " in my experience ( watched " Bridge of Spies " on mine last night in fact ). And you should be able to use low lamp. You should get a sample of each one to compare yourself. Are you in the US, or currently overseas ?


----------



## zenoc

Craig Peer said:


> You should get a sample of each one to compare yourself. Are you in the US, or currently overseas ?


Yeah getting samples would be really useful
but I'm overseas...


----------



## Runnjacket

Would love some advise. Just discovered Stewart screens and am leaning towards purchasing one

I have a dedicated theater room painted gray walls and ceilings

I do have a lot of sports memorabilia in it so several reflective surfaces 

I'm using an Epson 5030 and love advise on what screen material to use. I'm really looking for sharp picture with good contrast and the closest I can get to 4K look with the Epson. Most of the time lights will be at least dimmed but will mainly be watching football a and movies along with whatever my little ones want

Thanks for the help


----------



## Don Stewart

zenoc said:


> Hi guys, I need your help to choose the best ST screen material for my setup: I’ve a small room, throw distance will be 2.6m (8.53ft) and I’ll go with a 92" screen (16:9 AR) using the BenQ HT3050 projector (with 1.18x zoom).
> 
> *I’m hesitating between the StudioTek 100 and StudioTek 130 G3*. It’s going to be expensive for me (the screen will need to ship overseas) so I want to make the best possible choice here.
> 
> Since I have very good dark control in the room, I was thinking the ST 100 might be the best (also because I get pretty good black level with my DLP and I thought the 1.3 gain of the ST 130 might "damage" that by making the blacks more "grey blacks"?). But then today I did a side-by-side comparaison with my 65" LED TV and the image (projected on wall) was clearly not as bright as the one on the TV and lacking pop. I'm expecting the ST screen to help making the image "pop". So now I'm leaning towards the ST 130 G3 and I say to myself maybe if gain is too much I can always use economy lamp mode, which is actually good (for noise and lamp lifetime)...
> 
> I'm in an infinite loop, any advice to help me getting out of it would be very welcome


Hi Zenoc.

First of all, it is not a true test to compare a projected image on the wall with a back lighted flat screen. Your 65 inch LED is putting out well over 60fL and most viewers would find that uncomfortable to view over the duration of a full length movie in a theater dark room. 
Your requested screens size is relatively small, 92"D by 80'W by 45"H for a total of 25 square feet of viewing surface. Your PJ has a factory spec of 2,000 lumens. Your PJ also has a relative short throw of 102-1/2". With StudioTek 130, we recommends a minimum TD of 1.3 times screen width, 104", so your set up is right near the cusp of that requirement. You did not state what the viewing distance will be, but I am assuming you will be fairly close to the screen based on the info you supplied above. With that said, my recommendation would be Studiotek 100. The screen is smooth and no surface texture can be observed even at close viewing distances. As far as screen brightness here are the theoretical numbers for StudioTek 100 and your PJ.
Lamp on full power at 2000 factor spec lumens = 80fL. Real life estimate after calibration and lamp burn. 42 to 55 fL
Recommend the lamp be on economy mode. (based on lamp output of 50%) Real life estimate of 21 to 27 fL.
As a benchmark, please note that high quality flagship theaters and Hollywood studio screening rooms run in the neighborhood of 16fL.
With your set up, screen brightness should not be an issue. Hope that helps.


----------



## zenoc

Thanks so much for the answer Don. Very useful for my final decision!


----------



## Mike Garrett

Runnjacket said:


> Would love some advise. Just discovered Stewart screens and am leaning towards purchasing one
> 
> I have a dedicated theater room painted gray walls and ceilings
> 
> I do have a lot of sports memorabilia in it so several reflective surfaces
> 
> I'm using an Epson 5030 and love advise on what screen material to use. I'm really looking for sharp picture with good contrast and the closest I can get to 4K look with the Epson. Most of the time lights will be at least dimmed but will mainly be watching football a and movies along with whatever my little ones want
> 
> Thanks for the help


What size are you wanting?
What viewing distance?
What throw range do you have to work with?


----------



## Runnjacket

Mike Garrett said:


> Runnjacket said:
> 
> 
> 
> Would love some advise. Just discovered Stewart screens and am leaning towards purchasing one
> 
> I have a dedicated theater room painted gray walls and ceilings
> 
> I do have a lot of sports memorabilia in it so several reflective surfaces
> 
> I'm using an Epson 5030 and love advise on what screen material to use. I'm really looking for sharp picture with good contrast and the closest I can get to 4K look with the Epson. Most of the time lights will be at least dimmed but will mainly be watching football a and movies along with whatever my little ones want
> 
> Thanks for the help
> 
> 
> 
> What size are you wanting?
> What viewing distance?
> What throw range do you have to work with?
Click to expand...

I'm not 100% sure on size - leaning somewhere between 100-110

Front row seats are around 13 feet - back row around 16 feet

I think the projector will be set up around 14 feet back ceiling mount. It should be within range for the Epson 5030


----------



## Mike Garrett

Runnjacket said:


> I'm not 100% sure on size - leaning somewhere between 100-110
> 
> Front row seats are around 13 feet - back row around 16 feet
> 
> I think the projector will be set up around 14 feet back ceiling mount. It should be within range for the Epson 5030


I would go with a larger screen. A 110" is not large for 13' viewing and will seem on the small side for 16' viewing. Also what kind of seating are you planning on using, because 3' difference in first to second row viewing is too small. If your first row viewing is 13', then the back of the seat is probably 14'. If you had a 1' deep bar top, then you might be able to have second row viewing at 16'. That is assuming the first row of seats do not recline. If using reclining seats in both rows, usually you have 7' distance from first row viewing to second row viewing.


----------



## Runnjacket

Mike Garrett said:


> Runnjacket said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not 100% sure on size - leaning somewhere between 100-110
> 
> Front row seats are around 13 feet - back row around 16 feet
> 
> I think the projector will be set up around 14 feet back ceiling mount. It should be within range for the Epson 5030
> 
> 
> 
> I would go with a larger screen. A 110" is not large for 13' viewing and will seem on the small side for 16' viewing. Also what kind of seating are you planning on using, because 3' difference in first to second row viewing is too small. If your first row viewing is 13', then the back of the seat is probably 14'. If you had a 1' deep bar top, then you might be able to have second row viewing at 16'. That is assuming the first row of seats do not recline. If using reclining seats in both rows, usually you have 7' distance from first row viewing to second row viewing.
Click to expand...

The room is a bit funky - back of room has a couch that is about 16ft back and then there is a recliner up and to the left that can be moved around but right now was planning on it at about 13 ft - so not really two rows - unfortunately I'm limited in width so can't go to big because the room is long and fairly narrow


----------



## abid33063

Hi Guys
I am building a new theater in my new house. Currently I have a pioneer fpj1 projector with panamorph uh480 lens projecting on a vutec silverstar 128 inch 2.35:1 screen setup in my current house. I want to go bigger. I want to get 148 inch 2.35:1 curved Stewart screen with studiotek 130. Room is 20 feet long so I can mount the projector far enough to get that size image. Not sure if my projector is strong enough to handle such a large screen.

Any suggeestions are welcome.


----------



## markymiles

Just bagged myself a used Firehawk G3 screen and extremely impressed. Couple of questions. It has a couple of marks I assume this simple green cleaner is still the best stuff to use, I have some on order. There seems to be different suggested dilutions which one is recommended for use with the screen? I have some distilled water as well.

Secondly would appreciate help with adjusting the drop. The bottom drop needs to come up a fair bit. Just wondered if anyone had any picks of which hole, what to use, which direction etc to adjust the drop. Better still if there was a PDF available somewhere?

Thanks


----------



## Don Stewart

markymiles said:


> Just bagged myself a used Firehawk G3 screen and extremely impressed. Couple of questions. It has a couple of marks I assume this simple green cleaner is still the best stuff to use, I have some on order. There seems to be different suggested dilutions which one is recommended for use with the screen? I have some distilled water as well.
> 
> Secondly would appreciate help with adjusting the drop. The bottom drop needs to come up a fair bit. Just wondered if anyone had any picks of which hole, what to use, which direction etc to adjust the drop. Better still if there was a PDF available somewhere?
> 
> Thanks


I am not sure which roller screen housing model you have but the "Model A" is our most popular so I will direct you to our website link for PDF owners manuals.
Model-A-Owners-Manual.pdf. 
You will find how to adjust the motor limit switches starting on page 12. If you do not want the screen to drop out of the case is much then you want to adjust the Down limit switch. Have the screen fully extended as you make the adjustments. The factory recommends not to exceed more than 3 inches of adjustment as the screen lay flat characteristics may change. 
Hope that helps.


----------



## Mike Garrett

Runnjacket said:


> The room is a bit funky - back of room has a couch that is about 16ft back and then there is a recliner up and to the left that can be moved around but right now was planning on it at about 13 ft - so not really two rows - unfortunately I'm limited in width so can't go to big because the room is long and fairly narrow


Would an AT screen help with screen size?


----------



## Mike Garrett

abid33063 said:


> Hi Guys
> I am building a new theater in my new house. Currently I have a pioneer fpj1 projector with panamorph uh480 lens projecting on a vutec silverstar 128 inch 2.35:1 screen setup in my current house. I want to go bigger. I want to get 148 inch 2.35:1 curved Stewart screen with studiotek 130. Room is 20 feet long so I can mount the projector far enough to get that size image. Not sure if my projector is strong enough to handle such a large screen.
> 
> Any suggeestions are welcome.


If you are talking width, your projector is not bright enough for that size screen. If talking diagonal and you go with UltraMatte 150, then you would get around 18FL. That is adequate, but not good brightness. You would not have real long lamp life, but it would do for a while, until you upgrade to a brighter projector. Since you are using a JVC clone, I would take a look at the RS500. It would double your current brightness. Would even allow you to go with ST130 and still close the manual iris down, for increased contrast. If we can help you, give us a call.


----------



## markymiles

Don Stewart said:


> I am not sure which roller screen housing model you have but the "Model A" is our most popular so I will direct you to our website link for PDF owners manuals.
> Model-A-Owners-Manual.pdf.
> You will find how to adjust the motor limit switches starting on page 12. If you do not want the screen to drop out of the case is much then you want to adjust the Down limit switch. Have the screen fully extended as you make the adjustments. The factory recommends not to exceed more than 3 inches of adjustment as the screen lay flat characteristics may change.
> Hope that helps.


Thanks all done, nice and easy.

Great to have a bright enough picture on Eco lamp on my epson at last.


----------



## Runnjacket

Mike Garrett said:


> Runnjacket said:
> 
> 
> 
> The room is a bit funky - back of room has a couch that is about 16ft back and then there is a recliner up and to the left that can be moved around but right now was planning on it at about 13 ft - so not really two rows - unfortunately I'm limited in width so can't go to big because the room is long and fairly narrow
> 
> 
> 
> Would an AT screen help with screen size?
Click to expand...

I apologize for my ignorance but what's an AT screen?

I think I found my answer - acoustic transparent? If so I don't think I will go that route - I'm going to mount speakers on slanted ceiling above the screen so I do have the full wall and plan on going close to as large as I can with the width constraints

Just not sure which screen material I want with my room - would prefer bright dynamic colors similar to 4K but have some concern with reflective surfaces (several pictures and posters in the room)


----------



## Craig Peer

Runnjacket said:


> I apologize for my ignorance but what's an AT screen?
> 
> I think I found my answer - acoustic transparent? If so I don't think I will go that route - I'm going to mount speakers on slanted ceiling above the screen so I do have the full wall and plan on going close to as large as I can with the width constraints
> 
> Just not sure which screen material I want with my room - would prefer bright dynamic colors similar to 4K but have some concern with reflective surfaces (several pictures and posters in the room)


Using a screen with a little gain, like a StudioTek 130 G3 or Cima Neve, will help, as long as those pictures are on the side walls and not on a back wall, directly opposite the screen.


----------



## Mike Garrett

Runnjacket said:


> I apologize for my ignorance but what's an AT screen?
> 
> I think I found my answer - acoustic transparent? If so I don't think I will go that route - I'm going to mount speakers on slanted ceiling above the screen so I do have the full wall and plan on going close to as large as I can with the width constraints
> 
> Just not sure which screen material I want with my room - would prefer bright dynamic colors similar to 4K but have some concern with reflective surfaces (several pictures and posters in the room)


A picture of your screen wall, no flash, would help.


----------



## markymiles

Tried the simple green cleaner on the little mark on my Firehawk G3 screen. Unfortunately it hasn't gone. I think therefore it isn't something on the surface to remove rather something has rubbed off the surface slightly.


Just wondering, I take it there's no touch up paint available? Disappointed wasn't able to see the screen in use until I purchased it. It wasn't noticeable on inspection. It shows up when there is bright white on the screen. It's only tiny but you know what it's like you end up looking for it when watching


----------



## Craig Peer

markymiles said:


> Tried the simple green cleaner on the little mark on my Firehawk G3 screen. Unfortunately it hasn't gone. I think therefore it isn't something on the surface to remove rather something has rubbed off the surface slightly.
> 
> 
> Just wondering, I take it there's no touch up paint available? Disappointed wasn't able to see the screen in use until I purchased it. It wasn't noticeable on inspection. It shows up when there is bright white on the screen. It's only tiny but you know what it's like you end up looking for it when watching


Probably the optical coating is damaged there. Sorry.


----------



## BBMM79

Guys I know this is a great screen but am I paying to much for it?

123' Luxus Deluxe Screen Microperf StudioTek 130 G3 $6282.00

Thanks!


----------



## Mike Garrett

BBMM79 said:


> Guys I know this is a great screen but am I paying to much for it?
> 
> 123' Luxus Deluxe Screen Microperf StudioTek 130 G3 $6282.00
> 
> Thanks!


You did not provide all the information on your screen, as in frame type and aspect ratio. I sent you a PM.


----------



## Ellebob

That is the retail price for that screen.


----------



## BBMM79

Ellebob said:


> That is the retail price for that screen.


Thank you


----------



## grant0830

What Stewart screen would you suggest for the RS400 in a room 15'x 15' (13' viewing distance) with some ambient light?


----------



## Mike Garrett

grant0830 said:


> What Stewart screen would you suggest for the RS400 in a room 15'x 15' (13' viewing distance) with some ambient light?


Probably FireHawk, but need to know size and a picture of the room would help. The FireHawk requires around a 1.5 minimum throw distance to avoid hotspots. You could also consider a GrayHawk. If we can help you, give us a call.


----------



## Basa14

Mike Garrett said:


> Probably FireHawk, but need to know size and a picture of the room would help. The FireHawk requires around a 1.5 minimum throw distance to avoid hotspots. You could also consider a GrayHawk. If we can help you, give us a call.


I have a Tela 80 AT screen with a RS500 PJ. I'm thinking about getting 3D glasses. Does anyone know if the Tela 80 screen material retains polarization?

Thank you,

Basa14


----------



## thrang

In looking at the Wall Snapper (1.5" frame), the only documentation I can find for mounting indicates, what appears to me, to be a very odd and difficult system - four metal plates with slotted wholes attached to the rear of the frame, two top and two bottom, that you're supposed to slide over four protruding wall screws that you pre-aligned.

Now, for a 12.5 foot wide 2.35 screen, how are you supposed to align four widely spaced slotted plates, which you can't even see given that fact that they are hidden behind the constructed screen, and further, be certain one false move might not cause a protruding screw head to damage the screen from behind?

Am I missing something? Is there an easier way? Can one all use the standard bar cleat at the top of the frame to hang it?

thanks


----------



## Don Stewart

Basa14 said:


> I have a Tela 80 AT screen with a RS500 PJ. I'm thinking about getting 3D glasses. Does anyone know if the Tela 80 screen material retains polarization?
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> Basa14



This material will not designed to hold polarization for passive 3D. Of course it will do active 3D.


----------



## Don Stewart

thrang said:


> In looking at the Wall Snapper (1.5" frame), the only documentation I can find for mounting indicates, what appears to me, to be a very odd and difficult system - four metal plates with slotted wholes attached to the rear of the frame, two top and two bottom, that you're supposed to slide over four protruding wall screws that you pre-aligned.
> 
> Now, for a 12.5 foot wide 2.35 screen, how are you supposed to align four widely spaced slotted plates, which you can't even see given that fact that they are hidden behind the constructed screen, and further, be certain one false move might not cause a protruding screw head to damage the screen from behind?
> 
> *Am I missing something?* Is there an easier way? Can one all use the standard bar cleat at the top of the frame to hang it?
> 
> thanks


It sounds like you have a very old used screen and frame there. And yes, you are missing some wall mounting parts, the wall bracket spreader bars, that screen frame was original shipped with. Click on link then click on downloads icon. Open SN PDF owners manual. Start on page 4 for installation instructions. You will also see the parts you are missing. You may be able to fabricate new spreader bars out of wood 1x3's if you are somewhat handy.
http://stewartfilmscreen.com/applic.../basic-wallscreen-(snapper)-for-commercial-av


----------



## thrang

Don Stewart said:


> It sounds like you have a very old used screen and frame there. Also, you are missing some wall mounting parts, the wall bracket spreader bars, that screen frame was original shipped with. Click on link then click on downloads icon. Open SN PDF owners manual. Start on page 4 for installation instructions.
> http://stewartfilmscreen.com/applic.../basic-wallscreen-(snapper)-for-commercial-av


Thanks, but the snapper frame seems to be described starting on page 11. Site and product names are somewhat confusing...what's AT 1.5 vs the Luxus Snapper with a 1.5" frame

And the page you linked to is not exactly the same as this, accessible from the huge drop down menu:

http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/standard-products/basic-stewart-wallscreen-(snapper)

Finally, does the snapper also ship with a typical wall cleat bar, or is that only the larger deluxe frames?

Thanks


----------



## Don Stewart

thrang said:


> Thanks, but the snapper frame seems to be described starting on page 11. Site and product names are somewhat confusing...what's AT 1.5 vs the Luxus Snapper with a 1.5" frame
> 
> And the page you linked to is not exactly the same as this, accessible from the huge drop down menu:
> 
> http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/standard-products/basic-stewart-wallscreen-(snapper)
> 
> Finally, does the snapper also ship with a typical wall cleat bar, or is that only the larger deluxe frames?
> 
> Thanks


Over the years, we have manufactured hundreds of thousands of screens and frames, many of them custom one offs that were built specifically to a customer's specifications. Perhaps your screen is one of those. Without pictures or SN, I am kind of shooting in the dark.


----------



## thrang

Don Stewart said:


> Over the years, we have manufactured hundreds of thousands of screens and frames, many of them custom one offs that were built specifically to a customer's specifications. Perhaps your screen is one of those. Without pictures or SN, I am kind of shooting in the dark.


I don't own the screen, I'm looking perhaps at buying new...


----------



## Don Stewart

thrang said:


> I don't own the screen, I'm looking perhaps at buying new...


Sorry for the confusion. See figure 4 on page four. 
Also note that you align and mount the bare frame, no screen, with frame attached wall brackets to the wall first. Then you remove the frame leaving the wall brackets attached to the wall. Then attach the screen to the frame. Now you reattach the frame and screen to the already mounted wall brackets.
Hope that helps.


----------



## thrang

Don Stewart said:


> Sorry for the confusion. See figure 4 on page four.
> Also note that you align and mount the bare frame, no screen, with frame attached wall brackets to the wall first. Then you remove the frame leaving the wall brackets attached to the wall. Then attach the screen to the frame. Now you reattach the frame and screen to the already mounted wall brackets.
> Hope that helps.


But what is the snapper description on page 11 with those four tab brackets? I don't understand what the different is- how do I know what to ask for?

And can I use the standard horizontal cleat style bracket for either if these screens?

I'm more confused than before


----------



## Mike Garrett

Don Stewart said:


> Sorry for the confusion. See figure 4 on page four.
> *Also note that you align and mount the bare frame, no screen*, with frame attached wall brackets to the wall first. Then you remove the frame leaving the wall brackets attached to the wall. Then attach the screen to the frame. Now you reattach the frame and screen to the already mounted wall brackets.
> Hope that helps.


That is what Thrang is missing in the instructions. That way, you have everything lining up.


----------



## Mike Garrett

thrang said:


> But what is the snapper description on page 11 with those four tab brackets? I don't understand what the different is- how do I know what to ask for?
> 
> And can I use the standard horizontal cleat style bracket for either if these screens?
> 
> I'm more confused than before


Those are mounting systems for three different screens. No you can't use a cleat mounting system.


----------



## Don Stewart

thrang said:


> But what is the snapper description on page 11 with those four tab brackets? I don't understand what the different is- how do I know what to ask for?
> 
> And can I use the standard horizontal cleat style bracket for either if these screens?
> 
> I'm more confused than before


Please note that these instructions are for the many different variations of this screen frame. Page 11 is for a screen warp-around style were the screen warps around the outside edge of the frame and gives a border-less look to the screen

May I suggest you call AVS, give them your desired screen size and they can get made to order shop drawings from Stewart with dimensions and details for the particular screen you had in mind.


----------



## kronz757

*Grey or White?*

I purchased an Optoma HD26 DLP projector (3200 lumens 25,000 to 1 contrast ratio). I'm going to buy a 100" screen but I don't know if a grey screen or white screen is best for this room (see attached). The black-backed screen would be mounted above the window and cover it when in use. I would use it mostly in late afternoons and at night. Any recommendations? 

Thanks!
-Jay


----------



## jrod9707

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Jrod,
> After reviewing your photos and other technical information above I can not in good conscience recommend any white screen for your theater. Your room finishing colors are very light plus walls and windows are fairly close to screen position. Even when viewing movies at night in a darkened room you will have a considerable amount of cross reflection between walls, ceiling, floor carpets and screen. If this room was for myself, I would go with a gray screen that brings some ALR values to your project.. My first choice would be FireHawk, but the FH requires a bare minimum throw distance of 1.6 times screen width to assure decent white field uniformity, (minimum hot spotting) and you don't have that distance available. My second choice would be a GrayHawk 90, a less aggressive lighter gray ALR screen material but requires only a minimum TD of 1.3 times screen width. Currently, with our Cima screen line, we have not been happy with our last two manufacturing runs of the Cima Tiburon gray screens. The material failed our optical QC specifications and the runs were scrapped. So to fill current Cima orders for Tiburon, we have been upgrading the customer to our premium Stewart GrayHawk screen material at no extra charge. The GrayHawk has higher gain and also has a darker ND Gray value than the Tiburon which gives it superior ALR properties. (See gray value chart attached). As far as screen size goes, I just want to state that the 100 inch size will net you near 20% more brightness than the 110" screen. Also, if you elect to go with the 100" screen size, it would increase you throw distance ratio to over 1.5 which will add better white field uniformity to your image fidelity.
> 
> Hope that helps.


I wanted to follow up with Don's advice as I bought the Grayhawk to go with my room and it works very good. Heres some pictures that were shot using the Sony 40ES at 930 am with the sun coming directly through the window into the day room(FYI I do have solar shields on the windows0- which are black screens that have smaller holes than a regular screen).
I wanted to do this for people that were in the same boat as me who arent sure if they can pull off a projector. All I can say is projectors have come a long ways from just a few years ago. My wife was very impressed by how great the picture looks. She absolutely hates the idea of me getting a projector. Thank god my daughter was stoked about how great the 3d is and how great it looks 
Anyway I'm very happy as a lot of audio stores were pushing screen innovations and to me the Stewart just had that authentic film look and it was also "line free". I had an elite screen years ago and it was very sparklee and I could see lines in it. Hell, my sanded and white painted Behr wall produced a better image. So in my experience I can tell the difference between a cheap screen and what you get when you pay more for a quality one. 
So anyway here's some pictures to help those deciding on what may work for them.
Thanks for shooting me straight Don Stewart!!


----------



## dsumo

Hi All,

I have a 127" wide x 82" tall wall where i plan to install a Acoustically Transparent screen. The projector (Epson 5030) can be mounted between 12- 15 feet (i have enough room). 
I searched the forums and the stewart website but its not easy to search for a AT screen.

Can anyone provide insight into what type of stewart screens they have used and where they purchased it from? thanks
(I am open to other screens as well)

thanks


----------



## Ellebob

You can get most of the Stewart materials perforated. So look at the material that best suits your situation and they can make it perforated. Their perforation process is expensive and is quite a bit more than their non-perforated version. The perforated screensloseabout10% brightness over the non-perforated version. They have the Perforado under the Cima series. They also make a woven screen material, he Tela80. It was initially only available on the lace and grommet screens and not commonly used in homes.


----------



## anaththeanswer89

Anyone seen a stewart dealer with any memorial day discounts? The cheapest I have seen is HTmarket with their 10% coupon. I am hoping to order one this weekend.


----------



## rboster

anaththeanswer89 said:


> Anyone seen a stewart dealer with any memorial day discounts? The cheapest I have seen is HTmarket with their 10% coupon. I am hoping to order one this weekend.


if you haven't called Mike or Craig from AVS, I would do so. When I was in the market recently for a screen, AVS was the most competitive dealer...but it was the follow up after the sale that was important too. I've been a repeat customer over the last 15 plus years. 

Ron

Don: Love the Stewart Cima screen. I've been playing some 4k material using the Samsung 8500 matched with the JVC RS500 (not a true 4k projector, but accepts 4k signals etc). Love the image on the screen.


----------



## anaththeanswer89

rboster said:


> if you haven't called Mike or Craig from AVS, I would do so. When I was in the market recently for a screen, AVS was the most competitive dealer...but it was the follow up after the sale that was important too. I've been a repeat customer over the last 15 plus years.


Yea i called them yesterday and left a voicemail. I think they are only open over the weekdays?


----------



## rboster

anaththeanswer89 said:


> Yea i called them yesterday and left a voicemail. I think they are only open over the weekdays?


They are both very active on the forum as well. I would send them a PM through their AVS account. You'll get a quick response back.


----------



## Mike Garrett

anaththeanswer89 said:


> Anyone seen a stewart dealer with any memorial day discounts? The cheapest I have seen is HTmarket with their 10% coupon. I am hoping to order one this weekend.


Called and left you a message.


----------



## Mike Garrett

Joining the Stewart family. I am replacing my old HP screen with a 127" diag. 16:9 Luxus Model A Electriscreen with FireHawk material.


----------



## WilliamG

Wanted to give an update on my movie room (for reference - Studiotek ST100 LuminEsse 115" diagonal with LED kit) now that I've been able to properly use it for 15-20 hours.

In terms of picture quality, it can't be overstated just how good the ST100 is. It's a very "neutral" image with my Sony HW50ES projector. No added pop or contrast. It's extremely neutral. Some might prefer pictures with artificially enhanced color and pizzaz, but for me - this feels very "true." 

The StudioTek ST100 basically REQUIRES a bat cave. I feel like you're wasting your time, and there are "better" screens to go with if you're not pretty much 100% light-controlled. If you have light control? The ST100 is sensational.

I have to circle back to the no-shimmer part. I cannot overstate how much I DESPISE shimmer/sparkle/whatever-you-wanna-call it. It makes me insane. All screens that have shimmer/sparkle should be burned on a pyre. Yep, I feel that strongly. The ST100 has no shimmer, no sparkle. It's the smoothest image I've seen, and each time I sit down to watch a movie I just grin. 

I personally don't love the LED kit. If I do use it, it's at the lowest brightness setting to bring about some light bias, but you really don't need it in a bat cave. There's no denying the coolness factor, though... I included some pictures at the highest brightness setting. I can't imagine anyone using that setting because it does negatively impact the image contrast due to light splash, hah! It's certainly a cute novelty, though not cheap. Perhaps in a much larger room without side-splash potential, it could be more useful. I leave it off most of the time.

Overall, it can't be overstated how good the Studiotek ST100 is. I feel like the LuminEsse is the ultimate way to own Studiotek material, since it's fully assembled, with a tiny 3/8" bezel. Especially with the LED kit on low, it does feel like a huge floating flat screen TV on the wall, more-so with the LED kit wire hidden (or just buy the LuminEsse without the LED kit, of course!). I also can't overstate the bezel size really contributing to a very modern feel. It's just excellent (and requires you to dial your projector's geometry in very accurately!). 

(And actually, to expand on the geometry "issue" - if you're using a regular shelf for your projector, this small bezel will be tricky to work with. Projectors usually have two adjustable feet - one on either side of the lens end of the device. Usually the back has no adjustments. This makes things tricky. I never got my projector dialed in "perfectly" using a projector on a shelf in my previous house. I'm using a Chief RPMAU mount on the ceiling, now, which makes geometry SO. DARN. EASY. But this is something to bear in mind if you're a shelf user. It will be hard. With a capital H.)

Note: I kept the screen crate in the garage, because quite honestly I've no idea how we'd ever move without it. The crate itself weighs about 270lbs, if I recall correctly!

Bottom line: If you can afford it, have a bat cave, recognize a "pure" image when you see it, hatehatehate sparklies - this is your screen. If there's something better out there, I'd be amazed. 

----------------------------------------------------------

A little about the build:

This was a VERY difficult build, because the room is very small - really "cozy," and the amount of light from the three sizable windows proved a bit of a challenge. So, lots of light, and not much room to work with. I also already had a bunch of equipment (speakers, subwoofer etc) and it was just my wife and I doing it. It was a new house when we bought it in January, with a small office room 14' deep, and 10'6" wide. For reference, I attached a picture of what the the room looked like before we movie-fied it. Working with what we had, I think it turned out as well as I could have hoped.

First step was to paint the floors and ceiling, - grey for the walls and ceiling, and essentially black for the wall the screen went on. The light fixture had to go, replaced with a black track of spotlights, and the smoke detector was replaced with a Nest - in black! For controlling of the lights, a Harmony Elite works great, coupled with a black light switch with dimming, - Lutron Caseta. 

For the large array of windows on one side, and pocket doors on the other (see picture), we mounted tracks and put up burgundy light-blocking curtains. They feel very authentic in terms of movie-room feel, and were absolutely necessary given the amount of light that could leak in from those windows. With the curtains closed, you can't see your hand in front of your face. Perfect for the ST100 screen!

To finish the build, all cabling was routed in walls using a PowerBridge set and under the wall trim where necessary. Oh, and a huge, dark rug on the floor in front of the seats, of course!

The seats are motorized, and just fit in the room - two seats on each end and a love seat in the middle. All with cup holders, modular tray tables and wine-glass holders! Because the seats are about up against the back wall, the rear channels were mounted to the side, about ear height when standing up. When I add Atmos to my setup, it will be upward facing channels sitting on top of the front L and R speakers. 

Also, right at the end, I decided I was too annoyed that the power cable for the LED package on the ST100 was dangling down, reflecting off the dark glass of the cabinet, so my wife and I donned a pair of surgical gloves, removed the screen, cut holes in the drywall, inserted another PowerBridge, re-mounted the screen. Ah, much better. No visible cables or reflections on the smokey glass makes me happy. Of course, the pictures were taken before I sat down, sighed, and ripped apart the room again to hide the screen cable.


----------



## Don Stewart

Thank you for your accurate evaluation of StudioTek 100. And like you state, the screen is engineered and manufactured for professional viewing room environments where ambient light is not an issue. Because of the screen's true neutrality, you are now viewing your images as film professionals do. This is the exact same material that the major movie studios use in their small to medium viewing rooms to evaluate their own work. Wishing you many years of enjoyment with your new screen.


----------



## DavidHir

WilliamG said:


> I have to circle back to the no-shimmer part. I cannot overstate how much I DESPISE shimmer/sparkle/whatever-you-wanna-call it. It makes me insane. All screens that have shimmer/sparkle should be burned on a pyre. Yep, I feel that strongly. The ST100 has no shimmer, no sparkle. It's the smoothest image I've seen, and each time I sit down to watch a movie I just grin.


I feel the same way about shimmer.  I had tried out two other non Stewart screens before getting the ST100 and have been very pleased.


----------



## WilliamG

DavidHir said:


> I feel the same way about shimmer.  I had tried out two other non Stewart screens before getting the ST100 and have been very pleased.


That looks awesome. 

I will say, if I had to point out any downside, is that I miss my AT Seymour Enlightor 4K screen in terms of sound imaging. Don't get me wrong - I prefer the image from the ST100 (I could see the weave in the Seymour 4K material 13 feet away), but in terms of sound imaging, it's a tough thing to achieve with a solid screen and a speaker below the screen pointing up (as you appear to have, and how I'm doing things, too). No question, I preferred having my center channel behind the screen, in the middle of the image. 

There's always some tradeoff! Naturally, I'm probably the only one who'd notice this because it's very slight. It can be unfortunate to be so sensitive about things!


----------



## DavidHir

WilliamG said:


> That looks awesome.
> 
> I will say, if I had to point out any downside, is that I miss my AT Seymour Enlightor 4K screen in terms of sound imaging. Don't get me wrong - I prefer the image from the ST100 (I could see the weave in the Seymour 4K material 13 feet away), but in terms of sound imaging, it's a tough thing to achieve with a solid screen and a speaker below the screen pointing up (as you appear to have, and how I'm doing things, too). No question, I preferred having my center channel behind the screen, in the middle of the image.
> 
> There's always some tradeoff! Naturally, I'm probably the only one who'd notice this because it's very slight. It can be unfortunate to be so sensitive about things!



Thanks and that's true about home theater it seems - there are compromises; some of which are acceptable and some which are not. I can imagine losing the AT effect and how audio could sound with a solid screen by comparison of what you're used to. For myself, I am a bit more of a "video" guy vs audio. I'm also used to having my center channel either below the screen (as I have now) or before going front projection when I had my center channel mounted on a wall above and behind my flat panel. But I will say the audio is excellent; I had my Denon X3000 receiver cal'd by Chad B who used the Audyssey Pro ability (much better than regular auto cal Audyssey) and measured with REW - it greatly improved the audio and I highly recommend such a calibration if you haven't done so already.


----------



## WilliamG

DavidHir said:


> Thanks and that's true about home theater it seems - there are compromises; some of which are acceptable and some which are not. I can imagine losing the AT effect and how audio could sound with a solid screen by comparison of what you're used to. For myself, I am a bit more of a "video" guy vs audio. I'm also used to having my center channel either below the screen (as I have now) or before going front projection when I had my center channel mounted on a wall above and behind my flat panel. But I will say the audio is excellent; I had my Denon X3000 receiver cal'd by Chad B who used the Audyssey Pro ability (much better than regular auto cal Audyssey) and measured with REW - it greatly improved the audio and I highly recommend such a calibration if you haven't done so already.


Good info. I know some of the Yamaha receivers can be calibrated with a "height" adjustment, too, to make it sound like the audio is emanating from a higher position than it actually is. My Denon certainly doesn't have that, which sucks a bit.


----------



## Mike Garrett

WilliamG said:


> That looks awesome.
> 
> I will say, if I had to point out any downside, is that I miss my AT Seymour Enlightor 4K screen in terms of sound imaging. Don't get me wrong - I prefer the image from the ST100 (I could see the weave in the Seymour 4K material 13 feet away), but in terms of sound imaging, it's a tough thing to achieve with a solid screen and a speaker below the screen pointing up (as you appear to have, and how I'm doing things, too). No question, I preferred having my center channel behind the screen, in the middle of the image.
> 
> There's always some tradeoff! Naturally, I'm probably the only one who'd notice this because it's very slight. It can be unfortunate to be so sensitive about things!


Does not matter at what dollar point we are discussing, the word compromise always comes up. To get the speakers placed exactly where they belong, requires an AT screen. Using an AT screen does compromise the video. Not using an AT screen compromises the audio. You have to pick your poison.  I have an AT screen in one room and a solid screen in my second room. To get the size screen I wanted in the dedicated room required me to use an AT screen, since a solid screen would not have left enough room for good speaker placement.


----------



## WilliamG

Mike Garrett said:


> Does not matter at what dollar point we are discussing, the word compromise always comes up. To get the speakers placed exactly where they belong, requires an AT screen. Using an AT screen does compromise the video. Not using an AT screen compromises the audio. You have to pick your poison.  I have an AT screen in one room and a solid screen in my second room. To get the size screen I wanted in the dedicated room required me to use an AT screen, since a solid screen would not have left enough room for good speaker placement.


You speaks truth! My room is not perfect, that's for sure. I'd prefer the center channel higher (behind the screen!), I'd prefer my FL and FR speakers able to toe in more etc etc. Just the way it goes. I'm still pretty happy with how things ended up, though.


----------



## R Harkness

WilliamG said:


> Wanted to give an update on my movie room (for reference - Studiotek ST100 LuminEsse 115" diagonal with LED kit) now that I've been able to properly use it for 15-20 hours.
> 
> In terms of picture quality, it can't be overstated just how good the ST100 is. It's a very "neutral" image with my Sony HW50ES projector. No added pop or contrast. It's extremely neutral. Some might prefer pictures with artificially enhanced color and pizzaz, but for me - this feels very "true."
> 
> The StudioTek ST100 basically REQUIRES a bat cave. I feel like you're wasting your time, and there are "better" screens to go with if you're not pretty much 100% light-controlled. If you have light control? The ST100 is sensational.
> 
> I have to circle back to the no-shimmer part. I cannot overstate how much I DESPISE shimmer/sparkle/whatever-you-wanna-call it. It makes me insane. All screens that have shimmer/sparkle should be burned on a pyre. Yep, I feel that strongly. The ST100 has no shimmer, no sparkle. It's the smoothest image I've seen, and each time I sit down to watch a movie I just grin.


Thanks for the feedback on your ST100 screen.

I own the ST-130 and have been "stalking" the ST100 for quite a while. I have always wanted the smoothest screen structure I could get. Now that I have the significantly brighter JVC projector the ST100 became more viable. But new issues arise: the added brightness has been nice for 3D and I'd lose some of that going from the 1.3 gain of the ST130 to the 1.0 gain ST100. Also UHD HDR images require higher brightness than standard blu-ray, so I have to think of that. Plus, switching screen material is a real pain in my set up - no to mention expensive. 

So I haven't pulled the trigger. Maybe some day, because I am definitely someone who would appreciate the type of image smoothness the ST100 brings.


----------



## WilliamG

R Harkness said:


> Thanks for the feedback on your ST100 screen.
> 
> I own the ST-130 and have been "stalking" the ST100 for quite a while. I have always wanted the smoothest screen structure I could get. Now that I have the significantly brighter JVC projector the ST100 became more viable. But new issues arise: the added brightness has been nice for 3D and I'd lose some of that going from the 1.3 gain of the ST130 to the 1.0 gain ST100. Also UHD HDR images require higher brightness than standard blu-ray, so I have to think of that. Plus, switching screen material is a real pain in my set up - no to mention expensive.
> 
> So I haven't pulled the trigger. Maybe some day, because I am definitely someone who would appreciate the type of image smoothness the ST100 brings.


I haven't used the ST130. Does it exhibit any shimmer or other artifacts that you notice to make you want to switch? Or is there some other reason it's in your mind?


----------



## R Harkness

WilliamG said:


> I haven't used the ST130. Does it exhibit any shimmer or other artifacts that you notice to make you want to switch? Or is there some other reason it's in your mind?


It has a slight shimmer, usually not noticeable, but visible occasionally on large, solid bright areas (the classic being certain sky shots, and snow). It's subtle, but I'm sensitive enough to notice it here and there.

I bought the ST130 because, especially with my previous projectors I needed that extra bit of gain and the ST130 was the best compromise I could find in terms of a bit of gain with minimal hot-spotting and grain.
It's a fantastic screen for these purposes.


----------



## WilliamG

R Harkness said:


> It has a slight shimmer, usually not noticeable, but visible occasionally on large, solid bright areas (the classic being certain sky shots, and snow). It's subtle, but I'm sensitive enough to notice it here and there.
> 
> I bought the ST130 because, especially with my previous projectors I needed that extra bit of gain and the ST130 was the best compromise I could find in terms of a bit of gain with minimal hot-spotting and grain.
> It's a fantastic screen for these purposes.


That's about what I figured. Well, it sounds like it will be a trade-off in some ways if the brightness is a concern. 

I get plenty of brightness on Eco mode on my Sony HW50ES at about 13 feet from lens to 115" 16:9 ST100. I haven't measured the FL, but I know High lamp is too many in 2D. It hurts my eyes in High, and even on low it's quite bright in the man cave. For 3D I find there's never enough brightness, but then again 3D is a rarity in terms of usage. I just don't love the flicker and motion from active 3D.


----------



## Craig Peer

R Harkness said:


> Thanks for the feedback on your ST100 screen.
> 
> I own the ST-130 and have been "stalking" the ST100 for quite a while. I have always wanted the smoothest screen structure I could get. Now that I have the significantly brighter JVC projector the ST100 became more viable. But new issues arise: the added brightness has been nice for 3D and I'd lose some of that going from the 1.3 gain of the ST130 to the 1.0 gain ST100. Also UHD HDR images require higher brightness than standard blu-ray, so I have to think of that. Plus, switching screen material is a real pain in my set up - no to mention expensive.
> 
> So I haven't pulled the trigger. Maybe some day, because I am definitely someone who would appreciate the type of image smoothness the ST100 brings.


It is a trade off. JVC had their RS600 on a ST100 at CES, and a ST130 G3 at Cedia. One of the JVC guys at CES said he preferred the StudioTek 130, and I agreed. I just like the added brightness. It also means you can run in low lamp longer, and with the JVC, close the iris down further too. And have a larger screen !


----------



## WilliamG

Craig Peer said:


> It is a trade off. JVC had their RS600 on a ST100 at CES, and a ST130 G3 at Cedia. One of the JVC guys at CES said he preferred the StudioTek 130, and I agreed. I just like the added brightness. It also means you can run in low lamp longer, and with the JVC, close the iris down further too. And have a larger screen !


Yep it just depends on what you want. For me, the shimmeries/sparklies are like death. Before I got the ST100, I demoed a few screens with my go-to movie for this test - Oblivion. Lots of bright, harsh scenes. Some screens I demoed were literally (to me) unwatchable due to distraction. The sparklies were out. of. control.

E.g. I demoed a SI Zero Edge with.. I believe 1.3 gain, and a Stewart Firehawk 1.1. Both were completely unusable. The sparkles destroyed my enjoyment. I'm glad my wife is appalled by them, too, because at least we can both be insane together.  Now, ironically enough, the gentleman in the boutique store we demoed these screens with was barely bothered by the sparkles, but did, at least, notice when we pointed them out. "HOW DO YOU NOT NOTICE?!," I wanted to yell at him! 

But that sums it up. We're all susceptible to different things. I bought the ST100 sight unseen because I was promised (by people sensitive to sparkles) that it would be the smoothest image out there. And yep, it is. Never seen anything like it, and people whom I've demoed it to just gape at how good the image it is, - people with HT setups of their own far beyond in size and scope to my little movie room, - but, critically, without the ST100.

Of course, like you say, you give up some brightness to the ST130. For me, though, brightness is not a concern (I run in low lamp and it's more than bright enough - I recognize this won't be possible depending on the size screen, for others - though likely only an issue with massive movie room spaces given how good PJs are these days with brightness). But the other bottom line: You can always get a brighter projector/new lamp. But with a higher gain screen the sparkles will always be there, though, no matter the brightness or projector. And, for me at least, that's not acceptable.


----------



## Craig Peer

WilliamG said:


> Yep it just depends on what you want. For me, the shimmeries/sparklies are like death. Before I got the ST100, I demoed a few screens with my go-to movie for this test - Oblivion. Lots of bright, harsh scenes. Some screens I demoed were literally (to me) unwatchable due to distraction. The sparklies were out. of. control.
> 
> E.g. I demoed a SI Zero Edge with.. I believe 1.3 gain, and a Stewart Firehawk 1.1. Both were completely unusable. The sparkles destroyed my enjoyment. I'm glad my wife is appalled by them, too, because at least we can both be insane together.  Now, ironically enough, the gentleman in the boutique store we demoed these screens with was barely bothered by the sparkles, but did, at least, notice when we pointed them out. "HOW DO YOU NOT NOTICE?!," I wanted to yell at him!
> 
> But that sums it up. We're all susceptible to different things. I bought the ST100 sight unseen because I was promised (by people sensitive to sparkles) that it would be the smoothest image out there. And yep, it is. Never seen anything like it, and people whom I've demoed it to just gape at how good the image it is, - people with HT setups of their own far beyond in size and scope to my little movie room, - but, critically, without the ST100.
> 
> Of course, like you say, you give up some brightness to the ST130. For me, though, brightness is not a concern (I run in low lamp and it's more than bright enough - I recognize this won't be possible depending on the size screen, for others - though likely only an issue with massive movie room spaces given how good PJs are these days with brightness). But the other bottom line: You can always get a brighter projector/new lamp. But with a higher gain screen the sparkles will always be there, though, no matter the brightness or projector. And, for me at least, that's not acceptable.


This is why I always encourage people to get screen samples and test them prior to making a final decision.


----------



## WilliamG

Craig Peer said:


> This is why I always encourage people to get screen samples and test them prior to making a final decision.


No kidding.

I did get a screen sample of ST100, actually, but wasn't able to demo movies like I did the others. I did shine a flashlight on the ST100 sample, though.  No sparkles. 

I forgot to mention, this, though, in the interest of full disclosure: I thought the unbelievable smell was just unlucky with my ST100 sample. But nope... I'd say my movie room was smelly for about a month after I got my screen. ST100 absolutely STINKS! It's REALLY bad!


----------



## DavidHir

WilliamG said:


> No kidding.
> 
> I did get a screen sample of ST100, actually, but wasn't able to demo movies like I did the others. I did shine a flashlight on the ST100 sample, though.  No sparkles.
> 
> I forgot to mention, this, though, in the interest of full disclosure: I thought the unbelievable smell was just unlucky with my ST100 sample. But nope... I'd say my movie room was smelly for about a month after I got my screen. ST100 absolutely STINKS! It's REALLY bad!


It smells like roses compared to the Da-lite HD Pros.


----------



## WilliamG

DavidHir said:


> It smells like roses compared to the Da-lite HD Pros.


Well given how many years I lost off my life with the ST100, the Da-Lite HD Pros must be REALLY bad!


----------



## DavidHir

I actually called Da-lite about it as I was concerned. It was that bad. I mean it smelled like a toxic chemical. They told me it was all natural and would fade.


----------



## WilliamG

DavidHir said:


> I actually called Da-lite about it as I was concerned. It was that bad. I mean it smelled like a toxic chemical. They told me it was all natural and would fade.


Wow that's craziness. I likely would have done the same if my sample hadn't smelled exactly like the final product in my house. Crazy... I'm just glad the smell finally dissipated, because otherwise I'd have been very unhappy!


----------



## DavidHir

WilliamG said:


> Wow that's craziness. I likely would have done the same if my sample hadn't smelled exactly like the final product in my house. Crazy... I'm just glad the smell finally dissipated, because otherwise I'd have been very unhappy!


It even caused me a headache and a couple of people who came into the room immediately asked what that smell was.


----------



## WilliamG

DavidHir said:


> It even caused me a headache and a couple of people who came into the room immediately asked what that smell was.


Good grief! Well, maybe for the next screen, they can perfume it or something to hide the cancer-chemicals, - I mean... uh... production smell.


----------



## Craig Peer

WilliamG said:


> Wow that's craziness. I likely would have done the same if my sample hadn't smelled exactly like the final product in my house. Crazy... I'm just glad the smell finally dissipated, because otherwise I'd have been very unhappy!


New screen smell is like new car smell - the smell of money well spent !


----------



## WilliamG

R Harkness said:


> It has a slight shimmer, usually not noticeable, but visible occasionally on large, solid bright areas (the classic being certain sky shots, and snow). It's subtle, but I'm sensitive enough to notice it here and there.
> 
> I bought the ST130 because, especially with my previous projectors I needed that extra bit of gain and the ST130 was the best compromise I could find in terms of a bit of gain with minimal hot-spotting and grain.
> It's a fantastic screen for these purposes.


FYI, I thought I had posted this but apparently hadn't. 

This review was important in my decision to go with the ST100. It's clear the reviewer is sensitive to sparkles, and so this sold me 100%.

http://www.soundandvision.com/content/stewart-filmscreen-studiotek-100-screen#OBTqKJUsyYl0KpSV.97


----------



## Craig Peer

WilliamG said:


> FYI, I thought I had posted this but apparently hadn't.
> 
> This review was important in my decision to go with the ST100. It's clear the reviewer is sensitive to sparkles, and so this sold me 100%.
> 
> http://www.soundandvision.com/content/stewart-filmscreen-studiotek-100-screen#OBTqKJUsyYl0KpSV.97


It's a great screen material, if you have your room optimized for it, and have a bright projector !


----------



## WilliamG

Craig Peer said:


> It's a great screen material, if you have your room optimized for it, and have a bright projector !


I have a Sony HW50ES.


----------



## R Harkness

WilliamG said:


> FYI, I thought I had posted this but apparently hadn't.
> 
> This review was important in my decision to go with the ST100. It's clear the reviewer is sensitive to sparkles, and so this sold me 100%.
> 
> http://www.soundandvision.com/content/stewart-filmscreen-studiotek-100-screen#OBTqKJUsyYl0KpSV.97


Yes that review has tortured me for quite a while.


----------



## R Harkness

Craig Peer said:


> It is a trade off. JVC had their RS600 on a ST100 at CES, and a ST130 G3 at Cedia. One of the JVC guys at CES said he preferred the StudioTek 130, and I agreed. I just like the added brightness. It also means you can run in low lamp longer, and with the JVC, close the iris down further too. And have a larger screen !


I missed that post. Thanks for that info. Very interesting.

When I compared the ST130 with Carada's very smooth Brilliant White and Cinema White screen materials, there was just a certain "something" about the ST-130 material that brought things to life. I presume much or most of it was due to the slightly brighter picture.


----------



## WilliamG

R Harkness said:


> Yes that review has tortured me for quite a while.


I certainly don't mean to torture you! Worth saving your pennies for, but if the sparkles only occasionally bother you, maybe it's not worth it.


----------



## DavidHir

I have not seen a sample, but I think the Neve 1.1 might be a great compromise. I've heard it's basically the ST130 but with less coating. A little less bright, but a little less sparkle. Of course, the sizes are not customizable so that can be an issue for some people.

As I have written before, I am *very* sensitive to screen sparkle and the ST130 would probably be a little too distracting for me based on the sample I have, but surely fine for 99.9% of people. Fortunately, I don't like a very bright image and I view in a dedicated theater room which is Rosco painted/carpeted black with Protostar so the ST100 works perfect for me with my RS4810.


----------



## Craig Peer

R Harkness said:


> I missed that post. Thanks for that info. Very interesting.
> 
> When I compared the ST130 with Carada's very smooth Brilliant White and Cinema White screen materials, there was just a certain "something" about the ST-130 material that brought things to life. I presume much or most of it was due to the slightly brighter picture.


When you start trying to use consumer home theater projectors on 180" diagonal screens, something has to give. The ST100 looked dull to me at CES, compared to the same size ST130 G3 screen at Cedia. I like a bright picture. You also have to figure in that you are throwing away 20% + of your light when watching 2.35:1. So, it really depends on screen size and how bright your projector is. And just how often you want to change lamps. I'm more unhappy with less than 16 foot lamberts than I am with the occasional visible sheen in the very brightest portions of the picture. Now, if someone comes out with a long life laser projector that has multiple lamp power settings from 1000 lumens to 5000 lumens ( calibrated ) with JVC level contrast, I'll switch to the ST100 !  If I can afford that projector.  In the mean time, the ST130 G3 fits the bill.


----------



## DavidHir

I think in the long term, eventual affordable very high lumens laser projectors will definitely change the course of screen selection for many.


----------



## WilliamG

DavidHir said:


> I think in the long term, eventual affordable very high lumens laser projectors will definitely change the course of screen selection for many.


Absolutely. I will say that I'm going to think most people aren't dealing with 180" screens. For those people with "normal" screen sizes, a light-controlled room and an ~1800 lumen projector will probably be just fine for an ST100. Heck, as I mentioned earlier in the thread, I run my Sony HW50ES on low lamp to the 115" ST100. High lamp is blinding.

Some people really like a really bright image, though, or love 3D movies. For them, the decision gets harder. And it's not easy to demo stuff like this in comparable environments, if at all.


----------



## DavidHir

WilliamG said:


> Absolutely. I will say that I'm going to think most people aren't dealing with 180" screens. For those people with "normal" screen sizes, a light-controlled room and an ~1800 lumen projector will probably be just fine for an ST100. Heck, as I mentioned earlier in the thread, I run my Sony HW50ES on low lamp to the 115" ST100. High lamp is blinding.
> 
> Some people really like a really bright image, though, or love 3D movies. For them, the decision gets harder. And it's not easy to demo stuff like this in comparable environments, if at all.


Several years down the road when I eventually move, I plan on going to a much larger screen. I've got a 9 foot wide scope screen today and would like to go something like 12-15 feet wide in my next home and dedicated room. It will just depend on much large the room will be. I'm in a fairly small dedicated room today. However, given my preferences and given how projectors are getting brighter, I'm confident I'll be able to stick to a unity gain screen.


----------



## R Harkness

DavidHir said:


> I think in the long term, eventual affordable very high lumens laser projectors will definitely change the course of screen selection for many.


It seems to me much brighter laser projectors could be useful in different approaches. One is obviously
going with larger screen sizes.

The other is the one that, to me, seems to hold the most promise of increasing projector image quality
(under more conditions). That is using very high brightness, high contrast projectors, with dark screen
materials (without optical coating boost). I think this has the greatest chance of producing and preserving a high sense of contrast, and not restricted to "bat cave" environments. If we really get to projectors that can do huge simultaneous contrast with a bright image, it seems to me any image wash out will become even more critical to combat in order to realize those promises on a projector screen. Which is why I've always imagined a very bright laser projector on a darker screen substrate.


----------



## Craig Peer

R Harkness said:


> It seems to me much brighter laser projectors could be useful in different approaches. One is obviously
> going with larger screen sizes.
> 
> The other is the one that, to me, seems to hold the most promise of increasing projector image quality
> (under more conditions). That is using very high brightness, high contrast projectors, with dark screen
> materials (without optical coating boost). I think this has the greatest chance of producing and preserving a high sense of contrast, and not restricted to "bat cave" environments. If we really get to projectors that can do huge simultaneous contrast with a bright image, it seems to me any image wash out will become even more critical to combat in order to realize those promises on a projector screen. Which is why I've always imagined a very bright laser projector on a darker screen substrate.


I want it on my StudioTek 130 ! Imagine a laser 4K JVC with twice the lumens we have now, and a manual iris that goes to -20 !   Imagine 25 foot lamberts and 250,000:1 native contrast ! I'll take that and keep my ST 130 G3 thanks! 

A person can dream anyway !

Prometheus last night on my 128" diagonal ST 130 G3 looked spectacular, at 18 - 20 foot lamberts and the manual iris at -7 with my RS600. Star Wars: The Force Awakens looked incredible the night before too.


----------



## Mike Garrett

R Harkness said:


> It seems to me much brighter laser projectors could be useful in different approaches. One is obviously
> going with larger screen sizes.
> 
> The other is the one that, to me, seems to hold the most promise of increasing projector image quality
> (under more conditions). That is using very high brightness, high contrast projectors, with dark screen
> materials (without optical coating boost). I think this has the greatest chance of producing and preserving a high sense of contrast, and not restricted to "bat cave" environments. If we really get to projectors that can do huge simultaneous contrast with a bright image, it seems to me any image wash out will become even more critical to combat in order to realize those promises on a projector screen. Which is why I've always imagined a very bright laser projector on a darker screen substrate.


Yes, I could see the advantage in that. In my family room setup, I had a 106" diagonal 16:9, 2.8 gain HP screen. I know have a 127" diagonal 1.3 gain FireHawk. Since this room has lots of natural light, I have a TV for daytime viewing and projector at night. But I have noticed the FireHawk does provide a watchable image during the day for bright content such as sports. Never could do that with the HP screen, even though I was getting around 53FL with the HP screen and only 23FL with the FireHawk. The dark substrate of the FireHawk makes that much difference. This is with an RS45. If I had something that was putting out 3,000+ calibrated lumens, I am sure the picture would be quite good.


----------



## Mojito

I need an advice to select a screen material for my setup. I decided to go with a quality screen, so Stewart is on the top of my list. I am planning to install JVC 7000 projector at just under 11' from the screen. The maximum screen size I can get is 109' and since I need a retractable screen I'm limited to Model A.
I have a white celling and light grey walls and a big window on the side. I'm planning to use thick curtains and watch PJ at nights, so light shouldn't be an issue. However it's not going to be a complete darkness. Below the screen there will be a stand with glossy surface (about 20" high), the center speaker will sit on the top of the stand and it also have a shiny black surface on the top. 
There will be a TV mounted on the wall and the screen will be mounted behind the top edge of the opening so that when it extracts, it will cover the TV. 
Due to screen size and throw distance I cannot use Firehawk material (the 1.6 throw to width ratio) and I wouldn't like to reduce the size of the screen.
What other choices can be considered taking account the distances and the viewing environment? I attach some phone pics of my room. Please ignore the chaos, we are in a process of moving in ).


----------



## DaveN

I have a VPL-VW1000ES and I will be moving to new theater. Currently I have a 110" ST130 and I am thinking about moving to ST100 133". 

What do I need to use to stop reflections from the walls/ceiling. Fabric or paint? What colors are acceptable or must I use black?


----------



## Mike Garrett

DaveN said:


> I have a VPL-VW1000ES and I will be moving to new theater. Currently I have a 110" ST130 and I am thinking about moving to ST100 133".
> 
> What do I need to use to stop reflections from the walls/ceiling. Fabric or paint? What colors are acceptable or must I use black?


Fabric can do a better job than paint. You need dark, non reflective material. Does not have to be black. Paint also works reasonably well. You want low sheen paint with a low reflectance value.


----------



## Craig Peer

DaveN said:


> I have a VPL-VW1000ES and I will be moving to new theater. Currently I have a 110" ST130 and I am thinking about moving to ST100 133".
> 
> What do I need to use to stop reflections from the walls/ceiling. Fabric or paint? What colors are acceptable or must I use black?


Dark grays work well. Visit a Sherwin Williams store - they have color pallets of complimentary gray's. I used very dark gray on the ceiling and back wall, a slightly lighter shade on the side walls, a lighter still shade on the hall leading to the theater, black on the front ( screen ) wall, and dark red velvet curtains. And black carpeting. Looks like a theater, not a water boarding facility or dungeon. Lot's of things you can do to cut reflections - 










I have to crank up all the lights and use the flash to take pictures - the grays look much darker in person !


----------



## DavidHir

DaveN said:


> I have a VPL-VW1000ES and I will be moving to new theater. Currently I have a 110" ST130 and I am thinking about moving to ST100 133".
> 
> What do I need to use to stop reflections from the walls/ceiling. Fabric or paint? What colors are acceptable or must I use black?


The blacker and non-reflective, the better. I would take a look at the Rosco paints as they are incredibly flat and soak in light like you wouldn't believe. They are used in commercial production settings. My painter of 20 years said he never saw anything like it before - I used the Rosco black velour in my room, but if you don't want to go that dark, you can go with a darker grey as mentioned. But even the black I have is like a very dark grey when it dries. You can do the room in paint, but put Protostar or Velvet around the screen or on any adjacent sidewalls. I did this is my room with the Protostar as you can see. I also made a window panel from Styrofoam covering it in Duvetyne you can see on the left side of the attached image. I could have used velvet instead, but this did a good enough job and matched the paint a little better.


----------



## Mike Garrett

Mojito said:


> I need an advice to select a screen material for my setup. I decided to go with a quality screen, so Stewart is on the top of my list. I am planning to install JVC 7000 projector at just under 11' from the screen. The maximum screen size I can get is 109' and since I need a retractable screen I'm limited to Model A.
> I have a white celling and light grey walls and a big window on the side. I'm planning to use thick curtains and watch PJ at nights, so light shouldn't be an issue. However it's not going to be a complete darkness. Below the screen there will be a stand with glossy surface (about 20" high), the center speaker will sit on the top of the stand and it also have a shiny black surface on the top.
> There will be a TV mounted on the wall and the screen will be mounted behind the top edge of the opening so that when it extracts, it will cover the TV.
> Due to screen size and throw distance I cannot use Firehawk material (the 1.6 throw to width ratio) and I wouldn't like to reduce the size of the screen.
> What other choices can be considered taking account the distances and the viewing environment? I attach some phone pics of my room. Please ignore the chaos, we are in a process of moving in ).


Look at GrayHawk.


----------



## Mojito

Mike Garrett said:


> Look at GrayHawk.


Thanks.
After reading this thread I got an impreesion that this material is not very popular. Is there a reason for that?


----------



## GetGray

Mojito said:


> Thanks.
> After reading this thread I got an impreesion that this material is not very popular. Is there a reason for that?


I would advise against a Grayhawk in that environment. That material washes easily has no directionality and will do poorly with any ambient or light wall reflections.


----------



## Mike Garrett

GetGray said:


> I would advise against a Grayhawk in that environment. That material washes easily has no directionality and will do poorly with any ambient or light wall reflections.


His throw is too short for most of the ALR screens and GrayHawk would be a much better choice than a white screen. Per Stewart: " Superior performance in environments with ambient light"
http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/screen-materials/flexible-front-projection/grayhawk%C2%AE


----------



## gulliBELL

Mojito said:


> Thanks.
> After reading this thread I got an impreesion that this material is not very popular. Is there a reason for that?


My screen fabric is GrayHawk. In a light controlled room it's my screen fabric of choice.


----------



## Mojito

With grayhawk I'm put off by the statement that it is "designed to maximize the performance of today’s 1080p technology" while I'm looking to build the theater with a view for 4K content and equipment. Also, it's gain chart doesn't look too impressive already at 30 degrees. 
What about ST100/130?


----------



## Ted99

Shelf or Ceiling mount? My eyeballs are 20" below screen center. My PJ is on a shelf mount with the lens 1" above screen center. I'm planning to go to an Ultramatte 130 screen. Past research has said that a ceiling mount is better because the angle of reflection of a PJ above the center of a screen gives a brighter picture to eyes an equal angle below the center of the screen. Is this true for a material such as Ultramatte 130 with a more or less uniform dispersion?


----------



## Ted99

Please, what are the pros and cons of a curved screen at a TR of 1.35? Are the Pros/cons different if one is looking at 1.85 vs. 2.39?


----------



## Mike Garrett

Mojito said:


> With grayhawk I'm put off by the statement that it is "designed to maximize the performance of today’s 1080p technology" while I'm looking to build the theater with a view for 4K content and equipment. Also, it's gain chart doesn't look too impressive already at 30 degrees.
> What about ST100/130?


GrayHawk has no problem fully resolving 4K. ST100 will wash out a lot worse and ST130 will also wash out, but not near as bad as ST100.


----------



## Mike Garrett

Ted99 said:


> Please, what are the pros and cons of a curved screen at a TR of 1.35? Are the Pros/cons different if one is looking at 1.85 vs. 2.39?


Are you using an A-lens? If not you will have barrel distortion. If using an A-lens with something like ST130, then you are very close to the minimum throw.


----------



## Ted99

Mike Garrett said:


> Are you using an A-lens? If not you will have barrel distortion. If using an A-lens with something like ST130, then you are very close to the minimum throw.


Thanks, Mike.
No A lens
1. This is the opposite of what I thought to be true. I thought that a curved screen (no A lens) would reduce barrel distortion at my short TR. So, I should go to flat? Currently, with my interim Sony PJ, I can't see any barrel distortion with the grid projected on to the curved screen.

2. I'm changing to Ultramatte 130 from a generic, no coating, matte white 1.0 because I want a little gain to help HDR when I upgrade to the JVC RS500. I presume I'm still at the minimum throw for the JVC and no A lens?


----------



## Craig Peer

Ted99 said:


> Thanks, Mike.
> No A lens
> 1. This is the opposite of what I thought to be true. I thought that a curved screen (no A lens) would reduce barrel distortion at my short TR. So, I should go to flat? Currently, with my interim Sony PJ, I can't see any barrel distortion with the grid projected on to the curved screen.
> 
> 2. I'm changing to Ultramatte 130 from a generic, no coating, matte white 1.0 because I want a little gain to help HDR when I upgrade to the JVC RS500. I presume I'm still at the minimum throw for the JVC and no A lens?


I use a StudioTek 130 G3 with my JVC RS600, and Sony VW600, and my previous Sim Lumis. I'm nearly at minimum throw distance. A flat screen works fine. Email us your throw distance and desired screen size, and we can help you make sure it will work ( your seating distance is useful too ).


----------



## Ted99

^^^ Thanks. I'm at a TR of 1.35 with eyeballs at 8' 6", and curved screen seems to be working in my situation. If I can find a PJ with performance as good as the RS 500 with a shorter TR, I had planned to put up a flat screen 59" tall and 138" wide and put up velvet panels for 16:9 width of 105", with zoom for scope against a velvet covered front wall. Short throw PJ's being in the minority, I'll probably give up on this.


----------



## Mike Garrett

Ted99 said:


> ^^^ Thanks. I'm at a TR of 1.35 with eyeballs at 8' 6", and curved screen seems to be working in my situation. If I can find a PJ with performance as good as the RS 500 with a shorter TR, I had planned to put up a flat screen 59" tall and 138" wide and put up velvet panels for 16:9 width of 105", with zoom for scope against a velvet covered front wall. Short throw PJ's being in the minority, I'll probably give up on this.


As I said, you are very close to the minimum (TR 1.3 min.) for ST130 or UltraMatte 130. If you do not use an A-lens, you definitely want to stick with a flat screen.


----------



## Ted99

^^^ Yes, I accept what you say and will act accordingly.


----------



## LJG

I am having an issue with Stewart 4 way masking, the vertical panels got jammed and are at maximum extension on roller which is 3 appx 3 feet too long. I need to decrease the mask extension by 3 feet. I have tried the directions in the Stewart manual with no success. Any ideas on how to reduce the extension?


----------



## Kain

How far do you need to sit from the StudioTek 100 to avoid being able to see the perforation holes? I'm told it's harder to see the perforation holes on unity gain screens than high gain screens. Is this true?


----------



## Mike Garrett

Kain said:


> How far do you need to sit from the StudioTek 100 to avoid being able to see the perforation holes? I'm told it's harder to see the perforation holes on unity gain screens than high gain screens. Is this true?


11' to 12'.


----------



## Kain

Mike Garrett said:


> 11' to 12'.


Thanks.

However is it true that perforation holes are less noticeable on unity gain (1.0 gain) screens as there is less contrast between the dark holes and the screen itself (or something along those lines)?


----------



## Don Stewart

Hi All,
Getting ready to leave for the airport on my way to CEDIA. If you are attending the show please drop by our booth, (#4108) so we can chat.


----------



## GetGray

Don Stewart said:


> Hi All,
> Getting ready to leave for the airport on my way to CEDIA. If you are attending the show please drop by our booth, (#4108) so we can chat.


Me too. Looking forward to seeing the new material. See you there.


----------



## Mike Garrett

HALR looked really good. So good that Stewart was shooting some black and white material and the image looked great. Black and White is a torture test for an ALR screen. HALR passed with flying colors. Would like to change my fabric out to it.


----------



## Kain

Will someone be able to provide me with an estimated price of the StudioTek 100 screen with the 12 ft wide VistaScope masking system?

Secondly, any other Stewart AT screen recommendations for a 4K UHD laser projector with a 12 ft wide screen or is the StudioTek 100 the most recommended one?


----------



## Mike Garrett

Kain said:


> *Will someone be able to provide me with an estimated price of the StudioTek 100 screen with the 12 ft wide VistaScope masking system?*
> 
> Secondly, any other Stewart AT screen recommendations for a 4K UHD laser projector with a 12 ft wide screen or is the StudioTek 100 the most recommended one?


Sure, give us a call.


----------



## Mojito

I have a few questions on motorized screens:
1. What is the difference between model A LX and A LX Classic? They are under the same category, but I couldn't find the description of each one of them. After reading the manuals I noted that classic model has a different case design and curved sides. Without knowing the differences I is difficult to choose the right model for me.
2. I need the screen to be attached to the wall and I need about 7-8 inch clearance between the wall and screen surface (the screen will cover TV mounted on the wall). In order to acheive that I asked for reversed roll. However, according to the dealer, this will result in turing the case around (i.e. the mounting brackets would end up on the front of the case) and in order to fix the screen correctly some new "doctor brackets" will need to be supplied. This mounting option and 12V trigger increased the price of the screen by more than 1000$, which is very strange. I know that SI offers revers or standard roll with front or opposite projection in any combination without any change in price. Are Stewart screens less flexible in this respect?


----------



## wse

Craig Peer said:


> Dark grays work well. Visit a Sherwin Williams store - they have color pallets of complimentary gray's. I used very dark gray on the ceiling and back wall, a slightly lighter shade on the side walls, a lighter still shade on the hall leading to the theater, black on the front ( screen ) wall, and dark red velvet curtains. And black carpeting. Looks like a theater, not a water boarding facility or dungeon. Lot's of things you can do to cut reflections -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have to crank up all the lights and use the flash to take pictures - the grays look much darker in person !


Cool I used SW 9178 In the Navy for the walls and ceiling http://www.sherwin-williams.com/hom...6244-naval/#/9178/?s=coordinatingColors&p=PS0

I am putting Black Velvet on the front wall


----------



## wse

Mike Garrett said:


> HALR looked really good. So good that Stewart was shooting some black and white material and the image looked great. Black and White is a torture test for an ALR screen. HALR passed with flying colors. Would like to change my fabric out to it.


That sound great I have a Stewart Film Screen can I change the screen material?


----------



## Mike Garrett

wse said:


> That sound great I have a Stewart Film Screen can I change the screen material?


Yes, but not available until around January.


----------



## Don Stewart

Mojito said:


> I have a few questions on motorized screens:
> 1. What is the difference between model A LX and A LX Classic? They are under the same category, but I couldn't find the description of each one of them. After reading the manuals I noted that classic model has a different case design and curved sides. Without knowing the differences I is difficult to choose the right model for me.
> 2. I need the screen to be attached to the wall and I need about 7-8 inch clearance between the wall and screen surface (the screen will cover TV mounted on the wall). In order to acheive that I asked for reversed roll. However, according to the dealer, this will result in turing the case around (i.e. the mounting brackets would end up on the front of the case) and in order to fix the screen correctly some new "doctor brackets" will need to be supplied. This mounting option and 12V trigger increased the price of the screen by more than 1000$, which is very strange. I know that SI offers revers or standard roll with front or opposite projection in any combination without any change in price. Are Stewart screens less flexible in this respect?


The difference between the LX and LX Classic is screen housing size. The LX can accommodate screens up to 135" diagonal and the LX Classic can accommodate larger screens up to 165" diagonal. We prefer not to reverse roll screens unless there is no other option. When a screen is reversed rolled, then the very bottom of the screen's viewing side exposed to collect dust at the 12:00 position when screen is in the rolled up position and can damage viewing surface over time. You did not mention if your screen is going to be installed above or below the ceiling. If the screen is going to be installed below the ceiling and the the housing can be viewed, we make a designer roller model called the Cabaret. It is also available with extension brackets that allow for spacing when screen material is to be positioned in front of a flat panel TV. See link. As for pricing, I noticed that you live in Russia. The options that you mention are less than half of that here in the US. I do know that overseas prices go up quite a bit when additional parties are involved such as distributors. Those prices are set by the local distributors and dealers, not the factory.

Link: http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/ap.../up-to-12-image-width/cabaret-for-home-cinema


----------



## Mojito

Don Stewart said:


> The difference between the LX and LX Classic is screen housing size. The LX can accommodate screens up to 135" diagonal and the LX Classic can accommodate larger screens up to 165" diagonal. We prefer not to reverse roll screens unless there is no other option. When a screen is reversed rolled, then the very bottom of the screen's viewing side exposed to collect dust at the 12:00 position when screen is in the rolled up position and can damage viewing surface over time. You did not mention if your screen is going to be installed above or below the ceiling. If the screen is going to be installed below the ceiling and the the housing can be viewed, we make a designer roller model called the Cabaret. It is also available with extension brackets that allow for spacing when screen material is to be positioned in front of a flat panel TV. See link. As for pricing, I noticed that you live in Russia. The options that you mention are less than half of that here in the US. I do know that overseas prices go up quite a bit when additional parties are involved such as distributors. Those prices are set by the local distributors and dealers, not the factory.
> 
> Link: http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/ap.../up-to-12-image-width/cabaret-for-home-cinema


Thanks Don. Very helpful response as usual.
Just to give you an idea I attach the pictures. The screen will be mounted below celling in the niche. The celing there is too weak, therefore the screen should be attached to the wall. The case will not be visible (I'm planning to cover it with a false panel after the screen is installed), so fancy case is not necessary for my application.
As I said I need about 7-8 inches from the wall. Are those extension brackets also available for the LX models?

Also, in another thread you recommended Gray Matte 70 material for my room. The description I read on the site mentioned that "custom gains are availble". Does that mean I can order to increase the gain (in what range)? What are the drawbacks or advantages?


----------



## Don Stewart

Mojito said:


> Thanks Don. Very helpful response as usual.
> Just to give you an idea I attach the pictures. The screen will be mounted below celling in the niche. The celing there is too weak, therefore the screen should be attached to the wall. The case will not be visible (I'm planning to cover it with a false panel after the screen is installed), so fancy case is not necessary for my application.
> As I said I need about 7-8 inches from the wall. Are those extension brackets also available for the LX models?
> 
> Also, in another thread you recommended Gray Matte 70 material for my room. The description I read on the site mentioned that "custom gains are availble". Does that mean I can order to increase the gain (in what range)? What are the drawbacks or advantages?


Before we discuss screen materials, it is best to figure out how to mechanically fit screen housing in to available space.. How high and how deep is niche, (screen soffit) in either mm or inches?
Also, you plan to attach screen housing to back wall, not front soffit wall? Correct? Please advise.


----------



## Mojito

Don Stewart said:


> Before we discuss screen materials, it is best to figure out how to mechanically fit screen housing in to available space.. How high and how deep is niche, (screen soffit) in either mm or inches?


The soffit is 260 mm deep and 160 mm high (not counting the skirting) 



Don Stewart said:


> Also, you plan to attach screen housing to back wall, not front soffit wall? Correct? Please advise.


That's correct.


----------



## Kain

Mike Garrett said:


> Sure, give us a call.


Will it not be possible to provide a simple/quick price estimate over PM? MSRP will be fine too.


----------



## Craig Peer

Kain said:


> Will it not be possible to provide a simple/quick price estimate over PM? MSRP will be fine too.


I see you are in Dubai - send an email !


----------



## Don Stewart

Mojito said:


> The soffit is 260 mm deep and 160 mm high (not counting the skirting)
> That's correct.


You mentioned the screen needs to drop 6 to7 inches off back wall. If you could get that down to 125mm or so we can do a standard roll with custom side wall mount brackets. Otherwise we will need to do a reverse roll. What I suggest for a reverse roll is we add 8 inches of extra black masking between the bottom screen batten bar to where the bottom viewing area starts. This way, when screen is rolled up, any dust that accumulates on top of roller tube will be on the black masking portion of the screen and not on the viewing area. Since my wife is out to dinner with friends tonight, I had an unusual situation where I actually had time to draw a quick installation profile sketch of your project. (See attached drawing) We would also need to know how much black drop is needed between the screen housing and where the viewing area begins. Also, with your close viewing distance and the throw distance of your JVC 7000 PJ, I would still recommend the GrayMatte 70 material. It has an extremely smooth flat finish with absolutely no screen added artifacts. If you decide to move forward, our engineering department would supply you and your dealer with full engineering drawings for your approval before we start to build. Hope that helps.


----------



## Mojito

Don Stewart said:


> You mentioned the screen needs to drop 6 to7 inches off back wall. If you could get that down to 125mm or so we can do a standard roll with custom side wall mount brackets. Otherwise we will need to do a reverse roll. What I suggest for a reverse roll is we add 8 inches of extra black masking between the bottom screen batten bar to where the bottom viewing area starts. This way, when screen is rolled up, any dust that accumulates on top of roller tube will be on the black masking portion of the screen and not on the viewing area. Since my wife is out to dinner with friends tonight, I had an unusual situation where I actually had time to draw a quick installation profile sketch of your project. (See attached drawing) We would also need to know how much black drop is needed between the screen housing and where the viewing area begins. Also, with your close viewing distance and the throw distance of your JVC 7000 PJ, I would still recommend the GrayMatte 70 material. It has an extremely smooth flat finish with absolutely no screen added artifacts. If you decide to move forward, our engineering department would supply you and your dealer with full engineering drawings for your approval before we start to build. Hope that helps.


Thanks Don, your help is very much appreciated.
I attach for convenience a little out-of-scale drawing with all the dimiensons and picture of the room at the PJ side (sorry for the mess).
I can probably reduce the clearance between the wall and the screen ("Y" in the drawing) to 125 as I'm planning to get an LG OLED65E6 wich should be capable of being mounted about 100 mm away from the wall. 
I wouldn't like to add extra masking at the bottom of the screen as this will result in the screen being quite high above the floor and possibly even reduced viewing area (the hight of the screen below the soffit edge should be no more than 1650 mm). With my dimensions and the PJ I can get to 109" screen (I could probably get to even 110", but that will be at the limit of PJ's range and would allow for very little headroom), so normall roll and wooden spacers will be more preferable option (I just need to figure out how to attach them to the wall inside the narrow soffit space). 
So, that sounds like an LX non-classic model with normal roll, 109", GrayMatte 70, 220V and STI (12V trigger) option. I just need to figure out the backdrop so that the total screen size (from the celling in the soffit to the very bottom of the screen) is not more than 1850 mm.


----------



## Kain

With the VistaScope masking system, are the motorized masking panels acoustically transparent? Is it okay if the left and right LCR speakers get covered by the masking when the masking is enabled?


----------



## Don Stewart

Kain said:


> With the VistaScope masking system, are the motorized masking panels acoustically transparent? Is it okay if the left and right LCR speakers get covered by the masking when the masking is enabled?


If you order the VistaSope with the THX Micro-Perf screen option, then we automatically install acoustically transparent masking panels at the factory. So the answer is yes.
Hope that helps.

Best,
Don


----------



## Kain

Don Stewart said:


> If you order the VistaSope with the THX Micro-Perf screen option, then we automatically install acoustically transparent masking panels at the factory. So the answer is yes.
> Hope that helps.
> 
> Best,
> Don


Thanks.

What is the recommended or required minimum distance between the StudioTek 100 screen and the LCR speakers behind the screen?


----------



## Mike Garrett

Kain said:


> Will it not be possible to provide a simple/quick price estimate over PM? MSRP will be fine too.


Sent you a PM with description and MSRP.


----------



## Kain

Mike Garrett said:


> Sent you a PM with description and MSRP.


Sent reply.


----------



## Don Stewart

Kain said:


> Thanks.
> 
> What is the recommended or required minimum distance between the StudioTek 100 screen and the LCR speakers behind the screen?


If you have a audio system EQ and plan to have your sound calibrated by a pro audio guy, 2" or 50mm. If not, then 10-12 inches.


----------



## Kain

Don Stewart said:


> If you have a audio system EQ and plan to have your sound calibrated by a pro audio guy, 2" or 50mm. If not, then 10-12 inches.


Thanks.

Suppose I have a Trinnov Altitude32 in my system handling the EQ and processing. If I have it calibrated by a pro audio guy, will I gain anything by also having 10-12 inches of space between the screen and LCR speakers or will the overall result be the same if there was only 2" inches of space?


----------



## Don Stewart

If speakers are placed 10" to 12 "back, the audio will require less EQ correction.


----------



## Civik99si

Hi,


Like many others in this thread, I'm trying to chose between the Studiotek 100, 130, and the Neve.


I'll be using a JVC RS500 mounted 18 feet from the screen. My head is 12 feet from the screen. Screen size is 116 (or 110 with the Neve). As for the room, its very dark. The walls are covered with black velvet, except the ceiling, which is a drop ceiling with black matte Cinetiles. The Cinetiles do show some glare close to the screen with bright images. The carpet is black. I have a 7'4" ceiling, so the screen will be mounted very close to the ceiling.


So here is my question after reading through this and similar threads. If the "sparkles" in the 130 don't bother me, is there any reason to go with a 100 in this setup?


Thanks!


----------



## Craig Peer

Civik99si said:


> Hi,
> 
> 
> Like many others in this thread, I'm trying to chose between the Studiotek 100, 130, and the Neve.
> 
> 
> I'll be using a JVC RS500 mounted 18 feet from the screen. My head is 12 feet from the screen. Screen size is 116 (or 110 with the Neve). As for the room, its very dark. The walls are covered with black velvet, except the ceiling, which is a drop ceiling with black matte Cinetiles. The Cinetiles do show some glare close to the screen with bright images. The carpet is black. I have a 7'4" ceiling, so the screen will be mounted very close to the ceiling.
> 
> 
> So here is my question after reading through this and similar threads. If the "sparkles" in the 130 don't bother me, is there any reason to go with a 100 in this setup?
> 
> 
> Thanks!


Not really. The extra gain of the ST130 means you can close the iris down a little more with your RS500 too, for a bit better black levels.


----------



## DavidHir

If you're doing off-axis viewing and depending on the extent of it, you might get a little less brightness with the ST130 on the left and right side of the screen compared to the center. Screens with gain typically are at their brightness max in the center with some drop off away from it. This won't be an issue with the ST100 even though it will be less bright overall, it will remain pretty much the same brightness across the screen. See Jeff Meier's screen report. If sparkles and the off-axis are not an issue, then the ST130 would make more sense as Craig mentioned.


----------



## techjoy

I want projection in my Family Room, been researching ALR screens from all the reputable manufacturers including Stewart, Screen Innovations, DNP, etc., because of their ambient light rejecting properties, increased contrast performance in modestly lit environments, etc.. However, in my research, I found these screens have as many pros (better contrast, more saturated colors under higher ambient light conditions, etc..) as cons (sparkles, potential hot spotting, limited field of view, cost, etc..). So, I took a portable Da-Lite 1.0 gain screen, a sample of the Black Diamond 1.4 gain from SI and borrowed an old 720P Panasonic projector to run a few comparison tests at home. After some day and night time testing under modest ambient light and in complete darkness, I found that while the ALR material did show improvement in color saturation and contrast, I also found it lost brightness; making the whites appear duller. Granted, the projector I used was old, but I came to the realization that for most of my viewing after 6 PM M-F and S-S with the drapes closed, an ALR screen may not be a complete necessity.

Thus....I am now considering a more conventional projection screen. That said, I don't watch movies, sports, games or entertain in complete darkness, it's still a functioning Family Room, so I may occasionally have a lamp on and there may be some modest amounts of light bleeding from the adjacent kitchen; in general about 2-4 FC at night with a lamp light on measured at the proposed screen location. All this said, what Stewart non-ALR fixed screen is most similar to the SI Zero Edge product in terms of appearance, which Stewart material and gain would best serve me in the conditions stated above?

I need to strike a balance between that perfect picture everyone wants and using my Family Room for its intended purpose while getting the immersive viewing experience of projection and larger screen. I am currently considering the Epson 6040UB or a JVC RS400-RS500. Another reason I am shying away from the ALR screens is the projector at 11'-6" throw is at the lower range for a 100" ALR screen and that may amplify all the aforementioned cons mentioned earlier; the wider viewing angle of a conventional screen is also nice.

Lastly, I do prefer a gray screen material, as the room is not exclusively dedicated for projection and it would be nice if the screen didn't stand out like a sore thumb (had more of a giant TV look) when not in use, but certainly, I would consider white if that would be the ideal material color in this case.

I'd appreciate your comments and suggestions here folks. I need them! lol



Thanks!


----------



## tplague

*Is my old Stewart Firehawk worth shipping?*

Is my old 92" Stewart Firehawk worth shipping? (Ohio to Colorado)
Screen model# SNDQ092HFHWezX. (Purchased in 2004, still in perfect condition)


I don't have the old box for the metal frame but I DO have the tube for the screen its self. 
I'm not sure how I'd go about packaging the frame rails. 
Has anyone done this before? Est cost for shipping / recommended shipper?
Thinking about using a cardboard tube used for concrete forms as a container, thoughts?

New location has plenty of ambient light, even at night its not fully black-out dark as there is some street light pollution that bleeds through my 'high efficiency' blinds. 


If I do ship the screen I planned on purchasing a Sony VPL-HW45ES.
PJ would be high mounted -approximately 14ft from screen (Above viewing couch).
Is this a good combo with the old screen?

If the screen is not worth shipping I may forgo projection in general as I don't want to spend $4k on a full pj + screen for an apartment.


Thanks for any comments and feedback as I have been out of the PJ scene for many years at this point but excited to get back in!!


----------



## Kain

Can the StudioTek 100 screen not be used for 3D? According to the Stewart website, it states "No" for "Passive 3D use".


----------



## WilliamG

Kain said:


> Can the StudioTek 100 screen not be used for 3D? According to the Stewart website, it states "No" for "Passive 3D use".


Can't speak for passive 3D, but it works fine with active 3D on my Sony HW50ES. Are there even any passive 3D projectors out there anyway?


----------



## wanderer

Kain said:


> Can the StudioTek 100 screen not be used for 3D? According to the Stewart website, it states "No" for "Passive 3D use".


For the StudioTek 100 - no, you can't use that for passive 3D. The Stewart 5D though can definitely be used and is rated for passive 3D.


----------



## Ellebob

Most passive 3D projector systems use two projectors with a different polarizing filter in front of each lens. It also needs a processor to send odd frames to one projector and even one to the other. It also needs a screen with a gain silver coating to preserve polarization. While these screens are great for 3D they might not be optimal for 2D depending on the situation. Something like the 5D while great for 3D and 2D still looks very good is not going to compete with a Studiotek 100 in a dark environment for 2D. Passive 3D is some of the best 3D I have seen but can be expensive to implement well.


----------



## abinav555

Quick question:

Does Stewart sell the fabric seperately ?

I'm looking for a Studiotek 100 Microperf 133" diagonal 16:9 with horizontal masking. I'd like to know if i can the fabric alone and get an external masking system from Carada or Da-lite.

Also what would be the price of a fixed AT 133" 16:9 with horizontal masking Studiotek 100 ?

I'm from India and not the US and If someone could help shipping it from the US, I would handle clearing in my country.


----------



## techjoy

Hi all.

I was initially considering an ALR screen in my less than perfect room (for projection anyways), but after reviewing that technology and it's many shortcomings, I have decided to make some changes to my Family Room to better control ambient light during the day and artificial light at night, therefore, I am now considering a more conventional screen material. From what I have read here, the StudioTec 130 material seems to be a good match and more forgiving than the 100. Since I have never owned a projector or screen, I am trying to determine the largest size I can fit in my room: 13-6" W (screen side) X 18'-6"L X 8'-0"H? In the current plan, I am seating about 12'-6" from the screen (eye level at 38"), the projector throw is currently about 15'-6" (max. room will allow is 16'-0").

What would be the largest 2.35:1 screen I could comfortably fit on that wall without losing too much brightness and causing eye fatigue that also works from that throw distance? I will be purchasing either a JVC RS600 or the Epson LS10500 when it's available. Yes, I have played around with screen calculators, but I trust more the opinion of actual enthusiast in real world conditions more than the broad range numbers provided by an online calculator.

I am attaching two pictures showing my modest Family Room with a 16:9 120" screen outlined in blue tape. What I realized yesterday is that the main purpose of going to projection is to watch movies (80% of the time), both 1080P and 4K, streaming, Blu-Ray, etc. and those films are mostly in scope format. Therefore, I am reconsidering my choice of aspect ratios. However, since going scope in this case means having a smaller 16:9 viewing area, I want the largest screen possible.

What is the biggest size 2.35:1 screen I can put in this room and the recommended seating and throw distances for that specific size? Should I be concerned with hot spotting at the available throw distance, loss of brightness, etc.? I am fine with ranges, but prefer specifics from your own personal experience and preferences. I know viewing tolerances are different from person to person, but I do not want to regret going too small (or too big for that matter). For what it's worth, the currently outlined screen in blue tape from a 12'-6" seating distance last week appeared big to us, now is beginning to look small! lol

What say you?


----------



## Kain

Few questions on the Stewart fixed frame systems...

1. What is the difference between the Cima Wallscreen (Cima FF), Basic Wallscreen, and Deluxe Wallscreen?

2. Can all three support a micro-perf screen such as the StudioTek 100?

3. Can all three be bought in a CinemaScope aspect ratio?


----------



## techjoy

techjoy said:


> Hi all.
> 
> I was initially considering an ALR screen in my less than perfect room (for projection anyways), but after reviewing that technology and it's many shortcomings, I have decided to make some changes to my Family Room to better control ambient light during the day and artificial light at night, therefore, I am now considering a more conventional screen material. From what I have read here, the StudioTec 130 material seems to be a good match and more forgiving than the 100. Since I have never owned a projector or screen, I am trying to determine the largest size I can fit in my room: 13-6" W (screen side) X 18'-6"L X 8'-0"H? In the current plan, I am seating about 12'-6" from the screen (eye level at 38"), the projector throw is currently about 15'-6" (max. room will allow is 16'-0").
> 
> What would be the largest 2.35:1 screen I could comfortably fit on that wall without losing too much brightness and causing eye fatigue that also works from that throw distance? I will be purchasing either a JVC RS600 or the Epson LS10500 when it's available. Yes, I have played around with screen calculators, but I trust more the opinion of actual enthusiast in real world conditions more than the broad range numbers provided by an online calculator.
> 
> I am attaching two pictures showing my modest Family Room with a 16:9 120" screen outlined in blue tape. What I realized yesterday is that the main purpose of going to projection is to watch movies (80% of the time), both 1080P and 4K, streaming, Blu-Ray, etc. and those films are mostly in scope format. Therefore, I am reconsidering my choice of aspect ratios. However, since going scope in this case means having a smaller 16:9 viewing area, I want the largest screen possible.
> 
> What is the biggest size 2.35:1 screen I can put in this room and the recommended seating and throw distances for that specific size? Should I be concerned with hot spotting at the available throw distance, loss of brightness, etc.? I am fine with ranges, but prefer specifics from your own personal experience and preferences. I know viewing tolerances are different from person to person, but I do not want to regret going too small (or too big for that matter). For what it's worth, the currently outlined screen in blue tape from a 12'-6" seating distance last week appeared big to us, now is beginning to look small! lol
> 
> What say you?


Anyone?


----------



## Craig Peer

Kain said:


> Few questions on the Stewart fixed frame systems...
> 
> 1. What is the difference between the Cima Wallscreen (Cima FF), Basic Wallscreen, and Deluxe Wallscreen?
> 
> 2. Can all three support a micro-perf screen such as the StudioTek 100?
> 
> 3. Can all three be bought in a CinemaScope aspect ratio?


1. What is the difference between the Cima Wallscreen (Cima FF), Basic Wallscreen, and Deluxe Wallscreen? The Cima only comes in fixed sizes, with Neve or Tiburon Material. The Luxus screens come any size you want, with just about any of Stewart's screen materials. The Cima line costs a lot less. 

2. Can all three support a micro-perf screen such as the StudioTek 100? - yes. The perf'd Cima is called " PerfOrado " .

3. Can all three be bought in a CinemaScope aspect ratio? - yes.


----------



## Craig Peer

techjoy said:


> Hi all.
> 
> I was initially considering an ALR screen in my less than perfect room (for projection anyways), but after reviewing that technology and it's many shortcomings, I have decided to make some changes to my Family Room to better control ambient light during the day and artificial light at night, therefore, I am now considering a more conventional screen material. From what I have read here, the StudioTec 130 material seems to be a good match and more forgiving than the 100. Since I have never owned a projector or screen, I am trying to determine the largest size I can fit in my room: 13-6" W (screen side) X 18'-6"L X 8'-0"H? In the current plan, I am seating about 12'-6" from the screen (eye level at 38"), the projector throw is currently about 15'-6" (max. room will allow is 16'-0").
> 
> What would be the largest 2.35:1 screen I could comfortably fit on that wall without losing too much brightness and causing eye fatigue that also works from that throw distance? I will be purchasing either a JVC RS600 or the Epson LS10500 when it's available. Yes, I have played around with screen calculators, but I trust more the opinion of actual enthusiast in real world conditions more than the broad range numbers provided by an online calculator.
> 
> I am attaching two pictures showing my modest Family Room with a 16:9 120" screen outlined in blue tape. What I realized yesterday is that the main purpose of going to projection is to watch movies (80% of the time), both 1080P and 4K, streaming, Blu-Ray, etc. and those films are mostly in scope format. Therefore, I am reconsidering my choice of aspect ratios. However, since going scope in this case means having a smaller 16:9 viewing area, I want the largest screen possible.
> 
> What is the biggest size 2.35:1 screen I can put in this room and the recommended seating and throw distances for that specific size? Should I be concerned with hot spotting at the available throw distance, loss of brightness, etc.? I am fine with ranges, but prefer specifics from your own personal experience and preferences. I know viewing tolerances are different from person to person, but I do not want to regret going too small (or too big for that matter). For what it's worth, the currently outlined screen in blue tape from a 12'-6" seating distance last week appeared big to us, now is beginning to look small! lol
> 
> What say you?


The StudioTek 130 would be a good choice, as would the very similar Stewart Cima Neve ( I own both ). Where are your speakers going ? I sit 11' from a 122" diagonal 16:9 Cima Neve and about 10' 5" from a 128" diagonal ( 118" wide ) StudioTek 130 screen.


----------



## techjoy

Craig Peer said:


> The StudioTek 130 would be a good choice, as would the very similar Stewart Cima Neve ( I own both ). Where are your speakers going ? I sit 11' from a 122" diagonal 16:9 Cima Neve and about 10' 5" from a 128" diagonal ( 118" wide ) StudioTek 130 screen.


Hi Craig, thanks for replying.

As it stands now, L/R Fronts will be either on the wall or floor, the Center will be on the wall under screen, the L/R Surround and Front/Rear Atmos speakers will go in the ceiling; due to a slider on one left rear side and lack of wall to the left of the rear wall (opening into kitchen). Seating is about 13'-6" from the screen, throw distance about 16'-4", screen shown in attached drawing is a 125" 2.35:1. The rear wall be covered in some dark acoustic material, the screen will float off it a few inches.


----------



## DRC

*Studio Tek 130 G3 versus 100*

I need to make a decision on these 2 screens. I will have a JVC DLA RS500, 106 inch diagonal with a 12 foot throw distance. I currently have a Vutec Silverstar with a measured gain of 2.4.Some sparkles on white images, which with my old RS25 did not bother me but with he new projector could bother me.
I did read the AccuCal report and it was mentioned that the 130 did have some sheen. Using Projector Central calculator I would get 49 fl with the 100 and 64 fl with the 130. 
I like a brighter image but wanted some feedback on whether the 130 will give me to many sparkles.
Comments?


----------



## Craig Peer

DRC said:


> I need to make a decision on these 2 screens. I will have a JVC DLA RS500, 106 inch diagonal with a 12 foot throw distance. I currently have a Vutec Silverstar with a measured gain of 2.4.Some sparkles on white images, which with my old RS25 did not bother me but with he new projector could bother me.
> I did read the AccuCal report and it was mentioned that the 130 did have some sheen. Using Projector Central calculator I would get 49 fl with the 100 and 64 fl with the 130.
> I like a brighter image but wanted some feedback on whether the 130 will give me to many sparkles.
> Comments?


Get a sample ! I might have one laying around - PM me. For the record, any screen with gain will have some sheen - the trick is finding the right balance where the pluses of gain outweigh any potential negatives that migh bug you, like sheen in the brightest parts of the picture. The slight sheen I see - rarely, on my ST 130, don't bother me. I prefer a punchy bright picture. The ST 130 gives me that, and enables me to run in low lamp a long time.


----------



## Pultzar

So I am audiophile and a videophile trying to get the best of both worlds with my screen, impossible I know.

My speaker are going to be in front of the screen as they are dipoles. However, ideally I would have a screen which would allow me to put acoustic products (diffusors or absorption) behind the screen in order to treat the front wall.

I have tested every weave/mesh based product that I can get my hands on and to be honest I haven't been too excited about the visual quality. The artifacts are typically lowered sharpness, visible pattern, or sheen/sparkle. I often use my screen for computer work so the drop in sharpness is noticeable.

So I'm considering these options:

1) Forget about treatments and go with Studiotek 100 in a fixed frame. Perhaps build some mobile treatments on stands that I can position during music listening.
2) Go with Studiotek 100 microperf X2 in a fixed frame with treatments behind the screen. Concerns are visible texture due to the holes and I'm not sure how effective the treatments will be behind the screen? I'm mostly interested in 600-4000hz so high frequencies aren't a huge concern.
3) Go with Studiotek 100 in an electric screen which comes down over the treatments. My concern here is finding a way to have a nice black overscan area when aspect ratios are changed.

My plan is for a 2.40:1 screen approx 14-14.5' wide. Sitting distance is around 12 feet.

Thoughts?


----------



## A7mad78

Just receive My ST 100 165" cinemascope and great thx for this forum for giving me the right knowledge about this great company wish I enjoyed soon with my ST100 and I will pare it with Barco Orion cinemascope and 16 immersive channel driven by trinnov altitude 32
And Triad gold for the speakers 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## WTS

Is it possible to purchase only the Stewart screen material(St100 or snomatte) in a lace / grommet style, I'd build my own frame system.


----------



## Don Stewart

WTS said:


> Is it possible to purchase only the Stewart screen material(St100 or snomatte) in a lace / grommet style, I'd build my own frame system.


Yes...you can buy just screen with edge binding and grommets. You can download manual on link below. Go to the third from last download , near bottom of page, called, TG manual. Customer supplied frame information starts on page 13.
Hope that helps.

http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/support/downloads/manuals

Best,
Don


----------



## WTS

Thanks Don. I assume all screens are available in unperforated screen, just seems like most people talk about acoustically transparent screens on this thread.

So who can provide pricing for this, I'd be interested in pricing for 16:9 and 2.35-1, 110" & 120" diag.

thks


----------



## Don Stewart

WTS said:


> Thanks Don. I assume all screens are available in unperforated screen, just seems like most people talk about acoustically transparent screens on this thread.
> 
> So who can provide pricing for this, I'd be interested in pricing for 16:9 and 2.35-1, 110" & 120" diag.
> 
> thks


The screen material is manufactured solid. Each screen is made to order so you need not stick to standard sizes. 
You could always call AVS for pricing.


----------



## WTS

Hi Don,

Funny you should say just call AVS. 

I sent them an email and the person I conversed with(I won`t mention his name as he always posts) told me that Stewart didn`t sell just the screen material. So I had to email him back and mention this thread and that you had told me that Stewart does sell just the screen material. So now he knows and I`ll wait and see what pricing I get back.

Maybe some of your other dealers don`t know this as well.

Cheers,


----------



## Don Stewart

WTS said:


> Hi Don,
> 
> Funny you should say just call AVS.
> 
> I sent them an email and the person I conversed with(I won`t mention his name as he always posts) told me that Stewart didn`t sell just the screen material. So I had to email him back and mention this thread and that you had told me that Stewart does sell just the screen material. So now he knows and I`ll wait and see what pricing I get back.
> 
> Maybe some of your other dealers don`t know this as well.
> 
> Cheers,


Sorry, I think there is some confusion here. We do not sell raw screen material only. We do sell factory finished screens with edge binding, grommets and serial number attached to binding.
Mike and Craig. If you need clarity on this, please talk to Hideki, head of our inside sales. Thanks.

Best,
Don


----------



## WTS

Hi Don,

I`m not looking for raw material, I asked for pricing for a (finished) lace and grommet screen without a frame as I`ll build my own frame. 

Cheers,


----------



## Don Stewart

WTS said:


> Hi Don,
> 
> I`m not looking for raw material, I asked for pricing for a (finished) lace and grommet screen without a frame as I`ll build my own frame.
> 
> Cheers,


Yes, I am aware of that. Their seems to be some confusion with Stewart dealers. We will get it straightened out.


----------



## WTS

oh okay, sorry, I thought the last post was directed to myself.


----------



## WTS

Don,

Do the ST100 and Snomatte screens have black backing or something else?


----------



## Don Stewart

WTS said:


> Don,
> 
> Do the ST100 and Snomatte screens have black backing or something else?


The back of the ST100 can vary from off white to a very light gray, depending on the production run. If you need the screen to be 100% opaque, (Example: Screen is in front of a window), then we need to know at time of order. If so, then will include your screen in a special non-standard manufacturing process run. Please be advised when we manufacture our screen materials, they are cast in hugh 40 x 90 foot molds. In a special run, during the casting process, we will make a center sandwich cast with black pigments that will assure that the screen is 100% opaque. If 100% opaque is not required, our standard ST100 runs are in the neighborhood of 98% to 99% opaque.

Best,
Don


----------



## WTS

Hi Don,

Thanks. I guess I should have just asked "how much light passes through the screen". Actually some light passing through is not a concern, does light pass through?


----------



## Don Stewart

WTS said:


> Hi Don,
> 
> Thanks. I guess I should have just asked "how much light passes through the screen". Actually some light passing through is not a concern, does light pass through?


Not to the point to be concerned about.


----------



## WTS

Hi Don,

I tried to get a quote on the Cima Neve material but was told it's not available as finished material "only" like the Studiotek 100.


----------



## Don Stewart

WTS said:


> Hi Don,
> 
> I tried to get a quote on the Cima Neve material but was told it's not available as finished material "only" like the Studiotek 100.


That is correct. Our Cima screen line is only available in standard sizes including a screen frame or in retractable roller models.
Stewart premium screens are available pretty much anyway you would like to order it.


----------



## WTS

So Craig gets me all excited about the Neve only to find out I can't get it in what I want, lol, damn. Well I could always get it with the frame and take it out of the frame I guess. Does it come out of the frame, what type of connection method does it use?


----------



## WTS

what are the dimensions (side thickness, height) of the frame. What is the distance from the screen material to the face of the frame.


----------



## Don Stewart

WTS said:


> what are the dimensions (side thickness, height) of the frame. What is the distance from the screen material to the face of the frame.


The Cima Screen Line attaches to the frame via female snap fasteners. The frame rails have a 2-1/2" face. See frame section drawing below.

Best,
Don


----------



## WTS

Hi Don,

That drawing shows me what I needed.

So I guess ordering frameless is not available.

Thanks


----------



## DigitalAV

*How important is it to have the projector in the middle of the Phantom HALR screen?*

Don, Craig, Mike, & friends:

How important is it to have the projector in the middle of the Phantom HALR screen material?

I currently have a Firehawk G1 in my living room (lots of ambient light) paired with an Epson 3700. It's a great combo, but I miss out on deeper blacks with ambient light.

My projector is mounted slightly above the screen (using max vertical lens shift). From the HALR documentation, it seems this is not ideal/advised. What kind of problem(s) would I be looking at if I kept my current projector/screen frame positions, but swapped out the Firehawk material with the Phantom HALR?

EDIT: My throw distance is 2.1x image width.

Thanks in advance!


----------



## Mike Garrett

DigitalAV said:


> Don, Craig, Mike, & friends:
> 
> How important is it to have the projector in the middle of the Phantom HALR screen material?
> 
> I currently have a Firehawk G1 in my living room (lots of ambient light) paired with an Epson 3700. It's a great combo, but I miss out on deeper blacks with ambient light.
> 
> My projector is mounted slightly above the screen (using max vertical lens shift). From the HALR documentation, it seems this is not ideal/advised. What kind of problem(s) would I be looking at if I kept my current projector/screen frame positions, but swapped out the Firehawk material with the Phantom HALR?
> 
> EDIT: My throw distance is 2.1x image width.
> 
> Thanks in advance!


Your throw distance works well with HALR. Your projector mounting location works well with HALR, as long as you keep the windows, behind the projector covered, but that applies to any light rejecting screen, since that light is not off axis. With your lighter colored walls and off white ceiling, HALR would be a good choice. From what I saw, HALR throws a better image than FireHawk. If I can help you, let me know.


----------



## manoharshetty9

Having problems with the motor on a 6 year old 102" Diagonal 16:9 studiotek 130 G3 Model 'A' Electriscreen with horizontal masking. The screen will roll down properly until it reaches the down limit but will not roll back up on its own without me physically giving the baton a little upward lift. Once it starts rolling back up, then it retracts properly and completely, unless I stop it midway, after which it needs a little upward lift again for it to continue rolling back up. What can I do . I don't mind doing a repair service/myself. Thanks in advance for your replies.


----------



## Craig Peer

manoharshetty9 said:


> Having problems with the motor on a 6 year old 102" Diagonal 16:9 studiotek 130 G3 Model 'A' Electriscreen with horizontal masking. The screen will roll down properly until it reaches the down limit but will not roll back up on its own without me physically giving the baton a little upward lift. Once it starts rolling back up, then it retracts properly and completely, unless I stop it midway, after which it needs a little upward lift again for it to continue rolling back up. What can I do . I don't mind doing a repair service/myself. Thanks in advance for your replies.


Give Stewart a call - I'm sure they can help you.


----------



## NaTeDoGG

Can someone with firsthand experience explain any cons for the Phantom HALR?

It's a dark screen with a 1.0 gain, so I expect light is absorbed by dark layers, then positive gain layers bring the brightness back up. Gain typically comes at the cost of image smoothness. How does the Phantom HALR perform regarding image smoothness / lack of screen texture?

I understand gain can also result in hot spots, but this should be fully mitigated by proper throw distance (2.0x+ screen width for the Phantom HALR). Lastly, gain can cause sparkles/sparklies. How does the Phantom HALR do with sparklies?

Assuming a 2.1x throw distance, why would I pick the Firehawk over the Phantom HALR?

I prefer a bright, vivid picture, so I am somewhat leery about gray ALR screens. I've read that the general rule of thumb is to shoot for 15-20 fL for a vivid picture, but for a Firehawk that should be doubled because of the gray surface. Does that sound right? Does that apply to the Phantom HALR? If not, how many (real life, after calibration) foot-lamberts should I be aiming for?

I have a white ceiling, 128" diagonal screen, and 1.86x throw distance. With a 1.0 gain screen (ie the Phantom HALR), I estimate my JVC RS500 can put out 23 fL in high lamp mode after taking into account calibration, 15% zoom loss, and 25% bulb loss. Will this result in a vivid picture with the Phantom HALR?

If I go for the Firehawk, I estimate 25 fL. Would the Firehawk be a better choice for my situation? I have read the Firehawk is somewhat lacking when it comes to ambient light rejection from overhead sources.


----------



## Don Stewart

Craig Peer said:


> Give Stewart a call - I'm sure they can help you.


Call Scott Kimber, Stewart's customer service tech. He is very experienced at trouble shooting. He can be reached at 800 762-4999, ext 145.
Hope that helps.


----------



## Don Stewart

NaTeDoGG said:


> Can someone with firsthand experience explain any cons for the Phantom HALR?
> 
> It's a dark screen with a 1.0 gain, so I expect light is absorbed by dark layers, then positive gain layers bring the brightness back up. Gain typically comes at the cost of image smoothness. How does the Phantom HALR perform regarding image smoothness / lack of screen texture?
> 
> I understand gain can also result in hot spots, but this should be fully mitigated by proper throw distance (2.0x+ screen width for the Phantom HALR). Lastly, gain can cause sparkles/sparklies. How does the Phantom HALR do with sparklies?
> 
> Assuming a 2.1x throw distance, why would I pick the Firehawk over the Phantom HALR?
> 
> I prefer a bright, vivid picture, so I am somewhat leery about gray ALR screens. I've read that the general rule of thumb is to shoot for 15-20 fL for a vivid picture, but for a Firehawk that should be doubled because of the gray surface. Does that sound right? Does that apply to the Phantom HALR? If not, how many (real life, after calibration) foot-lamberts should I be aiming for?
> 
> I have a white ceiling, 128" diagonal screen, and 1.86x throw distance. With a 1.0 gain screen (ie the Phantom HALR), I estimate my JVC RS500 can put out 23 fL in high lamp mode after taking into account calibration, 15% zoom loss, and 25% bulb loss. Will this result in a vivid picture with the Phantom HALR?
> 
> If I go for the Firehawk, I estimate 25 fL. Would the Firehawk be a better choice for my situation? I have read the Firehawk is somewhat lacking when it comes to ambient light rejection from overhead sources.


Many of your questions can be answered in this thread. http://www.avsforum.com/forum/23-sc...-halr-light-rejecting-screen-ahead-cedia.html
Also, here is a comparison specs between the FireHawk G4 and Phantom HALR screen. http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/screen-materials/flexible-front-projection


----------



## NaTeDoGG

Don Stewart said:


> Many of your questions can be answered in this thread. http://www.avsforum.com/forum/23-sc...-halr-light-rejecting-screen-ahead-cedia.html
> Also, here is a comparison specs between the FireHawk G4 and Phantom HALR screen. http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/screen-materials/flexible-front-projection


Thanks. I have seen those links and have reviewed them again. This time through I did notice you said one of the Phantom HALR design goals was to reduce sparkles, but I'm still left with many other questions.

There is no talk about Phantom HALR cons besides viewing angle and 2x+ throw distance. Since there seem to be absolutely no reviews online, I feel like I'm only hearing the pros and missing half the story.

I understand a gray substrate absorbs light and therefore requires a brighter projector for a vivid picture. A vivid picture can have better perceived contrast and this appeals to many people, myself included. In the thread you linked, everyone asking if the Phantom HALR is a good fit for their specific room was told "no" due to throw distance. I have the throw distance, but I have no idea how much brightness is required _for a vivid picture_ on the Phantom HALR (or the Firehawk, really).

You mentioned the Phantom HALR (higher ambient light rejection) doesn't replace the Firehawk (low to moderate ambient light conditions), but it isn't clear how to choose between the two. If I need an ALR screen, wouldn't I choose the one which rejects the most ambient light? I'm guessing the Phantom HALR requires more brightness, but I'm not sure that is correct and even if it is I have no way to quantify it.


----------



## Iwanthd

Assuming I have a scope screen, is the minimum throw distance required by the Phantom HALR measured by the screen width or the 16 X 9 image width? My screen will be 144 diagonal and 19 feet from wall. Considering Phantom vs. Firehawk and concerned about throw distance.


----------



## Don Stewart

NaTeDoGG said:


> Thanks. I have seen those links and have reviewed them again. This time through I did notice you said one of the Phantom HALR design goals was to reduce sparkles, but I'm still left with many other questions.
> 
> There is no talk about Phantom HALR cons besides viewing angle and 2x+ throw distance. Since there seem to be absolutely no reviews online, I feel like I'm only hearing the pros and missing half the story.
> 
> I understand a gray substrate absorbs light and therefore requires a brighter projector for a vivid picture. A vivid picture can have better perceived contrast and this appeals to many people, myself included. In the thread you linked, everyone asking if the Phantom HALR is a good fit for their specific room was told "no" due to throw distance. I have the throw distance, but I have no idea how much brightness is required _for a vivid picture_ on the Phantom HALR (or the Firehawk, really).
> 
> You mentioned the Phantom HALR (higher ambient light rejection) doesn't replace the Firehawk (low to moderate ambient light conditions), but it isn't clear how to choose between the two. If I need an ALR screen, wouldn't I choose the one which rejects the most ambient light? I'm guessing the Phantom HALR requires more brightness, but I'm not sure that is correct and even if it is I have no way to quantify it.


There are no customer reviews because we are not shipping yet. Our first shipments are scheduled for first quarter of 2017. There are reviews by professionals who saw the Phantom in action at the CEDIA trade show last September. (See links below). The Phantom does not have any sparkle. It does have a small amount of shimmer that can be witnessed when projecting white light.
My personal opinion is the screen foot lambert brightness should be at least five times the amount of ambient light, measured in foot candles, that's entering at the viewer's eye point. This is just a rough rule of thumb as it can change from room to room.

http://www.cepro.com/photo/editors_pick_12_great_new_products_from_cedia_2016/0


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dprDxGVaoKw


----------



## Don Stewart

Iwanthd said:


> Assuming I have a scope screen, is the minimum throw distance required by the Phantom HALR measured by the screen width or the 16 X 9 image width? My screen will be 144 diagonal and 19 feet from wall. Considering Phantom vs. Firehawk and concerned about throw distance.


The throw distance calculation that we use is determined by screen's widest image width.


----------



## NaTeDoGG

Don Stewart said:


> There are no customer reviews because we are not shipping yet. Our first shipments are scheduled for first quarter of 2017. There are reviews by professionals who saw the Phantom in action at the CEDIA trade show last September. (See links below). The Phantom does not have any sparkle. It does have a small amount of shimmer that can be witnessed when projecting white light.


Thanks, I didn't know about availability (I'm waiting on a quote). First quarter of 2017 fits my time frame just fine (construction on the room is about to start).



Don Stewart said:


> My personal opinion is the screen foot lambert brightness should be at least five times the amount of ambient light, measured in foot candles, that's entering at the viewer's eye point. This is just a rough rule of thumb as it can change from room to room.


My ambient light is solely from room cross reflections, so I may meet that criteria. Considering foot-candles at the viewer's eye is interesting, but doesn't help me differentiate screens. 

Take a 1.0 gain white screen and a 1.0 gain gray screen (a gray substrate with a positive gain layer so the end result is 1.0 gain). Viewed in a light controlled room with dark surfaces, is the image identical? I guess the intent is that the gain completely makes up for the loss from the gray. Is that true both in theory and in practice?

I've read many reports of gray screens having dimmer whites and less vibrant colors (less "pop"). The usual suggestion of using a brighter projector leads me to think that a brighter projector is needed for a gray screen, despite the gain specification. Now that I'm considering an even darker gray screen (the Phantom HALR), the natural conclusion is that I'd need an even brighter projector (but I can't quantify how much brighter).

Can you explain which parameters to consider when choosing between a Firehawk and a Phantom HALR?


----------



## Iwanthd

Don Stewart said:


> The throw distance calculation that we use is determined by screen's widest image width.


So by my calculation, an 11 foot wide screen should have the projector 19.8 ft away. What potential problems will I notice with the Phantom if I am only 19.0 feet away?


----------



## NaTeDoGG

Iwanthd said:


> So by my calculation, an 11 foot wide screen should have the projector 19.8 ft away. What potential problems will I notice with the Phantom if I am only 19.0 feet away?


I've read the main risk in general from a too short throw is hot spotting / brightness uniformity, eg:









I don't know if there is a risk of other artifacts, nor if the 0.8 feet makes a difference. I have read it's a _minimum_ throw distance and a little bit farther is even better. You are measuring from the screen surface to the actual PJ lens?


----------



## Iwanthd

NaTeDoGG said:


> I've read the main risk in general from a too short throw is hot spotting / brightness uniformity, eg:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know if there is a risk of other artifacts, nor if the 0.8 feet makes a difference. I have read it's a _minimum_ throw distance and a little bit farther is even better. You are measuring from the screen surface to the actual PJ lens?


Yes, from PJ to Screen surface. 19 feet is my max distance due to a soffit installation.


----------



## manoharshetty9

Don Stewart said:


> Call Scott Kimber, Stewart's customer service tech. He is very experienced at trouble shooting. He can be reached at 800 762-4999, ext 145.
> Hope that helps.


Spoke to a representative in Mumbai, india and was told that I would be required to ship the unit to Delhi, India. Besides the time period that I will be left without a screen, this will also involve a high cost I cannot afford right now.

Seems like the capacitor in the Somfy motor is faulty therefore, occasionally, it is not able to generate enough torque to initiate a retraction/roll back of the screen and sometimes needs an initial push but works properly when the screen is being extended/rolled out.

Anyone know the specifications of the capacitor used in the Somfy motor and where I can acquire one so that I can try a replacement and see if it solves the problem?


----------



## Don Stewart

manoharshetty9 said:


> Spoke to a representative in Mumbai, india and was told that I would be required to ship the unit to Delhi, India. Besides the time period that I will be left without a screen, this will also involve a high cost I cannot afford right now.
> 
> Seems like the capacitor in the Somfy motor is faulty therefore, occasionally, it is not able to generate enough torque to initiate a retraction/roll back of the screen and sometimes needs an initial push but works properly when the screen is being extended/rolled out.
> 
> Anyone know the specifications of the capacitor used in the Somfy motor and where I can acquire one so that I can try a replacement and see if it solves the problem?


I did not realize you were in India. My suggestion is to email Scott Kimber. He will need the serial number of your screen to ID which motor you have. It can be found on the the back of the screen batten bar. Just another thought. In the past I have seen the same issue as you have when screen is not getting full voltage from house current. Screen will go down but will not retract with out a little manual help. It might pay to check this first.
[email protected]


----------



## Don Stewart

Geez...that is way beyond a hot spot in photo. In the industry, we call that an obnoxious "Hot Ball". It is caused by false gain which reflects undiffused PJ light more like a mirror. I hope that is not a photo of a commercial screen that someone paid for. Perhaps this screen was homemade. Just saying.


----------



## manoharshetty9

Don Stewart said:


> I did not realize you were in India. My suggestion is to email Scott Kimber. He will need the serial number of your screen to ID which motor you have. It can be found on the the back of the screen batten bar. Just another thought. In the past I have seen the same issue as you have when screen is not getting full voltage from house current. Screen will go down but will not retract with out a little manual help. It might pay to check this first.
> [email protected]


Thanks Don for the information. The unit I have also has motorised masking which is working fine and it is being powered via a 1000KVA online UPS which is capable to take on atleast 750 Watts of load. Do you think it still could be a power issue?

I shall email Sott Kimber with the details. Thanks again.


----------



## Don Stewart

manoharshetty9 said:


> Thanks Don for the information. The unit I have also has motorised masking which is working fine and it is being powered via a 1000KVA online UPS which is capable to take on atleast 750 Watts of load. Do you think it still could be a power issue?
> 
> I shall email Sott Kimber with the details. Thanks again.


From a trouble shooting standpoint, I would still check power at screen junction box with a meter just to eliminate possible voltage problem. Also, the masking panels have less weight than the screen and may retract ok when heavier screen may not.


----------



## manoharshetty9

Don Stewart said:


> From a trouble shooting standpoint, I would still check power at screen junction box with a meter just to eliminate possible voltage problem. Also, the masking panels have less weight than the screen and may retract ok when heavier screen may not.


Thanks Don. Will get the power at the screen junction box checked by an electrician.


----------



## Iwanthd

Don Stewart said:


> Geez...that is way beyond a hot spot in photo. In the industry, we call that an obnoxious "Hot Ball". It is caused by false gain which reflects undiffused PJ light more like a mirror. I hope that is not a photo of a commercial screen that someone paid for. Perhaps this screen was homemade. Just saying.


I realize this picture is an overstatement of a possible problem, but in my situation I may have something slightly less than a foot of meeting the minimum throw distance for the Phantom screen. Can you describe any problems I might notice with this configuration or should I stick with Firehawk? My room has a large front wall (20ft wide X 10 ft high) and is painted a cream color on all 3 surfaces. Windows directly behind PJ but we have installed blackout shades.
Thanks for your help!


----------



## Don Stewart

Iwanthd said:


> I realize this picture is an overstatement of a possible problem, but in my situation I may have something slightly less than a foot of meeting the minimum throw distance for the Phantom screen. Can you describe any problems I might notice with this configuration or should I stick with Firehawk? My room has a large front wall (20ft wide X 10 ft high) and is painted a cream color on all 3 surfaces. Windows directly behind PJ but we have installed blackout shades.
> Thanks for your help!


It is very difficult to make a judgment call from my armchair here. With that said, do you have a plan view drawing, including seating and PJ positions, of your room? The old saying that a picture is worth a thousands words applies here.

Best,
Don


----------



## NaTeDoGG

NaTeDoGG said:


> Take a 1.0 gain white screen and a 1.0 gain gray screen (a gray substrate with a positive gain layer so the end result is 1.0 gain). Viewed in a light controlled room with dark surfaces, is the image identical? I guess the intent is that the gain completely makes up for the loss from the gray. Is that true both in theory and in practice?
> 
> I've read many reports of gray screens having dimmer whites and less vibrant colors (less "pop"). The usual suggestion of using a brighter projector leads me to think that a brighter projector is needed for a gray screen, despite the gain specification. Now that I'm considering an even darker gray screen (the Phantom HALR), the natural conclusion is that I'd need an even brighter projector (but I can't quantify how much brighter).
> 
> Can you explain which parameters to consider when choosing between a Firehawk and a Phantom HALR?


Sorry for the bump, but I would really appreciate if Don or someone else at Stewart could provide some insight on this? I'm ready to place an order, I just want to have complete information so I don't have regrets.


----------



## Don Stewart

NaTeDoGG said:


> Sorry for the bump, but I would really appreciate if Don or someone else at Stewart could provide some insight on this? I'm ready to place an order, I just want to have complete information so I don't have regrets.


Can I have some more info on your room and proposed PJ please.

Room size, Projector Throw distance, Screen size, Viewing distance, Wall colors and ambient light conditions. Also, if you have any photos and/or a sketch that would be very helpful too.
When projecting images, the room itself is just as much part of the system as the components. With that said, I would more than happy to assist you.

Best,
Don


----------



## NaTeDoGG

Don Stewart said:


> Can I have some more info on your room and proposed PJ please.
> 
> Room size, Projector Throw distance, Screen size, Viewing distance, Wall colors and ambient light conditions. Also, if you have any photos and/or a sketch that would be very helpful too.
> When projecting images, the room itself is just as much part of the system as the components. With that said, I would more than happy to assist you.


Yes sir! Most definitely.  Here's my layout with annotations:
http://n4te.com/x/1339-su4e.png

I have European roller shades for all glass walls. These aluminum shades roll down on the outside of the windows, blocking 100% of outside light. They are great! The only light is from the projector.

The screen wall is black and the wall opposite the screen (behind the bed) is dark, but the rest of the walls and ceiling are white and the floors are light wood. This leads me to think an ALR screen is needed for room cross reflections. It would be sad to use a high contrast projector where the contrast can't be appreciated.

The screen will be 128" and the sitting distance ratio is 1.20 (11.15'). The projector will be the JVC X7500 (130,000:1 native contrast) with a 1.94 throw ratio (18.0 feet). With a new bulb and after calibration, the X7500 should give 1700 lumens on high and 1200 on low (based on reviews of the X7000 aka RS500). I hope running in high mode will be acceptable as the projector is 7 feet away. I think it's reasonable to use 25% for bulb loss when planning. Also I'll use ~50% zoom so expect to lose 15% there (based on reviews). High lamp mode after bulb loss and zoom: 1700 * 0.75 * 0.85 = ~1100 lumens.

I'm very anxious to hear your thoughts!


----------



## manoharshetty9

Don Stewart said:


> I did not realize you were in India. My suggestion is to email Scott Kimber. He will need the serial number of your screen to ID which motor you have. It can be found on the the back of the screen batten bar. Just another thought. In the past I have seen the same issue as you have when screen is not getting full voltage from house current. Screen will go down but will not retract with out a little manual help. It might pay to check this first.
> [email protected]


Checked the power at the junction box and it appears to be within specs. Tried emailing Scott at the above address and the email seems to not get delivered. Is the email address correct?


----------



## Don Stewart

manoharshetty9 said:


> Checked the power at the junction box and it appears to be within specs. Tried emailing Scott at the above address and the email seems to not get delivered. Is the email address correct?


Sorry, I left out the "K". 
This should work. 
[email protected]


----------



## Don Stewart

NaTeDoGG said:


> Yes sir! Most definitely.  Here's my layout with annotations:
> http://n4te.com/x/1339-su4e.png
> 
> I have European roller shades for all glass walls. These aluminum shades roll down on the outside of the windows, blocking 100% of outside light. They are great! The only light is from the projector.
> 
> The screen wall is black and the wall opposite the screen (behind the bed) is dark, but the rest of the walls and ceiling are white and the floors are light wood. This leads me to think an ALR screen is needed for room cross reflections. It would be sad to use a high contrast projector where the contrast can't be appreciated.
> 
> The screen will be 128" and the sitting distance ratio is 1.20 (11.15'). The projector will be the JVC X7500 (130,000:1 native contrast) with a 1.94 throw ratio (18.0 feet). With a new bulb and after calibration, the X7500 should give 1700 lumens on high and 1200 on low (based on reviews of the X7000 aka RS500). I hope running in high mode will be acceptable as the projector is 7 feet away. I think it's reasonable to use 25% for bulb loss when planning. Also I'll use ~50% zoom so expect to lose 15% there (based on reviews). High lamp mode after bulb loss and zoom: 1700 * 0.75 * 0.85 = ~1100 lumens.
> 
> I'm very anxious to hear your thoughts!


After studying your detailed drawing you have many options. BTW, the design is very good and I can see a lot of thought went into this. 
Calculating 100% IRE screen brightness with the lumen numbers you provided, you should have near 35fL with PJ lamp in high mode and around 22.5fL when in the low mode with a one gain screen. You state that the only light in the room will be from the projector. With that said, the Phantom HALR maybe more than needed here. The only concerns I have for this room will be some cross reflections from the kitchen area and white ceiling. It appears you have a dark area rug in front of screen so there should be no reflections problems from the light wood flooring. At best, you need a screen that will dampen the reflections from partial white walls and the full white ceiling. I would recommend the FireHawk G4 for this room. The G4 has a gain of 1.1, so the foot lambert numbers will be 10% higher than with a one gain screen.

Hope that helps.
Don


----------



## NaTeDoGG

Thanks Don! It's true I've spent a lot of time obsessing on this project. I'll go with the Firehawk G4 then. I appreciate your input, it gives me peace while I wait for delivery.  Cheers!


----------



## Don Stewart

For anyone who is interested in the Phantom screen. Our first production build of Phantom HALR screens are now shipping in both retractable and fixed frame models. Most of the first ones are going to dealer show rooms. 

(Photo shows factory screen tech making finishing adjustments on Phantom retractable screen tab system).


----------



## ajreynol

Greetings. I'm in the market and looking really hard at a Stewart screen. But I could use a bit of direction in the material I might need, as this will be my first projector setup.

The projector is going to be in my living room where light will be semi-controlled (most but not all windows will have screens on them). During the day time there will be ambient light, and I will be looking to use it during the day occasionally for sporting events. The room during the evening/night can get as dark as any dedicated, designed home theater room.

The projector is most likely going to be the Sony 665ES (http://www.sony.com/electronics/projector/vpl-vw665es) which offers a maximum of 1800 lumens. It will be ceiling mounted and placed whatever the closest distance is to achieve the desired screen size.

The target screen size is somewhere between 150"- 170". If we can get up to 170", that would be ideal. Our wall is quite large. 

We'll be looking at one of the motorized tension screen options.


So the question is based on that projector and light output potential, what screen material would you recommend for a good amount of brightness? 

If the brightness of the projector is too low, I'm also happy to take recommendations for a different (brighter) projector in the $8k-$15k range. It's important that the projector and screen can satisfactorily handle a screen up to 170". Any thoughts on screen material and projector to match that size will be GREATLY appreciated. Thanks!


----------



## loggeo

Don Stewart said:


> For anyone who is interested in the Phantom screen. Our first production build of Phantom HALR screens are now shipping in both retractable and fixed frame models. Most of the first ones are going to dealer show rooms.
> 
> (Photo shows factory screen tech making finishing adjustments on Phantom retractable screen tab system).


I know this is going to sound stupid, but if there would be anyone that could achieve it, it would be Stewart. So I am going to ask anyway. I already own a retractable firehawk and I could only wish I had a curved fixed frame screen to accommodate my set up, but unfortunately I face space limitations. 
Is it technically possible to see a retractable curved screen in the future? Can it be done?


----------



## Don Stewart

loggeo said:


> I know this is going to sound stupid, but if there would be anyone that could achieve it, it would be Stewart. So I am going to ask anyway. I already own a retractable firehawk and I could only wish I had a curved fixed frame screen to accommodate my set up, but unfortunately I face space limitations.
> Is it technically possible to see a retractable curved screen in the future? Can it be done?


We do not make a curved retractable screen at this time. Actually, your question is not stupid at all. We have been asked in the past the same question many times. Technically, it could be done
but the cost of doing so vs benefits are just not there.


----------



## Mike Garrett

ajreynol said:


> Greetings. I'm in the market and looking really hard at a Stewart screen. But I could use a bit of direction in the material I might need, as this will be my first projector setup.
> 
> The projector is going to be in my living room where light will be semi-controlled (most but not all windows will have screens on them). During the day time there will be ambient light, and I will be looking to use it during the day occasionally for sporting events. The room during the evening/night can get as dark as any dedicated, designed home theater room.
> 
> The projector is most likely going to be the Sony 665ES (http://www.sony.com/electronics/projector/vpl-vw665es) which offers a maximum of 1800 lumens. It will be ceiling mounted and placed whatever the closest distance is to achieve the desired screen size.
> 
> The target screen size is somewhere between 150"- 170". If we can get up to 170", that would be ideal. Our wall is quite large.
> 
> We'll be looking at one of the motorized tension screen options.
> 
> 
> So the question is based on that projector and light output potential, what screen material would you recommend for a good amount of brightness?
> 
> If the brightness of the projector is too low, I'm also happy to take recommendations for a different (brighter) projector in the $8k-$15k range. It's important that the projector and screen can satisfactorily handle a screen up to 170". Any thoughts on screen material and projector to match that size will be GREATLY appreciated. Thanks!


What size is your room?
What throw distance do you have available to work with?
Can you send me a picture of your screen wall, no flash. Show the room in the condition that you plan to use the projector in, as in blinds closed. 
Are you looking at doing 1080P, 3D, 4K or all three?
Are you wanting to do 4K with HDR?


----------



## ajreynol

Mike Garrett said:


> What size is your room?
> What throw distance do you have available to work with?
> Can you send me a picture of your screen wall, no flash. Show the room in the condition that you plan to use the projector in, as in blinds closed.
> Are you looking at doing 1080P, 3D, 4K or all three?
> Are you wanting to do 4K with HDR?


Hi thanks for the reply. Here is a picture of the room. The black cabinetry in the front is going to be removed and we'll be looking to use the majority of that wall for the screen. We're going to have a cabinet about 2' tall that's going to run the full width of the room which will house the receiver, amps, players, etc. 










The room is roughly 20'w x 25'L. The ceiling on the right (lowest) side is about 10' tall. The projector will be ceiling mounted and can be placed all the way to the very back of the room (so say a max throw distance of 24'-25'). 

The left wall is sliding glass doors and windows above the doors which we'll be installing motorized blinds on soon for good control during the day as needed. Assume a fair amount of ambient light will be present during the day since it's a living room. We'd still want it to be acceptably bright for daytime sporting events so you can probably understand the concern. 

The wall the projector will be on is likely to have the wallpaper removed entirely, so just think of it as a white wall for now. 

The screen size we're targeting is 160" - 170". 

We are looking to do 1080p and 4K primarily; 3D is fine if it has it; also fine if it doesn't. I know 3D is basically dead now that none of the recently announced CES TVs have the feature anymore, so yea. It's cool if it's there but not a problem otherwise.

We would like to do HDR with the 4K if possible (HDR would be nice but not necessary if it limits brightness options). Projector budget is up to $15k I'd say. I was intending on purchasing the Sony 665ES for around $10k, but new concerns about the brightness it offers (1800 lumens) vs the room we have and its lighting needs have provoked a new round of consideration. So while getting the right screen is the reason I'm in this thread, if you all feel the projector itself won't be able to light up a screen the size we'd like, I'm very much open to other projector options. If there are no 4K projectors in my price range that can sufficiently light up that wall, I'll be ready to look at 1080p options, but I'd prefer that to be a last resort. 

Thank you to all in advance.


----------



## tigerfan33

Don Stewart said:


> We do not make a curved retractable screen at this time. Actually, your question is not stupid at all. We have been asked in the past the same question many times. Technically, it could be done
> but the cost of doing so vs benefits are just not there.




Hey Don.
Has Stewart ever given any thought of developing a high gain screen comparable to the Dalite High Power Screen?
Since this screen has left the market many are in search of the same screen which I believe were manufactured by a few screen companies but like the Dalite has left the market.
Any thoughts?
Thanks


----------



## ajreynol

Hi Don, is there any chance I might be able to speak with you or one of your team members this weekend regarding my project? A second opinion on screen type would be really helpful (room pictured 2 posts up)


----------



## Don Stewart

tigerfan33 said:


> Hey Don.
> Has Stewart ever given any thought of developing a high gain screen comparable to the Dalite High Power Screen?
> Since this screen has left the market many are in search of the same screen which I believe were manufactured by a few screen companies but like the Dalite has left the market.
> Any thoughts?
> Thanks


Hi,

I don't see this happening in the near future. We manufacture most of our screen materials with a casting process which allow us to make seamless screens up to 40 by 90 feet.
The process works well with angular reflective coatings but has not worked well retro-reflective finishes in the past.


----------



## Don Stewart

ajreynol said:


> Hi Don, is there any chance I might be able to speak with you or one of your team members this weekend regarding my project? A second opinion on screen type would be really helpful (room pictured 2 posts up)


Most of our team has the weekend off. Please PM me your phone number.

Don


----------



## SXRDISBEST

Does anyone know what size snaps are used on the G2 Firehawk screen by chance? Or is it possible to source them?


----------



## Don Stewart

SXRDISBEST said:


> Does anyone know what size snaps are used on the G2 Firehawk screen by chance? Or is it possible to source them?


We use high quality DOT stainless steel snap fasteners as used in the marine industry.
You can find them in small numbers here.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/DOT-Stainless-Steel-Caps-and-Sockets-Snap-Fastener-Kit-200-pcs-/141736582409


----------



## SXRDISBEST

Don Stewart said:


> We use high quality DOT stainless steel snap fasteners as used in the marine industry.
> You can find them in small numbers here.
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/DOT-Stainless-Steel-Caps-and-Sockets-Snap-Fastener-Kit-200-pcs-/141736582409


Are these literally the same ones, brand and all? Thanks for the info sir!


----------



## Mojito

I received my motorized LX screen and have been using it for a couple of month. I noticed that the bottom edge of the screen is not completely straight. The bottom corners of the viewing area 56 mm away from the batten while the midlle is 50 mm away. As a result there is a barrel bow-shaped gap between the bottom of the image and the bottom of the viewing area which is quite visible and annoying. If I zoom the image to cover the gap, I get overscan on all other sides, which is also visible. 
Can this be fixed?


----------



## Don Stewart

Mojito said:


> I received my motorized LX screen and have been using it for a couple of month. I noticed that the bottom edge of the screen is not completely straight. The bottom corners of the viewing area 56 mm away from the batten while the midlle is 50 mm away. As a result there is a barrel bow-shaped gap between the bottom of the image and the bottom of the viewing area which is quite visible and annoying. If I zoom the image to cover the gap, I get overscan on all other sides, which is also visible.
> Can this be fixed?


Hi,

It might just need the tab guy wires to be adjusted. Please email Scott Kimber at our factory. Photos are also very helpful for Scott to interpret.
[email protected]

Best,
Don


----------



## manoharshetty9

Don Stewart said:


> I did not realize you were in India. My suggestion is to email Scott Kimber. He will need the serial number of your screen to ID which motor you have. It can be found on the the back of the screen batten bar. Just another thought. In the past I have seen the same issue as you have when screen is not getting full voltage from house current. Screen will go down but will not retract with out a little manual help. It might pay to check this first.
> [email protected]





Don Stewart said:


> From a trouble shooting standpoint, I would still check power at screen junction box with a meter just to eliminate possible voltage problem. Also, the masking panels have less weight than the screen and may retract ok when heavier screen may not.




The problem was with the Somfy motor capacitor. I tried interchanging the motors between the masking and the main screen roller tubes and it turns out that both the motors had weak/worn out capacitors.


Somfy motors service centre was really helpful and asked me to get both motors to their nearest service centre and they *replaced* the eight year old capacitors *for free*. I re-installed the motors and the screen is working as good as new at *zero cost*.


----------



## Don Stewart

manoharshetty9 said:


> The problem was with the Somfy motor capacitor. I tried interchanging the motors between the masking and the main screen roller tubes and it turns out that both the motors had weak/worn out capacitors.
> 
> 
> Somfy motors service centre was really helpful and asked me to get both motors to their nearest service centre and they *replaced* the eight year old capacitors *for free*. I re-installed the motors and the screen is working as good as new at *zero cost*.


Great to hear that you got the problem remedied.


----------



## Craig Peer

manoharshetty9 said:


> The problem was with the Somfy motor capacitor. I tried interchanging the motors between the masking and the main screen roller tubes and it turns out that both the motors had weak/worn out capacitors.
> 
> 
> Somfy motors service centre was really helpful and asked me to get both motors to their nearest service centre and they *replaced* the eight year old capacitors *for free*. I re-installed the motors and the screen is working as good as new at *zero cost*.


Wow - that's great service ! I'm even more glad I bought Stewart electric screens now !  Not that I've ever had anything go wrong with one.


----------



## dmillionz

My new CIMA Neve 138" 2.35:1 BC motorized screen has slightly bowed inward sides that really show with Cinemascope content. The corners are fine. It's just bowed in about .5 inch midway down on both sides. How can I remove these and make the screen surface a perfect rectangle? I'm not sure if the tension adjustments are causing this or something else. Other than this issue, the screen is outstanding in every regard.


----------



## Mojito

dmillionz said:


> My new CIMA Neve 138" 2.35:1 BC motorized screen has slightly bowed inward sides that really show with Cinemascope content. The corners are fine. It's just bowed in about .5 inch midway down on both sides. How can I remove these and make the screen surface a perfect rectangle? I'm not sure if the tension adjustments are causing this or something else. Other than this issue, the screen is outstanding in every regard.


I have a similar issue which I described a few posts above. I was told to use overscan. To be honest I expected a bit more from Stewart. In the era of 3D printers how difficult is it to draw a straigt rectangle?


----------



## dmillionz

Mojito said:


> I have a similar issue which I described a few posts above. I was told to use overscan. To be honest I expected a bit more from Stewart. In the era of 3D printers how difficult is it to draw a straigt rectangle?


The image you attached is exactly how mine looks on the sides. This is the first screen I've had that does this and also the most expensive. There has to be a fix and I don't see how overscan can resolve this when it's definitely the screen that needs correcting somehow.


----------



## scooter_29

Hi Don. Would you be able to fit the HALR material to a Cima frame? I installed a Cima Neve screen a few years ago. My dealer at the time thought it best to go with the 1.1 gain screen since I had sensitivity to sparkles from the screen in my old house(Firehawk3). It turns out that my blackout shades are not nearly as effective as I had hoped and would like to go to a light rejecting screen.


----------



## Mojito

Mojito said:


> I have a similar issue which I described a few posts above. I was told to use overscan. To be honest I expected a bit more from Stewart. In the era of 3D printers how difficult is it to draw a straigt rectangle?


Actually, on mine the distortions on the sides are not as bad as they look on the photo, although they are definitely there. My main problem is the bottom of the screen where I have a gap of the screen material between the masking and the image.


----------



## dmillionz

Mojito said:


> Actually, on mine the distortions on the sides are not as bad as they look on the photo, although they are definitely there. My main problem is the bottom of the screen where I have a gap of the screen material between the masking and the image.


I have this small gap on the bottom as well. I didn't have this on the Elite screen.


----------



## Danonano

Don,

I'm planning a setup in a multi-use room that has light walls, and plan to use a 138" 2.35 screen with a throw distance of 18 feet or so. I have seen you recommend the Graymatte 70 for this type of setup. Given the .7 gain, can you provide a rough estimate of how bright the projector needs to be to have an adequately bright picture?
Thanks


----------



## A7mad78

First image from My great ST 100 165" cinemascope 

What a great image through this screen 

Thx Stewart for ur great product 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## bstone261

So I was doing some reading on Acoustically Transparent Stewart FilmScreens. I have not purchased mine yet but I plan on getting a StudioTek 130 G3. I have a few questions on Stewarts AT material.



How are the AT Stewart Screens regarded in both audio and video quality? I know the non-AT are highly regarded for visual performance..
Would I need to put the speakers at-least 12" back from the screen?
I assume the subs can *not* go behind the screen?
Any help in this area would be greatly appreciated. thxs...


----------



## Tim in Scottsdale

Guys

I am being asked about the Stewart Grayhawk fabric for DLP; what is the current buzz on customers liking or not liking Grayhawk? I am 99% CRT action, so please advise.


----------



## Craig Peer

Tim in Scottsdale said:


> Guys
> 
> I am being asked about the Stewart Grayhawk fabric for DLP; what is the current buzz on customers liking or not liking Grayhawk? I am 99% CRT action, so please advise.


Grayhawk is a good material. You should get a sample - any dealer can send you one !


----------



## Tim in Scottsdale

Say Craig

I am a dealer, I just haven't been involved with lamp-driven projectors. Search "Blendzilla" in the CRT section to see what I mean.


----------



## Craig Peer

Tim in Scottsdale said:


> Say Craig
> 
> I am a dealer, I just haven't been involved with lamp-driven projectors. Search "Blendzilla" in the CRT section to see what I mean.


Doh - didn't realize that. I'm not ever in the CRT section - not my forte so to speak !


----------



## b curry

Tim in Scottsdale said:


> Guys
> 
> I am being asked about the Stewart Grayhawk fabric for DLP; what is the current buzz on customers liking or not liking Grayhawk? I am 99% CRT action, so please advise.


If I were you I'd give Stewart a call direct and ask your questions. They have sales engineers available to help with a selection and answer questions. The Stewart Gray screens, especially the FireHawk and GrayHawk have evolved over time. They were engineered to help with poor contrast and some ambient light situations. I saw in your other thread that you're dealing with some ambient light issues. Stewart has a new "Black" screen called the "Phantom HALR high ambient light rejecting screen" that might address some of your customers problems. Here's a link: http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/phantom

I've owned a FireHawk and now own a StudioTeK 130 and the were/are excellent screens.

I would give them a call with the particulars of the room, screen size, and the projector you're thinking about using and see what they have to say. Here's the telephone number: Stewart Sales Engineer, (800) 762-4999.


----------



## John Schuermann

For those interested in Stewart screens:

We are holding three different Home Theater Seminars in March, here in Colorado, all featuring Stewart screens - the new Phantom plus the StudioTek130 (we will also have samples of almost the entire line of Stewart materials, including Firehawk, GreyHawk and StudioTek / Snowmatte 100). The seminars are being sponsored by JVC, Stewart Filmscreen, JBL Synthesis, and Revel, with special guests Kris Deering (Sound and Vision Technical Editor / Lead Writer), Gregg Loewen (THX Video Standards Worldwide Instructor and calibrator), Robert Keeler (VP of Sales, Product Trainer for Stewart Filmscreen), and Chris Deutsch (National Sales Trainer - JVC Projectors). Brad Waite and I will be presenting as well. *These are educational seminars, NOT sales events*, so AVS has kindly allowed me to post about them. Scott Wilkinson wrote up a post here:

http://www.avsforum.com/home-theater-seminars-denver-colorado-springs/

The JVC RS4500 will be set up on a 156" diagonal 2.40:1 StudioTek130, with the RS620 set up on a 135" 16:9 Phantom.

Both projectors will be featured prominently and will be calibrated by Gregg Loewen (possibly in tandem with Kris Deering). Robert Keeler of Stewart will be there to do a presentation on the Stewart lineup and answer questions.

We'll also be setting up and demoing gear from JBL Synthesis, Revel, and JVC.

Registration is free thru Tuesday the 28th. Seminar dates are March 11th and 12th, Denver, and March 18th Colorado Springs at the Marriott Tech Center and Colorado Springs Marriott, respectively. More info at the link above


----------



## abinav555

hey don,

Can i get a mail id to contact for sales in India or US. I tried mail to the id listed on the site but there seemed to be no response.


----------



## SJHT

Just replaced my 10+ year old Firehawk retractable screen with a new one slightly larger and ST100 material. Is it normal for new screens to have a chemical smell to them? Thanks. SJ


----------



## Don Stewart

abinav555 said:


> hey don,
> 
> Can i get a mail id to contact for sales in India or US. I tried mail to the id listed on the site but there seemed to be no response.


Sorry for the late answer as I have not been viewing AVS much lately. Please contact Thomas Chenong in our Singapore office. He can direct you to our dealers in India.
[email protected]


----------



## Don Stewart

SJHT said:


> Just replaced my 10+ year old Firehawk retractable screen with a new one slightly larger and ST100 material. Is it normal for new screens to have a chemical smell to them? Thanks. SJ


Thank you for purchasing the Snomatte 100 studio reference screen. Snomatte 100 is manufactured with a casting process. The screen material will continue to cure for the first few weeks after installation. The non-toxic smell will dissipate during this period. Snomatte 100 is certified by Green Guard, an organization that test for environmental indoor safety, and is approved for use in elementary schools.
http://greenguard.org/en/index.aspx

Best,
Don


----------



## 12B4A

Just to support what Don said, my ST100 screen took 2 weeks or so before I stopped noticing the odor every time I walked in to the room.


----------



## SJHT

Don Stewart said:


> Thank you for purchasing the Snomatte 100 studio reference screen. Snomatte 100 is manufactured with a casting process. The screen material will continue to cure for the first few weeks after installation. The non-toxic smell will dissipate during this period. Snomatte 100 is certified by Green Guard, an organization that test for environmental indoor safety, and is approved for use in elementary schools.
> http://greenguard.org/en/index.aspx
> 
> Best,
> Don


It is a Studio Tech 100 but probably the same answer? Should I leave it down for a few days or does this matter. Thanks. Steve


----------



## Craig Peer

SJHT said:


> Just replaced my 10+ year old Firehawk retractable screen with a new one slightly larger and ST100 material. Is it normal for new screens to have a chemical smell to them? Thanks. SJ


That's like " new car smell " - I love it ! Currently I have to settle for " new projector smell ", as I'm perfectly satisfied with my Stewart screens !


----------



## SJHT

12B4A said:


> Just to support what Don said, my ST100 screen took 2 weeks or so before I stopped noticing the odor every time I walked in to the room.


Thanks for the info. Mine is rolled up. Wonder whether it should stay down and let the odor dissipate. SJ


----------



## Don Stewart

SJHT said:


> Thanks for the info. Mine is rolled up. Wonder whether it should stay down and let the odor dissipate. SJ


Yes, it will cure faster if exposed to circulating air.


----------



## fingersdlp

*Room treatment for ST100*

I am replacing a 2002 Firehawk G1. Choices are ST100 or ST130 (Neve would be a consideration but not available for my existing frame). Goal is to improve image quality and greatly reduce/eliminate the sheen/sparkle/material that is visible in bright areas. JVC RS520 projector. 18' 4" Foot throw. 118" 16:9 screen (with electrimask). Room is around 13 x 18.5 feet (projector behind rear wall). Maybe 16" from top of screen to ceiling. All screen wall area on front wall is black acoustic panels so screen is surrounded by black including the thick velvet boarder from frame.

I have a completely light controlled room (basement cave - no windows) with dark/very dark gray ceiling and very dark blue (midnight blue) walls. I am installing velvet curtains along the side walls out to 6 to 8 feet from screen. I had already wrapped sub and front speakers (L/C/R) with black velvet. Speakers sit below the screen (sub/center) or outside left/right of screen (still mostly below). The issue is the room is narrow so there is only a few feet on either side of the edges of the screen to the wall. There should not be much if any reflection from the back of any of the speakers because the way they are placed but I expect and see it from the sides of the L/R. 

On viewing samples all eyes preferred the ST100. Touch more detail and zero of the artifacts I am wanting to avoid. 

My concerns are the narrow room, the sides of L/R speaker and the painted ceiling. These are not optimal but I wonder if they are sufficient. Just asking if anyone thinks I will need to do more room treatment or if I should just avoid the ST100 for this setup.

I am very sensitive to the sheen (probably 15 years of upgrading projectors and seeing the sheen get more pronounced) so I want to get the ST100 provided there are no gotchas on my room treatment.

Thanks


----------



## fingersdlp

*Firehawk G1 vs ST100 measurement question*

Measured Firehawk G1 off the screen using Spyder 5 Pro I was getting 18.5 foot lamberts low lamp and 26.5 high lamp with a 100% full white test pattern.

Sliding ST100 sample material into place I was expecting these numbers to go down because of no gain but they did the opposite. They went from 18.5 to 24.5 on low lamp and from 26.5 to 37 on high lamp. All else was equal - I had it set to run constant measurements and I just slid the sample material in an out of place by hand.

Measuring off the screen requires the Spyder to be at an angle (slight) to the screen about 8 inches away from it. Could this angle explain why a 1.0 gain screen measured higher foot lamberts off the screen or is this a typlical difference between the white and gray screen materials?

Thanks


----------



## Ellebob

The angle of incident is the angle of reflection. Think of your projector as a laser pointer and the screen as a mirror, to get the optimal gain the sensor should be placed where the laser pointer reflects and the sensor should be angled towards that reflection. So it is quite possible you were off axis with the sensor and not getting optimal gain.

Anyway, in your room I would go with the ST100. Not other screen with gain will be as artifact free and with your darker wall I don't think you will light up the room much and you won't get a lot of light reflected back to the screen. The ST130 does have some sparkles but not as much as the Firehawk. The Firehawk has a darker base color material with a high gain coating. So while it's overall gain might be the similar, its coating is a higher gain then the ST130. Overall gain doesn't tell all the properties of a screen


----------



## fingersdlp

Ellebob said:


> ...So while it's overall gain might be the similar, its coating is a higher gain then the ST130. Overall gain doesn't tell all the properties of a screen


Makes sense. Thanks!


----------



## Craig Peer

fingersdlp said:


> *Room treatment for ST100*
> 
> I am replacing a 2002 Firehawk G1. Choices are ST100 or ST130 (Neve would be a consideration but not available for my existing frame). Goal is to improve image quality and greatly reduce/eliminate the sheen/sparkle/material that is visible in bright areas. JVC RS520 projector. 18' 4" Foot throw. 118" 16:9 screen (with electrimask). Room is around 13 x 18.5 feet (projector behind rear wall). Maybe 16" from top of screen to ceiling. All screen wall area on front wall is black acoustic panels so screen is surrounded by black including the thick velvet boarder from frame.
> 
> I have a completely light controlled room (basement cave - no windows) with dark/very dark gray ceiling and very dark blue (midnight blue) walls. I am installing velvet curtains along the side walls out to 6 to 8 feet from screen. I had already wrapped sub and front speakers (L/C/R) with black velvet. Speakers sit below the screen (sub/center) or outside left/right of screen (still mostly below). The issue is the room is narrow so there is only a few feet on either side of the edges of the screen to the wall. There should not be much if any reflection from the back of any of the speakers because the way they are placed but I expect and see it from the sides of the L/R.
> 
> On viewing samples all eyes preferred the ST100. Touch more detail and zero of the artifacts I am wanting to avoid.
> 
> My concerns are the narrow room, the sides of L/R speaker and the painted ceiling. These are not optimal but I wonder if they are sufficient. Just asking if anyone thinks I will need to do more room treatment or if I should just avoid the ST100 for this setup.
> 
> I am very sensitive to the sheen (probably 15 years of upgrading projectors and seeing the sheen get more pronounced) so I want to get the ST100 provided there are no gotchas on my room treatment.
> 
> Thanks


Sounds to me like you have treated the most critical parts of the room. Considering you liked the ST100 sample the best, and you have a dark room, I'd say go for it. Use the " flashlight test " to see if there is anything else in your room you could improve, and go from there ( see - http://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-di...read-once-you-go-black-you-never-go-back.html ).


----------



## fingersdlp

Craig Peer said:


> Sounds to me like you have treated the most critical parts of the room. Considering you liked the ST100 sample the best, and you have a dark room, I'd say go for it. Use the " flashlight test " to see if there is anything else in your room you could improve, and go from there ( see - http://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-di...read-once-you-go-black-you-never-go-back.html ).


I did venture into the dark zone - that thread gets scary fast and that was why I was wondering if I needed to do more. Thanks for the reply and info!


----------



## SJHT

Craig Peer said:


> Sounds to me like you have treated the most critical parts of the room. Considering you liked the ST100 sample the best, and you have a dark room, I'd say go for it. Use the " flashlight test " to see if there is anything else in your room you could improve, and go from there ( see - http://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-di...read-once-you-go-black-you-never-go-back.html ).


Is the flashlight test shining a light on walls,etc to see if it reflects back to the screen? Thanks. SJ


----------



## fingersdlp

SJHT said:


> Is the flashlight test shining a light on walls,etc to see if it reflects back to the screen? Thanks. SJ


I have heard it described two ways. Stand at screen facing the back wall/projector and shine the light over your shoulder onto the screen and observe the room elements that light up the most. Otherwise just stand at screen and move the light around in front of you to see what are the brightest objects.


----------



## Craig Peer

SJHT said:


> Is the flashlight test shining a light on walls,etc to see if it reflects back to the screen? Thanks. SJ


That's the method I use. Stand in the theater with your back to the screen, with a bright flashlight, with all lights off. Shine the flashlight to simulate what the light reflecting off the screen will light up, then see which room items reflect back enough light to light up the screen. Fix those items. I found the beige carpet in our theater to be a big offender, and black carpet really helped - 










That's my Stewart StudioTek 130 G3 screen !


----------



## jdlynch

I'm changing my setup from 16:9 to 2:35 scope. My existing screen, which I'm very satisfied with, is a Carada 106" diagonal bright white. Which Stewart screen material would be the closest to the Carada BW ? Too bad Carada has gone out of business.


----------



## Craig Peer

jdlynch said:


> I'm changing my setup from 16:9 to 2:35 scope. My existing screen, which I'm very satisfied with, is a Carada 106" diagonal bright white. Which Stewart screen material would be the closest to the Carada BW ? Too bad Carada has gone out of business.


You might consider Stewart's Cima Neve material. I might have a sample laying around - PM me if you want one.


----------



## Jerry Bruckheimer Fan

Would a Cima Neve screen be okay if my walls and ceiling are off-white with a light tinge of tan/yellow? Or would the Cima grey screen work better? I'm strongly considering Cima Neve but not 100%. Here's a picture of my wall. Also, I'm looking to upgrade to a true native 4K projector in the distant future (4-5 years). When the time comes, will this screen keep up and work well with true 4K? I'd hate to spend money to upgrade to a new screen later. Sorry if these questions have been asked before.


----------



## thetman

I was thinking of the stewart cima 2.35 screen for my room. not AT. mounted to wall. But a bit confused if the deluxe screen would be better since i have more screen material options? size will be 133 diagonal. projector will be JVCRS420. approx. 17ft. from screen wall. room is light controlled. any input appreciated.


----------



## Craig Peer

thetman said:


> I was thinking of the stewart cima 2.35 screen for my room. not AT. mounted to wall. But a bit confused if the deluxe screen would be better since i have more screen material options? size will be 133 diagonal. projector will be JVCRS420. approx. 17ft. from screen wall. room is light controlled. any input appreciated.


You can get the Cima Neve in a 133" or 138" diagonal 2.35:1. So, it will work.


----------



## SXRDISBEST

thetman said:


> I was thinking of the stewart cima 2.35 screen for my room. not AT. mounted to wall. But a bit confused if the deluxe screen would be better since i have more screen material options? size will be 133 diagonal. projector will be JVCRS420. approx. 17ft. from screen wall. room is light controlled. any input appreciated.


Gorgeous room! I like rooms that are fairly neutral and not covered in crazy bright colors. Jam the widest screen you can fit in there!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk


----------



## thetman

SXRDISBEST said:


> Gorgeous room! I like rooms that are fairly neutral and not covered in crazy bright colors. Jam the widest screen you can fit in there!
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk


thanks, appreciate it. never actually did a build thread. maybe once the screen is in I could put one together. About the screen size, definitely going to go with stewart cima. wife thinks the 133 might be too much and is already threatening to sit in the back row. we'll see.......


----------



## SXRDISBEST

thetman said:


> thanks, appreciate it. never actually did a build thread. maybe once the screen is in I could put one together. About the screen size, definitely going to go with stewart cima. wife thinks the 133 might be too much and is already threatening to sit in the back row. we'll see.......


I have a 130" (10ft wide) scope screen and I'm about 14' back (eye to screen). Not sure what your first row is but I could sit as close as 10ft from mine and be very happy. Any closer and I would start to see pixels. Tell her you're getting the smaller size and just order the big one and throw away the packaging with the details of the size asap. She'll never measure.  

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk


----------



## Ellebob

In installing these I have never heard somebody say I should have went with the smaller screen, I have heard them say I should have went bigger.


----------



## SXRDISBEST

Ellebob said:


> In installing these I have never heard somebody say I should have went with the smaller screen, I have heard them say I should have went bigger.


Absolutely. Never happens. 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk


----------



## fingersdlp

A big thanks to Mike at AV Science for his help in my upgrade from a first generation Firehawk (2002!) to the lovely StudioTek 100. Also to Craig for letting me pick his brain as well. My First Generation Firehawk was 15 years old and served me well but with brighter and higher resolution projectors it was in need of an upgrade. Here is my experience.

I decided to go with the StudioTek 100 but it was a tough call with the ST130. The samples Mike sent really helped me decide. I did upgrade the room treatment to further minimize reflected light. The "Black" theater improvement thread was a great resource. With the older Firehawk I had grown sensative to the sheen/sparkle that was more pronounced in that first generation with brighter content. The ST100 had none of that. Artifact free and fanstastic. In testing if I abused the ST130 with absurdly bright cloud images and such I could see those artifacts minimally although for normal viewing I doubt it would have much impact. I also thought I may miss the added pop the ST130 would give for 3D. I have a 118" 16:9 with a JVC 520 about 18 foot throw. I have found the ST100 plenty bright in 3D on high lamp in this setup. I also liked that the brightness does not vary with the viewing angle on the ST100. All the seating outside the prime spots are getting a brighter image from before. It was easy to see with the samples how the ones with gain got grayer off-axis walking around.

The ST100 does fill up the room with dispursed light - especially when I put up a full white image. I think you do need full light control with very good to great room treatment for this screen. I already had dark gray carpet/ceiling and blackout material on front screen wall for a combined border of about 2 feet all around the screen. Side walls are midnight blue (dark) with a little lighter blue acoustic panels. For the ST100 I completed the blackout of the front screen wall around the screen. I added black velvet material for the speakers (non AT screen) and installed black velvet curtains on the side walls that I can pull out from the front screen wall if I choose. It is a narrow room so these help but I was happy to see they were not required for a great image. The velvet on the speakers was probably the only needed change. 

I also want to give Stewart Filmscreen a shout out. The electric masking frame I bought with the Firehawk 15 years ago was a custom size. I was concerned how well the new screen material would fit the existing snaps. Stewart delivered with their great engineering and manufactoring as it went up wrinkle free with perfect snap placement. I was slow and careful and I had the old screen off and the new one on in less than 30 minutes. I did have a couple helpers to support the screen while I snapped it. Finally they packed the screen fantastic and I resused the packing for the old screen. 

I OCD in me might still want to paint the ceiling black or use some other treatment but it is hard to justify as the image is fantastic. VERY happy with the upgrade and it was clearly long overdue.


----------



## Jerry Bruckheimer Fan

I recently placed an order for a 138 inch Stewart Cima Neve 2.35:1 fixed frame screen. I can't wait to test it out!!! Too bad I'm still missing a projector (for the short-term future). To mark the occasion in preparation of receiving my screen (and projector soon, I hope) I double dipped and repurchased Crimson Tide and Con Air, this time on blu-ray, since my original DVDs didn't even have the enhanced widescreen anamorphic feature that later DVDs used.


----------



## DaveN

fingersdlp,

Congratulations. Great screen choice. I went from Stewart's 1.3 material to the ST100 and I am truly loving it with my VPL-Vw1100ES.

Read the going black thread. I used Roscoe paint, dark carpet, and highly recommend velvet instead of paint 4 feet out on all sides of the image.


----------



## fingersdlp

DaveN said:


> fingersdlp,
> 
> Congratulations. Great screen choice. I went from Stewart's 1.3 material to the ST100 and I am truly loving it with my VPL-Vw1100ES.
> 
> Read the going black thread. I used Roscoe paint, dark carpet, and highly recommend velvet instead of paint 4 feet out on all sides of the image.


Thanks. I would have loved to demo a full size ST130 in my room for an A/B comparison. I am sure I would have been happy with it. The Neve was of interest as well but not for my screen size apparently. 

Thanks for the feedback on the Roscoe/velvet. I have enough protostar flock to treat the first 4 feet of my ceiling. It will be a hard sell for the wife as the image is already fantastic. Nice problem to have.


----------



## thetman

looking for 2.35 screen fixed non-AT. Reading about different screens and materials is a bit overwhelming. My question is how would 4K material be on the Cima Neve screen material. Would it work ok? Or are there much better options. Screen is a big purchase and just want to make sure I am kind of future proof. also how would Cima compare to screen innovations series 3? just trying to narrow it down. thanks


----------



## GetGray

thetman said:


> looking for 2.35 screen fixed non-AT. Reading about different screens and materials is a bit overwhelming. My question is how would 4K material be on the Cima Neve screen material. Would it work ok? Or are there much better options. Screen is a big purchase and just want to make sure I am kind of future proof. also how would Cima compare to screen innovations series 3? just trying to narrow it down. thanks


Neve is a fairly plain white vinyl. It has no heavy optical coatings or perfs so it it will do fine for 4k.


----------



## thetman

GetGray said:


> Neve is a fairly plain white vinyl. It has no heavy optical coatings or perfs so it it will do fine for 4k.


ok thanks- still researching a bit. so many choices.


----------



## Craig Peer

thetman said:


> ok thanks- still researching a bit. so many choices.


I have a Cima Neve sample I could send you laying around. PM or email me if you would like.


----------



## DavidHir

fingersdlp said:


> I decided to go with the StudioTek 100 but it was a tough call with the ST130. The samples Mike sent really helped me decide. I did upgrade the room treatment to further minimize reflected light. The "Black" theater improvement thread was a great resource. With the older Firehawk I had grown sensative to the sheen/sparkle that was more pronounced in that first generation with brighter content. The ST100 had none of that. Artifact free and fanstastic. In testing if I abused the ST130 with absurdly bright cloud images and such I could see those artifacts minimally although for normal viewing I doubt it would have much impact. I also thought I may miss the added pop the ST130 would give for 3D. I have a 118" 16:9 with a JVC 520 about 18 foot throw. I have found the ST100 plenty bright in 3D on high lamp in this setup. I also liked that the brightness does not vary with the viewing angle on the ST100. All the seating outside the prime spots are getting a brighter image from before. It was easy to see with the samples how the ones with gain got grayer off-axis walking around.


I've got the ST100 (@ 9 foot wide scope) and couldn't be happier.


----------



## xHornZx

I just bought a used Firehawk for 550 bucks on Ebay. The seller does not know what version of the Firehawk it is so its probably the old versions, G1 or G2.

Does anyone know the differences between all the Firehawk versions? (G1, G2, G3 and G4) I could barely find any info about the old versions.

It would help me to find out which one I have!


----------



## 996911

On the back of the frame there should be a Stewart sticker with the model, generation, S/N, size, etc.


----------



## abinav555

DavidHir said:


> I've got the ST100 (@ 9 foot wide scope) and couldn't be happier.
> View attachment 2082841


Is that an AT screen ?


----------



## 996911

abinav555 said:


> Is that an AT screen ?


My guess would be no since all the LCR speakers are not behind it. But know that you can get the Stewart screen with or without the AT treatment.


----------



## Kris Deering

SXRDISBEST said:


> I have a 130" (10ft wide) scope screen and I'm about 14' back (eye to screen). Not sure what your first row is but I could sit as close as 10ft from mine and be very happy. Any closer and I would start to see pixels. Tell her you're getting the smaller size and just order the big one and throw away the packaging with the details of the size asap. She'll never measure.
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk




10 ft wide is a 140" diagonal screen if it is a 2.35:1 aspect.


When my wife and I built my current theater I went back and forth between a 110" or 120" 16x9 screen. I ended up with the 120" and when we were installing it she was like "this thing is HUGE!!", which I expected since the room before had a 78" diagonal screen. But after about a year I also heard her saying, we could have gone bigger. It is all relative. I am now having a 140" 2.35:1 screen with masking built by Stewart and should be installing in the next couple weeks. I agree completely, get the bigger one and just don't tell her. No way she'd be able to figure it out without looking at the spec sheet.


----------



## 996911

Kris Deering said:


> 10 ft wide is a 140" diagonal screen if it is a 2.35:1 aspect.


A 10' (120") wide screen is 130" in the 2.35/2.40 scope aspect not 140".


----------



## Kris Deering

996911 said:


> A 10' (120") wide screen is 130" in the 2.35/2.40 scope aspect not 140".



Doh, you're dead on. Sorry about that. For some reason I was thinking my 140" quote showed 120" width, but it is 129".


http://www.displaywars.com/140-inch-235x1-vs-130-inch-235x1


----------



## 996911

Kris Deering said:


> Doh, you're dead on. Sorry about that. For some reason I was thinking my 140" quote showed 120" width, but it is 129".
> 
> 
> http://www.displaywars.com/140-inch-235x1-vs-130-inch-235x1


haha, no worries. The only reason it looked off to me was I have been going through every possible calculation for my new screen.

By the way, that display wars link is sweet!


----------



## 996911

Here is my comparison:http://www.displaywars.com/120-inch-16x9-vs-152-inch-235x1

I went from a 16x9 120" to a 2.35 152" screen which nets me almost 80% larger picture watching 2.35 movies! I wanted to keep the 16x9 size I currently had which was perfect for my theater room but the 2.35/2.40 movies looked horrible (so small) that I was left wanting more any time we fired up a movie. My goal was to basically keep my 16x9 screen but be able to stretch the screen out for scope movies. This gets me that. Instal is Thursday. Very excited.


----------



## GJBetancourt

996911 said:


> Here is my comparison:http://www.displaywars.com/120-inch-16x9-vs-152-inch-235x1
> 
> I went from a 16x9 120" to a 2.35 152" screen which nets me almost 80% larger picture watching 2.35 movies! I wanted to keep the 16x9 size I currently had which was perfect for my theater room but the 2.35/2.40 movies looked horrible (so small) that I was left wanting more any time we fired up a movie. My goal was to basically keep my 16x9 screen but be able to stretch the screen out for scope movies. This gets me that. Instal is Thursday. Very excited.




What are your room dimensions?


----------



## 996911

GJBetancourt said:


> What are your room dimensions?


18' Wide 
21' Deep


----------



## Craig Peer

996911 said:


> Here is my comparison:http://www.displaywars.com/120-inch-16x9-vs-152-inch-235x1
> 
> I went from a 16x9 120" to a 2.35 152" screen which nets me almost 80% larger picture watching 2.35 movies! I wanted to keep the 16x9 size I currently had which was perfect for my theater room but the 2.35/2.40 movies looked horrible (so small) that I was left wanting more any time we fired up a movie. My goal was to basically keep my 16x9 screen but be able to stretch the screen out for scope movies. This gets me that. Instal is Thursday. Very excited.


Post a photo when the new screen is installed !


----------



## 996911

Craig Peer said:


> Post a photo when the new screen is installed !


Will do. And will do one better.....a before with the 16x9 FireHawk and then the new 2.35 StudioTek 130 :nerd:


----------



## abinav555

What is the minimum distance before you stop seeing the perfs ? For HD and 4K. Let's assume for a nitpicky person with 20/20 vision.


----------



## 996911

abinav555 said:


> What is the minimum distance before you stop seeing the perfs ? For HD and 4K. Let's assume for a nitpicky person with 20/20 vision.


Completely dependent on the amount of light in the room, the image being displayed (dark scene versus bright scene), and I'm sure a few other factors. With the room completely dark with the brightest white scene you will be able to see the AT treatment if you get close enough. But from where I sit in row 1 (12' viewing distance) you really have to know what you are looking for to even trick yourself into seeing any of the perfs. But make no mistake, you will be able to see them if you are sitting close enough (maybe in that 6-8' range for really bright, white domnated scenes).


----------



## DavidHir

abinav555 said:


> Is that an AT screen ?





996911 said:


> My guess would be no since all the LCR speakers are not behind it. But know that you can get the Stewart screen with or without the AT treatment.


Correct.

My room is not very big; just a little bigger than 12 x 10 feet. There is a closet behind the couch where the projector is ceiling mounted (closet doors removed) which gives me two more feet of throw. I sit about 10.5 feet back from the 9 foot wide screen. I wanted pretty much the biggest scope screen from that distance, so went with bookshelf speakers.

Down the road when I move, I will make sure my new home has a larger room that can easily accommodate at least a 12 foot wide scope screen.


----------



## 996911

DavidHir said:


> Down the road when I move, I will make sure my new home has a larger room that can easily accommodate at least a 12 foot wide scope screen.


Heck yeah!


----------



## elvisior

We have an electric tensioned studiotek 130 acoustically transparent screen. We've loved it very much.
Today it decided to descend (without the motor running) and refuses to wind back up into the case. The motor turns on but the screen doesn't go up.
The only thing appearing to keep the screen from being destroyed (although it is extremely precariously jerry rigged at the moment) is the tensioning wires on the side appear to be connected to the case still.

I'm having a slight panic.. anyone got any knowledge on such things that can offer me some advice?

I'm hoping someone will say .. undo these screws and you'll see x has come off the y .. sit it back on and away you go.. good as new.. (I can dream can't I?)

Cheers,

Trav


----------



## Shepardos

I have a *fixed frame curved 3.40m 21:9 Stewart Greyhawk G3* Screen. I love the screen, but I would like to watch also during the day. Now I found the new Phantom from Stewart.



Question:

- I only have a throw ration *1.4* instead *1.8*. Is it still possible to use this screen or do I have to expect to much hot spotting?

- Can I only order the Phantom Screen material, because I already have a fixed frame from Stewart and only exchange my Greyhawk screen?



Appreciated any feedback...


----------



## Don Stewart

Shepardos said:


> I have a *fixed frame curved 3.40m 21:9 Stewart Greyhawk G3* Screen. I love the screen, but I would like to watch also during the day. Now I found the new Phantom from Stewart.
> 
> 
> 
> Question:
> 
> - I only have a throw ration *1.4* instead *1.8*. Is it still possible to use this screen or do I have to expect to much hot spotting?
> 
> - Can I only order the Phantom Screen material, because I already have a fixed frame from Stewart and only exchange my Greyhawk screen?
> 
> 
> 
> Appreciated any feedback...


Yes...we can manufacture a replacement screen for your existing frame. We would just need the serial number. But with that said, I can not recommend a Phantom replacement with a 1.4 throw distance. Since your screen is curved with a horizontal radius, we can go a little shorter than we would with a flat screen as the angle of incident has been somewhat reduced. I would be more inclined consider FireHawk G4 as a replacement. Also, is there anyway that PJ throw distance can be increased?

Best Regards,
Don


----------



## Shepardos

Hi Don,

Thanks for your feedback.

What is the minimum throw ratio with my 21:9 curved screen for the Phantom? I need to revers-engineer how much I have to move the projector. 
BTW: The projector is ceiling mounted , I use the lens shift, not sure if this is also a problem for the Phantom?

Thanks
S.


----------



## Don Stewart

Shepardos said:


> Hi Don,
> 
> Thanks for your feedback.
> 
> What is the minimum throw ratio with my 21:9 curved screen for the Phantom? I need to revers-engineer how much I have to move the projector.
> BTW: The projector is ceiling mounted , I use the lens shift, not sure if this is also a problem for the Phantom?
> 
> Thanks
> S.


Please PM me your serial number. I can then have staff look up your original order to determine horizontal radius dimension. Also, are you using an "A" lens or zoom out method for Scope?

Regards,
Don


----------



## RapalloAV

To get an AT screen curved 150" dia scope and some gain, would I have to use micro perf since all the wocen are less than 1.0 gain?
Is a 1.3 gain micro perf ok curved at 150" diag, scope?


----------



## Mike Garrett

RapalloAV said:


> To get an AT screen curved 150" dia scope and some gain, would I have to use micro perf since all the wocen are less than 1.0 gain?
> Is a 1.3 gain micro perf ok curved at 150" diag, scope?


Yes, you would need to go with a microperf. ST130 microperf will give you about 1.17 gain. As far as is the curve okay, are you using an A-lens? If so, what throw? If no A-lens, then you will have some barrel distortion.


----------



## RapalloAV

Mike Garrett said:


> Yes, you would need to go with a microperf. ST130 microperf will give you about 1.17 gain. As far as is the curve okay, are you using an A-lens? If so, what throw? If no A-lens, then you will have some barrel distortion.


I use an Isco III lens and the throw is 6M. Does one loose blacks on a slightly higher gain screen over a woven AT screen?


----------



## Mike Garrett

RapalloAV said:


> I use an Isco III lens and the throw is 6M. Does one loose blacks on a slightly higher gain screen over a woven AT screen?


Not if you match brightness.


----------



## Craig Peer

elvisior said:


> We have an electric tensioned studiotek 130 acoustically transparent screen. We've loved it very much.
> Today it decided to descend (without the motor running) and refuses to wind back up into the case. The motor turns on but the screen doesn't go up.
> The only thing appearing to keep the screen from being destroyed (although it is extremely precariously jerry rigged at the moment) is the tensioning wires on the side appear to be connected to the case still.
> 
> I'm having a slight panic.. anyone got any knowledge on such things that can offer me some advice?
> 
> I'm hoping someone will say .. undo these screws and you'll see x has come off the y .. sit it back on and away you go.. good as new.. (I can dream can't I?)
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Trav


Call Stewart ( if you haven't already ) !


----------



## elvisior

Thanks Craig... Due to timezone differences I had a bit of trouble getting on to someone (and was having a bit of a panic). Eventually exchanged some emails with stewart support and am now in contact with the stewart representative in this country.
Sounds like the tube motor is stuffed.... This year was the screen's 21st birthday... looked good as new too ... 



Craig Peer said:


> Call Stewart ( if you haven't already ) !


----------



## Craig Peer

elvisior said:


> Thanks Craig... Due to timezone differences I had a bit of trouble getting on to someone (and was having a bit of a panic). Eventually exchanged some emails with stewart support and am now in contact with the stewart representative in this country.
> Sounds like the tube motor is stuffed.... This year was the screen's 21st birthday... looked good as new too ...


21 YEARS ! WOW ! That's amazing !


----------



## Wallyangler

elvisior said:


> We have an electric tensioned studiotek 130 acoustically transparent screen. We've loved it very much.
> Today it decided to descend (without the motor running) and refuses to wind back up into the case. The motor turns on but the screen doesn't go up.
> The only thing appearing to keep the screen from being destroyed (although it is extremely precariously jerry rigged at the moment) is the tensioning wires on the side appear to be connected to the case still.
> 
> I'm having a slight panic.. anyone got any knowledge on such things that can offer me some advice?
> 
> I'm hoping someone will say .. undo these screws and you'll see x has come off the y .. sit it back on and away you go.. good as new.. (I can dream can't I?)
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Trav


This is caused by the rubber coupling between the motor and the aluminum screen tube failing. My screen is about 20 years old and around 5 years ago the same thing happened with the screen coming completely out. The motor worked but the coupling degrades and turns to a gummy tar like mess. There's also another rubber bushing that holds the other end of the motor and it also failed. I got nowhere trying to get replacement parts so had to makeshift my own using parts from a hardware store. It's not to hard to fix if you can get the parts.


----------



## Don Stewart

elvisior said:


> We have an electric tensioned studiotek 130 acoustically transparent screen. We've loved it very much.
> Today it decided to descend (without the motor running) and refuses to wind back up into the case. The motor turns on but the screen doesn't go up.
> The only thing appearing to keep the screen from being destroyed (although it is extremely precariously jerry rigged at the moment) is the tensioning wires on the side appear to be connected to the case still.
> 
> I'm having a slight panic.. anyone got any knowledge on such things that can offer me some advice?
> 
> I'm hoping someone will say .. undo these screws and you'll see x has come off the y .. sit it back on and away you go.. good as new.. (I can dream can't I?)
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Trav


Yes, the rubber coupling, (dampens the motor noise) has failed. Please contact Mr Scott Kimber in customer support. 
[email protected]
Phone 1-310 784-5300 ext.145

Best,
Don


----------



## thetman

got my 133" scope Cima screen installed yesterday. Screen looks very nice and install went great. It was trying to get a decent picture on new JVC X570R that was frustrating me yesterday. I feel better today after doing some amateurish tweaking. So I was able to sit back bit and enjoy home theater experience for the first time. The installers were raving how easy and nice the screen install went together. looking forward to spending a lot of time watching movies now. thanks to Craig & mike at AVS for helping me along in getting the screen and answering my questions. much appreciated.


----------



## Tom Bley

thetman said:


> got my 133" scope Cima screen installed yesterday. Screen looks very nice and install went great. It was trying to get a decent picture on new JVC X570R that was frustrating me yesterday. I feel better today after doing some amateurish tweaking. So I was able to sit back bit and enjoy home theater experience for the first time. The installers were raving how easy and nice the screen install went together. looking forward to spending a lot of time watching movies now. thanks to Craig & mike at AVS for helping me along in getting the screen and answering my questions. much appreciated.


Nice home theater and the screen looks great.


----------



## thetman

Tom Bley said:


> thetman said:
> 
> 
> 
> got my 133" scope Cima screen installed yesterday. Screen looks very nice and install went great. It was trying to get a decent picture on new JVC X570R that was frustrating me yesterday. I feel better today after doing some amateurish tweaking. So I was able to sit back bit and enjoy home theater experience for the first time. The installers were raving how easy and nice the screen install went together. looking forward to spending a lot of time watching movies now. thanks to Craig & mike at AVS for helping me along in getting the screen and answering my questions. much appreciated.[/QUOTE
> 
> Nice home theater and the screen looks great.
> 
> 
> 
> thanks, appreciate it. took long enough- but finally have a HT room to enjoy.
Click to expand...


----------



## RapalloAV

I currently have a curved 145" diag scope AT screen XD material with motorised masking for three ratios.
Its screen fabric has grommets installed and fixed to a curved timber frame with "O" rings. The setup works beautifully and looks wonderful as it has no visible frame that screens are usually attached to. The setup is how cinemas used to look, being an X projectionist for over 35+ years Im real fussy about the look and presentation of my image...

I would like a bit more gain and have been thinking after chatting with many that the UltraMatte 150 micro perf would be the answer to give me the extra gain Im wanting.
However I need fabric only with my setup, can I buy just the fabric from Stewart?
Would be great if they can also supply with installed grommets....


----------



## Don Stewart

RapalloAV said:


> I currently have a curved 145" diag scope AT screen XD material with motorised masking for three ratios.
> Its screen fabric has grommets installed and fixed to a curved timber frame with "O" rings. The setup works beautifully and looks wonderful as it has no visible frame that screens are usually attached to. The setup is how cinemas used to look, being an X projectionist for over 35+ years Im real fussy about the look and presentation of my image...
> 
> I would like a bit more gain and have been thinking after chatting with many that the UltraMatte 150 micro perf would be the answer to give me the extra gain Im wanting.
> However I need fabric only with my setup, can I buy just the fabric from Stewart?
> Would be great if they can also supply with installed grommets....


Hi Murray,

No problem replacing screen only to match your existing mounting frame. We would need your SN so we can look up your original order dimensions in our archives and duplicate with new screen material.

Best,
Don


----------



## RapalloAV

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Murray,
> 
> No problem replacing screen only to match your existing mounting frame. We would need your SN so we can look up your original order dimensions in our archives and duplicate with new screen material.
> 
> Best,
> Don


Hi Don
My original screen material is not from you, its an XD Seymour. I have the pattern on file for it with the placements of the grommets, you could use this as the template. I live in New Zealand so it would have to be shipped to me as Seymour once did. This will be the third screen replacement in 6 years so I want to get this right this time with the little extra gain from the UltraMatte 150 microperf.

My throw is 17 ' and the width of my curved scope screen is 11' wide, would you consider the UltraMatte150 microperf a safe gain that would produce any hotspotting? I have three rows of four seats.

Can you give me an email please so i can send you the template for a price?
Again many thanks...


----------



## Schuyler Bain

*CIMA vs G130?*

The Studiotek G130 microperf seems to be the reference gold standard and the CIMA seems to be best performance for your buck. Don’t know that the performance increase for G130 warrants large price increase over CIMA. Thoughts, comparisons?


My first row of seating will be 9’7” distance from the screen. I read that the recommended minimum distance from G130 is 10ft, so that you don’t see the perforations on the screen. Is that accurate?


I will be using a dedicated room with controlled lighting, need AT screen and using Epson 5040UB. Looking to get 125" diag. 2:35:1.


----------



## Ellebob

We install these and personally I don't think the ST130 is better than the Cima Neve unless you need the added brightness or you are doing a curved screen. The Cima Neve IMHO is the bargain among screens at the moment. It is much better than the cheapies and very, very close to the pricier models.

10 feet is minimum and some may notice the perforations on bright scenes at 10 feet but may not see all the time. I'd say 11-12 feet is a better distance to never have it totally disappear.


----------



## Schuyler Bain

Ellebob said:


> 10 feet is minimum and some may notice the perforations on bright scenes at 10 feet but may not see all the time. I'd say 11-12 feet is a better distance to never have it totally disappear.


Is the CIMA the same minimum viewing distance in the AT/Perforated material as the G130?


----------



## Ellebob

I'm not sure about the Perforado which is the Cima perforated but I believe it is about the same. I haven't used that material yet, I did see it but don't recall the viewing distance. I'm sure Don can better answer that and the differences. I am not sure if it uses the same perforation method. In person it looked very good.


----------



## Tom Bley

G130? you must mean ST130? The micro perforations look the same size, I believe they are .5mm in Dia. Get a sample, everyones vision is different. I'm sure the distance recommendation is the same no matter what material of Stewarts you have Micro-perfed. The perfs mostly disappear for me at 11.5 feet even in the brighter scenes.


----------



## Schuyler Bain

Tom Bley said:


> G130? you must mean ST130? The micro perforations look the same size, I believe they are .5mm in Dia. Get a sample, everyones vision is different. I'm sure the distance recommendation is the same no matter what material of Stewarts you have Micro-perfed. The perfs mostly disappear for me at 11.5 feet even in the brighter scenes.


Yes, I meant the studiotek 130G3. And the CIMA Neve IS perforated as well? Can anyone recommend some other options that might be a better fit for slightly less than 10' viewing distance? Or is this how most AT screen materials are constructed?


----------



## Ellebob

There are two basic type of AT screens, perforated and woven. Each has its pros and cons and there is no perfect screen for every situation. Here is my opinion and experience. Others may vary.

Perforated Pros:
Better picture quality
A wider variety of screen materials available for different situations. Ambient light rejecting, gain screens, etc.

Perforated Cons:
More audio degradation, needs more EQ
works better if speakers are 8-12" behind screen. Can be placed closer but trades off more audio.

Woven Pros:
Some materials (not all) can be very fine and allow for closer seating distances.
Less audio degradation. EQ might not be needed depending on material
speakers can be closer to screen material without affecting audio as much

Woven Cons:
No gain or ALR materials
decreased picture quality

A videophile won't use an AT screen because whenever you have holes or weave it allows some light to go through it and if light goes through it then you lose some picture quality (not much) compared to a solid screen. An audiophile would never put something in front of his speakers even if it is the equivalent of speaker grill material. Now all this might seem bad but in reality to me an AT screen is the way to go for home theater. The benefits outweigh the trade offs by getting your speakers placed optimally it has a much bigger benefit on sound then the material in front of it, even if it requires some EQ. I'm also willing to sacrifice a little picture quality for a bigger screen with better audio. YMMV.

To answer your question there are some woven materials you can sit closer without seeing the weave. In general I'm not a big fan of screen samples because they are often too small to give a real good idea of the difference in materials like you won't be able to tell hot spotting or uniformity from a 1 foot sample. However, this may be one of those instances where samples might help decide if the perforations or weave will work for your seating distance.

The Cima Perforado is the perforated model. I believe it is the Neve that has been perforated. Don monitors this thread and I'm sure he can tell you the exact specs.


----------



## Craig Peer

Schuyler Bain said:


> The Studiotek G130 microperf seems to be the reference gold standard and the CIMA seems to be best performance for your buck. Don’t know that the performance increase for G130 warrants large price increase over CIMA. Thoughts, comparisons?
> 
> 
> My first row of seating will be 9’7” distance from the screen. I read that the recommended minimum distance from G130 is 10ft, so that you don’t see the perforations on the screen. Is that accurate?
> 
> 
> I will be using a dedicated room with controlled lighting, need AT screen and using Epson 5040UB. Looking to get 125" diag. 2:35:1.


I own both a StudioTek 130 and a Cima Neve, but mine are not AT screens. That said, I find the StudioTek 130 to look just a little more " refined " picture wise, and finer grained, when I can see any screen surface at all which is rare ( mostly because I like a really bright picture ).


----------



## Schuyler Bain

Ellebob said:


> There are two basic type of AT screens, perforated and woven. Each has its pros and cons and there is no perfect screen for every situation. Here is my opinion and experience. Others may vary.
> 
> Perforated Pros:
> Better picture quality
> A wider variety of screen materials available for different situations. Ambient light rejecting, gain screens, etc.
> 
> Perforated Cons:
> More audio degradation, needs more EQ
> works better if speakers are 8-12" behind screen. Can be placed closer but trades off more audio.
> 
> Woven Pros:
> Some materials (not all) can be very fine and allow for closer seating distances.
> Less audio degradation. EQ might not be needed depending on material
> speakers can be closer to screen material without affecting audio as much
> 
> Woven Cons:
> No gain or ALR materials
> decreased picture quality
> 
> A videophile won't use an AT screen because whenever you have holes or weave it allows some light to go through it and if light goes through it then you lose some picture quality (not much) compared to a solid screen. An audiophile would never put something in front of his speakers even if it is the equivalent of speaker grill material. Now all this might seem bad but in reality to me an AT screen is the way to go for home theater. The benefits outweigh the trade offs by getting your speakers placed optimally it has a much bigger benefit on sound then the material in front of it, even if it requires some EQ. I'm also willing to sacrifice a little picture quality for a bigger screen with better audio. YMMV.
> 
> To answer your question there are some woven materials you can sit closer without seeing the weave. In general I'm not a big fan of screen samples because they are often too small to give a real good idea of the difference in materials like you won't be able to tell hot spotting or uniformity from a 1 foot sample. However, this may be one of those instances where samples might help decide if the perforations or weave will work for your seating distance.
> 
> The Cima Perforado is the perforated model. I believe it is the Neve that has been perforated. Don monitors this thread and I'm sure he can tell you the exact specs.


That's a great break down of the info - Thanks


----------



## Tom Bley

Schuyler Bain said:


> Yes, I meant the studiotek 130G3. And the CIMA Neve IS perforated as well? Can anyone recommend some other options that might be a better fit for slightly less than 10' viewing distance? Or is this how most AT screen materials are constructed?


I believe the Cima screen with perf is called Perforado. I think it's the neve material but just perfed. 

If you have to sit that close, might want to look at a woven material.

Elle Bob pretty much summed it up!


----------



## Schuyler Bain

Tom Bley said:


> If you have to sit that close, might want to look at a woven material.


Can you recommend a good woven AT screen for a room with controlled lighting?


----------



## Mike Garrett

Schuyler Bain said:


> Yes, I meant the studiotek 130G3. And the CIMA Neve IS perforated as well? Can anyone recommend some other options that might be a better fit for slightly less than 10' viewing distance? Or is this how most AT screen materials are constructed?


If wanting to go slightly less than 10' viewing, then you need to be looking at a woven screen, but there are only a few of those that will meet that description. If going to woven, you are going to have to give up gain.


----------



## Schuyler Bain

Mike Garrett said:


> If wanting to go slightly less than 10' viewing, then you need to be looking at a woven screen, but there are only a few of those that will meet that description. If going to woven, you are going to have to give up gain.


With controlled lighting and Epson 5040UB, that shouldn't be an issue, right? Any woven recommendations that are also AT?


----------



## Schuyler Bain

Schuyler Bain said:


> With controlled lighting and Epson 5040UB, that shouldn't be an issue, right? Any woven recommendations that are also AT?


What about Screen Innovations 5 Series woven? Model No. 5SF125MW.


----------



## Tom Bley

Schuyler Bain said:


> What about Screen Innovations 5 Series woven? Model No. 5SF125MW.


You do realize your posting in a "Stewart Film Screen thread". That was why I PM'd you. Start a new thread with your questions or talk to Mike Garrett who works sales for AVS and he can get you some samples.


----------



## WLC

We have a Sony 665ES projector and a ten year old 120" Firehawk. We sit 17' from the screen and the projector is ceiling mounted 17' from the screen. The room is very dark, black velvet 7.5' completely surrounding screen into room on all sides and ceiling, with black carpet. We recently placed a sample of the Studiotek 130 against the screen. From up close, the difference in brightness was significant. From the seating area, the difference was negligible. Any opinions?


----------



## Schuyler Bain

Tom Bley said:


> You do realize your posting in a "Stewart Film Screen thread". That was why I PM'd you. Start a new thread with your questions or talk to Mike Garrett who works sales for AVS and he can get you some samples.


I realize that and was hoping to get feedback compared to the Stewarts that I'm considering. Probably best to start a new thread. Thanks


----------



## Craig Peer

WLC said:


> We have a Sony 665ES projector and a ten year old 120" Firehawk. We sit 17' from the screen and the projector is ceiling mounted 17' from the screen. The room is very dark, black velvet 7.5' completely surrounding screen into room on all sides and ceiling, with black carpet. We recently placed a sample of the Studiotek 130 against the screen. From up close, the difference in brightness was significant. From the seating area, the difference was negligible. Any opinions?


I switched from Firehawk to Studiotek 130 a few years ago. If you can treat your room to reduce reflections, blacks will look just as good, and it will be a much brighter / better picture in my opinion.


----------



## Craig Peer

Lately I have been loving the combination of my StudioTek 130 G3 screen, and 4K Blu-rays with my JVC RS4500 projector !


----------



## Don Stewart

Anyone going to the InfoComm show in Orlando? If so, please stop by our booth, #3121. The exhibit hall dates are June14-16. For those not familiar with InfoComm, it is like a giant CEDIA for the commercial markets.
You can register for a free pass here. https://l.feathr.co/infocomm-2017-stewart-filmscreen-l

Photo below of our crew setting up a 40 foot wide retractable Snomatte 100 screen above our booth.
Hope to see you there.

Don


----------



## WilliamG

This thread update reminded me to update my own info!

After ~15 months with my Stewart LuminEsse StudioTek 100 screen, it's still the absolute best screen material/application I've ever seen. Everyone who gets treated to a movie with it is just blown away. It's so worth the money. No shimmer, clean image. Love it, love it, love it. Even with my 4-year old Sony HW50ES 1080p projector, it's a joy. When I go 4K with an even higher contrast projector, I know the screen will be there to carry the load. 

Great product, Stewart!


----------



## thetman

Craig Peer said:


> Lately I have been loving the combination of my StudioTek 130 G3 screen, and 4K Blu-rays with my JVC RS4500 projector !


wow, looks real nice. I know the price difference is huge. but i wish I could get my x570R/cima neve combination anywhere near the quality of those screen shots.


----------



## WLC

*Screen Choice*

What are the disadvantages of the Ultramatte 150 versus the Studiotek 130? What are the advantages of the Studiotek 130 versus the Ultramatte 150?

Thanks.


----------



## elvisior

Just an update... Many thanks to Paul (the Australian distributor) and not so many thanks to the many electricians who didn't want to take on the job of helping get the screen down. In the end I managed to find a couple of very helpful electricians to help me get the screen down (they rocked).

Once I got the screen down and disassembled I found the rubber on the motor mount was on the edge of failing and the rubber on the drive shaft was completely destroyed.

Luckily I'm a 3d printing nerd and was able to model up some replacement parts and print them (https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:2391086).

So now the screen is back up ... wow is makes you appreciate how great these screens are when you have been without it for a while.

It's got a few ripples that weren't there before (it used to be dead flat) which are worrying me but they're changing over time so I'll keep my fingers crossed they'll flatten out over time.
The ripples run vertically in the middle of the screen in the bottom 3rd of the screen.

I tried loosening the tension but the screw just spins without changing anything. I'm afraid to try and grip it with anything as it looks like they will crush easily. Any suggestions?



Don Stewart said:


> Yes, the rubber coupling, (dampens the motor noise) has failed. Please contact Mr Scott Kimber in customer support.
> [email protected]
> Phone 1-310 784-5300 ext.145
> 
> Best,
> Don


----------



## DaveN

elvisior said:


> Just an update... Many thanks to Paul (the Australian distributor) and not so many thanks to the many electricians who didn't want to take on the job of helping get the screen down. In the end I managed to find a couple of very helpful electricians to help me get the screen down (they rocked).
> 
> Once I got the screen down and disassembled I found the rubber on the motor mount was on the edge of failing and the rubber on the drive shaft was completely destroyed.
> 
> Luckily I'm a 3d printing nerd and was able to model up some replacement parts and print them (https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:2391086).
> 
> So now the screen is back up ... wow is makes you appreciate how great these screens are when you have been without it for a while.
> 
> It's got a few ripples that weren't there before (it used to be dead flat) which are worrying me but they're changing over time so I'll keep my fingers crossed they'll flatten out over time.
> The ripples run vertically in the middle of the screen in the bottom 3rd of the screen.
> 
> I tried loosening the tension but the screw just spins without changing anything. I'm afraid to try and grip it with anything as it looks like they will crush easily. Any suggestions?


Try a hair dryer on the wrinkles. Worked for my last screen.


----------



## Don Stewart

Try loosening the guy wire cables on screen batten. When turning adjustment screw, you must hold round shaft that is located just above batten with griping tool or it will spin also. Let screen hang with full weight of batten for a few days.


----------



## Craig Peer

thetman said:


> wow, looks real nice. I know the price difference is huge. but i wish I could get my x570R/cima neve combination anywhere near the quality of those screen shots.


Have you had your projector professionally calibrated ? It can make a big difference. Here are screen shots on my Cima Neve from the Blu-ray " The Fall " -


----------



## 996911

Wow Craig, those colors really pop! Assuming that is HDR? What a fantastic example.


----------



## thetman

Craig Peer said:


> Have you had your projector professionally calibrated ? It can make a big difference. Here are screen shots on my Cima Neve from the Blu-ray " The Fall " -
> 
> looks awesome. Just got my appointment confirmation today for calibration from Chad. End of july. Only have about 35 hours on the projector. better get to watching more movies. hopefully when he is done I can come close to those screen shots with my Cima screen


----------



## Craig Peer

996911 said:


> Wow Craig, those colors really pop! Assuming that is HDR? What a fantastic example.


No - it's a Blu-ray filmed in 18 countries called " The Fall " . Worth checking out - interesting story, amazing cinematography !  And, it looks great on my Cima Neve !

http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/The-Fall-Blu-ray/1010/#Review


----------



## NaTeDoGG

Hi guys! I finally got my 128" Firehawk with Luxus Deluxe screen!

I first hung just the frame, as the installation instructions suggest, to check if my mount was level and in the correct position. This didn't work at all because the frame is not very rigid. The top and bottom frame edges are each two pieces, connected near the center. The joint where these connect bends a bit. Maybe Stewart doesn't make frame pieces long enough to be a single piece? My outside screen width is 118.125". I did have my screen shipped to me, but the long pieces were shipped assembled so could have easily been a single piece. If a single piece option is available, I very much wish I had gotten it!

Next I installed the screen material (and then uninstalled it again, since more painting is needed), hoping it would make the frame straighter. It did help a LOT, however the top and bottom edges still aren't quite straight, especially the bottom:








Here is a short video (no camera stabilization is applied so the lines are straight):




Is this normal? Distance to the speakers is good left and right, but distances from the bottom screen edge to the speakers below are 0.8", 1.5", and 0.8".  Will it change in time as the screen material relaxes a little?

I've never seen anyone's Stewart screen looking like this. Is this normal? I searched and didn't find anyone else talking about it.


----------



## 996911

What mounting system did you select for your screen? 

I have had 2 Stewart screens now and the frames on both have been spot on perfect. My Firehawk G3 1.78AR 120" was a single frame piece for all 4 sides. The newest screen is a 2.35AR 152" StudioTek130 and the top and bottom sections were multiple pieces (2 top and 2 bottom). Your pieces should have had letters on them to illustrate the correct order of assembly and orientation. 

Do you have pics of the back side of the screen showing installation?

That's odd that the long run (top and bottom) frame pieces came pre assembled.

Did you order directly from Stewart?


----------



## NaTeDoGG

996911 said:


> What mounting system did you select for your screen?
> 
> Did you order directly from Stewart?


I got the Luxus Deluxe Screen Wall Quicksnap. I ordered through a local reseller, who ordered directly from Stewart. Here's a page from the Stewart quote:











> I have had 2 Stewart screens now and the frames on both have been spot on perfect. My Firehawk G3 1.78AR 120" was a single frame piece for all 4 sides. The newest screen is a 2.35AR 152" StudioTek130 and the top and bottom sections were multiple pieces (2 top and 2 bottom).


It sounds like there is some size > 120" and < 128" where they start using 2 pieces each for the top and bottom. I don't mind that it's 2 pieces, but not being straight looks bad. I feel like I'm missing some sort of adjustment?



> Your pieces should have had letters on them to illustrate the correct order of assembly and orientation.
> 
> Do you have pics of the back side of the screen showing installation?


I've disassembled the screen so we can do more painting, but I definitely matched up the numbers to put the frame together correctly.



> That's odd that the long run (top and bottom) frame pieces came pre assembled.


I agree, especially since they had to be shipped from California to Croatia! I really thought it would be one piece when I saw the length of the package, so I surprised when it was 2, and further surprised when the frame doesn't hang straight.


----------



## 996911

The quick snap is just how the screen attaches to the frame. The mounting system I was referring to was which of their 2 typical mount styles....the standard wall mount or the EZ-mount system. I have had both and prefer the EZ-mount system which makes horizontal alignment adjustment super easy once installed. The mount would be on page 2-3 of your build sheet.

Regardless, it shouldn't be anything other than perfectly straight when assembled. I would definitely talk to Stewart directly. They are great on communication and help.

So sorry to hear about this but I have no doubt that if it's not something easy to fix with a quick phone call to Stewart, they will make it right.


----------



## NaTeDoGG

996911 said:


> The quick snap is just how the screen attaches to the frame. The mounting system I was referring to was which of their 2 typical mount styles....the standard wall mount or the EZ-mount system. I have had both and prefer the EZ-mount system which makes horizontal alignment adjustment super easy once installed. The mount would be on page 2-3 of your build sheet.
> 
> Regardless, it shouldn't be anything other than perfectly straight when assembled. I would definitely talk to Stewart directly. They are great on communication and help.
> 
> So sorry to hear about this but I have no doubt that if it's not something easy to fix with a quick phone call to Stewart, they will make it right.


Oh, haha of course. :facepalm: I used the EZ-mount system.

I was hoping it was something I was doing wrong, but I'll give Stewart a call. Thanks!


----------



## 996911

Keep us posted. Great screen and room looks like it's coming along!


----------



## john barlow

mtmason said:


> I'll share my experience comparing firehawk to high power. I have a similar setup for projector mounting location, screen size, and viewing distance. Currently I'm just using blackout cloth, and am hard pressed to justify the marginal improvement I'll see in dark viewing for the expense. However, I find I'm doing more and more viewing with ambient light. So I ordered samples from Da-Lite and Stewart to check them out. I suggest you do the same (they were free).
> 
> 
> In my evaluation I decided on the Firehawk. Although the high power does provide a higher gain image than other screens with a ceiling mount, it's depressing to stand up and see the image get much brighter and seemingly more vibrant. I think I would end up wanting to stand during movies! The firehawk provided the best picture in my actual viewing area. I also found it shed light better in ambient situations. The relative contrast between black and white were more profound to me, especially compared to the high power OUTSIDE of it's sweet spot.
> 
> 
> Of all the materials I tested from Stewart and Da-lite only the high power and the firehawk were compelling enough of a difference from black out cloth for me to consider. FWIW the black out cloth was indistinguishable from matt white screen material. I hung both samples on my screen for a while just to see different situations. With lights on, I was always impressed with the firewhawk.
> 
> 
> When it comes down to it though, you'll get used to what you have and until you see something better you won't really know what you're missing. With the high-power you'll always see what you're missing every time you stand up. That would drive me crazy! You may be different. Good Luck.
> 
> 
> MM


Very nice post, I liked what you said. I have a Stewart Filmscreen. I ordered it ahead of my home cinema build in our new home in Lansing. By new home, I mean our 98 year old Custom Craftsman. Our cinema is in what once was the Master Bedroom, dimensions are 18'L x 14'W. The first projector was a Panasonic AE4000U, then the AE8000U, six months later, the Epson 5040UB. The Stewart has been fantastic with all three. My thinking at the time of designing our first projector based cinema, was that it would be prudent to shoot the wad with the Stewart right away. Then it's done and I'll never be jonsin for a new screen. It worked because I have not even felt the need to consider it. I thought that maybe someday with LED's being so versatile that maybe someday there will be hybrid projector screen systems. The projector would be laser and the screen would have an array of tiny LED's for backlighting and improved HDR. I imagine the cost would be through the roof, but I'm a dreamer so I dream. We love home cinema. It's one of the most rewarding family oriented activities that pay the highest dividends because for me, films, the art, the cinematography, the high fidelity immersive audio, form a synergy that opens up the potential to see the world in all it's beauty and brilliance, the best way possible. Right in our very own home. Cheers! Stewart Filmscreen, no matter what seat I'm in or standing, always renders our content as if we're peering at the world through a 130" magical window. 3D and UHD look fantastic on this screen. At times, it's every bit as beautiful and bright as our high end Sony flat panels, of which, there are three in various rooms throughout the home.


----------



## john barlow

Craig Peer said:


> Have you had your projector professionally calibrated ? It can make a big difference. Here are screen shots on my Cima Neve from the Blu-ray " The Fall " -


Great color pop from that stunningly original concept film. I bought the Blu ray after renting it some years back. Delightful little girl. The cinematography from her fantasy sequences were astonishing and beautiful. This was high art as far as I was concerned. It looked great on our Stewart/PannyAE4000U combo. Watched again on the Epson 5040, still amazing color pop. This is one that would benefit from a UHD reissue. Cheers!


----------



## john barlow

NaTeDoGG said:


> Hi guys! I finally got my 128" Firehawk with Luxus Deluxe screen!
> 
> I first hung just the frame, as the installation instructions suggest, to check if my mount was level and in the correct position. This didn't work at all because the frame is not very rigid. The top and bottom frame edges are each two pieces, connected near the center. The joint where these connect bends a bit. Maybe Stewart doesn't make frame pieces long enough to be a single piece? My outside screen width is 118.125". I did have my screen shipped to me, but the long pieces were shipped assembled so could have easily been a single piece. If a single piece option is available, I very much wish I had gotten it!
> 
> Next I installed the screen material (and then uninstalled it again, since more painting is needed), hoping it would make the frame straighter. It did help a LOT, however the top and bottom edges still aren't quite straight, especially the bottom:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is a short video (no camera stabilization is applied so the lines are straight):
> https://youtu.be/2eZY1qi9tyI
> Is this normal? Distance to the speakers is good left and right, but distances from the bottom screen edge to the speakers below are 0.8", 1.5", and 0.8".  Will it change in time as the screen material relaxes a little?
> 
> I've never seen anyone's Stewart screen looking like this. Is this normal? I searched and didn't find anyone else talking about it.


That just looks shockingly wrong to me if the camera isn't distorting the bow. My frame for our Stewart is milled aluminum 130" scope screen for 2:35.1 widescreen. The tube that contained the frame was so long it had to be sent freight to our home a couple of weeks before we made the move to Lansing. My friend drove up from Troy to help me assemble. We took our good natured time. The first thing I noticed about the screen kit was the quality of materials was top grade. That frame, once assembled was solid as a rock and true as can be. Mounting it was a new experience but, we took our time, scoured the instructions and carefully assembled the frame and snapped the screen around the huge rectangle. It was impressive as anything I could imagine once mounted and measured and meticulously leveled. It looks as perfect today as it did in April of 2010. Get satisfaction brother. It should look perfect to you or get it replaced post haste. Cheers and good luck in getting this resolved. They're a world class screen builder. Customer service should be world class in any case.


----------



## 996911

Forgot to ask but was the packaging damaged in any way? I know the packaging for mine was triple packed like a crate and was solid as a rock. I think I posted a pic earliner in this thread but for sure in my other thread highlighting the arrival and install


----------



## NaTeDoGG

996911 said:


> Forgot to ask but was the packaging damaged in any way? I know the packaging for mine was triple packed like a crate and was solid as a rock. I think I posted a pic earliner in this thread but for sure in my other thread highlighting the arrival and install


The packaging was good, the frame isn't damaged at all. The quality is very good, if it were straight it would be perfect! Since everyone says theirs is straight, I'll figure out what is going on and report back.


----------



## 996911

I almost looks like the vertical single pieces are too long and create the exact bow top and bottom. I'm going to go with that as my final answer


----------



## john barlow

NaTeDoGG said:


> Oh, haha of course. :facepalm: I used the EZ-mount system.
> 
> I was hoping it was something I was doing wrong, but I'll give Stewart a call. Thanks!


I don't know if you tried this but, here it goes. unsnap the screen from the frame and see if the frame doesn't become more true. The screen could have been cut improperly and the longer frame pieces cannot withstand the pull from the overall strength of the fully snapped screen. Anytime I have a failure, I check what my level of expertise allows me to. This is an easy one.


----------



## 996911

I don't see how in the world the screen material could bow the metal frame, much less be able to line up the snaps to even achieve that.


----------



## Craig Peer

996911 said:


> I don't see how in the world the screen material could bow the metal frame, much less be able to line up the snaps to even achieve that.


Neither do I.


----------



## john barlow

Craig Peer said:


> Neither do I.


You're more than likely right. I believe in checking all the boxes when trying to uncover a dilemma. It's wide span of metal. Perhaps there was an oversight in their quality process and this defective unit never should have left the manufacturing facility.


----------



## NaTeDoGG

I've been in contact with Stewart and their support has been very good. Apparently they only make the top and bottom in two pieces each when requested. Somehow my order got that request, though it isn't clear how/why. I'm also not sure why that request would ever be made, as the resulting screen won't be square. Anyway, the plan is that they will fabricate two braces which will keep the screen square. If that makes the screen square, I'll be happy. That the top and bottom are two pieces isn't noticeable (the black velour hides the seam), so the only thing I lose in the end is time (assuming and hoping the braces solve it).


----------



## socalsharky

*Dark Edges with a Firehawk G4*

I am in the final stages of choosing my screen. This will be a 120 +/- inch screen with a 1.6 TR, viewed from about 11 feet. This is in a loft area, that is moderately light controlled, but gets a fair amount of ambient light in the daytime. It will be either the Tiburon or Firehawk G4. I have samples of both. I have moved them all around the screen on various freeze frame images. I really like the way that the Firehawk makes blacks look, especially with some ambient light. However, whenever I move the sample to the edge of the picture, there is a noticeable darkening, even from the center axis of the screen. When viewed from a seat that is 3-4 feet off center, the sample on the far edge of the screen obviously gets even darker. I realized that this is an inescapable compromise to using a higher gain ALR screen. 

I realize that per the standard guidelines, my setup is acceptable for the Firehawk screen. However, my main viewing position is entirely within the 35 degree half gain zone, but my far left and right viewing areas are more like 40 to 45 degrees offset from the far edge.

My question is whether the unavoidable variation in brightness that will occur across the screen is noticeable during viewing? I am thinking that the darkness I am seeing with the samples is primarily due to the small size of the sample piece, which is being placed on a temporary screen consisting of the Carl's white material, which I believe is 1.0 or 1.1 gain. I have also see off angle pictures of the Firehawk like this, that make me think it will be no problem.


----------



## Don Stewart

socalsharky said:


> I am in the final stages of choosing my screen. This will be a 120 +/- inch screen with a 1.6 TR, viewed from about 11 feet. This is in a loft area, that is moderately light controlled, but gets a fair amount of ambient light in the daytime. It will be either the Tiburon or Firehawk G4. I have samples of both. I have moved them all around the screen on various freeze frame images. I really like the way that the Firehawk makes blacks look, especially with some ambient light. However, whenever I move the sample to the edge of the picture, there is a noticeable darkening, even from the center axis of the screen. When viewed from a seat that is 3-4 feet off center, the sample on the far edge of the screen obviously gets even darker. I realized that this is an inescapable compromise to using a higher gain ALR screen.
> 
> I realize that per the standard guidelines, my setup is acceptable for the Firehawk screen. However, my main viewing position is entirely within the 35 degree half gain zone, but my far left and right viewing areas are more like 40 to 45 degrees offset from the far edge.
> 
> My question is whether the unavoidable variation in brightness that will occur across the screen is noticeable during viewing? I am thinking that the dankness I am seeing with the samples is primarily due to the small size of the sample piece, which is being placed on a temporary screen consisting of the Carl's white material, which I believe is 1.0 or 1.1 gain. I have also see off angle pictures of the Firehawk like this, that make me think it will be no problem.


Yes...it is very difficult to make educated decision when viewing an 8 by10 inch ALR screen sample, especially against a white background. Obviously from your photo, you will never be viewing the screen that far off axis as your right speaker will be blocking the viewer's sight line. Since you live in Orange County, you are probably within 45 minutes or so from our factory. So the ultimate solution we can offer is to bring your projector and favorite DVD's to the factory and we will set your PJ up at 1.6 times screen width so you can view on a full size screen. If that works for you, we can also give you a tour of the factory and you can see how 40 by 90 foot seamless screen materials are made from scratch.

Best,
Don


----------



## socalsharky

Don Stewart said:


> Yes...it is very difficult to make educated decision when viewing an 8 by10 inch ALR screen sample, especially against a white background. Obviously from your photo, you will never be viewing the screen that far off axis as your right speaker will be blocking the viewer's sight line. Since you live in Orange County, you are probably within 45 minutes or so from our factory. So the ultimate solution we can offer is to bring your projector and favorite DVD's to the factory and we will set your PJ up at 1.6 times screen width and you can view on a full size screen. If that works for you, we can also give you a tour of the factory and you can see how 40 by 90 foot seamless screen materials are made from scratch.
> 
> Best,
> Don


Don--thanks for your comments as well as your time on the phone last week. Just to clarify, that photo is not of my room. It is taken from the Audioholics review of the Firehawk screen. I was just making the point that I don't see any noticeable darkness at the far edge of that image.

I may just take you up on that offer of a factory demo!


----------



## PiK

Hi guys,
just wanted to give you a heads up. I had ordered Firehawk G4 123" from the Stewart via a local reseller (Poland).
Unfortunately the living room preparation works have been prolonged by almost a year, so finally the reseller received the screen 7 months before it has been installed in my room. During the unpacking installation team noticed that mounting holes were distorted but it was not a big deal. The package was not damaged, so it had to be done during the manufacture.
After the installation has been done, the installer noticed that the screen casing was also distorted - there is 50cm long gap between the casing and the ceiling. As I said, there were no damages to the package. If there was not such a big period before receiving the package from Stewart and installing it, I could be able to fill a complain. Now I can only hope that there is everything OK with the projection material.
Lesson learned: do not order the screen before preparing the room.


----------



## socalsharky

Just ordered my Cima Tiburon screen today--115", 2.35:1. Can't wait to get it put up.

It came down to the Tiburon and the Firehawk G4 material. For my room and my taste, I think the Tiburon will be a little better. I liked how images looked on both the Tiburon and Firehawk, but the sparkles on the Firehawk, as well as the narrow viewing cone led me to choose the Tiburon. Saving $1000 helped with the decision as well!

Many thanks to @Don Stewart and @Craig Peer for their help in making the choice and providing samples.


----------



## Craig Peer

> Hi guys,
> just wanted to give you a heads up. I had ordered Firehawk G4 123" from the Stewart via a local reseller (Poland).
> Unfortunately the living room preparation works have been prolonged by almost a year, so finally the reseller received the screen 7 months before it has been installed in my room. During the unpacking installation team noticed that mounting holes were distorted but it was not a big deal. The package was not damaged, so it had to be done during the manufacture.
> After the installation has been done, the installer noticed that the screen casing was also distorted - there is 50cm long gap between the casing and the ceiling. As I said, there were no damages to the package. If there was not such a big period before receiving the package from Stewart and installing it, I could be able to fill a complain. Now I can only hope that there is everything OK with the projection material.
> Lesson learned: do not order the screen before preparing the room.


Actually, don't order anything ( projector, receiver, screen, speakers ) until you are ready to install them. You are just burning through your warranty period for no reason.


----------



## thetman

Craig Peer said:


> Actually, don't order anything ( projector, receiver, screen, speakers ) until you are ready to install them. You are just burning through your warranty period for no reason.


good advice. made this mistake during my construction project. bought a projector, screen etc. ended up selling it all because the project took much, much longer than anticipated and the equipment stayed in boxes for a very long time. meanwhile all new models had already come out on the projector and receiver etc.


----------



## dgkula

*92" Cima Neve vs. StudioTek100*

Hi,

I have a light controlled room, black flat ceilings, dark blue flat walls, 48 sq. ft. velvet panels on the 7' ceiling to absorb reflected light from the screen. Black shag rug on the floor. Not exactly a batcave but pretty darn dark. 9.5' throw from RS620 (shipping this week) on a Elite CineWhite 1.0 gain screen. I think I should have enough brightness that I can use a 1.0 gain screen. 

Is this a good room for the StudioTek100 or would the Cima Neve be a better choice? Cost of the ST100 is almost double. Is it worth it in my setup?

Will I notice much difference in picture quality from the CineWhite screen? Currently using an Epson 8350 and I do sometimes "see" the texture of the surface in all-white scenes like the start of "Art of Flight."

Thanks,
David


----------



## Don Stewart

dgkula said:


> Hi,
> 
> I have a light controlled room, black flat ceilings, dark blue flat walls, 48 sq. ft. velvet panels on the 7' ceiling to absorb reflected light from the screen. Black shag rug on the floor. Not exactly a batcave but pretty darn dark. 9.5' throw from RS620 (shipping this week) on a Elite CineWhite 1.0 gain screen. I think I should have enough brightness that I can use a 1.0 gain screen.
> 
> Is this a good room for the StudioTek100 or would the Cima Neve be a better choice? Cost of the ST100 is almost double. Is it worth it in my setup?
> 
> Will I notice much difference in picture quality from the CineWhite screen? Currently using an Epson 8350 and I do sometimes "see" the texture of the surface in all-white scenes like the start of "Art of Flight."
> 
> Thanks,
> David


Both StudioTek 100 and Cima Neve are surface texture free. From your room description and provided photo either screen would be a good match. My suggestion is to contact either Graig or Mike from AVS to get samples and then compare.

Best,
Don


----------



## Craig Peer

dgkula said:


> Hi,
> 
> I have a light controlled room, black flat ceilings, dark blue flat walls, 48 sq. ft. velvet panels on the 7' ceiling to absorb reflected light from the screen. Black shag rug on the floor. Not exactly a batcave but pretty darn dark. 9.5' throw from RS620 (shipping this week) on a Elite CineWhite 1.0 gain screen. I think I should have enough brightness that I can use a 1.0 gain screen.
> 
> Is this a good room for the StudioTek100 or would the Cima Neve be a better choice? Cost of the ST100 is almost double. Is it worth it in my setup?
> 
> Will I notice much difference in picture quality from the CineWhite screen? Currently using an Epson 8350 and I do sometimes "see" the texture of the surface in all-white scenes like the start of "Art of Flight."
> 
> Thanks,
> David


I'll add the StudioTek 130 G3 screen to Don's recommendations.  Shoot me an email.


----------



## 996911

I'd second that! Love my ST130!!!


----------



## Craig Peer

996911 said:


> I'd second that! Love my ST130!!!


It can certainly produce a sharp picture ! If only I had a better camera for better screen shots ( I have my eye on one ) -


----------



## Stan-Lee

socalsharky said:


> I am in the final stages of choosing my screen. This will be a 120 +/- inch screen with a 1.6 TR, viewed from about 11 feet. This is in a loft area, that is moderately light controlled, but gets a fair amount of ambient light in the daytime. It will be either the Tiburon or Firehawk G4. I have samples of both. I have moved them all around the screen on various freeze frame images. I really like the way that the Firehawk makes blacks look, especially with some ambient light. However, whenever I move the sample to the edge of the picture, there is a noticeable darkening, even from the center axis of the screen. When viewed from a seat that is 3-4 feet off center, the sample on the far edge of the screen obviously gets even darker. I realized that this is an inescapable compromise to using a higher gain ALR screen.
> 
> I realize that per the standard guidelines, my setup is acceptable for the Firehawk screen. However, my main viewing position is entirely within the 35 degree half gain zone, but my far left and right viewing areas are more like 40 to 45 degrees offset from the far edge.
> 
> My question is whether the unavoidable variation in brightness that will occur across the screen is noticeable during viewing? I am thinking that the darkness I am seeing with the samples is primarily due to the small size of the sample piece, which is being placed on a temporary screen consisting of the Carl's white material, which I believe is 1.0 or 1.1 gain. I have also see off angle pictures of the Firehawk like this, that make me think it will be no problem.



I realize you opted for the Tiburon and know you will love it. I have a Firehawk G4. 120" diagonal. PJ is a Sony VPL-VW675ES with 1800 lumens but I have it in the low setting (1200?). Throw is 13'. My screen is in my living room with tons of ambient light and only blackout drapes to block a 20' wide sliding window. Yeah it's about 20 feet wide and ceiling to floor. Anyway, I can certainly attest to the Firehawk G4 providing great whites and blacks in my situation. 
Now these 2 photos are only from my iPhone from this morning watching Wimbledon tennis.....with drapes closed.


----------



## Danonano

Thanks for all the good info in this thread.

I'm posting in the off chance that someone is aware of a Stewart 130, 100, or Cima Neve on display in the Northern VA area. I've done quite a bit of research, read all recommendations, looked at samples, and now have a projector and room so am ready to decide on a screen. I've visited all the local AV stores that are showing projector setups, but none are showing any of the above 3 screens.

I am aware of the ideal uses for each of the 3 screens, but given the investment and my picky eye, I would much prefer to see these screens in use before I make a final decision. Is anyone aware of store that is using one in an active setup? Anything in Northern VA, D.C., or Baltimore would be great. Or even further away for that matter...

thanks,
Dan


----------



## Don Stewart

Danonano said:


> Thanks for all the good info in this thread.
> 
> I'm posting in the off chance that someone is aware of a Stewart 130, 100, or Cima Neve on display in the Northern VA area. I've done quite a bit of research, read all recommendations, looked at samples, and now have a projector and room so am ready to decide on a screen. I've visited all the local AV stores that are showing projector setups, but none are showing any of the above 3 screens.
> 
> I am aware of the ideal uses for each of the 3 screens, but given the investment and my picky eye, I would much prefer to see these screens in use before I make a final decision. Is anyone aware of store that is using one in an active setup? Anything in Northern VA, D.C., or Baltimore would be great. Or even further away for that matter...
> 
> thanks,
> Dan


Thank you for your interest in our products. Probably the best advice I can give is to contact our local factory rep. He has local knowledge of which stores/dealers in his/your territory who have certain screen models on display. Chances are, you will not find all three screen materials lit up in the same store so you may have go to a few.
Here is the info for our HT rep who covers your state.*

Nutech Group Marketing*
120A Keystone DR
Montgomerville, PA 18936 USA
215-654-1224
[email protected]


----------



## Danonano

Don Stewart said:


> Thank you for your interest in our products. Probably the best advice I can give is to contact our local factory rep. He has local knowledge of which stores/dealers in his/your territory who have certain screen models on display. Chances are, you will not find all three screen materials lit up in the same store so you may have go to a few.
> Here is the info for our HT rep who covers your state.*
> *


*


Thanks Don!*


----------



## IKohlbacher

My Stewart Cima Neve 135" arrived today - can't wait for Joel to get it set up and rocking this weekend! Thanks John Schuermann. -i


----------



## WilliamG

Danonano said:


> Thanks for all the good info in this thread.
> 
> I'm posting in the off chance that someone is aware of a Stewart 130, 100, or Cima Neve on display in the Northern VA area. I've done quite a bit of research, read all recommendations, looked at samples, and now have a projector and room so am ready to decide on a screen. I've visited all the local AV stores that are showing projector setups, but none are showing any of the above 3 screens.
> 
> I am aware of the ideal uses for each of the 3 screens, but given the investment and my picky eye, I would much prefer to see these screens in use before I make a final decision. Is anyone aware of store that is using one in an active setup? Anything in Northern VA, D.C., or Baltimore would be great. Or even further away for that matter...
> 
> thanks,
> Dan


Danonano what are you looking for in terms of brightness? And what are you looking for in terms of image? Do sparklies/shimmering bother you? Do you have amazing light control etc etc? Is your projector really bright? Throw distance? Screen size?

I have the 100 and it's unfreakingbelievable, so I can give you my input there if you let me know what you're looking for specifically.


----------



## 996911

I spent quite a bit of time working with Don before picking my most current screen (StudioTek130 152" 2.35AR). It was based on the most important factors...what projector am I using, what is the throw distance, and what is the light control in the room. The screen is amazing for MY needs but without knowing the other factors, it's hard to tell what would be best for you.


----------



## Craig Peer

Anyone in the Northern California area that wants to see a StudioTek 130 and Cima Neve in person is welcome to visit my theater. Send me an email if interested.


----------



## 996911

Craig Peer said:


> Anyone in the Northern California area that wants to see a StudioTek 130 and Cima Neve in person is welcome to visit my theater. Send me an email if interested.


Same offer here if anybody is in or near the research triangle (Raleigh/Durham/Chapel Hill) in North Carolina, you are welcome to visit my theater.


----------



## dmillionz

996911 said:


> Same offer here if anybody is in or near the research triangle (Raleigh/Durham/Chapel Hill) in North Carolina, you are welcome to visit my theater.


OK now I need to know. Why do you and Craig have both the ST 130 and Cima Neve screens?


----------



## 996911

dmillionz said:


> OK now I need to know. Why do you and Craig have both the ST 130 and Cima Neve screens?


I have a StudioTek130 2.35AR 152" and a Firehawk 1.78AR 120" (both have roughly the same vertical).


----------



## dmillionz

996911 said:


> I have a StudioTek130 2.35AR 152" and a Firehawk 1.78AR 120" (both have roughly the same vertical).


What's the picture quality like between the two? I have the Neve and the picture is excellent as far as I'm concerned, but I've never had material from the 130 or 100 to compare it to.


----------



## 996911

dmillionz said:


> What's the picture quality like between the two? I have the Neve and the picture is excellent as far as I'm concerned, but I've never had material from the 130 or 100 to compare it to.


The ST130 is amazing. Really pairs well with the RS600 and a light controlled room with minimal light. But the screens loses all brightness and "pop" once the lights start to come up. The Firehawk is a great screen but NOT the optimal choice for light controlled room. Unless you plan to watch a lot of programming with the lighting up a little higher as it performs really well in an environment with ambient light or controlled lighting that is up higher than "movie" mode lighting. You really lose some brightness with the grey screen but at the same time you are controlling better than the white material (like the ST130) when there is lighting. It does a much better job "holding" the picture brightness and pop in those higher than normal lighting conditions. Our theater room originally started out with the FireHawk since we watched mostly TV programming and higher light levels but once we realized we built the room for movies, it made sense to go with the ST130 and now the room shines! The FireHawk is being moved to the basement where we have a lot of ambient lighting and watching sports, play xbox, etc, so that fits better. Hope that makes sense.


----------



## WilliamG

996911 said:


> The ST130 is amazing. Really pairs well with the RS600 and a light controlled room with minimal light. But the screens loses all brightness and "pop" once the lights start to come up. The Firehawk is a great screen but NOT the optimal choice for light controlled room. Unless you plan to watch a lot of programming with the lighting up a little higher as it performs really well in an environment with ambient light or controlled lighting that is up higher than "movie" mode lighting. You really lose some brightness with the grey screen but at the same time you are controlling better than the white material (like the ST130) when there is lighting. It does a much better job "holding" the picture brightness and pop in those higher than normal lighting conditions. Our theater room originally started out with the FireHawk since we watched mostly TV programming and higher light levels but once we realized we built the room for movies, it made sense to go with the ST130 and now the room shines! The FireHawk is being moved to the basement where we have a lot of ambient lighting and watching sports, play xbox, etc, so that fits better. Hope that makes sense.


To be fair, the ST100 is the "same." You absolutely need a man-cave for it to work. 

This page from some years ago has me also wondering - specifically about this part: 

https://davidsusilouncensored.wordpress.com/2013/02/01/sony-vpl-hw1000es-4k-projector-review/

_"With 4K, screen plays even more important role in the system. Fortunately, there is no more confusion in matching the screen to the projector anymore. It is straightforward, no-option given for the screen type. It’s only matte-white, 1.0 gain, flat (not drop-down) screen. My personal experience also seconded by my contact at Stweart Filmscreen who mentioned that screen artifacts such as un-even-ness (from a drop down screen), shimmer, colour shifts, hotspotting and mottling (unevenness of colour shown on the screen) are easily visible with 4K projection. Even Sony’s position on the matter is that their VPL-VW1000ES should be used with matte white screens to reduce screen texture and hot-spotting. Sony also mentioned that grey and silver screens are not ideal for 4K. This same view is shared also with Joel Silver of Imaging Science Foundation (ISF) and Joe Kane, also an industry guru and consultant.

*This means, if you’re currently using a Stewart StudioTek 100, my screen of choice for ages, you’re fine. If you’re currently using a StudioTek 130, like many users out there… well, it’s time to throw away your screen and start doing what studio professionals and myself have been doing for ages; use a 1.0 gain screen*. Oh, before I forget… perforated screen is also not recommended for home theatre use since the perforation will reduce the resolving resolution projected by the 4K projector."_


----------



## dmillionz

For anyone who has seen both, what's the visual quality difference between the white CIMA Neve and white ST100? Just curious. Is it significant or negligible? Because if the ST100 is noticeably better and I'm missing out on the full capabilities of my Sony 675, I may sell the CIMA to my father-in-law and get the ST.


----------



## 996911

The problem is that to move from the 130 to the 100 you better have a black hole of a theatre. Black or dark matte wall and ceiling color and NO lighting. Since my room is almost that but still has enough reflective surfaces with AND a little lighting present which we prefer for regular programming, that makes the choice easy for us.


----------



## WilliamG

996911 said:


> The problem is that to move from the 130 to the 100 you better have a black hole of a theatre. Black or dark matte wall and ceiling color and NO lighting. Since my room is almost that but still has enough reflective surfaces with AND a little lighting present which we prefer for regular programming, that makes the choice easy for us.


Honestly, aside from the "little lighting present," you'd be fine with an ST100. But yeah, if you like some ambient lighting, forget about it. ST100 goes to absolute crap with ambient lighting. Thankfully, just the screen lighting up my movie room a little gives me enough ambient light to not need specific-light-source extra. 

I too tend to not like watching in a pitch black room. OLED changed my mind there in the bedroom (LG C7 65" - amazing blacks), and the ST100 is just TOO good to give up. I personally can't imagine a more perfect screen than the ST100, given that I am EXTREMELY sensitive to:

1.) Viewing angle deficiencies
2.) Sparkies/shimmeries due to modified-gain screens
3.) Hot-spotting
4.) Acoustically transparent screen weave. Even with my beloved Enlightor 4K screen before I moved and got the ST100, I could see the weave/pattern at 12 feet, no matter what the reviews say about not being able to from more than several feet away.

So, yes, I'm extremely sensitive. The ST100 has exceeded my expectations in every single way. There's truly nothing I don't like about it. Can't wait to move to 4K and experience it in a whole new light - so to speak!


----------



## BondDonBond

WilliamG said:


> To be fair, the ST100 is the "same." You absolutely need a man-cave for it to work.
> 
> This page from some years ago has me also wondering - specifically about this part:
> 
> https://davidsusilouncensored.wordpress.com/2013/02/01/sony-vpl-hw1000es-4k-projector-review/
> 
> _"With 4K, screen plays even more important role in the system. Fortunately, there is no more confusion in matching the screen to the projector anymore. It is straightforward, no-option given for the screen type. It’s only matte-white, 1.0 gain, flat (not drop-down) screen. My personal experience also seconded by my contact at Stweart Filmscreen who mentioned that screen artifacts such as un-even-ness (from a drop down screen), shimmer, colour shifts, hotspotting and mottling (unevenness of colour shown on the screen) are easily visible with 4K projection. Even Sony’s position on the matter is that their VPL-VW1000ES should be used with matte white screens to reduce screen texture and hot-spotting. Sony also mentioned that grey and silver screens are not ideal for 4K. This same view is shared also with Joel Silver of Imaging Science Foundation (ISF) and Joe Kane, also an industry guru and consultant.
> 
> *This means, if you’re currently using a Stewart StudioTek 100, my screen of choice for ages, you’re fine. If you’re currently using a StudioTek 130, like many users out there… well, it’s time to throw away your screen and start doing what studio professionals and myself have been doing for ages; use a 1.0 gain screen*. Oh, before I forget… perforated screen is also not recommended for home theatre use since the perforation will reduce the resolving resolution projected by the 4K projector."_


I directly asked Stewart just 90 days ago and they said the StudioTek 130 was a great choice for my 4K projector in my light controlled room. They could have told me anything.


----------



## Danonano

WilliamG said:


> Danonano what are you looking for in terms of brightness? And what are you looking for in terms of image? Do sparklies/shimmering bother you? Do you have amazing light control etc etc? Is your projector really bright? Throw distance? Screen size?
> 
> I have the 100 and it's unfreakingbelievable, so I can give you my input there if you let me know what you're looking for specifically.


William,

I'm hoping to go with the 100. My room doesn't have blacked out walls though, and I'm running 4K HDR with a JVC so it my be worth going with a higher gain screen to allow me to get a slightly bigger screen than I have right now. 

Thanks for the offers to see screens. Craig I was just in San Jose! 

996911, I have family in NC, so may make it down there sometime. (do you by chance happen to know what an alpha code is??)


----------



## 996911

BondDonBond said:


> I directly asked Stewart just 90 days ago and they said the StudioTek 130 was a great choice for my 4K projector in my light controlled room. They could have told me anything.


Not sure I follow what you mean by "they could have told me anything"



Danonano said:


> Thanks for the offers to see screens. Craig I was just in San Jose!
> 
> 996911, I have family in NC, so may make it down there sometime. (do you by chance happen to know what an alpha code is??)


Welcome to check out my setup if you make it my way. By alpha code are you referring to military alpha? Then yes


----------



## Danonano

996911 said:


> Welcome to check out my setup if you make it my way. By alpha code are you referring to military alpha? Then yes


As in 996911 is your alpha code?


----------



## 996911

Danonano said:


> As in 996911 is your alpha code?


Ah, got it. But it's actually not. It's the model designation of the first Porsche I bought 15 years ago.


----------



## Danonano

996911 said:


> Ah, got it. But it's actually not. It's the model designation of the first Porsche I bought 15 years ago.


Ah got it. Very cool! I drove a little 986 once upon a time.


----------



## 996911

Danonano said:


> Ah got it. Very cool! I drove a little 986 once upon a time.


Awesome! I've been through countless p-cars and even raced several. I even raced a 986 once upon a time :nerd:


----------



## retro124

My first PJ screen
Hello guys, I have now 65" 4k non HDR TV. I was between idea of getting 75" or PJ and screen. So I ended up to getting new 65" TV with HDR and PJ and screen. 

So PJ I'm between Sony Sony VPLHW45ES (I have it at home for test) and Epson 5040UB.

I'm looking only for motorized screen 100" (I have no room for bigger one) going down from ceiling. I have center channel 56" from ceiling so I guess I will have to have screen front of center channel so it needs to be AT one I guess? 

I have screen at home just for try easy set up model: 

https://www.amazon.com/Elite-Screens...100"+pull+up

I can see waves on it from day one  


So what will be great fit for those PJ? I know needs to be tab tensioned screen , so I'm looking for no waves , very good PQ for movies and sport. Any recommendations?

Budget is not much limited but I really don't want to by limited edition Ferrari screen for Mustang PJ 

Thanks for help.


----------



## BondDonBond

996911 said:


> Not sure I follow what you mean by "they could have told me anything"
> 
> 
> 
> Welcome to check out my setup if you make it my way. By alpha code are you referring to military alpha? Then yes


They could have recommended any screen.


----------



## 996911

BondDonBond said:


> They could have recommended any screen.


Are you suggesting that they rec'd any screen regardless of your needs, specs, etc, just to sell you anything?


----------



## Craig Peer

retro124 said:


> My first PJ screen
> Hello guys, I have now 65" 4k non HDR TV. I was between idea of getting 75" or PJ and screen. So I ended up to getting new 65" TV with HDR and PJ and screen.
> 
> So PJ I'm between Sony Sony VPLHW45ES (I have it at home for test) and Epson 5040UB.
> 
> I'm looking only for motorized screen 100" (I have no room for bigger one) going down from ceiling. I have center channel 56" from ceiling so I guess I will have to have screen front of center channel so it needs to be AT one I guess?
> 
> I have screen at home just for try easy set up model:
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/Elite-Screens...100"+pull+up
> 
> I can see waves on it from day one
> 
> 
> So what will be great fit for those PJ? I know needs to be tab tensioned screen , so I'm looking for no waves , very good PQ for movies and sport. Any recommendations?
> 
> Budget is not much limited but I really don't want to by limited edition Ferrari screen for Mustang PJ
> 
> Thanks for help.


It would help to know a little about your room. If you have a dark non reflective theater like room, certainly a StudioTek 130 g3 or a Cima Neve can't be beat !


----------



## retro124

Craig Peer said:


> It would help to know a little about your room. If you have a dark non reflective theater like room, certainly a StudioTek 130 g3 or a Cima Neve can't be beat !


Thanks for response, Ok I will have it in livingroom, size of room is 16x16 with open kitchen on one side. I'm really looking only for evening viewing sometimes afternoon sport watching if possible cause of light, so but evenings I can have room nice and dark.


----------



## Craig Peer

retro124 said:


> Thanks for response, Ok I will have it in livingroom, size of room is 16x16 with open kitchen on one side. I'm really looking only for evening viewing sometimes afternoon sport watching if possible cause of light, so but evenings I can have room nice and dark.


Sounds like Firehawk or possibly Tiberon might work better than a white screen - send me an email and I'll see about getting you some various screen samples to check out in your room !


----------



## retro124

Craig Peer said:


> Sounds like Firehawk or possibly Tiberon might work better than a white screen - send me an email and I'll see about getting you some various screen samples to check out in your room !


Ok let me pm you details, thaks


----------



## BondDonBond

996911 said:


> Are you suggesting that they rec'd any screen regardless of your needs, specs, etc, just to sell you anything?


No it was in discussion that the 130 was not a good screen for 4K. Stewart recommended I get it for my 4K projector. I wanted something for both my 1080p 3D and 4K projector.


----------



## 996911

Who told you that the 130 was not a good screen for 4K??? Not Stewart who actually designed the screen for specific applications. And in a situation where you need "some" gain like a room with "some" lighting, you will need to select the 130 over the 100 as it moves you from 1.0 to 1.3 gain. As has been said, unless you watch movies in a cave with no lighting, the 100 will be completely inappropriate and look worse than the 1.3 gain 130.


----------



## armanifreak

need advice...my room is 12 X 20 fully enclosed room with no little issue. 13' throw from lens to projector (epson LS10000). looking to do a 118'' - 125'' image diagonal to make full best use of the wall space available.

recommendations? was looking at a stewart product, seymour H105 precision frame glacier white non-acoustical, or elunevision slim series reference EV-S-120. Need to stay at or around $1000 budget for screen. Obviously, the less the better  screen probably needs to be white due to no light issue. Prefer fixed since that is the cheaper way to go.

also not sure if i should do 16:9 or 2:35 aspect ratio. want to use setup for 90% blurays - 4k blurays/regular blurays, and 10% directv programming.

My first home theater setup so any thoughts or advice appreciated for a newbie. 

P.S in case why im not going acoustical transparent screen: i have martin logan speakers already installed at the front and rear sloped ceilings of the room...pair of vanquish as Front L and R. Axis as center channel...2 pairs electromotion R; a pair as height in center of the room, and the other pair on rear.


----------



## Craig Peer

BondDonBond said:


> No it was in discussion that the 130 was not a good screen for 4K. Stewart recommended I get it for my 4K projector. I wanted something for both my 1080p 3D and 4K projector.


Of course it's good for 4K. I've used mine with a JVC RS600, Sony VW600 and now a JVC RS4500. 4K and HDR need a lot of brightness. The StudioTek 130 G3 is ideal in my opinion.


----------



## robber616

Craig Peer said:


> Of course it's good for 4K. I've used mine with a JVC RS600, Sony VW600 and now a JVC RS4500. 4K and HDR need a lot of brightness. The StudioTek 130 G3 is ideal in my opinion.


Where to buy screen guys ? Thanks


----------



## 996911

I'd contact Stewart directly and ask them for a list of authorized resellers in your area.


----------



## retro124

I just recieved samples of screens Neve and Tiburon G2. Can't wait to try it with Sony 45es and compare it to Elite pull up screen. 

It will be in livingroom set up motorized screen down from ceiling.

Anyone have one of those Stewart screens any preferences or comment how good they are?


----------



## Theaterfreak360

I bought a 152” wide 2.35 AR microperfed Stewart Ultramatte 150. While colors absolutely pop on the screen, I am sensitive to the screen’s sheen. My dealer sent me two samples to compare before I made my purchase, which were the Studiotek 130 and the Ultramatte 150. At the sample sizes provided, it was extremely difficult to tell the difference between the two samples. I decided to go with the Ultramatte 150 because the sample sizes were so similar and it seemed to offer a little more gain without being too far removed from the Studiotek 130. Well, after owning the screen for three months now and set-up for the past six weeks, I will say the big difference is the sheen coating is a bit extreme on the Ultramatte 150 compared to the Studiotek 130. Don’t get me wrong…I’m not seeing many sparkles, if any at all. It’s just the sheen coating is noticeable when lighter colored images are on the screen. While I enjoy the experience of playing games, watching TV shows and movies on a screen that size, at times, I am taken out of the experience when my eye catches the sheen.

I spoke to my dealer and he asked if it was hot-spotting from the projector. He thought maybe the projector was too close to the screen. The projector is twenty-two feet from the screen, which is far enough from a 152” wide screen. In addition, it’s not hot-spotting because the sheen coating is fairly even throughout the screen. 

I based my screen size on a demo room from a Home Theater store here in San Antonio called Bjorn’s. They have quite a few dedicated home theater rooms that are pretty awesome to visit. Their largest room is the one that caught my attention. It has a 155” wide 2.35 AR microperfed Studiotek 130 paired with a Sony 5000ES. Needless to say, the image is gorgeous! The sound system compliments it well too! After seeing this demo room, I figured I would go with a screen of similar size because I have the space in my theater and I loved how immersive the screen size felt.

I’m not writing this to knock the Ultramatte 150 or to speak ill of it. Heck, I own it and it definitely has its place. It’s just that I’ve noticed newer members on the forum asking for a comparison between the Ultramatte 150 and the Studiotek 130 and I was in the same position last year asking the exact same question. Very few people on the forum had much experience with it. And on top of that, there were absolutely no demo rooms available to view the Ultramatte 150 first–hand anywhere near me. I’m sure it’s probably the same for many AVS’ers contemplating this screen. I will say that if I had to the opportunity to do this again after seeing both the Ultramatte 150 and the Studiotek 130 at larger sizes first-hand, I would choose the Studiotek 130. The Studiotek 130 has a great image, less sheen than the Ultramatte 150 and it’s very similar in gain. If you are not very sensitive to sheen or can altogether ignore it, the Ultramatte 150 may be a great screen for you. The colors do pop!


----------



## RapalloAV

I just installed a 145" Studiotek 130 microperf after testing both samples including The Ultramatte 150. I decided on the 130 as I could see sheen on the 150 even with the small samples. However I never rushed those tests, I spent days trying so much different material and the bright scenes were a bit of a worry to me on the 150. I really loved the gain from it but I was worried that that sheen might be worse on a larger screen.

However I am over the moon on the 130.  Its the best ever screen I have ever ever used, the image is bright, the movies pop and the colours and blacks are better than any other screen I have ever owned, and there has been a few! At first I was a bit worried about the results as this screen is not cheap, but teamed with my JVC X9500 my mouth drops every time I look at the image. I believe the Stewart Studiotek 130 microperf must be one of the very best AT screens on the market today. I have NO regrets now how much I paid for this screen, Im over the moon with the results, its so good I even think about it in bed!!!

On a side note, sometimes when the image is really bright I see a very slight sheen in the centre, but I would be the only one as Im very very fussy about my image, my audience wouldn't know! But I dont care about that as the image is so bright and vibrant with the 130 I can even run on low lamp now with my X9500.

What projector are you using?
Have you tried to lower the lumens if the image is very bright, it might help?


----------



## Theaterfreak360

RapalloAV said:


> What projector are you using?
> Have you tried to lower the lumens if the image is very bright, it might help?


I'm actually using the exact same projector you have, JVC RS620. I agree...the projector is awesome! You're right about the gain on the screen making the image pop. I had the RS620 and the Lumagen Radiance Pro 4446 calibrated, so the image and color space look fantastic. I just finished watching a movie on Netflix in my theater and I'm still blown away by how good the image looks, even with a streamed movie. Our gigabit internet helps out a bit with that too. 

The one thing I will say about this screen is that SDR Rec 2020 looks spectacular! I have to remind myself sometimes that it's a trade off with a screen this large to have to deal with a bit of sheen to get the brightness needed to properly display Rec 2020. There's enough pop on the screen to catch details that a lesser gain screen probably wouldn't be able to display. I haven't had to increase the lamp above low lamp mode. I have tried it in high lamp mode for 3D.

Oh...I almost forgot...3D with this screen looks really really good! I was never much of a 3D fan in the past, but I am now! 3D at home on a high gain screen this large looks amazing. 

You're absolutely right about the price we pay for these screens. You definitely want to walk away happy with your purchase.


----------



## thetman

retro124 said:


> I just recieved samples of screens Neve and Tiburon G2. Can't wait to try it with Sony 45es and compare it to Elite pull up screen.
> 
> It will be in livingroom set up motorized screen down from ceiling.
> 
> Anyone have one of those Stewart screens any preferences or comment how good they are?


have a 133" Cima fixed screen I bought 3 month ago. I love it. I believe Craig Peer from AVS has a motorized Cima version. His setup rocks with dual motorized screens.


----------



## DavidHir

I hate seeing sparklies or texture at all which is why I went with the Stewart ST100. Initially, I tried out the Da-lite HD Pro 1.1 which had them rather badly - I then went to the 0.9 which had them to a lesser degree, but not until I went with the ST100 was I really satisfied. I've got a 2:35, 9 foot wide screen. I sit back about 10.5 feet. I realize those with larger screens might have limited brightness issues with such material, but darn it's nice.


----------



## WilliamG

DavidHir said:


> I hate seeing sparklies or texture at all which is why I went with the Stewart ST100. Initially, I tried out the Da-lite HD Pro 1.1 which had them rather badly - I then went to the 0.9 which had them to a lesser degree, but not until I went with the ST100 was I really satisfied. I've got a 2:35, 9 foot wide screen. I sit back about 10.5 feet. I realize those with larger screens might have limited brightness issues with such material, but darn it's nice.


It can't be overstated how amazing the ST100 is in regards to sparklies, i.e. there's none. Accept no substitute if you're even slightly sensitive to this. Best. Screen. Ever.


----------



## Mike Garrett

robber616 said:


> Where to buy screen guys ? Thanks


Shoot me a PM and I can give you some options.


----------



## RS3771

WilliamG said:


> It can't be overstated how amazing the ST100 is in regards to sparklies, i.e. there's none. Accept no substitute if you're even slightly sensitive to this. Best. Screen. Ever.


Sheen, sparklies, & texture absolutely bother me, which is why I've decided to go for a 14-ft ST100 (& totally avoid the ST130) paired with my 5000ES in a completely light-controlled room with dark walls, ceiling, & floor - now, this has got to be really good - will know in a month or so....


----------



## WilliamG

RS3771 said:


> Sheen, sparklies, & texture absolutely bother me, which is why I've decided to go for a 14-ft ST100 (& totally avoid the ST130) paired with my 5000ES in a completely light-controlled room with dark walls, ceiling, & floor - now, this has got to be really good - will know in a month or so....


You’re in for an absolute treat.


----------



## 996911

RS3771 said:


> Sheen, sparklies, & texture absolutely bother me, which is why I've decided to go for a 14-ft ST100 (& totally avoid the ST130) paired with my 5000ES in a completely light-controlled room with dark walls, ceiling, & floor - now, this has got to be really good - will know in a month or so....


With dark walls, ceiling, floor, etc, and light controlled, that should be fantastic! I can say though that the small gain the 130 gets me over the 100 is worth it as I see ZERO sheen or sparkles. But then again, maybe that is b/c mine has the THX microperf treatment and is 152"


----------



## G-Rex

RS3771 said:


> Sheen, sparklies, & texture absolutely bother me, which is why I've decided to go for a 14-ft ST100 (& totally avoid the ST130) paired with my 5000ES in a completely light-controlled room with dark walls, ceiling, & floor - now, this has got to be really good - will know in a month or so....


I am amazed how bright my 5000ES is on my 14' ST100 (non-perforated) 2.40:1 screen. Laser at 50 is very bright for either stripped HDR or SDR viewing. With the Panasonic UHD player in HDR mode, laser at 78 produces a very nice image. The 5000 really shines with the ST100 over the ST130. The screen disappears, with no shimmering, sparkles with an added sense of clarity. 3D is not as good though on the ST100 vs the ST130, which isn't a very large concern of mine.


----------



## RS3771

G-Rex said:


> I am amazed how bright my 5000ES is on my 14' ST100 (non-perforated) 2.40:1 screen. Laser at 50 is very bright for either stripped HDR or SDR viewing. With the Panasonic UHD player in HDR mode, laser at 78 produces a very nice image. The 5000 really shines with the ST100 over the ST130. The screen disappears, with no shimmering, sparkles with an added sense of clarity. 3D is not as good though on the ST100 vs the ST130, which isn't a very large concern of mine.


I'm also going for the non-perforated ST100 screen. When you say 3D is not as good as on the ST130, I presume you're referring to a discernible brightness loss? As for me, I've been projecting on a wall for the last 5 years (!) - never had a screen. Right now, I'm projecting on a wall painted with the specially formulated HT paint from GooScreens (formulated to be the equivalent of 1.3 gain on a textured wall) - and there's texture, shimmering, sparklies, etc. (observed for the first time after I switched from 1100ES to 5000ES) But 3D is fantastic! So, I suppose there would be loss of brightness but maybe not that bad - I wasn't very unhappy with the 3D output even from the low-lumen 1100ES.


----------



## G-Rex

Hard to tell if it's merely brightness loss or is it something additional as well. Such as the different light dispersion pattern that occurs with a unity gain screen (omnidirectional). I also noticed much more sparkles and shimmering on the 130 with the 5000 vs my prior 1100.


----------



## A7mad78

The perfection of the ST100 even with 25% of lights as showing 

Great screen from a great company 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## WilliamG

G-Rex said:


> Hard to tell if it's merely brightness loss or is it something additional as well. Such as the different light dispersion pattern that occurs with a unity gain screen (omnidirectional). I also noticed much more sparkles and shimmering on the 130 with the 5000 vs my prior 1100.


I wonder if you’d see any with the 100. I doubt it. I think sparkles are an abomination!



A7mad78 said:


> The perfection of the ST100 even with 25% of lights as showing
> 
> Great screen from a great company
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Lovely. I’ve had the ST100 a little over a year now and can’t get over how incredible it isn’t. I have literally ZERO complaints. Bear in mind I feel like I’m the pickiest person ever when it comes to image quality.


----------



## A7mad78

WilliamG said:


> I wonder if you’d see any with the 100. I doubt it. I think sparkles are an abomination!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lovely. I’ve had the ST100 a little over a year now and can’t get over how incredible it isn’t. I have literally ZERO complaints. Bear in mind I feel like I’m the pickiest person ever when it comes to image quality.




Me to I am 7 months now and I am so happy i was had the choice between ST100 & ST130 and i feel i take the right choice when i go with the 100 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Mike Garrett

For image quality, ST100 beats ST130 every time, as long as you can light up the ST100 size.


----------



## Craig Peer

Mike Garrett said:


> For image quality, ST100 beats ST130 every time, as long as you can light up the ST100 size.


Depends what you like. At least one of the JVC guys at their demo suite at CES 2016 agreed with me that they liked the ST130 better. The ST100 looked dull in comparison. Plus, the gain of the ST130 lets me watch my RS4500 in low laser with Blu-rays and get 18.5 foot lamberts. Just because you have a bright laser projector doesn't mean it has infinite light output. It dims just like a lamp based projector, just a lot slower. No need to speed up the laser diode decay. I'm just as stingy conserving lumens as with a lamp based projector .


----------



## Craig Peer

G-Rex said:


> Hard to tell if it's merely brightness loss or is it something additional as well. Such as the different light dispersion pattern that occurs with a unity gain screen (omnidirectional).* I also noticed much more sparkles and shimmering on the 130 with the 5000 vs my prior 1100*.


You shouldn't if you have the VW5000 calibrated for the same foot lamberts off the screen as the VW1100. I see no difference with my RS4500 vs my previous VW600, RS600 or Sim Lumis Host. Currently watching Blu-rays at 18.5 foot lamberts and 4K Blu-rays at 38 foot lamberts. I preferred watching at around 18+ foot lamberts with the previous projectors too.


----------



## WilliamG

Craig Peer said:


> Depends what you like. At least one of the JVC guys at their demo suite at CES 2016 agreed with me that they liked the ST130 better. The ST100 looked dull in comparison. Plus, the gain of the ST130 lets me watch my RS4500 in low laser with Blu-rays and get 18.5 foot lamberts. Just because you have a bright laser projector doesn't mean it has infinite light output. It dims just like a lamp based projector, just a lot slower. No need to speed up the laser diode decay. I'm just as stingy conserving lumens as with a lamp based projector .


Dull? Curious. Mind you, I’d take the ST100 even if it only displayed black & white over ANY sparkles/shimmer.


----------



## WilliamG

Craig Peer said:


> You shouldn't if you have the VW5000 calibrated for the same foot lamberts off the screen as the VW1100. I see no difference with my RS4500 vs my previous VW600, RS600 or Sim Lumis Host. Currently watching Blu-rays at 18.5 foot lamberts and 4K Blu-rays at 38 foot lamberts. I preferred watching at around 18+ foot lamberts with the previous projectors too.


If one in sensitive to sparkles, surely the ST130 wouldn’t be the right choice? I’ve seen it brought up in numerous reviews that the ST130 = sparkles, at least to some degree. My previous screen was the fantastic Enlightor 4K and the weave at 14 feet still drove me nuts (despite it advertised as not being even slightly visible at that distance). I’m sure those sensitive to sparkles and shimmer (such as myself) would be driven mad by ANYTHING less than perfection in this regard. 

For instance, if someone says they see sparkles/shimmer only once in a blue moon - I absolutely avoid that screen type. I can’t stand it even for a second.


----------



## Mike Garrett

Craig Peer said:


> Depends what you like. At least one of the JVC guys at their demo suite at CES 2016 agreed with me that they liked the ST130 better. The ST100 looked dull in comparison. Plus, the gain of the ST130 lets me watch my RS4500 in low laser with Blu-rays and get 18.5 foot lamberts. Just because you have a bright laser projector doesn't mean it has infinite light output. It dims just like a lamp based projector, just a lot slower. No need to speed up the laser diode decay. I'm just as stingy conserving lumens as with a lamp based projector .


That is why I said, if you can light it up. If you want 30+ FL on screen for HDR, then you will have to watch your size for sure. I doubt anybody would pick the image on an ST130 over the image of the ST100 if brightness matched. So if you prefer 18.5FL, then both would need to be 18.5FL. The trade off will be longevity of the lamp and brightness for HDR.


----------



## Craig Peer

WilliamG said:


> If one in sensitive to sparkles, surely the ST130 wouldn’t be the right choice? I’ve seen it brought up in numerous reviews that the ST130 = sparkles, at least to some degree. My previous screen was the fantastic Enlightor 4K and the weave at 14 feet still drove me nuts (despite it advertised as not being even slightly visible at that distance). I’m sure those sensitive to sparkles and shimmer (such as myself) would be driven mad by ANYTHING less than perfection in this regard.
> 
> For instance, if someone says they see sparkles/shimmer only once in a blue moon - I absolutely avoid that screen type. I can’t stand it even for a second.


My point was if someone says they never saw sparkles with a VW1100, and now they do with a VW5000, the screen hasn't changed. If you watch at the same foot lamberts with both projectors, the screen should look the same. Must be watching at much higher foot lamberts with the VW5000.


----------



## Craig Peer

Mike Garrett said:


> That is why I said, if you can light it up. If you want 30+ FL on screen for HDR, then you will have to watch your size for sure. I doubt anybody would pick the image on an ST130 over the image of the ST100 if brightness matched. So if you prefer 18.5FL, then both would need to be 18.5FL. The trade off will be longevity of the lamp and brightness for HDR.


I think the ST100 screen at CES was smaller than the ST130 screen we saw Mike at CEDIA, and yes, both myself and one of the JVC guys agreed - we preferred the picture on the ST130. Both times they were running the RS600. You pay your money and you make your choices. They are both good screens. I would need a lot more lumens than my RS4500 and a much darker complete velvet lined room to enjoy the ST100 in my theater, especially with 4K HDR ( for which there are never enough lumens available ).


----------



## Craig Peer

WilliamG said:


> Dull? Curious. Mind you, I’d take the ST100 even if it only displayed black & white over ANY sparkles/shimmer.


Choice is good. I prefer more brightness - especially with HDR. But if the ST100 is the right combination of brightness and lack of artifacts for you, you can't find a better unity gain screen. Enjoy !


----------



## A7mad78

When i made the post i don't want to make an argument discussion coz both of 130 and 100 are identical accept the extra gain

The pic i took was from sat receiver not from blur ray or K-scape but it's looks for my eyes gorgeous my projector is Barco Orion CS 2017 V

and it's light's up the 100 165" very very will 

Again both of them are elite types of screens 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## WilliamG

A7mad78 said:


> When i made the post i don't want to make an argument discussion coz both of 130 and 100 are identical accept the extra gain
> 
> The pic i took was from sat receiver not from blur ray or K-scape but it's looks for my eyes gorgeous my projector is Barco Orion CS 2017 V
> 
> and it's light's up the 100 165" very very will
> 
> Again both of them are elite types of screens
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


For the sake of clarification in case others stumble in here trying to figure out whether to get the ST100 or ST130, they are NOT identical except for higher gain. 

https://www.soundandvision.com/content/stewart-filmscreen-studiotek-100-screen


----------



## A7mad78

WilliamG said:


> For the sake of clarification in case others stumble in here trying to figure out whether to get the ST100 or ST130, they are NOT identical except for higher gain.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.soundandvision.com/content/stewart-filmscreen-studiotek-100-screen




Maybe i got wrong info 

But agin ur post is one of reason i change to 100 and i am sooooo happy 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## WilliamG

A7mad78 said:


> Maybe i got wrong info
> 
> But agin ur post is one of reason i change to 100 and i am sooooo happy
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Both the ST100 and ST130 are excellent. As a general rule of thumb, if you have a cave-room, go ST100 if you have enough lumens. Otherwise, go ST130. If you’re not sensitive to shimmer/sparkles and want loads of brightness, go ST130 from the start. Sometimes I wish I weren’t so sensitive to every little screen artifact. Would have made the whole movie room experience much cheaper, hah! 

As a side-note, reading how some people felt the ST100 looked “dull” makes little sense to me. I’d be interested how that was determined (same projector? Same settings? Etc...).


----------



## G-Rex

Craig Peer said:


> Depends what you like. At least one of the JVC guys at their demo suite at CES 2016 agreed with me that they liked the ST130 better. The ST100 looked dull in comparison. Plus, the gain of the ST130 lets me watch my RS4500 in low laser with Blu-rays and get 18.5 foot lamberts. Just because you have a bright laser projector doesn't mean it has infinite light output. It dims just like a lamp based projector, just a lot slower. No need to speed up the laser diode decay. I'm just as stingy conserving lumens as with a lamp based projector .


Agreed... With my 5000 viewing bluray, on a non-perfed 14' ST100, I am getting a very bright image with the laser at less than 50% (45-ish). Nice to have it running cool, and have the laser on such a low setting. HDR is still nice at around 78 on the laser, so still technically in low mode. High mode with associated fan noise and heat kicks in at 80 laser and above. There is so much usable light headroom on the 5000 that it's a perfect match for the ST100. Of course a careful eye needs to be applied to theater colors and room materials.


----------



## Craig Peer

G-Rex said:


> Agreed... With my 5000 viewing bluray, on a non-perfed 14' ST100, I am getting a very bright image with the laser at less than 50% (45-ish). Nice to have it running cool, and have the laser on such a low setting. HDR is still nice at around 78 on the laser, so still technically in low mode. High mode with associated fan noise and heat kicks in at 80 laser and above. There is so much usable light headroom on the 5000 that it's a perfect match for the ST100. Of course a careful eye needs to be applied to theater colors and room materials.


How many foot lamberts do you watch at with your VW5000 ?


----------



## joerod

G-Rex said:


> Agreed... With my 5000 viewing bluray, on a non-perfed 14' ST100, I am getting a very bright image with the laser at less than 50% (45-ish). Nice to have it running cool, and have the laser on such a low setting. HDR is still nice at around 78 on the laser, so still technically in low mode. High mode with associated fan noise and heat kicks in at 80 laser and above. There is so much usable light headroom on the 5000 that it's a perfect match for the ST100. Of course a careful eye needs to be applied to theater colors and room materials.


Having had a couple screens the past couple years I can say without a doubt the ST100 is hands down our best presentation. The image has never been so clean to our eyes. Ken W. suggested it and I have to say I am damn glad I listened to him. The Alien movie (new one) and Guardians are breathtaking! Football with all my crazy eye candy settings has never looked better. If you have the extra brightness use it! We are hosting a party for the fight this weekend and the ST100/5000ES and new Sony 75" model will be front and center.


----------



## G-Rex

Craig Peer said:


> How many foot lamberts do you watch at with your VW5000 ?


My 1100 was measured at 22 foot lamberts, during my general viewing. I always seem to prefer the 18-22 foot lamberts range. I have not measured the 5000, but I presume I am in that range. I did notice that my second 5000 appeared to be a fair amount brighter per a given laser setting than my first. This leads me to believe that all 5000s will not all measure exactly the same in light output.


----------



## Craig Peer

G-Rex said:


> My 1100 was measured at 22 foot lamberts, during my general viewing. I always seem to prefer the 18-22 foot lamberts range. I have not measured the 5000, but I presume I am in that range. I did notice that my second 5000 appeared to be a fair amount brighter per a given laser setting than my first. This leads me to believe that all 5000s will not all measure exactly the same in light output.


I'd think you would want to measure it just for curiosity sake, or to verify you are watching at the same foot lamberts as your previous projector.


----------



## G-Rex

I plan to measure once a few more things are done to my theater.


----------



## Mike Garrett

Yep, for pure image quality (fewest artifacts) I do not know of anything that tops ST100. But it may not be the best choice for everyone. It depends on screen size, aspect ratio, room conditions and projector used. In other words, you have to take the whole system into account. But that is the case for every screen.


----------



## 996911

mike garrett said:


> yep, for pure image quality (fewest artifacts) ......you have to take the whole system into account.


this


----------



## WilliamG

Mike Garrett said:


> Yep, for pure image quality (fewest artifacts) I do not know of anything that tops ST100. But it may not be the best choice for everyone. It depends on screen size, aspect ratio, room conditions and projector used. In other words, you have to take the whole system into account. But that is the case for every screen.





996911 said:


> this



Which, if read another way...

"Everyone rip apart your room and make it as dark as possible, and then have a really bright projector, or mount your projector closer, so you can enjoy the sheer awesomeness of ST100. Accept No Substitute. "


----------



## Mike Garrett

WilliamG said:


> Which, if read another way...
> 
> "Everyone rip apart your room and make it as dark as possible, and then have a really bright projector, or mount your projector closer, so you can enjoy the sheer awesomeness of ST100. Accept No Substitute. "


If you want the best possible image, then yes, black pit of a room. My room looks ugly with the lights on, but sure looks good with the lights off. Problem is, not everybody is willing or able to make a room a black pit.

Added
Picture is a little misleading. The gray area outside of the black velvet is not the room. That is just how it posted. The side walls are covered by floor to ceiling black velvet curtains. The image I took stops where the black velvet ends on the right and left. That image completely filled the view of the camera imager.


----------



## WilliamG

Mike Garrett said:


> If you want the best possible image, then yes, black pit of a room. My room looks ugly with the lights on, but sure looks good with the lights off. Problem is, not everybody is willing or able to make a room a black pit.


Yeah, it really can't be overstated how much of a pit you need. With a little ambient light it can be "passably OK" for watching some sports etc, but for movies? Fuggedaboutit. 

Just wish 4K was affordable/logical at this point... would love to see the ST100 with something better than my Sony HW50ES from 2012, that I personally got in 2013. Oy... The image still looks great with the Sony, but I would love a higher-contrast 4K projector. The higher your projector contrast, the higher the perceived contrast, too, because there's less light splash off the screen during darker scenes etc etc.

Someday, someday...


----------



## 996911

WilliamG said:


> Which, if read another way...
> 
> "Everyone rip apart your room and make it as dark as possible, and then have a really bright projector, or mount your projector closer, so you can enjoy the sheer awesomeness of ST100. Accept No Substitute. "


Or......

I designed my theater room FIRST and then selected equipment based on all conditions (SPL metering and room volume for proper sub and speaker selection, screen based on projector and room lighting, etc). I'd really like to cover the room in flat black paint and black velvet, but I had to compromise as I wanted to make sure it also looked very elegant as well. Sure, the all black theme could work but I also want my wife to have a say as she enjoys the movies (and HDR) almost as much as I do.


----------



## WilliamG

996911 said:


> Or......
> 
> I designed my theater room FIRST and then selected equipment based on all conditions (SPL metering and room volume for proper sub and speaker selection, screen based on projector and room lighting, etc). I'd really like to cover the room in flat black paint and black velvet, but I had to compromise as I wanted to make sure it also looked very elegant as well. Sure, the all black theme could work but I also want my wife to have a say as she enjoys the movies (and HDR) almost as much as I do.


Yeah you do need to find a good balance. There's always something we'll want to do to improve things or tinker with things. Just the nature of the beast!


----------



## 996911

WilliamG said:


> Yeah you do need to find a good balance. There's always something we'll want to do to improve things or tinker with things. Just the nature of the beast!


You ain't kidding! My mind is continually coming up with ideas for the room. I love it as it is right now, but have a few ideas


----------



## Mike Garrett

996911 said:


> You ain't kidding! *My mind is continually coming up with ideas for the room.* I love it as it is right now, but have a few ideas


That is how you end up with a baffle wall system and black pit of a room.


----------



## WilliamG

Mike Garrett said:


> That is how you end up with a baffle wall system and black pit of a room.


STAAAAAP ITTT!

My wife would murder.


----------



## 996911

grrrrrrrrr


----------



## Craig Peer

WilliamG said:


> STAAAAAP ITTT!
> 
> My wife would murder.


I just waited for my wife to be out of town for a week to get the Roscoe Black Velour paint out. " Surprise honey " !  Better que up " The Notebook " before she can strangle you.


----------



## WilliamG

Craig Peer said:


> I just waited for my wife to be out of town for a week to get the Roscoe Black Velour paint out. " Surprise honey " !  Better que up " The Notebook " before she can strangle you.


Well, thankfully the room all the HT gear is in is a DEDICATED room. So it's literally used for nothing else. But if she sees me working any further on the obsession that's already cost a veritable fortune... oy...

Must... resist...


----------



## Craig Peer

WilliamG said:


> Well, thankfully the room all the HT gear is in is a DEDICATED room. So it's literally used for nothing else. But if she sees me working any further on the obsession that's already cost a veritable fortune... oy...
> 
> Must... resist...


Sometimes it's good to just relax and watch some movies for a while. After all, that's what this hobby is all about at the end of the day!


----------



## WilliamG

Craig Peer said:


> Sometimes it's good to just relax and watch some movies for a while. After all, that's what this hobby is all about at the end of the day!


Huh? Watch movies? No no no. That's time taken away from upgrading the system!


----------



## 996911

Craig Peer said:


> Sometimes it's good to just relax and watch some movies for a while. After all, that's what this hobby is all about at the end of the day!


Which is why I'm not in a huge hurry to fix the light colored coffer in my theater room. Yes, it will be dark in due time. But right now, I just enjoy watching movies..... 

....and they have never looked better in my life! And that's with only getting about 70 nits in HDR. Hoping to get that bumped up with some black velvet or flat black paint on the ceiling in the near future.


----------



## Craig Peer

WilliamG said:


> Huh? Watch movies? No no no. That's time taken away from upgrading the system!


So many movies, and they all look outstanding on my Stewart screens !


----------



## WilliamG

Craig Peer said:


> So many movies, and they all look outstanding on my Stewart screens !


But that takes away from room-upgrading-plotting time!


----------



## Craig Peer

996911 said:


> Which is why I'm not in a huge hurry to fix the light colored coffer in my theater room. Yes, it will be dark in due time. But right now, I just enjoy watching movies.....
> 
> ....and they have never looked better in my life! And that's with only getting about 70 nits in HDR. Hoping to get that bumped up with some black velvet or flat black paint on the ceiling in the near future.


Last night I had friends over to watch " Kingsman ; The Secret Service " on 4K Blu-ray, while doing a tasting of 6 single malts - especially every time they drank on screen ( I had 21 year old to 14 year old and everything in between ). One guest said " the picture on that screen ( my StudioTek 130 G3 2.35:1 screen ) looked amazing " !!


----------



## 996911

How was Kingsman in HDR? Haven't watched it yet. I do like the idea of a tasting and movie combo


----------



## Craig Peer

996911 said:


> How was Kingsman in HDR? Haven't watched it yet. I do like the idea of a tasting and movie combo


It's a great looking movie in 4K /HDR, and it's a really funny movie to boot !

I did a " Goldfinger " vodka martini / chocolate martini movie night not too long ago too ( using my Stewart Cima Neve 16:9 screen ) - 

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-di...laser-projector-confirm-160.html#post53936761

Next up is " The Seven Year Itch " with champagne and potato chips !


----------



## 996911

I remember your vodka martini night. Epic! We'll be doing that soon


----------



## Theaterfreak360

I have to say, in my previous review of the Ultramatte 150, I jumped the gun too early before having my room optimally set-up. My seats were not completely in and my viewing position was limited. In addition, this being my first projector set-up, I was being way too critical. The Ultramatte 150 is a great screen! 

While there is sheen evenly coated throughout the screen to give that extra punch in brightness, there are no sparkles. Let me rephrase...I did notice sparkles, but it wasn't the screen. It was behind the screen! I have Triad Silver 6 LCRs behind my AT Ultramatte 150 and the manufacturer sticker was on the front face of all my front speakers. The stickers were reflecting from behind the screen and it had me thinking the screen had pretty bad sparkles. 

Well, I have since removed the screen, checked all my speakers and subs behind the screen for "obstructions" and...wah-lah! No more sparkles! After removing the manufacture sticker from the front center speaker and adjusting the stickers on the front left and right speakers...no sparkles what-so-ever! I have since been very pleased with this screen. I still stand by my original statement that if you are extremely sensitive to sheen you may want to consider the ST130 or even the ST100, but do not underestimate the Ultramatte 150! It is still an awesome screen! The colors absolutely pop and it gives a killer clear image! If you want a large screen and would like (or need) the additional brightness, this is the screen to beat.


----------



## RapalloAV

I have behind my Studiotek 130 screen one complete layer of black cheap speaker cloth, it hides everything that might reflect behind the microperf screen.


----------



## rmilyard

I have a change to pickup a 123" 16:9 GreyHawk RS screen pretty cheap. However I think it's missing the EZ Mount Bracket System. Anyone know where buy one?


----------



## Craig Peer

rmilyard said:


> I have a change to pickup a 123" 16:9 GreyHawk RS screen pretty cheap. However I think it's missing the EZ Mount Bracket System. Anyone know where buy one?


Contact any Stewart dealer !


----------



## rmilyard

Craig Peer said:


> Contact any Stewart dealer !


I found one in CA. There are looking into it. Thanks!


----------



## Don Stewart

rmilyard said:


> I found one in CA. There are looking into it. Thanks!


Be sure to get the serial number off the back of the frame and supply to dealer as Stewart has multiple types of mounting brackets. This way it can be looked up in our achieves to make sure you get the proper ones to fit the frame.


----------



## jkennedy

Don,

I am looking for a stealth trap door system - a couple of questions for you. Can I use Harmony on this screen? Can I have a black back cloth to stop reflected light? Do you have a minimum recommended viewing distance for Harmony? 

Kind regards

JK


----------



## Don Stewart

Thanks for all who came by our booth at CEDIA. It was nice meeting many forum members face to face.
We are also pleased that our new Balon Borderless Frame with Phantom HALR screen won a CE PRO "Best Of Show Award".


----------



## tspotorno

I have a Sony VW5000 and am looking to upgrade my screen. Can someone tell me what the difference in Snomatte 100 vs StudioTek 100? I have seen both recommended in other threads and wondered which might be better. I have a Ultramatte 150 and it is too bright with the 5000. Thanks.


----------



## Ericglo

Here is a split screen from Cedia with Studio 100 on the left and Phantom on the right.


----------



## Don Stewart

^ Please note that the spot lights were putting 66 Foot Candles of light directly on the screen surfaces. Yes, that Gibson Les Paul guitar is suppose to be black.
PS: Ericglo, hope you made it thru the Hurricane alright.


----------



## Don Stewart

I came back from CEDIA with a nasty cold and have not been in the office all week. I just read for the first time here on AVS that the "The Gemini" Night and Day Twin Screen system won an AVS Forum Best of CEDIA Award.
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-forum-best-of-cedia-2017-awards/
Again, thanks to all forum members who stopped by the booth to say hi.


----------



## Don Stewart

tspotorno said:


> I have a Sony VW5000 and am looking to upgrade my screen. Can someone tell me what the difference in Snomatte 100 vs StudioTek 100? I have seen both recommended in other threads and wondered which might be better. I have a Ultramatte 150 and it is too bright with the 5000. Thanks.


It is exactly the same product. For commercial installations, such as professional post production and studio review rooms, it has traditionally been called Snomatte 100.
For Home Cinema applications it is named StudioTek 100. Sorry for the confusion. We can blame the marketing boys for that.

EDIT: Just curious. How does the Ultramatte 150 look when the PJ is in HDR mode? Is it still too bright? Please advise.


----------



## Ericglo

Don Stewart said:


> ^ Please note that the spot lights were putting 66 Foot Candles of light directly on the screen surfaces. Yes, that Gibson Les Paul guitar is suppose to be black.
> PS: Ericglo, hope you made it thru the Hurricane alright.



I was trying to determine which of the images highlighted the differences the best and I ended up with these two. Honestly I think the Eiffel Tower might be better than the guitar. Some of the street lights are green on the Phantom whereas they are totally washed out on the 100. 

It should be noted that the Stewart booth wasn't an enclosed booth. There was a high level of ambient light in the booth even without the spot lights.


Thanks for asking about the hurricane. I am still in Dallas, but my cars and residence is ok.


----------



## StFidelis

*Screen Material/Perf Recommendations*

Hi all,

Currently in the throws of a remodel where my DIY home theater is being gutted and renovated by a local A/V Professional. For years we have loved the quality on our DIY painted concoction which was provided on AVS. Thank you! I believe it was SilverFire 2.5 directly on a sheetrock wall.

But I've always dreamed of replacing my DIY with a Stewart, and that day has finally come! With so many material options and I'm concerned about viewing angles, what to do? It appears ambient light rejection and half gain angle are direct tradeoffs. I also would like audio perforations which appear to have light loss from 8-10%. I assume that will affect how gray I can go?

Not sure if it's splitting hairs when comparing screen materials, below is some of the relevant info. 

Thanks in advance for your help!

Projector: Epson 5020ub (2400 Lumens)
Screen Size: 120"
Throw Distance: 18 ft
Viewing distance: 18 - 25 ft.
Location: Basement
Ambient light: 6 small basement windows with room darkening shades, open stairwell (no doors) off to side, bar lighting on side
Seating: Theater seating is direct, but bar seating and restaurant booth type seating on either side. (roughly 50 degree off center).
Screen budget: $4k
Home Theatre Component Budget: $20k


----------



## 996911

StFidelis said:


> Hi all,
> 
> Currently in the throws of a remodel where my DIY home theater is being gutted and renovated by a local A/V Professional. For years we have loved the quality on our DIY painted concoction which was provided on AVS. Thank you! I believe it was SilverFire 2.5 directly on a sheetrock wall.
> 
> But I've always dreamed of replacing my DIY with a Stewart, and that day has finally come! With so many material options and I'm concerned about viewing angles, what to do? It appears ambient light rejection and half gain angle are direct tradeoffs. I also would like audio perforations which appear to have light loss from 8-10%. I assume that will affect how gray I can go?
> 
> Not sure if it's splitting hairs when comparing screen materials, below is some of the relevant info.
> 
> Thanks in advance for your help!
> 
> Projector: Epson 5020ub (2400 Lumens)
> Screen Size: 120"
> Throw Distance: 18 ft
> Viewing distance: 18 - 25 ft.
> Location: Basement
> Ambient light: 6 small basement windows with room darkening shades, open stairwell (no doors) off to side, bar lighting on side
> Seating: Theater seating is direct, but bar seating and restaurant booth type seating on either side. (roughly 50 degree off center).
> Screen budget: $4k
> Home Theatre Component Budget: $20k


I would absolutely contact Don (Stewart) directly and he will give you the best recs based on your projector, lighting, AT or not-AT, etc, etc, etc. I have 2 Stewart screens and absolutely love them. I spent a considerable amount of time working through the options on my current screen with Don and his rec was perfect for my situation and has produced the best picture possible for my situation.


----------



## Erod

Craig Peer said:


> Of course it's good for 4K. I've used mine with a JVC RS600, Sony VW600 and now a JVC RS4500. 4K and HDR need a lot of brightness. The StudioTek 130 G3 is ideal in my opinion.


Craig, quick question. 

RS620, 110-inch ST130 at 16:9, sitting from 11 feet, *calibrated by Chad B*

I'm planning to go to a 2.35 screen in a few months with the same 54" height and use the zoom for movies. Will that ruin the calibration Chad B did for me with the lower fL?


----------



## Craig Peer

Erod said:


> Craig, quick question.
> 
> RS620, 110-inch ST130 at 16:9, sitting from 11 feet, *calibrated by Chad B*
> 
> I'm planning to go to a 2.35 screen in a few months with the same 54" height and use the zoom for movies. Will that ruin the calibration Chad B did for me with the lower fL?


I'd email Chad and ask his recommendation on this. Maybe you just need to open the iris a bit.


----------



## jkennedy

*Question on Harmony & Stealth*

Don,

Please can you help with my question.

Thanks

JK



jkennedy said:


> Don,
> 
> I am looking for a stealth trap door system - a couple of questions for you. Can I use Harmony on this screen? Can I have a black back cloth to stop reflected light? Do you have a minimum recommended viewing distance for Harmony?
> 
> Kind regards
> 
> JK


----------



## GetGray

jkennedy said:


> Don,
> 
> Please can you help with my question.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> JK


JK. If you contact me off-line I'll be happy to help with your details. Meanwhile, re black backing, if you mane projector light going through the screen, are you going to microperf the fabric? You should not need a backing with one of these screens for that purpose. If you mean to prevent outside light from coming through, you need to work with a dealer to help you there. 

You can configure this screen so you can control it with a harmony. The IR codes should already be in their database and if they are not we can get them added.

Scott


----------



## abinav555

I am curious to know if there would be any difference in Image quality when a HALR screen is used in a dedicated HT with 100% light control as compared to a Snomatte or ST100.


----------



## Ellebob

There is definitely a difference in picture quality. Any time you use an ambient light rejecting screen or a screen with gain you are altering the light and some artifacts will exist. If there wasn't they wouldn't even make a Studiotek 100 and just have a one size fits all type of screen. How detrimental or noticeable these artifacts can be is a different question. The other trade off with these type of screens is viewing angle, which might not be an issue depending on seating locations. A Studiotek 100 will give everyone the best presentation. If you have the environment (no lights, dark walls, floor and ceiling) to use a Studiotek 100 then it is a no brainer. if you don't have that ideal environment then or want to have some lights on when you watch then get a screen that best matches your conditions.


----------



## Erod

What is the best masking option for my 16:9 ST130 screen to create a 2:35 masked image? 


Not sure where to start. Thanks.


----------



## Craig Peer

Erod said:


> What is the best masking option for my 16:9 ST130 screen to create a 2:35 masked image?
> 
> 
> Not sure where to start. Thanks.


Unless Don has new manual masking panels I'm not aware of, you could make some - http://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-di...er-theater-better-image-137.html#post54735385


----------



## David Shapiro

I currently have a 10 yr old motorized Stewart Studiotek 130 microperf. It is a 120” wide 16:9 screen. We sit about 10 feet away. It has been bulletproof and has served me very well. I’m going to a JVC RS4500 and I’m interested in a scope screen for movies. It also serves as our primary TV. Therefore, it also needs to work for 16:9 and 2.35. We can go up to 144” wide.

This is a long-winded way of asking what material should I be looking at, what aspect ratio and what gain, to accommodate the increased light needs for HDR and 4K 3D?
Also, since I need a microperf, are people using a black backing to cut light loss through the holes?

Thanks,
David


----------



## Craig Peer

David Shapiro said:


> I currently have a 10 yr old motorized Stewart Studiotek 130 microperf. It is a 120” wide 16:9 screen. We sit about 10 feet away. It has been bulletproof and has served me very well. I’m going to a JVC RS4500 and I’m interested in a scope screen for movies. It also serves as our primary TV. Therefore, it also needs to work for 16:9 and 2.35. We can go up to 144” wide.
> 
> This is a long-winded way of asking what material should I be looking at, what aspect ratio and what gain, to accommodate the increased light needs for HDR and 4K 3D?
> Also, since I need a microperf, are people using a black backing to cut light loss through the holes?
> 
> Thanks,
> David


Why not stick with the StudioTek 130 material ? But maybe not 144" wide. If you are keeping your seating at 10', I'd size it to match that. Maybe 138" diagonal ?


----------



## Craig Peer

A few 4K Blu-ray screen shots on my 128" diagonal 2.35:1 StudioTek 130 G3 screen - 














































4K HDR looks amazing on this screen !


----------



## kaotikr1

I'd like to welcome myself to the ST130 family.









Sent from my Pixel C using Tapatalk


----------



## roadkingtroy

I just installed a sony 365 projector, yes I bought this projector months ago and of course guess what Sony comes out with the 285 thats about right with my luck, oh well anyway what would be a good screen match for the Sony? I was thinking Studio Tek 100 or Cima screen. I do have a decated home theater with flat grey walls and ceilings. Thanks for the advise!


----------



## Craig Peer

roadkingtroy said:


> I just installed a sony 365 projector, yes I bought this projector months ago and of course guess what Sony comes out with the 285 thats about right with my luck, oh well anyway what would be a good screen match for the Sony? I was thinking Studio Tek 100 or Cima screen. I do have a decated home theater with flat grey walls and ceilings. Thanks for the advise!


I personally like the Cima Neve - great screen for the price, and great screen for 4K and HDR too.


----------



## ShockFett

Hello guys,

I need some advice. My DNP supernova blade fell and dented a corner. So I?m open to options on a new screen.

1. Are Stewart screens comparable to the quality of the DNP?

2 My room is not a cave. I can get it dark at night but day time is your average room. Light walls, white ceiling etc. Walls and ceiling are quite a good distance from screen. I also have the DLA-X700 and use a 100?

3. Which screen matches my needs? I see you guys ae recommending the 130 for rooms like mine.

4. Are blacks good on these screens?

5. What is roughly the price of a 100? screen fixed and motorized?

Thank you guys. I do appreciate any advice.


----------



## Buckeye Dave

My 153" 2.35:1 Cima Neve arrived yesterday! 

I am very excited to get this assembled and hung. Huge thank you to Craig Peer for his great knowledge and customer service. He certainly made the screen selection and ordering process a pleasant one.

Glad to join the Stewart family.


----------



## roadkingtroy

I'm looking for a Cima screen myself. Any recommendations on where to purchase Stewart screens. Thanks for the help!


----------



## 996911

roadkingtroy said:


> I'm looking for a Cima screen myself. Any recommendations on where to purchase Stewart screens. Thanks for the help!


I'd call Stewart directly and ask for AUTHORIZED dealers in your area. Then, forum members could comment on who they rec based on experience, etc.


----------



## Buckeye Dave

roadkingtroy said:


> I'm looking for a Cima screen myself. Any recommendations on where to purchase Stewart screens. Thanks for the help!


Yes, talk to Craig Peer on this forum. He will hook you up.


----------



## thetman

Buckeye Dave said:


> Yes, talk to Craig Peer on this forum. He will hook you up.


thats what I did to get my cima screen. worked out great.


----------



## thetman

Craig Peer said:


> A few 4K Blu-ray screen shots on my 128" diagonal 2.35:1 StudioTek 130 G3 screen -
> 
> 4K HDR looks amazing on this screen !


looks awesome. I'm sure your projector has something to do with that excellent picture too.


----------



## thetman

Buckeye Dave said:


> My 153" 2.35:1 Cima Neve arrived yesterday!
> 
> I am very excited to get this assembled and hung. Huge thank you to Craig Peer for his great knowledge and customer service. He certainly made the screen selection and ordering process a pleasant one.
> 
> Glad to join the Stewart family.


congrats- its a great screen. I've been enjoying mine for a few months now.
get some pics!


----------



## Craig Peer

thetman said:


> looks awesome. I'm sure your projector has something to do with that excellent picture too.


True, but I needed a screen to match. I've had lesser screens in the past - and even this projector can't make a mediocre screen look good.


----------



## thetman

Craig Peer said:


> True, but I needed a screen to match. I've had lesser screens in the past - and even this projector can't make a mediocre screen look good.


very true. either way your getting an outstanding picture now. those screen shots looks great


----------



## Shermstead

Anyone have experience with the Phantom HALR? I’m close to pulling the trigger on a 120’.


----------



## Shermstead

Any suggestions for a fairly priced Stewart dealer? This will be a standard dimension Luxus Model A screen without any special build details.


----------



## DavidHir

Shermstead said:


> Any suggestions for a fairly priced Stewart dealer? This will be a standard dimension Luxus Model A screen without any special build details.


Reach out to Mike Garrett at AV Science. I got a nice deal on my ST100 screen with Luxus frame.


----------



## Craig Peer

Shermstead said:


> Anyone have experience with the Phantom HALR? I’m close to pulling the trigger on a 120’.


Only at Cedia, where it looked very good under less than idea conditions.


----------



## Don Stewart

Just a sidebar here. We at Stewart are honored to contribute to the restoration of a true American histohttps://www.facebook.com/aurumhometech/photos/pcb.912811015541309/912810918874652/?type=3rical landmark. NASA's Mission Control in Houston is being restored to it's former glory where the Mercury, Gemini and the Apollo Moon landings took place. I am an aviation-aerospace enthusiast and love projects like this. For anyone with same interest please see link below.
https://www.commercialintegrator.co...2631604&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook


----------



## Erod

Does Stewart sell masking systems for an existing Studiotek 130 screen?


----------



## GetGray

Erod said:


> Does Stewart sell masking systems for an existing Studiotek 130 screen?


No. but sometimes I take trade ins on upgrades. Offline.


----------



## SJHT

For folks with electiscreens (Luxus Model A), do you always roll up the screen after each use? Mine (new this year replacing a 10 years old similar model), works great. It does make a little bit of a strange sound (well, different than during most of the screen down procedure) during the last 6-12 inches of travel, but operations has never failed. Just wondered if it should be kept down most of the time or rolled up? Maybe it doesn't matter! Less dust when it is up of course. SJ


----------



## Don Stewart

SJHT said:


> For folks with electiscreens (Luxus Model A), do you always roll up the screen after each use? Mine (new this year replacing a 10 years old similar model), works great. It does make a little bit of a strange sound (well, different than during most of the screen down procedure) during the last 6-12 inches of travel, but operations has never failed. Just wondered if it should be kept down most of the time or rolled up? Maybe it doesn't matter! Less dust when it is up of course. SJ


The screen will do well either way. If you do choose to leave it down for long periods of time, then an occasional dusting of the viewing surface won't hurt. We use old school drafting brushes at our factory to dust off screen material. (See Link)
https://www.amazon.com/Alvin-2341-Traditional-Dusting-Brush/dp/B000HF6K9S
If you get fly poop on your screen, a light brown waxy substance, remove by blotting with the sticky side of 3M masking tap. The slight change of sound you hear when the screen deploys the last 6 to 12 inches is the screen's black drop releasing from the back of the screen material. It has a little more tact and a different texture than the rest of the screen.


----------



## SJHT

Don Stewart said:


> The screen will do well either way. If you do choose to leave it down for long periods of time, then an occasional dusting of the viewing surface won't hurt. We use old school drafting brushes at our factory to dust off screen material. (See Link)
> https://www.amazon.com/Alvin-2341-Traditional-Dusting-Brush/dp/B000HF6K9S
> If you get fly poop on your screen, a light brown waxy substance, remove by blotting with the sticky side of 3M masking tap. The slight change of sound you hear when the screen deploys the last 6 to 12 inches is the screen's black drop releasing from the back of the screen material. It has a little more tact and a different texture than the rest of the screen.


Interesting. I have some brown waxy substance. However, since this was rolled up into the housing, it doesn’t come off with masking tape. Most did, but likely it was pressed into the screen resulting in a small mark. Any suggestions on how to clean? Thanks. SJ


----------



## Craig Peer

SJHT said:


> For folks with electiscreens (Luxus Model A), do you always roll up the screen after each use? Mine (new this year replacing a 10 years old similar model), works great. It does make a little bit of a strange sound (well, different than during most of the screen down procedure) during the last 6-12 inches of travel, but operations has never failed. Just wondered if it should be kept down most of the time or rolled up? Maybe it doesn't matter! Less dust when it is up of course. SJ


I usually leave mine down, since it's in a dark dedicated home theater. I'll roll up the 2.35:1 screen when I watch 16:9 ( that screen is behind it ).


----------



## Don Stewart

SJHT said:


> Interesting. I have some brown waxy substance. However, since this was rolled up into the housing, it doesn’t come off with masking tape. Most did, but likely it was pressed into the screen resulting in a small mark. Any suggestions on how to clean? Thanks. SJ


Which Stewart screen material do you have? Please advise.


----------



## SJHT

Don Stewart said:


> Which Stewart screen material do you have? Please advise.


ST100. Thanks. SJ


----------



## Don Stewart

SJHT said:


> ST100. Thanks. SJ


One suggestion. Have another person hold a hard surface, such as a book or magazine directly behind the screen material where the fly poop is. This gives you a hard surface to blot against.
Try removing with with 3M masking tape again. If that does not work, then leave it be.


----------



## SJHT

OK. Really doesn't show. Not sure I can get something behind it because of the location. I noticed on the Stewart website they suggested:

"For tougher spots, you can make a cleaning solution using a water-based detergent and warm water. Moisten a clean, cotton cloth or Q-Tip with this solution; moisten the stained area; and gently lift off the stain. Do not use any other cleaning materials on the screen."


----------



## Don Stewart

SJHT said:


> OK. Really doesn't show. Not sure I can get something behind it because of the location. I noticed on the Stewart website they suggested:
> 
> "For tougher spots, you can make a cleaning solution using a water-based detergent and warm water. Moisten a clean, cotton cloth or Q-Tip with this solution; moisten the stained area; and gently lift off the stain. Do not use any other cleaning materials on the screen."


Studiotek 100 has an extreme matte surface with almost no gloss level. I would not use any liquids on the surface as it could cause a shinny spot. If the spot is small, I would leave it.


----------



## thetman

Don Stewart said:


> The screen will do well either way. If you do choose to leave it down for long periods of time, then an occasional dusting of the viewing surface won't hurt. We use old school drafting brushes at our factory to dust off screen material. (See Link)
> https://www.amazon.com/Alvin-2341-Traditional-Dusting-Brush/dp/B000HF6K9S
> If you get fly poop on your screen, a light brown waxy substance, remove by blotting with the sticky side of 3M masking tap. The slight change of sound you hear when the screen deploys the last 6 to 12 inches is the screen's black drop releasing from the back of the screen material. It has a little more tact and a different texture than the rest of the screen.


can I use this brush for my fixed Cima screen?


----------



## Don Stewart

thetman said:


> can I use this brush for my fixed Cima screen?


Yes, we use them on all our materials.


----------



## bytebuster

Hi Don, sincerely appreciate your input on this message board. 
I am a proud owner of a luxus firehawk G3 installed in my family room.
I am looking into upgrading to a bigger screen. But this time I wanted to consider another screen material like the ST130.
The sparkly effect that the ALR screens exhibit can be a tad distracting at times. But at the same time I am worried about what I will lose if I move away from the firehawk.
Any suggestions on how I can go about evaluating whether the ST130 will work for me?


----------



## SJHT

Talk to a dealer and get samples. That’s what I did. SJ


----------



## Craig Peer

bytebuster said:


> Hi Don, sincerely appreciate your input on this message board.
> I am a proud owner of a luxus firehawk G3 installed in my family room.
> I am looking into upgrading to a bigger screen. But this time I wanted to consider another screen material like the ST130.
> The sparkly effect that the ALR screens exhibit can be a tad distracting at times. But at the same time I am worried about what I will lose if I move away from the firehawk.
> Any suggestions on how I can go about evaluating whether the ST130 will work for me?


I had a Firehawk and got a ST130 sample. I devised a board with a stand so I could position the sample in front of the Firehawk and compare. Replaced the Firehawk with the ST130, and I've never looked back. So like SJHT said, start with a sample !


----------



## bytebuster

Craig Peer said:


> I had a Firehawk and got a ST130 sample. I devised a board with a stand so I could position the sample in front of the Firehawk and compare. Replaced the Firehawk with the ST130, and I've never looked back. So like SJHT said, start with a sample !


Are u referring to one of the 8x11 samples? 
Also, how does the ST100 compare with the ST130?


----------



## Craig Peer

bytebuster said:


> Are u referring to one of the 8x11 samples?
> Also, how does the ST100 compare with the ST130?


Yes, the 8.5" x 11" samples worked for me. You'll need to get an ST100 sample and compare it yourself.


----------



## scyto

Craig Peer said:


> Yes, the 8.5" x 11" samples worked for me. You'll need to get an ST100 sample and compare it yourself.


Where can one buy samples?
I found an online store on one screen manufacturers site, but nothing on theirs.
Also what screen material would you suggest I consider sampling to get the best out of the 885es we are all having fun discussing (I need something new as the texture on my old firehawk is distracting) for example would anything improve the contrast issue?


----------



## Ellebob

Any Stewart dealer should be able to get samples. Call Craig at AVScience he should be able to get you some.

Which material will work best depends on your viewing conditions and somewhat how much brightness you need. In a nutshell if you watch in the dark and your room is painted dark then a ST100 is tough to beat. If you need more brightness than an ST130. But once you add gain you add some amount of artifacts, the more gain the more artifacts. if you watch in the dark but light colored walls than an ST130 or if you have enough brightness possibly a Grayhawk or even a Graymatte. If you watch with the lights or have ambient light than a more ambient light rejecting material like the Grayhawk, Firehawk or HALR. Now ALR screens often have a lot of gain so their artifacts can be greater.

Many do not understand gain. Here is he simplest way I can explain it. If you have a basic white screen with no gain let's call it a 1.0 gain screen. if we add .5 gain coating we now have a 1.5 gain screen. if we start with a gray screen with no coating some light is absorbed so let's say it is a .8 screen with no coating. If we add a .5 gain coating to it we have 1.2 gain screen. Many ALR screen have more than .5 gain coating. If you want an idea of how much gain is added to a material look at the half gain angle of the screen. The lower the half gain angle, the smaller the viewing cone and the greater gain coating is on that screen. Even the best of screens with gain will show some artifacts, the question is how noticeable they are with normal viewing material. ALR and gain screens might sound bad but they are a tradeoff. if you don't have the environment for a reference screen like the ST100 then these screens will look a LOT better even with some artifacts then how washed out the ST100 will look in the wrong environment. And of course if you do not have enough brightness it will also not look good.


----------



## Craig Peer

scyto said:


> Where can one buy samples?
> I found an online store on one screen manufacturers site, but nothing on theirs.
> Also what screen material would you suggest I consider sampling to get the best out of the 885es we are all having fun discussing (I need something new as the texture on my old firehawk is distracting) for example would anything improve the contrast issue?


Screen samples are free !


----------



## Shermstead

thetman said:


> have a 133" Cima fixed screen I bought 3 month ago. I love it. I believe Craig Peer from AVS has a motorized Cima version. His setup rocks with dual motorized screens.


Does Stewart offer dual motorized in their Cima line? Is the Cina available with Phantom HALR?


----------



## Ellebob

No dual screen and only the Neve and Tiburon materials for tensioned non-AT screens.


----------



## Craig Peer

Shermstead said:


> Does Stewart offer dual motorized in their Cima line? Is the Cina available with Phantom HALR?


You have to go with the regular Stewart screen material lineup for the dual screen. http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/


----------



## Shermstead

*Stewart pricing*

I have received quotes from over a half dozen Stewart Dealers, for the exact same specifications, and the pricing varies by as much as 60%! I’ve never witnessed such pricing discrepancies for such basic technology.

Especially, considering the Luxus Model A hasn’t changed in over a decade!


----------



## 996911

Shermstead said:


> I have received quotes from over a half dozen Stewart Dealers, for the exact same specifications, and the pricing varies by as much as 60%! I’ve never witnessed such pricing discrepancies for such basic technology.
> 
> Especially, considering the Luxus Model A hasn’t changed in over a decade!


I would contact Stewart directly and ask 2 questions.....

1. Which of the Stewart dealers are 100% genuine authorized Stewart dealers (if you haven't already obtained that info from Stewart).

2. What is the MSRP pricing for the spec you are getting quotes on. I got my quote DIRECTLY from Stewart and presented to my dealer I use and the pricing was the same so I know I wasn't getting marked up over Stewarts pricing. I wouldn't expect my dealer to do that, but the pricing was transparent from Stewart anyway it was nice to compare.


----------



## Shermstead

996911 said:


> I would contact Stewart directly and ask 2 questions.....
> 
> 1. Which of the Stewart dealers are 100% genuine authorized Stewart dealers (if you haven't already obtained that info from Stewart).
> 
> 2. What is the MSRP pricing for the spec you are getting quotes on. I got my quote DIRECTLY from Stewart and presented to my dealer I use and the pricing was the same so I know I wasn't getting marked up over Stewarts pricing. I wouldn't expect my dealer to do that, but the pricing was transparent from Stewart anyway it was nice to compare.


I know the MSRP from Stewart. It’s the AD’s pricing discrepancy that’s at issue and these are all Authorized Dealers.


----------



## 996911

Shermstead said:


> I know the MSRP from Stewart. It’s the AD’s pricing discrepancy that’s at issue and these are all Authorized Dealers.


Are some grossly overcharging above MSRP?


----------



## Ellebob

Make sure they all have the same options as well. The options for control by either 12V trigger, IR, RS-232, IP can easily be a grand difference depending on how the dealer configured the control options.


----------



## Craig Peer

Shermstead said:


> I have received quotes from over a half dozen Stewart Dealers, for the exact same specifications, and the pricing varies by as much as 60%! I’ve never witnessed such pricing discrepancies for such basic technology.
> *
> Especially, considering the Luxus Model A hasn’t changed in over a decade!*


The case hasn't changed, but the material has.


----------



## SJHT

Having recently updated to a new one, the motors are a lot quieter. SJ


----------



## Craig Peer

SJHT said:


> Having recently updated to a new one, the motors are a lot quieter. SJ


Good to know ! Mine are 4+ years old.


----------



## SJHT

Craig Peer said:


> Good to know ! Mine are 4+ years old.


Mine was 10+! Never failed once and I rolled it up after every use. SJ


----------



## Soulnight

R Harkness said:


> 
> 
> I'm talking about quotes like this from Widescreen Review, which in the review of the Studiotek 100 said:
> 
> _"This is a reference quality screen that exhibits *better contrast*, more detail, and far better uniformity over the entire image area than any other
> screen material the company has to offer. "_
> 
> The "better contrast" is puzzling and I'm curious why the reviewer would claim such a thing and/or how it would have been explained...and verified.


Hey,
can you remember what gain did they measure for both the studiotek 100 and the JKP affinity 0.9 compared to the spectralon lambertian reference with 0.99 reflectivity?

Thank you,
Florian


----------



## scyto

Hey qq.

The screen frame of my screen says it is a firehawk, whats interesting to me is the material is very similar of the elite screens cinegray 3d material. 
Is there any chance this is not a firehawk (like it says on the frame) but a greyhawk?

I am asking because as per this hotspot i am thinking the screen (which was in the house when i bought it) is not well matched to my projector or room conditions and want to be sure what i have before i dive into what i should get next?

alex


----------



## Craig Peer

scyto said:


> Hey qq.
> 
> The screen frame of my screen says it is a firehawk, whats interesting to me is the material is very similar of the elite screens cinegray 3d material.
> Is there any chance this is not a firehawk (like it says on the frame) but a greyhawk?
> 
> I am asking because as per this hotspot i am thinking the screen (which was in the house when i bought it) is not well matched to my projector or room conditions and want to be sure what i have before i dive into what i should get next?
> 
> alex


Alex, is your theater dark / dedicated with full light control ?


----------



## scyto

Craig Peer said:


> Alex, is your theater dark / dedicated with full light control ?


Thanks craig.

It is dark blue (though not matte - grr) walls, with white ceiling and cream carpet. It is a basement so light control is very good but not perfect due to a window with only 99% good balckout blind.

I am a dual use scenario. I tend to watch movies with overheads off completely but wall sconces on low.
I do more gaming than movie watching and for that tend to have dimmed overhead illuination.

As such i am thinking i still want to have something that does some amount of ALR?

I have cheapo luminance meter arrving in the next couple of days that will give me a swag of what is happening.
Also have tripod coming for my idisplay pro so i can get some basic readings.

Was thinking i should wait on professional claibration until after i chose a new screen / wait for first firmware drop on the 885es, but perhaps the first step is getting a full claibration with existing stewart screen before i do much else so i get accurate baseline, as i assume the calibrator will do things to get 'right' amount of Ft Lambert?


----------



## Craig Peer

scyto said:


> Thanks craig.
> 
> It is dark blue (though not matte - grr) walls, with white ceiling and cream carpet. It is a basement so light control is very good but not perfect due to a window with only 99% good balckout blind.
> 
> I am a dual use scenario. I tend to watch movies with overheads off completely but wall sconces on low.
> I do more gaming than movie watching and for that tend to have dimmed overhead illuination.
> 
> As such i am thinking i still want to have something that does some amount of ALR?
> 
> I have cheapo luminance meter arrving in the next couple of days that will give me a swag of what is happening.
> Also have tripod coming for my idisplay pro so i can get some basic readings.
> 
> *Was thinking i should wait on professional claibration until after i chose a new screen / wait for first firmware drop on the 885es, but perhaps the first step is getting a full claibration with existing stewart screen before i do much else so i get accurate baseline, as i assume the calibrator will do things to get 'right' amount of Ft Lambert?*


A calibrator should be able to dial things in. I've found that having some lighting on with my white Cima Neve still looks fine, but your cream carpet and white ceiling are more of an issue.


----------



## Balthezor

I ordered a Cima Neve screen. Is the screen somewhat transparent? Basically I am curious if the paint color of the wall where this will be mounted needs to be painted black. 

Or do I need to paint the surround wall black, but actually not the actual backside?


----------



## dmillionz

Balthezor said:


> I ordered a Cima Neve screen. Is the screen somewhat transparent? Basically I am curious if the paint color of the wall where this will be mounted needs to be painted black.
> 
> Or do I need to paint the surround wall black, but actually not the actual backside?


It's not transparent at all and it is pure white. It will however show light through the material if the screen is in front of a window, open door, light etc. due to it being a very thin elasticky material.


----------



## Shermstead

*Phantom HALR*

I was finally ready to order the Phantom HALR Motorizied Screen when I read these two reviews:

Chief among these is its inability to deal with fast pans where the footage is bright – something which leaves behind visible artefacts. It’s enough to knock it down the list a little bit, a fact not helped along by that staggering pricetag. Ultimately, this is a great screen with a lot of potential, but it isn’t quite there yet.

- The Master Switch

There is one compelling reason why I can’t declare this mostly excellent screen a Top Pick: The puzzling artifact I’ve described. 

- Sound & Vision

I like to watch a lot of hockey and this is a major deficit for this screen. Is this being addressed by Stewart or just a cost of choosing their ALR.

Any feedback is appreciated...especially from Don Stewart.


----------



## yrnron

I am thinking about purchasing this Stewart Firehawk projector screen from my local OfferUp. 


My main questions are: 
What generation/year is this from? 

What is it worth? Is it worth it to buy at $70?


Here is a linked album of images of the screen.
https://imgur.com/a/FjhyG


----------



## ak6862

I am planning to install Stewart 150 inches 2.35:1 motorized Screen hidden on entertainment Cabinet ceiling. I still not decided which model in this period. But Contractor push me to give the rough opening dimension right now. Any one can help give me the estimated size of the case?


----------



## Ellebob

yrnron said:


> I am thinking about purchasing this Stewart Firehawk projector screen from my local OfferUp.
> 
> 
> My main questions are:
> What generation/year is this from?
> 
> What is it worth? Is it worth it to buy at $70?
> 
> 
> Here is a linked album of images of the screen.
> https://imgur.com/a/FjhyG


Call Stewart and they can tell you all the details from the serial #. But the frame alone is worth $70 and you can always get new screen material for it. I am not sure what size this is but a new 110" is $2750, even if it is small it is as least over $2000 new.


----------



## Balthezor

I finally got my 153" Cima Neve screen assembled and wall mounted this past weekend. Stewart had ran out of the standard frame so they offered me a free upgrade for the Luxus Deluxe frame. Anyone know how much that usually costs?

I thought it came with the EZ mount bracket system but mine came with 4 wall boards instead. Took about 4 hours for us with no experience to put it together. The wall boards were a real pain but just glad its over with.

Screen looks great and I don't regret the purchase one bit. The quality is outstanding. Glad I didn't get a Silver Ticket Screen to just get this eventually.


----------



## Craig Peer

Balthezor said:


> I finally got my 153" Cima Neve screen assembled and wall mounted this past weekend. *Stewart had ran out of the standard frame so they offered me a free upgrade for the Luxus Deluxe frame. Anyone know how much that usually costs?*
> 
> I thought it came with the EZ mount bracket system but mine came with 4 wall boards instead. Took about 4 hours for us with no experience to put it together. The wall boards were a real pain but just glad its over with.
> 
> Screen looks great and I don't regret the purchase one bit. The quality is outstanding. Glad I didn't get a Silver Ticket Screen to just get this eventually.


I've never heard of them doing this. So you have a one of a kind screen - " priceless " !


----------



## Ellebob

It might be because they are moving the production of the Cima line from Ohio to California.


----------



## Balthezor

Ellebob said:


> It might be because they are moving the production of the Cima line from Ohio to California.


It was shipped from California. The regular Cima Neve frame would have take an extra 6 weeks to get to me. So I agreed to the Luxus Deluxe frame pretty quickly.


----------



## Vladimirovich

Good afternoon!
Tell me what model number is SN100HFHWX?
It Firehawk, but which one? G3? G4?


----------



## 996911

Vladimirovich said:


> Good afternoon!
> Tell me what model number is SN100HFHWX?
> It Firehawk, but which one? G3? G4?


Have you called Stewart?


----------



## Vladimirovich

996911 said:


> Have you called Stewart?


I do not have this opportunity.
Is there another way to determine what kind of cloth the model number is?


----------



## Craig Peer

Vladimirovich said:


> I do not have this opportunity.
> Is there another way to determine what kind of cloth the model number is?


Send them an email ! http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/contact-us


----------



## wolfgang1

I'm selling a Cine Curve 133" Greyhawk GS complete with BRIC in the classifieds if anyone is interested. Houston TX.


----------



## wolfgang1

I am selling a CineCurve 133" screen in the classifieds if anyone is keen.

In Houston TX

Complete with BRIC. Greyhawk GS


----------



## markmon1

I am considering upgrading from my dalite 1.3 gain to a stewart g3 studiotek 130. Stewart sent me some samples and I taped them to the screen and was very impressed. The stewart 1.3 gain is just as black as my dalite but the whites are brighter. I assume this should result in a net contrast ratio gain. 

Does anyone have any experience with the bezel-less screens? How close to the ceiling can they be mounted? How hard is it to get the projector centered onto this? I think the black velvet is helpful in allowing a little overscan in one area if needed.

I'm considering upgrading my 16:9 133" to a stewart custom 17:9 155". My projector is native 4096x2160 and I can use the 17:9 resolution for pc games and desktop. Also in 2.35:1 movies. On 16:9 content I'll either have slight black bars on the side or if that bothers me maybe I'll just zoom/crop since there probably won't be much loss at 16:9 res zoomed to 17:9 with top and bottom cut off.


----------



## Craig Peer

markmon1 said:


> I am considering upgrading from my dalite 1.3 gain to a stewart g3 studiotek 130. Stewart sent me some samples and I taped them to the screen and was very impressed. The stewart 1.3 gain is just as black as my dalite but the whites are brighter. I assume this should result in a net contrast ratio gain.
> 
> *Does anyone have any experience with the bezel-less screens? How close to the ceiling can they be mounted? How hard is it to get the projector centered onto this? I think the black velvet is helpful in allowing a little overscan in one area if needed.*
> 
> I'm considering upgrading my 16:9 133" to a stewart custom 17:9 155". My projector is native 4096x2160 and I can use the 17:9 resolution for pc games and desktop. Also in 2.35:1 movies. On 16:9 content I'll either have slight black bars on the side or if that bothers me maybe I'll just zoom/crop since there probably won't be much loss at 16:9 res zoomed to 17:9 with top and bottom cut off.


Is your ceiling black / non reflective ? That would be my concern mounting close to the ceiling. I've never used a bezel-less screen myself - but you should be able to align the projector. It's just less forgiving than a velvet lined frame. 

I love my StudioTek 130 - great screen material !


----------



## Erod

markmon1 said:


> I am considering upgrading from my dalite 1.3 gain to a stewart g3 studiotek 130. Stewart sent me some samples and I taped them to the screen and was very impressed. The stewart 1.3 gain is just as black as my dalite but the whites are brighter. I assume this should result in a net contrast ratio gain.
> 
> Does anyone have any experience with the bezel-less screens? How close to the ceiling can they be mounted? How hard is it to get the projector centered onto this? I think the black velvet is helpful in allowing a little overscan in one area if needed.
> 
> I'm considering upgrading my 16:9 133" to a stewart custom 17:9 155". My projector is native 4096x2160 and I can use the 17:9 resolution for pc games and desktop. Also in 2.35:1 movies. On 16:9 content I'll either have slight black bars on the side or if that bothers me maybe I'll just zoom/crop since there probably won't be much loss at 16:9 res zoomed to 17:9 with top and bottom cut off.


I can't recommend the Stewart ST130 enough. It's phenomenal.

I toyed with the idea of going to a ST100 because I have ideal light control. I thought I could get rid of the ever-so-slight sparkle of the screen, but the tradeoff in brightness just isn't worth it. Especially with HDR, that gain is critical.

If I do anything, it'll be getting a bigger ST130 than what I have.


----------



## markmon1

Check out how awesome this stewart sample is. The sample is a 8x11 sample taped up onto the dalite screen. The dalite is also 1.3 gain. The sample is a Studiotek 130 G3 1.3 gain. It's incredible how white the stewart is compared to the dalite. Notice the whiteness from the stewart and the black seems about the same. So you gain white and retain the blacks. The red also pops slightly more on the stewart. I'm very impressed. Going to have to upgrade to this screen.

Here's the image you can see the stewart sample taped onto the middle of the image overlapping white, black and red.


----------



## Shermstead

I have a 123” 1.78 Phantom HALR on order, arriving shortly. I’m currently running an Epson 5040UB at 1.82 screen width ratio or just 2.25” longer than the suggested minimum throw distance.

The projector lens center is 6” below top of screen and seating distance is 12’ from the screen. I have room to move the projector further from the screen another 3 feet. Is it worth the effort to move the projector further from the screen?


----------



## Craig Peer

markmon1 said:


> Check out how awesome this stewart sample is. The sample is a 8x11 sample taped up onto the dalite screen. The dalite is also 1.3 gain. The sample is a Studiotek 130 G3 1.3 gain. It's incredible how white the stewart is compared to the dalite. Notice the whiteness from the stewart and the black seems about the same. So you gain white and retain the blacks. The red also pops slightly more on the stewart. I'm very impressed. Going to have to upgrade to this screen.
> 
> Here's the image you can see the stewart sample taped onto the middle of the image overlapping white, black and red.


I did the same type of comparison several years back. Came to the same conclusion, and bought a StudioTek 130. I've been happy ever since. And my Cima Neve is a very close 2nd.


----------



## markmon1

Craig Peer said:


> I did the same type of comparison several years back. Came to the same conclusion, and bought a StudioTek 130. I've been happy ever since. And my Cima Neve is a very close 2nd.


When you first got the screen, did your projector immediately seem a little brighter because of it?


----------



## Craig Peer

markmon1 said:


> When you first got the screen, did your projector immediately seem a little brighter because of it?


I switched from a Firehawk G3, and not only was the picture brighter, it seemed a bit sharper. I actually improved the blacks on screen by not relying on the screen material to preserve them, but improving my room instead. A little dark paint and Protostar ( and black carpeting ) made a huge improvement. As did the ST130 screen ! 






































The picture is amazing. Of course I have an RS4500 projecting on it - can't beat the screen, can't beat the projector !


----------



## vullcan

Does anyone have experience rolling a screen back on its shipping tube for storage (I have the small inner tube and the large outer tube still)? I'm renovating and the screen isn't safe in the open.
Should I roll it loose against the small tube, with a little pressure or tight?

I tried it (using two people, one at each end of the tube) and noticed one end would develop some small wrinkles now and then during the rolling, however you could pull the screen away from the tube ends as you rolled to eliminate these. 

Because of that I decided just to ask if there were any tricks or tips before storing it (like do you need to masking tape it shut once done rolling to prevent it from unrolling itself a bit once in the large tube). 
My worst fear is wrinkles that dont come out after it is re-stretched! 

Thanks


----------



## Shermstead

Back in town and finally got the Phantom HALR installed. Worth the wait (8 weeks from order to delivery). From packaging to product Stewart is a class act.

If anyone’s interested, I’ll post pic’s.

FYI: I’ve had the DES Abyss and while quite an impressive ALR they were not able to apply to a motorized screen properly.


----------



## Craig Peer

Shermstead said:


> Back in town and finally got the Phantom HALR installed. Worth the wait (8 weeks from order to delivery). From packaging to product Stewart is a class act.
> 
> If anyone’s interested, I’ll post pic’s.
> 
> FYI: I’ve had the DES Abyss and while quite an impressive ALR they were not able to apply to a motorized screen properly.


Photos are good !


----------



## Shermstead

Craig Peer said:


> Photos are good !


Of course I’m out of town again, but will post when I’m home. Stewart’s down a great job with the Phantom, as expected, but it’s not going to be as impressive as your StudioTek 130. It does an excellent job with my difficult living room lighting situation. Also, not the high end projector your using, Craig! I’m currently using an Epson 5040UB and, even though it’s relatively new, I’m looking to upgrade to a true 4K laser.

I’ve also booked a calibration by AccuCalAV in May. Even though I’ve had a projector system, with a Stewart Filmscreen for over 10 years, I’m still a newbie and need help with calibration.


----------



## Craig Peer

Shermstead said:


> Of course I’m out of town again, but will post when I’m home. Stewart’s down a great job with the Phantom, as expected, but it’s not going to be as impressive as your StudioTek 130. It does an excellent job with my difficult living room lighting situation. Also, not the high end projector your using, Craig! I’m currently using an Epson 5040UB and, even though it’s relatively new, I’m looking to upgrade to a true 4K laser.
> 
> I’ve also booked a calibration by AccuCalAV in May. Even though I’ve had a projector system, with a Stewart Filmscreen for over 10 years, I’m still a newbie and need help with calibration.


I bet it's more impressive in your room than my ST130 would be. You picked the right tools for the room ! At the end of the day, it's all about watching movies and shows with family and friends !


----------



## landonin

Hi, I'm thinking about using a StudioTek 130 microperf for a 14' wide screen in a light-controlled, black pit room with a maximum projector distance of around 18'. The main seating viewing distance will be 14' away although "the cheap seats" will be 8' away. I'm currently looking at the Sony $5000 or $7000 4K projectors which are listed at 1500 lumens.

Will this configuration work well or will it be compromised in some way (like not bright enough, for example) ?

Thanks!


----------



## briangreen

Shermstead said:


> I was finally ready to order the Phantom HALR Motorizied Screen when I read these two reviews:
> 
> Chief among these is its inability to deal with fast pans where the footage is bright – something which leaves behind visible artefacts. It’s enough to knock it down the list a little bit, a fact not helped along by that staggering pricetag. Ultimately, this is a great screen with a lot of potential, but it isn’t quite there yet.
> 
> - The Master Switch
> 
> There is one compelling reason why I can’t declare this mostly excellent screen a Top Pick: The puzzling artifact I’ve described.
> 
> - Sound & Vision
> 
> I like to watch a lot of hockey and this is a major deficit for this screen. Is this being addressed by Stewart or just a cost of choosing their ALR.
> 
> Any feedback is appreciated...especially from Don Stewart.


Shermstead, I saw you ordered this, but it doesn't look like you ever received comments on your concerns. Can you comment on these concerns yourself now that you have it installed? Further, I'm a big fan of the ALR review from ProjectorCentral, however it's dated from March 2016, prior to the release of the HALR. Can anyone comment on the measurables of HALR vs any of the other screens in that list? I'm particularly interested in the measured black levels and contrast levels against some of the higher performing models (at least according to the PC article) For simplicity, can anyone compare the HALR directly to either the SI slate or black diamond? These appear to be similar in viewing angles, so I imagine it's a "fair fight" Unfortunately, I can't seem to find any reviews that pit the HALR against other ALR products.


----------



## Shermstead

briangreen said:


> Shermstead, I saw you ordered this, but it doesn't look like you ever received comments on your concerns. Can you comment on these concerns yourself now that you have it installed? Further, I'm a big fan of the ALR review from ProjectorCentral, however it's dated from March 2016, prior to the release of the HALR. Can anyone comment on the measurables of HALR vs any of the other screens in that list? I'm particularly interested in the measured black levels and contrast levels against some of the higher performing models (at least according to the PC article) For simplicity, can anyone compare the HALR directly to either the SI slate or black diamond? These appear to be similar in viewing angles, so I imagine it's a "fair fight" Unfortunately, I can't seem to find any reviews that pit the HALR against other ALR products.


I’ve had the 123” (1.78) Phantom HALR up for less than a week and my early observation is this screen is wonderful. Im running an Epson 5040UB with excellent results in contrast and black levels. I use Dynamic setting (high power) for daytime viewing and Bright Cinema (medium power) for evening and movie viewing. I cannot comment on the Black Diamond, as I needed a motorized screen, but I can say the aPhantom is night and day (pun intended) better than the Slate. The Phantom is typical Stewart fit and finish quality with outstanding ALR abitlities and excellent night time or movie viewing.

I believe Stewart has another winning filmscreen and beats any motorized ALR Screen currently available. I have not observed any artifacts with bright, high speed pan- my reference watching hockey.


----------



## briangreen

Shermstead said:


> I’ve had the 123” (1.78) Phantom HALR up for less than a week and my early observation is this screen is wonderful. Im running an Epson 5040UB with excellent results in contrast and black levels. I use Dynamic setting (high power) for daytime viewing and Bright Cinema (medium power) for evening and movie viewing. I cannot comment on the Black Diamond, as I needed a motorized screen, but I can say the aPhantom is night and day (pun intended) better than the Slate. The Phantom is typical Stewart fit and finish quality with outstanding ALR abitlities and excellent night time or movie viewing.
> 
> I believe Stewart has another winning filmscreen and beats any motorized ALR Screen currently available. I have not observed any artifacts with bright, high speed pan- my reference watching hockey.


Awesome. This is great to hear. I'm strongly considering the HALR paired w/ the Optoma UHZ65 or a similar Epson. Does it look great in near-black ambient light conditions as well? It sounds like my room conditions are similar to yours. For the benefit of others, I was able to find a few reviews of this exact setup:

https://www.cepro.com/article/ce_pro_hands_on_stewart_phantom_halr_screen_redefines_video_projection
https://www.cepro.com/article/ce_pro_product_review_optoma_uhz65_4k_laser_projector


----------



## briangreen

Shermstead, one other question: How far away is your projector from the screen? Stewart recommends 1.8x the width, which for your screen width (of 107?) is about 192 inches (16ft). Do you have the ability to move your projector any closer to the screen? I'm particularly interested in any performance/brightness degradation at 1.5x viewing distance. The motivation for this is that a cinescope screen with a width of 138 (150 diagonal) has the same height as a 120 inch diagonal 16:9 screen. I'd like to get the 138 width cinescope and use lens memory to scale down to the 120 16:9 if possible. However, if being only 1.5x width away is a deal breaker, then I guess I'll just get the 120 16:9 screen.


----------



## Shermstead

briangreen said:


> Shermstead, one other question: How far away is your projector from the screen? Stewart recommends 1.8x the width, which for your screen width (of 107?) is about 192 inches (16ft). Do you have the ability to move your projector any closer to the screen? I'm particularly interested in any performance/brightness degradation at 1.5x viewing distance. The motivation for this is that a cinescope screen with a width of 138 (150 diagonal) has the same height as a 120 inch diagonal 16:9 screen. I'd like to get the 138 width cinescope and use lens memory to scale down to the 120 16:9 if possible. However, if being only 1.5x width away is a deal breaker, then I guess I'll just get the 120 16:9 screen.


Your correct that my screen is 107” width. My projector is just a couple inches over the recommended 16’. I have no hot spotting whatsoever. As to going less than the recommended 1.8 I can’t answer. I’d call Harry Fukushima at Stewart and hear what he has to say. Harry has always given me straight and good advice.


----------



## Shermstead

Here are some real quick picks of my ambient light challenged room under bright sunlight conditions:


----------



## briangreen

Shermstead said:


> Here are some real quick picks of my ambient light challenged room under bright sunlight conditions:


Wow, looks great, even in that light. Would love to see some pictures at night when the room is less challenged! I will definitely give Stewart a call and ask about the distance recommendation. Will report back on findings.


----------



## Craig Peer

landonin said:


> Hi, I'm thinking about using a StudioTek 130 microperf for a 14' wide screen in a light-controlled, black pit room with a maximum projector distance of around 18'. The main seating viewing distance will be 14' away although "the cheap seats" will be 8' away. I'm currently looking at the Sony $5000 or $7000 4K projectors which are listed at 1500 lumens.
> 
> Will this configuration work well or will it be compromised in some way (like not bright enough, for example) ?
> 
> Thanks!


That's a big screen - 2.40:1 aspect ratio I assume ? It would be bright enough for Blu-ray / SDR content, with an anamorphic lens for 2.40 material ( and 16:9 material with no lens ). Not going to be bright enough for good HDR / 4K though.


----------



## Craig Peer

Shermstead said:


> Here are some real quick picks of my ambient light challenged room under bright sunlight conditions:


Nice !


----------



## 996911

Shermstead said:


> Here are some real quick picks of my ambient light challenged room under bright sunlight conditions:


You ain't kiddin'.....that is one seriously light challenged room! Picture looks great!!!


----------



## Craig Peer

briangreen said:


> Wow, looks great, even in that light. Would love to see some pictures at night when the room is less challenged! I will definitely give Stewart a call and ask about the distance recommendation. Will report back on findings.


Here is a good guide to Stewart materials and minimum throw distances - http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/screen-materials/flexible-front-projection


----------



## 996911

landonin said:


> Hi, I'm thinking about using a StudioTek 130 microperf for a 14' wide screen in a light-controlled, black pit room with a maximum projector distance of around 18'. The main seating viewing distance will be 14' away although "the cheap seats" will be 8' away. I'm currently looking at the Sony $5000 or $7000 4K projectors which are listed at 1500 lumens.
> 
> Will this configuration work well or will it be compromised in some way (like not bright enough, for example) ?
> 
> Thanks!


And I thought my 152" 2.35AR screen was huge. That's insane. You'll need a "light canon" for HDR. There is no way you'll get satisfactory HDR with an entry/mid level projector in the 5-7K range. My RS600 (was a $10K projector but now a $8K unit as a RS640) has great lumen output but I'm barely getting 70 nits for HDR.


----------



## landonin

996911 said:


> And I thought my 152" 2.35AR screen was huge. That's insane. You'll need a "light canon" for HDR. There is no way you'll get satisfactory HDR with an entry/mid level projector in the 5-7K range. My RS600 (was a $10K projector but now a $8K unit as a RS640) has great lumen output but I'm barely getting 70 nits for HDR.


Yikes! Okay, I guess I will rethink the larger screen and/or the $5K - $7K budget for the projector ... sounds like I need to do both.  

Thanks for the feedback!


----------



## 996911

landonin said:


> Yikes! Okay, I guess I will rethink the larger screen and/or the $5K - $7K budget for the projector ... sounds like I need to do both.
> 
> Thanks for the feedback!


Very welcome. Having just gone through this recently doing V2.0 in a dedicated theater and having the projector professionally calibrated by ChadB, I can report that between the size and the microperf, I am right on the edge of having enough nits for HDR. Before Chad, there was NO WAY that there was enough for HDR and HDR was pathetically unwatchable. But now, pretty good. There are only a few titles so far that I have had to move the Panny HDR dynamic slider up a few clicks to get some extra brightness. Most HDR discs are great but I would love to have more nits (wouldn't we all!). I just don't have 20-30K in the budget for the next big step up in projector to get that sort of nit level for a screen this size. The ST130 is phenomenal! It will be great for many many many years to come as I move through projectors over the years


----------



## todaxy

Hi,
Looking for advice on replacing my old Da-Lite cosmopolitan electrol (drop down, tensioned) high contrast (gray) screen and have been doing research but my head is swimming. The current screen is a 1.78 104" diagonal and am thinking of going up slightly. I have a ceiling mounted JVC DLA-X3 positioned about 13' away (seating area the same) The room is not a dedicated room, but an L shaped family room/kitchen (painted off white) and we watch movies at night in full darkness about 90% of the time. Of the Steward screen materials, Im thinking Gray Hawk, Fire Hawk, Studio Tek 100 or 130. Will either of the ST screens make a noticeable difference in brightness over the GH or FH? Conversely, would I be giving up too much in dark colors / contrast? Any advice you have if you've compared the different materials would be appreciated. I'm called the local rep to see if samples can be obtained but have not heard back yet. Will Stewart screens send samples out?

Thanks, Tom


----------



## Craig Peer

todaxy said:


> Hi,
> Looking for advice on replacing my old Da-Lite cosmopolitan electrol (drop down, tensioned) high contrast (gray) screen and have been doing research but my head is swimming. The current screen is a 1.78 104" diagonal and am thinking of going up slightly. I have a ceiling mounted JVC DLA-X3 positioned about 13' away (seating area the same) The room is not a dedicated room, but an L shaped family room/kitchen (painted off white) and we watch movies at night in full darkness about 90% of the time. Of the Steward screen materials, Im thinking Gray Hawk, Fire Hawk, Studio Tek 100 or 130. Will either of the ST screens make a noticeable difference in brightness over the GH or FH? Conversely, would I be giving up too much in dark colors / contrast? Any advice you have if you've compared the different materials would be appreciated. I'm called the local rep to see if samples can be obtained but have not heard back yet. Will Stewart screens send samples out?
> 
> Thanks, Tom


Tom, I made the same switch from a Da Lite HCCV grey screen to a StudioTek 130 and a Cima Neve screen. I'm in the Sacramento area if you want to come see mine in person. And I have a couple of samples I no longer need - email me or pm me.


----------



## Craig Peer

Here's a screen shot from my 128" diagonal 2.35:1 StudioTek 130 G3 screen, using my new Panamorph Paladin DCR lens with my RS4500. 47 foot lamberts for 4K HDR in mid laser. The StudioTek 130 screen is perfect for HDR !


----------



## todaxy

Craig Peer said:


> Tom, I made the same switch from a Da Lite HCCV grey screen to a StudioTek 130 and a Cima Neve screen. I'm in the Sacramento area if you want to come see mine in person. And I have a couple of samples I no longer need - email me or pm me.


Thanks Craig for the offer, will send email.
Tom


----------



## Killer

Craig Peer said:


> Here's a screen shot from my 128" diagonal 2.35:1 StudioTek 130 G3 screen, using my new Panamorph Paladin DCR lens with my RS4500. 47 foot lamberts for 4K HDR in mid laser. The StudioTek 130 screen is perfect for HDR !


The RS4500 and StudioTek demo at CES was easily one of the best 4K pictures I have EVER seen....


----------



## jaoquin

Cima Neve Perf 153” question? Will this screen be bright enough with a Sony 385 projector? I will have two rows of seating, 10 feet and 16 feet away. The room is about 16x19 feet , totally light controlled.


----------



## Craig Peer

jaoquin said:


> Cima Neve Perf 153” question? Will this screen be bright enough with a Sony 385 projector? I will have two rows of seating, 10 feet and 16 feet away. The room is about 16x19 feet , totally light controlled.


Not for HDR. It would be ok brightness wise for HD if you used a Panamorph Paladin anamorphic lens - gains back 20% of the light you would otherwise waste. Otherwise, it starts out barely bright enough for Blu-rays in high lamp ( under 17 foot lamberts by my calculations - maybe 21 foot lamberts with the lens ) . You would be better off dropping down to the 138" diagonal screen in my opinion.


----------



## Danonano

Craig Peer said:


> Not for HDR. It would be ok brightness wise for HD if you used a Panamorph Paladin anamorphic lens - gains back 20% of the light you would otherwise waste. Otherwise, it starts out barely bright enough for Blu-rays in high lamp ( under 17 foot lamberts by my calculations - maybe 21 foot lamberts with the lens ) . You would be better off dropping down to the 138" diagonal screen in my opinion.



Craig, is there a calculator you recommend for making the screen brightness calculations?


----------



## Craig Peer

Danonano said:


> Craig, is there a calculator you recommend for making the screen brightness calculations?


I think there is one over on the $ 3000+ projector section. I'm using one I downloaded from those threads years ago. But note - you have to use actual lumen measurements to start with from trustworthy reviewers - you can't just use manufacturer specifications. Always err on the conservative side. And also remember - if you zoom on a scope screen, you loose 20+ % of your light.


----------



## 996911

Craig Peer said:


> ........And also remember - if you zoom on a scope screen, you loose 20+ % of your light.


And if you zoom on a scope screen AND have an AT screen??? :crying::crying::crying:


----------



## Craig Peer

996911 said:


> And if you zoom on a scope screen AND have an AT screen??? :crying::crying::crying:


Get a smaller screen, brighter projector and / or and anamorphic lens !


----------



## Craig Peer

Danonano said:


> Craig, is there a calculator you recommend for making the screen brightness calculations?


Try this- http://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-di...preview-release-web-projector-calculator.html


----------



## Danonano

Craig Peer said:


> Try this- http://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-di...preview-release-web-projector-calculator.html


Thank you.


----------



## Ellebob

Also keep in mind with projectors especially bulb based ones that the bulb dims over time and their hour rating are until its 50% as bright. You will usually lose about 20% light output in the first several hundred hours then they gradually decrease over their lifespan. So if you make calculations from the reviewers measurements you might want to subtract some lumens depending how often you are willing to change a bulb. Most reviewers are given a projector with a new bulb or with not many hours.

I also see many recommend getting a projector and throw the image on the wall see how big you can go. This is not good advice if testing for brightness with a new bulb as it doesn't account for bulb aging. Lasers lose brightness as well but much more gradually and they don't color shift like bulbs do when they lose it. For most by the time the laser projector gets dim it is time for a new projector as technology will have moved on.


----------



## 996911

Craig Peer said:


> Get a smaller screen, brighter projector and / or and anamorphic lens !


smaller screen? you take back that blasphemy!!!


----------



## Craig Peer

996911 said:


> smaller screen? you take back that blasphemy!!!


Get a VW5000 then.


----------



## 996911

Craig Peer said:


> Get a VW5000 then.


I wish, but trying to explain to the wife I am spending 50K on a projector is never going to go well. But she was ok with $10K CF buckets for the GT3? I guess since I sold the safety angle  I can't figure out the break point for spending on a projector and the RS600 is "good enough" since Chad dialed it in beautifully. My guess is the max spend on the projector is prob 15-20k at most.


----------



## Craig Peer

996911 said:


> I wish, but trying to explain to the wife I am spending 50K on a projector is never going to go well. But she was ok with $10K CF buckets for the GT3? I guess since I sold the safety angle  I can't figure out the break point for spending on a projector and the RS600 is "good enough" since Chad dialed it in beautifully. My guess is the max spend on the projector is prob 15-20k at most.


I hear you. Basically if you aren't willing to shrink the proposed screen size, you eventually need a projector with more lumens.


----------



## 996911

Craig Peer said:


> I hear you. Basically if you aren't willing to shrink the proposed screen size, you eventually need a projector with more lumens.


Yeah, I'm not helping myself with 152" as well as AT. #wavethewhiteflag 

But......the imersion of 152" is second to none and worth the trade off (for me) and the AT is something I feel strongly about as I'm in the camp that you should NEVER see speakers across the front nor can you get the proper locations since they have to be placed outside the envelope of the viewing area. 

Hopefully, we see a projector that gives us those vw5000es lumens for sub 20k in the near future.


----------



## Craig Peer

996911 said:


> Yeah, I'm not helping myself with 152" as well as AT. #wavethewhiteflag
> 
> But......the imersion of 152" is second to none and worth the trade off (for me) and the AT is something I feel strongly about as I'm in the camp that you should NEVER see speakers across the front nor can you get the proper locations since they have to be placed outside the envelope of the viewing area.
> 
> Hopefully, we see a projector that gives us those vw5000es lumens for sub 20k in the near future.


Stack RS600's maybe.


----------



## 996911

Craig Peer said:


> Stack RS600's maybe.


----------



## Danonano

Craig Peer said:


> Stack RS600's maybe. /forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif





996911 said:


> /forum/images/smilies/eek.gif/forum/images/smilies/eek.gif/forum/images/smilies/eek.gif


Ya, I'm on the hunt for a used RS500 to add to my current one to try stacking for HDR. I realize it may be more trouble then it's worth, so I'll just sell the 2nd projector if that proves to be true. 

Another fun idea is stacked projectors, with a Panamorph on both!


----------



## Craig Peer

996911 said:


> Yeah, I'm not helping myself with 152" as well as AT. #wavethewhiteflag
> 
> But......the imersion of 152" is second to none and worth the trade off (for me) and the AT is something I feel strongly about as I'm in the camp that you should NEVER see speakers across the front nor can you get the proper locations since they have to be placed outside the envelope of the viewing area.
> 
> Hopefully, we see a projector that gives us those vw5000es lumens for sub 20k in the near future.


What's your eyeball to screen distance with your 152" screen ?


----------



## 996911

Craig Peer said:


> What's your eyeball to screen distance with your 152" screen ?


12’ Row 1
18.5’ Row 2


----------



## Craig Peer

996911 said:


> 12’ Row 1
> 18.5’ Row 2


With two rows like that you need a bigger screen. I only have one row ( a sectional that seats about 8 people ), so a somewhat smaller screen at a 10' viewing distance works well. It also gives me 47 foot lamberts right now !


----------



## 996911

Craig Peer said:


> With two rows like that you need a bigger screen. I only have one row ( a sectional that seats about 8 people ), so a somewhat smaller screen at a 10' viewing distance works well. It also gives me 47 foot lamberts right now !


47 is the stuff of dreams for me. I'm just over 19 after Chad worked his magic. 

You are correct, No way I could go smaller. You've seen pics of my theatre, it's the proper screen proportion for the room. As great of a projector it is, the weak spot is the RS600 but the best I could get in the sub $10K projector field. The projector will ultimately be upgraded yet again as soon as there is something that blows the RS600 out of the water but doesn't blow the checkbook out of the water


----------



## Shermstead

*Phantom HALR*

Thought I’d post an update on the Phantom HALR. Worth the price and long build time. As always, Stewart Filmscreen hand builds a quality product built like a tank.

Jeff Meier from AccucalAV calibrated my audio and visual equipment and I cannot recommend his services more highly! The quality change of my projection system and audio is absolutely, stunningly amazing.

AccucalAV’s Screen Material Report (https://www.accucalav.com/wp-content...een_report.pdf) has been referenced many times in this forum. The following is a recent tweet from AccucalAV:

Jeff Meier @ HomeCinemaGuru · May 10

Worked with a Stewart light rejecting Phantom HALR screen in client’s home. This is an impressive product if you must reject ambient light. The client had tried several others in his room and settled on the HALR. This is the best I have seen for this.

Jeff Meier @ HomeCinemaGuru · May 9

Finished video calibration of Epson HDR projector and audio calibration of Yamaha Klipsch Atmos surround system.


----------



## Don Stewart

Shermstead said:


> Thought I’d post an update on the Phantom HALR. Worth the price and long build time. As always, Stewart Filmscreen hand builds a quality product built like a tank.
> 
> Jeff Meier from AccucalAV calibrated my audio and visual equipment and I cannot recommend his services more highly! The quality change of my projection system and audio is absolutely, stunningly amazing.
> 
> AccucalAV’s Screen Material Report (https://www.accucalav.com/wp-content...een_report.pdf) has been referenced many times in this forum. The following is a recent tweet from AccucalAV:
> 
> Jeff Meier @ HomeCinemaGuru · May 10
> 
> Worked with a Stewart light rejecting Phantom HALR screen in client’s home. This is an impressive product if you must reject ambient light. The client had tried several others in his room and settled on the HALR. This is the best I have seen for this.
> 
> Jeff Meier @ HomeCinemaGuru · May 9
> 
> Finished video calibration of Epson HDR projector and audio calibration of Yamaha Klipsch Atmos surround system.


It has been awhile since I posted on AVS. That said, thank you for the comments on the Phantom HALR. I am pleased to learn that Jeff Meier, an individual with a very trained professional eye, was impressed by the screen's optical performance under ambient light conditions. I will convey this to the members of the Stewart team who worked long and hard on the development of the Phantom screen. They will appreciate the positive feedback. Again, thanks for the news.
Best,
Don


----------



## Shermstead

Don Stewart said:


> It has been awhile since I posted on AVS. That said, thank you for the comments on the Phantom HALR. I am pleased to learn that Jeff Meier, an individual with a very trained professional eye, was impressed by the screen's optical performance under ambient light conditions. I will convey this to the members of the Stewart team who worked long and hard on the development of the Phantom screen. They will appreciate the positive feedback. Again, thanks for the news.
> Best,
> Don


Thank you, Don, for developing this screen. This is my second Stewart Filmscreen and I tried several other ALR screens prior to the launch of the Phantom HALR.

While you’re sharing with your team, please praise Harry Fukushima for always answering my questions and holding my hand through the build process.

Thank you, again, and I, too, am a huge fan of Jeff Meier’s!


----------



## Domcorleone

I am in the process of getting a new screen and would like some guidance. I have a living room with grey/ dark blue walls but a white ceiling and a light grey rug. I have been using my projector at night mostly but would like the ability to watch in the day as well. My place is an open space condo so light seeps in everywhere but still gets fairly dark at night. Should I go with a firehawk or studiotek 1.3? I was debating on those two but have also considered the greyhawk. 

Any suggestions? Pics below.

Thanks!




























Light OFF


----------



## 996911

Domcorleone said:


> I am in the process of getting a new screen and would like some guidance. I have a living room with grey/ dark blue walls but a white ceiling and a light grey rug. I have been using my projector at night mostly but would like the ability to watch in the day as well. My place is an open space condo so light seeps in everywhere but still gets fairly dark at night. Should I go with a firehawk or studiotek 1.3? I was debating on those two but have also considered the greyhawk.
> 
> Any suggestions? Pics below.
> 
> Thanks!


Unless you have total light control, especially during the day, then the ST130 is out of the running. The ST130 is for a room with complete light control. The Firehawk G4 is probably best for your situation as the FG4 is geared for situations with some ambient light. 

What projector do you have?


----------



## Domcorleone

996911 said:


> Unless you have total light control, especially during the day, then the ST130 is out of the running. The ST130 is for a room with complete light control. The Firehawk G4 is probably best for your situation as the FG4 is geared for situations with some ambient light.
> 
> What projector do you have?


I have a JVC 570R, I will probably upgrade to a 790r in the next month or so. I’m just worried about seeing artifacts or hot spotting but I feel like I am losing a lot of blacks with the white ceiling and fireplace.


----------



## 996911

Yup, all the white in the room is definitely NOT helping. I've had both the Firehawk and the ST130. The ST130 is my current screen. While the Firehawk was great, the ST130 has a much crisper image in my home theatre. The Firehawk was intially selected b/c most of our viewing was TV programming with some ambient lighting. We have since decided to watch TV in near darkness like movies and made the change to the ST130. The Firehawk will be moved down to our basement media area where it is better suited. The move to the 790 should really help with the increased light output. Others like Craig (much more knowledgeable than myself WRT the screens) will probably chime in to help add to this discussion. With that said, if I was in your situation having gone through the research and hands on results of the 2 screens, the Firehawk would be my choice for that environment.


----------



## Domcorleone

996911 said:


> Yup, all the white in the room is definitely NOT helping. I've had both the Firehawk and the ST130. The ST130 is my current screen. While the Firehawk was great, *the ST130 has a much crisper image* in my home theatre. The Firehawk was intially selected b/c most of our viewing was TV programming with some ambient lighting. We have since decided to watch TV in near darkness like movies and made the change to the ST130. The Firehawk will be moved down to our basement media area where it is better suited. The move to the 790 should really help with the increased light output. Others like Craig (much more knowledgeable than myself WRT the screens) will probably chime in to help add to this discussion. With that said, if I was in your situation having gone through the research and hands on results of the 2 screens, the Firehawk would be my choice for that environment.


That is what I am worried about. I game alot in 4k and I want to make sure the screen I get can resolve all those pixels to get the most crisp picture possible. To your knowledge would the HALR have a better screen finish? I do not want the screen to be too grainy and me lose the pixels. Thank you for helping by the way!


----------



## Craig Peer

Domcorleone said:


> That is what I am worried about. I game alot in 4k and I want to make sure the screen I get can resolve all those pixels to get the most crisp picture possible. To your knowledge would the HALR have a better screen finish? I do not want the screen to be too grainy and me lose the pixels. Thank you for helping by the way!


Get some screen samples ! That way you can compare them with your current screen and each other.


----------



## karlsch

Domcorleone said:


> I have a JVC 570R, I will probably upgrade to a 790r in the next month or so. I’m just worried about seeing artifacts or hot spotting but I feel like I am losing a lot of blacks with the white ceiling and fireplace.


I had a Stewart FireHawk G4. The artifacts/hot-spotting/grainy appearance, especially the hot-spotting, wasn't as bad as my previous ALR screen, but they were still there. They could even be seen when watching a basketball game where the floor was a light color – the floor appeared slightly grainy.

I might be too fussy.

When I got a 4K projector I decided I wanted an ALR screen that gave me a more pristine picture, so I replaced the FireHawk.


----------



## Domcorleone

karlsch said:


> I had a Stewart FireHawk G4. The artifacts/hot-spotting/grainy appearance, especially the hot-spotting, wasn't as bad as my previous ALR screen, but they were still there. They could even be seen when watching a basketball game where the floor was a light color – the floor appeared slightly grainy.
> 
> I might be too fussy.
> 
> When I got a 4K projector I decided I wanted an ALR screen that gave me a more pristine picture, so I replaced the FireHawk.


What did you replace the Firehawk with? And how far was the G4 from your projector? I definitely do not want to deal with hotspot or grainy appearances. Mike Garrett will be sending me a few samples so I can see. 

Does anyone have experience with the Greymatte 70 screen, Phantom HALR of Grayhawk?


----------



## Domcorleone

Craig Peer said:


> Get some screen samples ! That way you can compare them with your current screen and each other.


Craig, I think I have read in other threads that you had a Firehawk at some point. Is there anyway to avoid the hotspotting or artifacts? I essentially want better blacks whilst obtaining a crisper image...


----------



## Craig Peer

Domcorleone said:


> Craig, I think I have read in other threads that you had a Firehawk at some point. Is there anyway to avoid the hotspotting or artifacts? I essentially want better blacks whilst obtaining a crisper image...


Hotspotting results from being closer than the recommended throw distance. As for artifacts, there's no free lunch. You start with a black velvet lined cave with StudioTek 100, and work up from there until the side effects / artifacts outweigh the improvements. Get a sample of Phantom, Grayhawk and Firehawk ( maybe even Tiburon ). Or, you need to black out the light and treat your room ( which is what I eventually did before switching to StudioTek 130 G3 ).


----------



## karlsch

Domcorleone said:


> What did you replace the Firehawk with? And how far was the G4 from your projector? I definitely do not want to deal with hotspot or grainy appearances.................


I replaced the G4 with a Da-Lite Parallax that I bought from B&H. Zero artifacts.

110" Screen. Projector distance is 1.8 x screen width.

You might want to read my post on another thread: http://www.avsforum.com/forum/23-sc...innovations-black-diamond-4.html#post55867486

Then if you scroll to the end of the thread you will see more of my posts including ones that have pictures that I posted for another AVS member. 

Here is a picture of my room. A lot of light colors including a white ceiling.


----------



## 996911

Domcorleone said:


> That is what I am worried about. I game alot in 4k and I want to make sure the screen I get can resolve all those pixels to get the most crisp picture possible. To your knowledge would the HALR have a better screen finish? I do not want the screen to be too grainy and me lose the pixels. Thank you for helping by the way!


Very welcome. Glad to share my experience. I have no experience with the HALR screen so I cannot comment. Sorry about that.



Craig Peer said:


> Get some screen samples ! That way you can compare them with your current screen and each other.


Great advice. Samples will help tremendously.



Craig Peer said:


> Hotspotting results from being closer than the recommended throw distance. As for artifacts, there's no free lunch. You start with a black velvet lined cave with StudioTek 100, and work up from there until the side effects / artifacts outweigh the improvements. Get a sample of Phantom, Grayhawk and Firehawk ( maybe even Tiburon ). Or, you need to black out the light and treat your room ( which is what I eventually did before switching to StudioTek 130 G3 ).


Bingo. I never had hotspotting with my Firehawk and made sure the throw was at the suggested range.


----------



## psychdoc

A question for anyone out there that is familiar with the Stewart Vistascope: what are the wooden strips supposed to be/ function as that I see in all the drawings in the manual? I don’t think they are visualizing the studs in the wall and clearly you need something that can handle all that weight so what exactly are those small thin strips supposed to do? Are they needed if I were to just build plates that are secured to studs? Any advice would be helpful. Thank you.


----------



## Killer

psychdoc said:


> A question for anyone out there that is familiar with the Stewart Vistascope: what are the wooden strips supposed to be/ function as that I see in all the drawings in the manual? I don’t think they are visualizing the studs in the wall and clearly you need something that can handle all that weight so what exactly are those small thin strips supposed to do? Are they needed if I were to just build plates that are secured to studs? Any advice would be helpful. Thank you.



Those are the wall mount brackets. certainly ideally they would fall on studs and you can spec WHERE you want them if you know. Otherwise I'd run some 1/2" or 3/4" ply cut to create a "plate" that falls on two studs to give you maximum strength and placement capabilities.


----------



## psychdoc

Hi All 

I sit here in the theater confused and in need of some assistance if anyone might know the answers. I feel the answers are likely very easy but I’m just not seeing it currently.

First, as stated above, my Vistascope was sent with the wrong instructions so I don’t know what I don’t know. That said, I found a manual online but it doesn’t include all the extra sheets explaining things like the Cinecurve packet that they sent me. I’m not sure what applies to my screen and what doesn’t and what else I need to know. I’ve been looking at the manual and my screen and unlike my previous Stewart screen, this one doesn’t make sense to me.

The two main problems are how this would attach to the “wood plates” and where exactly those plates would go. Here is the only pic from the manual that shows the wooden plates. How exactly is this helpful unless they lined up exactly on studs? And if they did line up on studs, why would you need these strips to begin with????












Here is what i have:





















Only on the bottom do i have two brackets that can be used to mount something against the wall. Look closely here:












The remaining six are like the following in the pic below. They would just stab into the wall. 











The comments I’ve received so far line up with using 3/4” playwood. I just don’t see a solution with what I have using plywood. I suppose I could massively thick lumber and attack from above and below but good grief, that can’t be right. Am I missing 6 brackets?????? What am I not seeing? Thanks all!

-Stuck in Seattle (well sorta near Seattle).


----------



## Don Stewart

Pschdoc, 

Please see attached sketch I just drew up for you to explain mounting. You can either harden wall as drawn, or if you prefer, you can use butterfly fasteners to attach frame.The preferred method that most professional installer-integrator's use is the hardened method. Also, 1 by 4 Pine or Douglas Fir can be used as plates instead of plywood. Hope that helps.


----------



## psychdoc

Don Stewart said:


> Pschdoc,
> 
> Please see attached sketch I just drew up for you to explain mounting. You can either harden wall as drawn, or if you prefer, you can use butterfly fasteners to attach frame.The preferred method that most professional installer-integrator's use is the hardened method. Also, 1 by 4 Pine or Douglas Fir can be used as plates instead of plywood. Hope that helps.


Thank you Mr Stewart but unfortunately attaching wood to the wall is pretty straight forward. But still, thank you for jumping in so quickly. My confusion is how does the screen frame attach to anything? Am I missing six clips? Should I use 4” thick blocks and bolt them in and then use 6” long bolts to attach them to the wall? Again, the plates against the wall and finding studs is the easy part. With the photos above and having only 2 out of 8 clips that allow horizontal attachment, what is the solution? My strong suspicion is that my screen is missing hardware. Your thoughts?

Or am I misreading this whole thing and those 8 horizontal ridges are not used for attachment at all. If not, where exactly do I attach it to???

I have 8 very long clips (see pic below) that should be used (in my opinion) to attach this very heavy screen to a hardened wall or directly to studs. But as you can see they have no vertical part to attach to a vertical wall. 










On only two clips, two on the bottom, is there a vertical portion on the clip that will allow use to mount agains the wall. This is my main thought, I must be missing the other 6 clips. Please look closely to the photo below:


----------



## Don Stewart

I just PM you for a phone number.


----------



## Craig Peer

psychdoc said:


> Hi All
> 
> I sit here in the theater confused and in need of some assistance if anyone might know the answers. I feel the answers are likely very easy but I’m just not seeing it currently.
> 
> First, as stated above, my Vistascope was sent with the wrong instructions so I don’t know what I don’t know. That said, I found a manual online but it doesn’t include all the extra sheets explaining things like the Cinecurve packet that they sent me. I’m not sure what applies to my screen and what doesn’t and what else I need to know. I’ve been looking at the manual and my screen and unlike my previous Stewart screen, this one doesn’t make sense to me.
> 
> The two main problems are how this would attach to the “wood plates” and where exactly those plates would go. Here is the only pic from the manual that shows the wooden plates. How exactly is this helpful unless they lined up exactly on studs? And if they did line up on studs, why would you need these strips to begin with????
> 
> The comments I’ve received so far line up with using 3/4” playwood. I just don’t see a solution with what I have using plywood. I suppose I could massively thick lumber and attack from above and below but good grief, that can’t be right. Am I missing 6 brackets?????? What am I not seeing? Thanks all!
> 
> -Stuck in Seattle (well sorta near Seattle).


Just a thought, but you should always contact the dealer you bought the screen from. If they are worth anything, they will get the answers for you, or put you in touch with the technical guys over at Stewart, who will answer every question !


----------



## Domcorleone

Craig Peer said:


> Hotspotting results from being closer than the recommended throw distance. As for artifacts, there's no free lunch. You start with a black velvet lined cave with StudioTek 100, and work up from there until the side effects / artifacts outweigh the improvements. Get a sample of Phantom, Grayhawk and Firehawk ( maybe even Tiburon ). Or, you need to black out the light and treat your room ( which is what I eventually did before switching to StudioTek 130 G3 ).


Craig, I just got some of your recommended screen samples in last night. How do I test it out? Is there a specific movie that is best for these types of things? I tried to black out my room as much as I could last night and taped up the firehawk g4, Studiotek 130, Neve and Tubron and the firehawk looked good albeit a bit dimmer and the Studiotek looked real good to me but I felt the image looked more washed out. I was testing this out with Baby Driver...

I am new to this projector stuff so its real hard to know what to look out for or how the picture should really look.


----------



## Craig Peer

Domcorleone said:


> Craig, I just got some of your recommended screen samples in last night. How do I test it out? Is there a specific movie that is best for these types of things? I tried to black out my room as much as I could last night and taped up the firehawk g4, Studiotek 130, Neve and Tubron and the firehawk looked good albeit a bit dimmer and the Studiotek looked real good to me but I felt the image looked more washed out. I was testing this out with Baby Driver...
> 
> I am new to this projector stuff so its real hard to know what to look out for or how the picture should really look.


I'd recommend not comparing the white and gray samples at the same time, since most people will tend to gravitate to the brighter image, and ignore other factors. Try dark movies ( Star Trek, Star Wars / sci fi ) and brighter movies. Room reflections are probably washing out the ST130 screen. So you might be better off with the Firehawk, unless you are willing to tame your room reflections.


----------



## Domcorleone

Craig Peer said:


> I'd recommend not comparing the white and gray samples at the same time, since most people will tend to gravitate to the brighter image, and ignore other factors. Try dark movies ( Star Trek, Star Wars / sci fi ) and brighter movies. Room reflections are probably washing out the ST130 screen. So you might be better off with the Firehawk, unless you are willing to tame your room reflections.


Thank you, I just did a test of all the grey screens. I felt the gray hawk looked the best but I wasn’t sure if there were big differences between the firehawk and grayHawk aside from viewing angle. Are there any? Below is a photo i took of the sample from the side. The Tiburon is on the upper left, GrayHawk, second on the left, Slate third on the left and the firehawk is the top right and the phantom is on the bottom right.











https://i.imgur.com/PQ2WPgY.jpg
https://imgur.com/a/OJL222k


----------



## Craig Peer

Domcorleone said:


> Thank you, I just did a test of all the grey screens. *I felt the gray hawk looked the best but I wasn’t sure if there were big differences between the firehawk and grayHawk aside from viewing angle. Are there any?* Below is a photo i took of the sample from the side. The Tiburon is on the upper left, GrayHawk, second on the left, Slate third on the left and the firehawk is the top right and the phantom is on the bottom right.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://i.imgur.com/PQ2WPgY.jpg
> https://imgur.com/a/OJL222k


All of Stewart's screen material info is here - http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/screen-materials/flexible-front-projection


----------



## Erod

Craig Peer said:


> All of Stewart's screen material info is here - http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/screen-materials/flexible-front-projection


Craig, what is your opinion of the Stewart (and other) woven screens? Like you, I love my ST130 screen, but I'm considering some Triads up front, and it seems those need to best be in line.

That would mean a painful screen change that I'm not sure I''m willing to make.


----------



## Craig Peer

Erod said:


> Craig, what is your opinion of the Stewart (and other) woven screens? Like you, I love my ST130 screen, but I'm considering some Triads up front, and it seems those need to best be in line.
> 
> That would mean a painful screen change that I'm not sure I''m willing to make.


I'd say you should get some screen material samples. Only you can decide if it's worth it or not.


----------



## deanoak

I have owned my Stewart Luxus A Electriscreen from new since January this year(2018) and it has worked without any problems. Last night it decided to play up by stuttering when it was dropping ie: start stopping every second or so. Going up it was ok. It seems to me it is probably the down relay that is causing the problem. Has anyone any idea please. Oh I am in the UK by the way.


----------



## Craig Peer

deanoak said:


> I have owned my Stewart Luxus A Electriscreen from new since January this year(2018) and it has worked without any problems. Last night it decided to play up by stuttering when it was dropping ie: start stopping every second or so. Going up it was ok. It seems to me it is probably the down relay that is causing the problem. Has anyone any idea please. Oh I am in the UK by the way.


That's a new one. Call your dealer !


----------



## Don Stewart

deanoak said:


> I have owned my Stewart Luxus A Electriscreen from new since January this year(2018) and it has worked without any problems. Last night it decided to play up by stuttering when it was dropping ie: start stopping every second or so. Going up it was ok. It seems to me it is probably the down relay that is causing the problem. Has anyone any idea please. Oh I am in the UK by the way.


Are you using a screen trigger to activate screen to the down position? If so, it could be the external power supply that latches the relay is bad or has a poor connection. It sounds like the relay is not getting full voltage. Please call Scott Kimber at Stewart Customer Support. The number is 800 762-4999, ext 145. He can help trouble shoot the problem. 



Best Regards,
Don


----------



## deanoak

Hi Don,
Thank you for your reply. If what you say is true then why does the screen return up normally with no judder. The screen is triggered by the projector a JVC 7900 with an additional 12 volt current supply. It worked without a problem with my previous Stewart screen.


----------



## Craig Peer

Twin Stewart electric screens - best thing I ever did. Wider StudioTek 130 scope screen. Taller 16:9 Cima Neve screen for Avatar, Dunkirk or the Super Bowl. The best of both worlds !


----------



## psychdoc

psychdoc said:


> Hi All
> 
> I sit here in the theater confused and in need of some assistance if anyone might know the answers. I feel the answers are likely very easy but I’m just not seeing it currently.
> 
> First, as stated above, my Vistascope was sent with the wrong instructions so I don’t know what I don’t know. That said, I found a manual online but it doesn’t include all the extra sheets explaining things like the Cinecurve packet that they sent me. I’m not sure what applies to my screen and what doesn’t and what else I need to know. I’ve been looking at the manual and my screen and unlike my previous Stewart screen, this one doesn’t make sense to me.
> 
> The two main problems are how this would attach to the “wood plates” and where exactly those plates would go. Here is the only pic from the manual that shows the wooden plates. How exactly is this helpful unless they lined up exactly on studs? And if they did line up on studs, why would you need these strips to begin with????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here is what i have:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only on the bottom do i have two brackets that can be used to mount something against the wall. Look closely here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The remaining six are like the following in the pic below. They would just stab into the wall.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The comments I’ve received so far line up with using 3/4” playwood. I just don’t see a solution with what I have using plywood. I suppose I could massively thick lumber and attack from above and below but good grief, that can’t be right. Am I missing 6 brackets?????? What am I not seeing? Thanks all!
> 
> -Stuck in Seattle (well sorta near Seattle).



All,

I'm hoping anyone here might have heard of this. Unfortunately I'm having problems with this screen at every turn. 

I now have a problem with the BRIC. Basically, it doesn't work. I'm guessing the presets should have been set but there are none. I then started reading more of the manual and playing with the "control 1" and the "control 2" buttons to see if I can program the presets. Sometimes the "control" buttons move the screen, most of the time they do not even after repeatedly pressing the buttons. Initially the side felt panels only opened about 1 foot. The only thing they would do from there is fully close (2.35:1). After hitting all the buttons over and over the panels suddenly fully opened (likely 4:3 ratio). After that, they now only close on each side by one foot, despite repeatedly pressing all the buttons that can be pressed. The manual doesn't help except a one sentence line about crossing the lines which I have checked. Basically, I'm hoping there is an error that the manual isn't covering but I have to admit, I've been disappointed with this very expensive screen so far. I'm dreading spending a couple weeks breaking this thing down if it all needs to be returned. I'm guessing the connections are poor but I noticed right away that the connectors attached to the screen were slightly bent and I had to spend a lot of time trying to line them up just in order for the connectors to go together. 

There would be no reason to take this to my dealer (also a friend on the other side of the country) so I've sent some emails out to the company but I'm hoping there is something quick and easy the forum members here might know of. Thanks all.


----------



## psychdoc

So currently the screen will bounce between these two settings and even though I set 4:3 by following directions and waiting for the “beep”, it doesn’t do anything. It currently won’t fully open to allow either 4:3 or 2.35:1. 

Is there a big reset button somewhere for this whole thing????


----------



## Craig Peer

psychdoc said:


> So currently the screen will bounce between these two settings and even though I set 4:3 by following directions and waiting for the “beep”, it doesn’t do anything. It currently won’t fully open to allow either 4:3 or 2.35:1.
> 
> Is there a big reset button somewhere for this whole thing????


Call Stewart !


----------



## psychdoc

I sent emails and called the number Don Stewart added in a recent post but this is the weekend (no one is there) so I’m holding out hope someone with some knowledge has seen this before and maybe there is some sort of easy fix I’m overlooking.

Thanks all.


----------



## scoote69

I'm deciding between a 1.3 Studiotek and a lower gain screen. While I'd like the extra gain, my concern is the L and R speakers will be only 3-4 inches and the C only 7 inches from the screen. Will a lower gain screen be impacted noticeably less by any reflections off the speakers? It's important to take into account that if I go with a lower gain screen I'll be increasing the projector lumens so it may just be the same. 

Thanks.


----------



## Erod

scoote69 said:


> I'm deciding between a 1.3 Studiotek and a lower gain screen. While I'd like the extra gain, my concern is the L and R speakers will be only 3-4 inches and the C only 7 inches from the screen. Will a lower gain screen be impacted noticeably less by any reflections off the speakers? It's important to take into account that if I go with a lower gain screen I'll be increasing the projector lumens so it may just be the same.
> 
> Thanks.


One thing you'll like about the ST130 is that the gain focuses light back toward the center, away from the walls, and in your case, away from your speakers. Will you see them? Yes, but a 1.0 gain screen has a more pronounced and wider light reflection area. 

I want to do AT for sound purposes, but I just can't bring myself to do it. I love the image of my ST130 too much.


----------



## Craig Peer

Erod said:


> One thing you'll like about the ST130 is that the gain focuses light back toward the center, away from the walls, and in your case, away from your speakers. Will you see them? Yes, but a 1.0 gain screen has a more pronounced and wider light reflection area.
> 
> I want to do AT for sound purposes, but *I just can't bring myself to do it. I love the image of my ST130 too much*.


Same here. The StudioTek 130 and 4K is just amazing !


----------



## Erod

Craig Peer said:


> Same here. The StudioTek 130 and 4K is just amazing!


Yes, I really like how Gladiator looks in HDR/4K. It really deepened the color and brought the costume detail.


----------



## Craig Peer

Erod said:


> Yes, I really like how Gladiator looks in HDR/4K. It really deepened the color and brought the costume detail.


Detail on surfaces and long shots too ! 



















The StudioTek 130 gives 4K and HDR that added brightness needed to really bring a picture on a good sized screen to life !


----------



## longbow

I have relocated my StudioTek 130 to its third home in 20 years. It now serves it's 6th projector, a new Epson 5040UB. I have a 2nd StudioTek that is for sale. 92" electric tab tensioned. We downsized and only have room for one theater. The 130 has been exceptional and while it is initially expensive my daily cost of ownership is now well under .50 per day! 4k is amazing (OK, E-Shift, whatever!) and it does a terrific job with 3D as well (Looking at you Avatar!).

Thanks @DonStewart for a great product.


----------



## Low Profile

longbow said:


> I have relocated my StudioTek 130 to its third home in 20 years. It now serves it's 6th projector, a new Epson 5040UB. I have a 2nd StudioTek that is for sale. 92" electric tab tensioned. We downsized and only have room for one theater. The 130 has been exceptional and while it is initially expensive my daily cost of ownership is now well under .50 per day! 4k is amazing (OK, E-Shift, whatever!) and it does a terrific job with 3D as well (Looking at you Avatar!).
> 
> Thanks @DonStewart for a great product.


Thanks for sharing. Question though if I may. Ever consider a universal remote? :wink:


----------



## longbow

Low Profile said:


> Thanks for sharing. Question though if I may. Ever consider a universal remote? :wink:


Indeed. I do need to find a good one. Suggestions are welcome.


----------



## 996911

longbow said:


> Indeed. I do need to find a good one. Suggestions are welcome.


RTI if you don't mind paying $$$ for a true custom setup tailored to your wants and needs.

Control 4 is next best but not nearly as customizable as RTI but you can do a lot of it yourself with the subscription option and your dealer can dial in to make changes as well.

I have both. I use RTI at my main home as I have a fairly integrated and substantial system in a large home. It gives me complete customization with my dealer. You can have virtually whatever you can think up. With that said, I use Control 4 at my beach house as it's a smaller scale of integration and requirements and doesn't require a visit from my dealer for any changes I want as he can connect remotely to my system for updates.


----------



## longbow

Thanks for the Control 4 and RTI suggestions. Since I am not using home automation I opted for a more room specific tool in the Harmony Elite. It should be here tomorrow so we'll see how that goes.


----------



## 996911

I am not as familiar with Harmony but for a room specific IR style universal remote, I’ve heard good things about them.


----------



## JT37

longbow said:


> Thanks for the Control 4 and RTI suggestions. Since I am not using home automation I opted for a more room specific tool in the Harmony Elite. It should be here tomorrow so we'll see how that goes.



I just bought the Harmony Elite....so far so good. I'll see how it works with the new JVC arriving tomorrow.


----------



## Low Profile

*One remote to rule them all, one remote to find them, One remote to bring them all and in the darkness bind them. *

Good luck with your Harmony Elite's *longbow* and *JT37*. My "*precious*" is the Philips Pronto Professional TSU9600 remote in conjunction with Philips Pronto RFX9600 extenders. Philips closed their Pronto line years ago, but the hardware is still available on the used market and for pennies on the dollar for those interested. My Pronto currently serves as a replacement for 34 OEM remotes. Talk about the one remote to rule them all!


----------



## Domcorleone

Can anyone help me with this? 

I just got a 110' motorized Cima screen and I am looking to do a 12v trigger connection to my projector. The manual states I need to connect the RJ25 cable to the splitter (one cable going to the keypad) and then create an adapter to connect the RJ25 to the 12v trigger port on my projector. How do I do this? I have searched everywhere online for an adapter but I havent had any luck. Anyone with a motorized screen able to help me out with this?

Thanks


----------



## Don Stewart

Domcorleone said:


> Can anyone help me with this?
> 
> I just got a 110' motorized Cima screen and I am looking to do a 12v trigger connection to my projector. The manual states I need to connect the RJ25 cable to the splitter (one cable going to the keypad) and then create an adapter to connect the RJ25 to the 12v trigger port on my projector. How do I do this? I have searched everywhere online for an adapter but I havent had any luck. Anyone with a motorized screen able to help me out with this?
> 
> Thanks


They are easy to make up. First, figure out how long your cable has to be then just make up a two conductor wire from your 12 volt trigger output and connect to RJ plug as shown on Diagram attached below. Hope that helps.


----------



## Domcorleone

Don Stewart said:


> They are easy to make up. First, figure out how long your cable has to be then just make up a two conductor wire from your 12 volt trigger output and connect to RJ plug as shown on Diagram attached below. Hope that helps.


/ /
Thank you Don. This is very helpful, however, where do I purchase a RJ25 socket? They seem very hard to find. Can I use any telephone cable plug and any 3.4 mm jack and wire them together?


----------



## Craig Peer

Domcorleone said:


> / /
> Thank you Don. This is very helpful, however, where do I purchase a RJ25 socket? They seem very hard to find. Can I use any telephone cable plug and any 3.4 mm jack and wire them together?


Try Google - " RJ25 socket " - tons came up for sale - cheap !


----------



## JaremyP

Ordered my 135" Cima Neve 16:9 today for my in-progress theater build. Can't wait. Didn't think there was any way I'd be dropping a Stewart in the room. Using a JVC X790.


----------



## Craig Peer

JaremyP said:


> Ordered my 135" Cima Neve 16:9 today for my in-progress theater build. Can't wait. Didn't think there was any way I'd be dropping a Stewart in the room. Using a JVC X790.


You will love it. I certainly love mine !


----------



## mcucka

Don Stewart said:


> They are easy to make up. First, figure out how long your cable has to be then just make up a two conductor wire from your 12 volt trigger output and connect to RJ plug as shown on Diagram attached below. Hope that helps.


I tried this to the 12V trigger of my Optoma UHD51 and cannot get it to work...
I confirmed the Optoma is putting out 12V - I can trigger the screen by jumping the black/red and black/green wires.
But, wiring the 12V wires to pins 2&5 doesn't trigger the screen.

Any thoughts?

BTW, I sent several customer support forms to Stewart about this and never received a response. I tried calling Stewart and they would only refer me to a "local" dealer - not really local since they are in Maine and I live in CT - but that dealer has not returned any calls.messages.

Thanks!


----------



## Don Stewart

mcucka said:


> I tried this to the 12V trigger of my Optoma UHD51 and cannot get it to work...
> I confirmed the Optoma is putting out 12V - I can trigger the screen by jumping the black/red and black/green wires.
> But, wiring the 12V wires to pins 2&5 doesn't trigger the screen.
> 
> Any thoughts?
> 
> BTW, I sent several customer support forms to Stewart about this and never received a response. I tried calling Stewart and they would only refer me to a "local" dealer - not really local since they are in Maine and I live in CT - but that dealer has not returned any calls.messages.
> 
> Thanks!



Please call all our trouble shooter and screen control expert, Scott Kimber at 800 762-4999, ext 145 or his direct number at 310 891-3145. He will take care of you.


----------



## mcucka

Don Stewart said:


> Please call all our trouble shooter and screen control expert, Scott Kimber at 800 762-4999, ext 145 or his direct number at 310 891-3145. He will take care of you.


Thank you, Don - will do!


----------



## Craig Peer

The 4K Blu-ray of " Darkest Hour " looks amazing on my 122" Cima Neve screen ! Still love this screen after nearly 5 years !


----------



## Venger99

Hi all.
Just building my home theatre. 
I was thinking of getting a 2.35:1 ratio screen, approx 140” wide. This is about the width of the room, but I love the big screen experience.
Considering a Stewart curved screen with variable masking and studiotek 130 G3 material.
Why does it say only 90” wide for material? Does this mean a join for larger sizes? Is this at all noticeable?
It will mainly be viewed by me in the central viewing position. Is there a big advantage to a curved screen? How much worse is the viewing experience from the side of the room? 
The screen will be viewed from approximately 4 m (13’) away.
How reliable are the masking panels?
My PJ is currently an epson 9100, not super bright, hence the 1.3 gain material.
Thanks in advance.


----------



## Ellebob

I don't know if there is a typo on Stewart's site but it is 90 feet wide not 90 inches, so no worry there. Curved screens are great if using an anamorphic lens with your projector. If not I would stick with a flat screen. With an anamorphic lens you will get more light output as you will use all the pixels in your projector and not have the black bars. The projector needs to be able to stretch the image vertically for this to work, I don't think the 9100 has this feature. With the anamorphic lens and curved screen you will also get better screen uniformity. You also wouldn't want to use less than a 1.3 gain with a curved screen to avoid some of the picture going back onto the screen itself. There are advantage to curved screens and anamorphic lenses but don't think it is the best choice for your projector. You would probably have to add a video processor and if you are spending that much than update the projector instead.

Oops, just noticed your from the UK. Some of the European model numbers are different. I was thinking of the Pro cinema 9100. Is this your model?
https://epson.com/For-Home/Projectors/Pro-Cinema/PowerLite-Pro-Cinema-9100-Projector/p/V11H336420


----------



## Venger99

Thanks for reply.
No, mine is different: https://www.epson.co.uk/products/projectors/home-cinema/epson-eh-tw9100w
but description of mine doesn’t mention an anamorphic lens. Seem to remember anamorphic setting in menu, will check tonight.


----------



## Ellebob

Yours appear to be what is called the 5020UB in the states. In the US they sell two versions of that projector the 5020UB and the 6020UB. The 6020 was the "PRO" model and came with an extra lamp, cable cover, ceiling mount and an extra year warranty. The Pro model was also black where the non-pro was white. The Pro models were also not sold online. They still sell the regular and pro versions with current models. One of the features of the "PRO" models that distinguished it from the non-Pro model is it had the processing for an anamorphic lens. If it has this processing when you hit the aspect button on your remote a couple of the options will be "anamorphic Wide" and "Horizontal Squeeze", the 5020 did not have these options. I don't know if your projector is a 5020 just rebadged or if it is the Pro 6020 in a white case and has these options. Let us know.


----------



## scoote69

I ordered my screen almost 9 weeks ago and am still waiting. They said it would be 4 weeks. No real response from Stewart as to what's causing the delay. Anyone else have to wait this long?


----------



## Venger99

Ellebob said:


> Yours appear to be what is called the 5020UB in the states. In the US they sell two versions of that projector the 5020UB and the 6020UB. The 6020 was the "PRO" model and came with an extra lamp, cable cover, ceiling mount and an extra year warranty. The Pro model was also black where the non-pro was white. The Pro models were also not sold online. They still sell the regular and pro versions with current models. One of the features of the "PRO" models that distinguished it from the non-Pro model is it had the processing for an anamorphic lens. If it has this processing when you hit the aspect button on your remote a couple of the options will be "anamorphic Wide" and "Horizontal Squeeze", the 5020 did not have these options. I don't know if your projector is a 5020 just rebadged or if it is the Pro 6020 in a white case and has these options. Let us know.


Yes, mine has anamorphic wide and horizontal squeeze settings.
I don’t understand how this uses more pixels or why this is necessary for a curved screen though.
I thought it was a setting because some dvds had this as an option on their menus (to make letterbox widescreen?). Doesn’t this distort the image?
If I got a curved screen but then wanted a new PJ would I be tied to models that had this anamorphic feature?
Thanks


----------



## Ellebob

If you use a curved screen without an anamorphic lens you will get a barrel distortion because the sides of the screen are closer than the middle. The anamorphic lens will also stretch the picture horizontally. To compensate for this the picture is stretched vertically first so the aspect ratio will be correct 

When displaying a 2.35 picture on a normal 16:9 screen you will have black bars on the top and bottom. The chips in projectors basically block light from your bulb, pixels open or close to allow loght to go to the lens. The black bars are blocking some light from the bulb so when we stretch the picture vertically more light is passing through. So there is a modest increase in overall light output when you use all the pixels. Also compared to the zoom method where you are zooming the picture bigger you also lose light. Typically an anamorphic system has 25-30% more light output than the zoom method. Also it can have perceived more resolution because we are using all the pixels in the chip. The downside is you can get some distortion based on quality of lens and vertically stretching the picture digitally.

Each method has its pros and cons. I ha e two projector systems in my home. Both are 2.35 and one uses a curved screen with an anamorphic lens and the other a flat screen with a projector that has lens memories for the zoom method.

If you upgrade your projector you can use the lens with the new projector but you'd want one with the vertical stretch processing.


----------



## Venger99

I understand. The PJ is literally just stretching the image to fill the screen.
I prefer the loss of screen area to the stretched image. Will go for a flat 2.35:1 screen with side masking for when I view 16:9 then. Will have to manually zoom the PJ out for full width. 
I will then have the “black bars” from the image projected above and below the screen. Should I make some sort of black gate in the superior inferior dimension which I can close down for 2.35:1, positioned near the PJ light source to cut this out and stop any of this light reaching the (black velvet) backwall around the screen?
Thanks.


----------



## Venger99

How heavy is the screen and frame for a 140” 2.35:1? Ok to fix straight onto drywall or should I put up thin plyboard to fix it on to?
Thanks


----------



## Ellebob

The gate won't work, some light reflects back. Masking around the screen usually gives enough outline for the picture. If your front wall is black or dark you won't notice the overspray when zooming. As for mounting if you can hit some studs you will be fine otherwise use plywood. The non-masking screens you could probably hang with togglers if necessary but he masking screens are considerably heavier. Don can probably give you an approximate weight.


----------



## Don Stewart

Venger99 said:


> How heavy is the screen and frame for a 140” 2.35:1? Ok to fix straight onto drywall or should I put up thin plyboard to fix it on to?
> Thanks



Please advise which fixed screen model so I can get accurate information for you.


Best,
Don


----------



## Venger99

Thanks. Ok I will forget the gate idea!
Was thinking of the vista scope with 140” wide 2.35:1 studiotek 130 G3 material. 
What is the approx weight? 
Is this the right screen for me?


----------



## Ellebob

They have some dimensions and weights on their website to give you a ball park. Just download the PDF.

http://stewartfilmscreen.com/standard-products/2-way-variable-vertical-masking-system-(vistascope)

These are 2.4 but 2.35 will be very close. The 144" wide model is 190# with 410# shipping weight and the 132" wide model is 170# with 390# shipping weight. So somewhere in that range.


----------



## thetman

Craig Peer said:


> The 4K Blu-ray of " Darkest Hour " looks amazing on my 122" Cima Neve screen ! Still love this screen after nearly 5 years !
> 
> awesome screenshots. I love my Cima Neve screen. of course your projector is much better than mine ( RS420). But for the last year I have really been enjoying it for movies.


----------



## Craig Peer

thetman said:


> Craig Peer said:
> 
> 
> 
> The 4K Blu-ray of " Darkest Hour " looks amazing on my 122" Cima Neve screen ! Still love this screen after nearly 5 years !
> 
> awesome screenshots. I love my Cima Neve screen. of course your projector is much better than mine ( RS420). But for the last year I have really been enjoying it for movies.
> 
> 
> 
> Yup - I still totally love mine !
Click to expand...


----------



## Venger99

Don Stewart said:


> Venger99 said:
> 
> 
> 
> How heavy is the screen and frame for a 140” 2.35:1? Ok to fix straight onto drywall or should I put up thin plyboard to fix it on to?
> Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please advise which fixed screen model so I can get accurate information for you.
> 
> 
> 
> Best,
> Don
Click to expand...

I was thinking of the vista scope screen with side masking, 2.35:1 ratio, 140” wide with studiotek 130 screen material.
I sent a couple of email enquiries on the site TW pricing but no reply yet 😞


----------



## taxman2015

I just purchased a JVC X590RB projector. While I didn't buy it because it has 3D ability, I wouldn't mind using it for that if it doesn't cost too much

The issue is that from what I have read on the forms with this projector if you have a screen that retains polarization then you need more expensive 3d glasses that only JVC sells

I purchased my screen over 10 yeas ago, and can't be positive on the model, but I think it is a Grayhawk (its a Stewart and gray that much I know for sure)

Does anybody know if this screen, from that long ago, does retain polarization?


----------



## Don Stewart

Venger99 said:


> I was thinking of the vista scope screen with side masking, 2.35:1 ratio, 140” wide with studiotek 130 screen material.
> I sent a couple of email enquiries on the site TW pricing but no reply yet 😞


Hi Venger,


Being you are from the UK, when we at the factory receive an inquiry, we immediately forward it to our appropriate distributor in your area. They are suppose to respond within 24 hours.
For the UK, our distributor is:


 *Custom AV Distribution Ltd*
Heynes Green
Maidenhead
SL6 3NA Berkshire United Kingdom
[email protected]


----------



## Don Stewart

taxman2015 said:


> I just purchased a JVC X590RB projector. While I didn't buy it because it has 3D ability, I wouldn't mind using it for that if it doesn't cost too much
> 
> The issue is that from what I have read on the forms with this projector if you have a screen that retains polarization then you need more expensive 3d glasses that only JVC sells
> 
> I purchased my screen over 10 yeas ago, and can't be positive on the model, but I think it is a Grayhawk (its a Stewart and gray that much I know for sure)
> 
> Does anybody know if this screen, from that long ago, does retain polarization?


Hi Taxman,


If your screen is a GrayHawk, it is not designed for use with passive 3D polarization. In order to hold polarization, generally a high gain metallic surface finish is required such as a Silver screen. The GrayHawk will do active 3D, like most other screens.


----------



## bronxkid

My lutron shades are delayed so my room has direct sunlight coming into the room and onto the screen. Is this bad for the Stewart screen to have hours of sunlight directly on it? Also any popular recommendation for cleaning the screen? I have the Neve. Once the shades are installed I can't wait to snap some pics.


----------



## Don Stewart

bronxkid said:


> My lutron shades are delayed so my room has direct sunlight coming into the room and onto the screen. Is this bad for the Stewart screen to have hours of sunlight directly on it? Also any popular recommendation for cleaning the screen? I have the Neve. Once the shades are installed I can't wait to snap some pics.


The direct sunlight is no problem. All our FP screens are formulated with UV protectors in the formulation and at the same time still meets UL GreenGuard certification for indoor use.
As far as cleaning, there are different remedies for different problems. If you are just looking for normal dusting maintenance, then we recommend a soft fox tail drafting brush and even use these at the factory. Here is a link. Hope that helps.
https://www.amazon.com/Alvin-2341-Traditional-Dusting-Brush/dp/B000HF6K9S


----------



## bronxkid

Don Stewart said:


> The direct sunlight is no problem. All our FP screens are formulated with UV protectors in the formulation and at the same time still meets UL GreenGuard certification for indoor use.
> As far as cleaning, there are different remedies for different problems. If you are just looking for normal dusting maintenance, then we recommend a soft fox tail drafting brush and even use these at the factory. Here is a link. Hope that helps.
> https://www.amazon.com/Alvin-2341-Traditional-Dusting-Brush/dp/B000HF6K9S





Appreciate it, thanks so much. I had great experience working with you guys in getting my screen.


----------



## Venger99

Don Stewart said:


> Venger99 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was thinking of the vista scope screen with side masking, 2.35:1 ratio, 140” wide with studiotek 130 screen material.
> I sent a couple of email enquiries on the site TW pricing but no reply yet 😞
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Venger,
> 
> 
> Being you are from the UK, when we at the factory receive an inquiry, we immediately forward it to our appropriate distributor in your area. They are suppose to respond within 24 hours.
> For the UK, our distributor is:
> 
> 
> *Custom AV Distribution Ltd*
> Heynes Green
> Maidenhead
> SL6 3NA Berkshire United Kingdom
> [email protected]
Click to expand...

Thanks Don, if I don’t hear back soon I’ll try that email.


----------



## taxman2015

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Taxman,
> 
> 
> If your screen is a GrayHawk, it is not designed for use with passive 3D polarization. In order to hold polarization, generally a high gain metallic surface finish is required such as a Silver screen. The GrayHawk will do active 3D, like most other screens.


Thamks

All of these are active 3D glasses. The difference appears to be how they work (using vertical or horizontal technologies) and that is apparently impacted by how the screen retains polarization


----------



## tspotorno

Controlling the BRIC...

I have a BRIC controller for my Stewart screen. Problem is the documentation on the unit is much different than the actual unit.

I am looking to control it via Demopad.

1. The ports on the left side are completely different than the documentation. I have RJ45 jack, then the jack the lit keypad plugs into, then a RJ11 jack, then another RJ45 jack that has lights like a standard Ethernet connector. In addition to several green connectors.

2. The keypad works and hence so does the remote.

3. Does this box have an Ethernet connection? If it does can I control it via IP? There are zero instructions anywhere on the net or otherwise that I can find.

4. I tried to hook up a home made cable for RS232 but nothing works, I have plugged into the top RJ45 and the bottom RJ45 but not the RJ11 jack as the instructions show specifically an RJ45.

5. I have not plugged in an cat5 cable to my switch as I do not want to blow out the unit if it is indeed not a network jack.

I have programmed the software to output the correct codes, yet the BRIC unit does not respond.

Any idea's?


----------



## Don Stewart

tspotorno said:


> Controlling the BRIC...
> 
> I have a BRIC controller for my Stewart screen. Problem is the documentation on the unit is much different than the actual unit.
> 
> I am looking to control it via Demopad.
> 
> 1. The ports on the left side are completely different than the documentation. I have RJ45 jack, then the jack the lit keypad plugs into, then a RJ11 jack, then another RJ45 jack that has lights like a standard Ethernet connector. In addition to several green connectors.
> 
> 2. The keypad works and hence so does the remote.
> 
> 3. Does this box have an Ethernet connection? If it does can I control it via IP? There are zero instructions anywhere on the net or otherwise that I can find.
> 
> 4. I tried to hook up a home made cable for RS232 but nothing works, I have plugged into the top RJ45 and the bottom RJ45 but not the RJ11 jack as the instructions show specifically an RJ45.
> 
> 5. I have not plugged in an cat5 cable to my switch as I do not want to blow out the unit if it is indeed not a network jack.
> 
> I have programmed the software to output the correct codes, yet the BRIC unit does not respond.
> 
> Any idea's?


Hi Tspotorno.


I am more of an optical guy, not really a binary guy. That said, please contact Scott Kimber at our factory as he is in charge of screen controller products. He can be reached at 800 762-4999, ext 145.


Best,
Don


----------



## ScottieBoysName

I'm starting to look at purchasing a non-AT screen, and Stewart keeps coming up over and over again. 

I'm looking for a screen size between 120-130 diagonal, 16:9. I'll sit with eyes 10.5 feet from the screen, and the throw distance will be around 13.3 feet. 

I keep hearing great things about the StudioTek 130, for it's high gain and ability to help out with HDR. I'm a brightness/HDR kinda guy so that sounds great. 

Anyone offer up a suggestion of a direction they could point me in regarding other screens Stewart makes? This is in a completely light controlled room.


----------



## LJG

I just saw that Stewart has a "new" Directors choice screen at Cedia, just wondering what changes have been made?


----------



## rmilyard

I purchased a JVC x990r projector few days ago. I also own a Stewart Filmscreen Luxus Deluxe Wallscreen. My room has some light during day since can’t completely in close room. I have the Greyhawk RS screen but was wondering if should be using something else? I believe gain is .08?

Throw is 156” and screen size is 128”


----------



## Iwanthd

I've heard of a Gen5 Firehawk screen material that is designed to improve HDR performance. Is this material available yet and how does it compare to the Gen4 Firehawk?


----------



## lockdown571

LJG said:


> I just saw that Stewart has a "new" Directors choice screen at Cedia, just wondering what changes have been made?


Here you go: 




Sounds like the major change is the framing is smaller allowing you to fit a bigger screen in the same space.


----------



## rmilyard

Can someone help me out. I purchased a Stewart Filmscreen Luxus Deluxe 16:9 123" screen about a year old used. The snap in screen says is is GreyHawk RS. Can someone tell me what gain this material is?


----------



## Craig Peer

rmilyard said:


> Can someone help me out. I purchased a Stewart Filmscreen Luxus Deluxe 16:9 123" screen about a year old used. The snap in screen says is is GreyHawk RS. Can someone tell me what gain this material is?


Probably .9 gain - http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/screen-materials/flexible-front-projection


----------



## rmilyard

rmilyard said:


> Can someone help me out. I purchased a Stewart Filmscreen Luxus Deluxe 16:9 123" screen about a year old used. The snap in screen says is is GreyHawk RS. Can someone tell me what gain this material is?


Does anyone happen to remember if the snaps on this frame are fixed or can you move them? I would need to take mine down so just asking before I do that.


----------



## CameronP

The snaps on my Luxus Deluxe frame are mounted in a groove and slide within that groove.


----------



## rmilyard

CameronP said:


> The snaps on my Luxus Deluxe frame are mounted in a groove and slide within that groove.


Thanks!


----------



## thebland

lockdown571 said:


> Here you go: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndDglsrG-IE
> 
> Sounds like the major change is the framing is smaller allowing you to fit a bigger screen in the same space.


I see the frame is 75% smaller / less wide... That's awesome!


2 Things: 
1. I am considering a Vistascope for my new room (side masking, CIH). It has a bulky sides where masking is hidden, anyone know if this smaller frame and chassis for the DIrector's Choice is going to move over the Vistascope line to stream line its frame??

2. What would the physical dimensions of this new Director's Choice screen be for a 15' wide 2.40 aspect screen?


----------



## rmilyard

Craig Peer said:


> Probably .9 gain - http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/screen-materials/flexible-front-projection


I saw that. I have some saying it's .8 others .9. Even read somewhere is .95.

Trying to figure out if should replace it. For HDR content with my new JVC x990r seems dark.


----------



## Takamikey

How would you pick between the Stewart Cima Neve vs. Tiburon? I have a dark wall room with a JVC DLA-X590, looking at 135”. I have windows with blackout curtains, 85% light controlled movies, some kiddo / hangout stuff that may have a little ambient light... (but also won’t be worried about pic quality as much). Thx for the input...


----------



## Takamikey

Takamikey said:


> How would you pick between the Stewart Cima Neve vs. Tiburon? I have a dark wall room with a JVC DLA-X590, looking at 135”. I have windows with blackout curtains, 85% light controlled movies, some kiddo / hangout stuff that may have a little ambient light... (but also won’t be worried about pic quality as much). Thx for the input...


85% of the time will be spent*


----------



## Craig Peer

Takamikey said:


> How would you pick between the Stewart Cima Neve vs. Tiburon? I have a dark wall room with a JVC DLA-X590, looking at 135”. I have windows with blackout curtains, 85% light controlled movies, some kiddo / hangout stuff that may have a little ambient light... (but also won’t be worried about pic quality as much). Thx for the input...


I'd go with the Cima Neve for sure. Just try and arrange the lighting so it doesn't shine directly on the screen.


----------



## Takamikey

Craig Peer said:


> I'd go with the Cima Neve for sure. Just try and arrange the lighting so it doesn't shine directly on the screen.


Great!


----------



## Craig Peer

Takamikey said:


> Great!


I have a little light on in my theater at times - it still look just fine.


----------



## Jmouse007

I posted the following on another thread seeking advice on which projector screen to purchase in an ambient light (lighter colored walls) room.

Since what I posted is so relevant to this Official STEWART Owners thread I thought I would post it here as well, enjoy!

"Go with a gray STEWART FILM SCREEN that is specifically designed to handle ambient light. 

The STEWART will cost more at the outset, but is worth every penny. We own a 100 inch gray 16/9 STEWART Firehawk SST tab-tensioned electriscreen which we have had since 2007. The screen material was a special formula, specifically created by STEWART, with the cooperation of SONY, for use with their Sony 1080p projectors. 

Interestingly enough I called STEWART several months ago and talked with their tech developement department. I am making the move from 1080p to 4K and wanted to know if I would need to purchase a different screen material.

He asked me the specific material my STEWART film screen was. I told him it is the unique STEWART Firehawk SST material STEWART developed with Sony. When he heard this I was shocked by what he said next; this is a direct quote: 

'You are very fortunate, the screen material you have is very special; the formula is essentially what we base our latest line of 4K gray screen material on. Your screen should be future proof for the next 17 years.' 

Needless to say, I was flabbergasted at this news given the fact our screen is 11 years old. The screen material is perfectly suited for our ambient light situation and so good, it is already 4K compliant! Now all I need is a new 4K projector.

We do not own a TV, our PJ and screen function for cable TV, and movies via Bluray and 4K. Since 2007 we have used our STEWART retractable screen nearly every day. It has performed flawlessly and looks as good as the day we installed it.

Yes, it cost more, but it is an outstanding screen and has more than paid for itself, and will be doing so well into the future! 

My strong advice, call STEWART, Filmscreen in LA, tell them about your room, email them photos and let them know what you are looking for and need, then buy the STEWART screen they recommend for your specific application, you won't regret it."


----------



## Venger99

I’m looking to get either the Cima with neve material or the deluxe frame with studiotek G3 130 material. Both will be 2.35:1 ratio, 127” wide.
Light controlled room with no windows or natural light, dimmable LED strips at back of the room.
Current projector is a 2000 lumens epson 9100, but I plan to upgrade soonish to a 4K “HDR” (by PJ standards) projector.
Is there a big advantage to the studiotek material? Not a massive price difference in my quotes.
Second question: I can’t really justify the price hike for a masked screen. When watching 16:9 material what is the best way to budget mask the sides of the screen? Should I use black velvet curtains? I also thought about horizontally mounted blackout blinds that I could pull across.
To be clear, no actual light from the PJ should be hitting these side parts of the screen, so it will be to block the slight ambient light from the room hitting the screen, and to provide a better contrast at the projected screen edges. Will this be a non issue anyway?
I am still finalising the lighting and could have the LED strips all shine away from the direction of the screen.
For 2.35:1 films I plan to zoom the image until a possible future anamorphic lens purchase. The black bars will be projected off the screen and shouldn’t be an issue (black backwall).
Thanks


----------



## enricoclaudio

Robert Keeler sent me today samples of StudioTek 100 and StudioTek 130. I'm pretty sure I'll be ordering very soon a Luxus Deluxe StudioTek 100 but Robert wanted me to check on the ST 130 as well. I'll pairing this screen with a JVC RS2000. Funny thing is that I asked Mike Garrett if it was possible to send me samples and he did so I'll be getting enough samples to maybe build my own DIY screen  Thanks, @Mike Garrett


----------



## Pultzar

I'm considering a 2.40:1 Balon Borderless sceren with black fidelio velvet behind it to catch overscan. Since there is no frame in front of the screen, building a nice masking system for the sides shouldn't be too difficult.

My question is, how crisp are the edges of the screen? I know that there is a bevel but I haven't seen any high resolution photos of what it looks like. Has anybody here used one of these screens yet?


----------



## Killer

thebland said:


> I see the frame is 75% smaller / less wide... That's awesome!
> 
> 
> 2 Things:
> 1. I am considering a Vistascope for my new room (side masking, CIH). It has a bulky sides where masking is hidden, anyone know if this smaller frame and chassis for the DIrector's Choice is going to move over the Vistascope line to stream line its frame??
> 
> 2. What would the physical dimensions of this new Director's Choice screen be for a 15' wide 2.40 aspect screen?


What I know from CEDIA
1) Next project
2)
Image width + 10"
Image Height + 12"
Depth at CEDIA was 19" to accommodate the larger roller tubes for the masking. They(the masking panels) are a bit more "Hollywood" than other brands.


----------



## enricoclaudio

Really IMPRESSED with StudioTeK 100. I thought my Carada CCW material was very close to ST100, well I was wrong. 

Here some photos comparing ST100 (left), Carada CCW (center) and ST130 (right).


----------



## Don Stewart

Pultzar said:


> I'm considering a 2.40:1 Balon Borderless sceren with black fidelio velvet behind it to catch overscan. Since there is no frame in front of the screen, building a nice masking system for the sides shouldn't be too difficult.
> 
> My question is, how crisp are the edges of the screen? I know that there is a bevel but I haven't seen any high resolution photos of what it looks like. Has anybody here used one of these screens yet?


Please be advised I sent you a PM regarding your question.


----------



## bytebuster

Hi Don, 
I am looking to upgrade from my old model A motorized 90 inch firehawk (purchased in 2011)
Is this now referred to as the "classic" model? I see references to this now on the website. How is the newest iteration of the screen different from this?


----------



## BondDonBond

enricoclaudio said:


> Robert Keeler sent me today samples of StudioTek 100 and StudioTek 130. I'm pretty sure I'll be ordering very soon a Luxus Deluxe StudioTek 100 but Robert wanted me to check on the ST 130 as well. I'll pairing this screen with a JVC RS2000. Funny thing is that I asked Mike Garrett if it was possible to send me samples and he did so I'll be getting enough samples to maybe build my own DIY screen  Thanks, @Mike Garrett


I just ordered a 120" StudioTek 130 from Mike for my new RS2000. My thinking is that I want as much help as possible with HDR without screwing up the picture. We will see. I have a antique Stewart 1.3 gain screen that is about 18 years old and love it but I want 120" scope screen.


----------



## Don Stewart

bytebuster said:


> Hi Don,
> I am looking to upgrade from my old model A motorized 90 inch firehawk (purchased in 2011)
> Is this now referred to as the "classic" model? I see references to this now on the website. How is the newest iteration of the screen different from this?


Hi Bytebuster,

The Classic Model A will do larger screens sizes, (any viewing size up to 9 feet high by 12 feet wide). Therefore, the screen roller housing outside dimensions are larger than your newer 90 inch Standard Model A screen housing. 
Also, your existing screen housing can be retrofitted with a difference Stewart screen material of the same size but would require the unit being sent back to the factory to do so.


Hope that helps.
Don


----------



## bytebuster

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Bytebuster,
> 
> The Classic Model A will do larger screens sizes, (any viewing size up to 9 feet high by 12 feet wide). Therefore, the screen roller housing outside dimensions are larger than your newer 90 inch Standard Model A screen housing.
> Also, your existing screen housing can be retrofitted with a difference Stewart screen material of the same size but would require the unit being sent back to the factory to do so.
> 
> 
> Hope that helps.
> Don


Thanks Don. Appreciate your valuable input in this thread.
Another question regarding the model A. I wish the bracket placement could have been a little flexible on the model A. One issue I had with mine was that the brackets wouldn't line up with my ceiling joists (since the joists run perpendicular to the housing). So I ended up adding extra support between the studs (so that I can attach one end of the brackets to the support).

Is there any other motorized model that offers more flexibility with ceiling mounts


----------



## Don Stewart

bytebuster said:


> Thanks Don. Appreciate your valuable input in this thread.
> Another question regarding the model A. I wish the bracket placement could have been a little flexible on the model A. One issue I had with mine was that the brackets wouldn't line up with my ceiling joists (since the joists run perpendicular to the housing). So I ended up adding extra support between the studs (so that I can attach one end of the brackets to the support).
> 
> *Is there any other motorized model that offers more flexibility with ceiling mounts*



Yes, our Cima, below ceiling screen housing, allows ceiling brackets to slide in a track on top of housing to adjust to any position. Please see link below. You can pull up a detailed PDF screen housing drawing by clicking on the drawing box and then picking the appropriate size screen. Then click on download for very detailed drawings.
http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/ap...ling-electriscreen-(cima®-bc)-for-home-cinema


----------



## Montanasam

Hi, I recently bought a house that had a Stewart mounted screen. I’m trying to find out it’s value and if it is good for a 4 k projector. Any insight would be great!
Sticker reads=
Screen firehawk OD: 50.5 x 86.25
Model: SNDQ096HFHWX
S/N: T0400050
It’s still in great shape.
Thanks,

Sam


----------



## enricoclaudio

Montanasam said:


> Hi, I recently bought a house that had a Stewart mounted screen. I’m trying to find out it’s value and if it is good for a 4 k projector. Any insight would be great!
> Sticker reads=
> Screen firehawk OD: 50.5 x 86.25
> Model: SNDQ096HFHWX
> S/N: T0400050
> It’s still in great shape.
> Thanks,
> 
> Sam


That's a 16:9, 96" Stewart Luxus Deluxe Wallscreen with FireHawk screen material. FireHawk material is rated for up to 16K resolution. 

http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/screen-materials/flexible-front-projection/firehawk®

http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/standard-products/deluxe-stewart-wallscreen-(sndq)

If you email Stewart with the serial number, they will email you the detailed drawings of your screen.


----------



## Killer

Montanasam said:


> Hi, I recently bought a house that had a Stewart mounted screen. I’m trying to find out it’s value and if it is good for a 4 k projector. Any insight would be great!
> Sticker reads=
> Screen firehawk OD: 50.5 x 86.25
> Model: SNDQ096HFHWX
> S/N: T0400050
> It’s still in great shape.
> Thanks,
> 
> Sam


Sam, you're in good shape, Stewart has been making screens that are 16K capable for a long time.


----------



## bytebuster

Guys, got swatches for the firehawk and st130.
While fixing this on the wall, how do I know which side or face to project on? 
Is it the face with the “label” that identifies the material or the other side?


----------



## enricoclaudio

bytebuster said:


> Guys, got swatches for the firehawk and st130.
> While fixing this on the wall, how do I know which side or face to project on?
> Is it the face with the “label” that identifies the material or the other side?


It’s the side with the label.


----------



## bytebuster

Does anyone have a pic of what the white luxus model A electric screen look like?
I have the black model A. Just wanted to look at what the white version looks like


----------



## Don Stewart

bytebuster said:


> Does anyone have a pic of what the white luxus model A electric screen look like?
> I have the black model A. Just wanted to look at what the white version looks like


Here you go.


----------



## bytebuster

Don Stewart said:


> Here you go.


Thanks Don. Reached out to your team as well earlier and they forwarded me detailed pics of the screen


----------



## Azekecse

Don Stewart said:


> Here you go.


Nice Pic Don...I'm going to try a Stewart 130 2:35/16:9 (Masking) before I retire, once my wife approves of course . I have other requirements first though.

Does Stewart provide Military Veteran Discounts??? Just humbly asking sir...

Peace and blessings,

Azeke


----------



## Craig Peer

Azekecse said:


> Nice Pic Don...I'm going to try a Stewart 130 2:35/16:9 (Masking) before I retire, once my wife approves of course . I have other requirements first though.
> 
> Does Stewart provide Military Veteran Discounts??? Just humbly asking sir...
> 
> Peace and blessings,
> 
> Azeke


Some Stewart dealers offer military discounts. Thank you for your service.


----------



## Don Stewart

Azekecse said:


> Nice Pic Don...I'm going to try a Stewart 130 2:35/16:9 (Masking) before I retire, once my wife approves of course . I have other requirements first though.
> 
> Does Stewart provide Military Veteran Discounts??? Just humbly asking sir...
> 
> Peace and blessings,
> 
> Azeke


First of all, thank you for serving our country in time of need. My grandfather, father and brother were all military veterans and were also past members of Stewart Filmscreen. I too wanted to join the Air Force and pilot airplanes but my uncorrected vision was not good enough. Again, thank you for your service. 

As Graig mentioned above, Stewart products are sold through a dealer network and we do not have any control over final pricing and discounts given to the end user. That said, you can shop around and ask for a military discount. I am willing to bet that some dealers will give you one.


Best Regards,
Don


----------



## Azekecse

Craig Peer said:


> Some Stewart dealers offer military discounts. Thank you for your service.


Thank you Craig...

Peace and blessings,

Azeke


----------



## Azekecse

Don Stewart said:


> First of all, thank you for serving our country in time of need. My grandfather, father and brother were all military veterans and were also past members of Stewart Filmscreen. I too wanted to join the Air Force and pilot airplanes but my uncorrected vision was not good enough. Again, thank you for your service.
> 
> As Graig mentioned above, Stewart products are sold through a dealer network and we do not have any control over final pricing and discounts given to the end user. That said, you can shop around and ask for a military discount. I am willing to bet that some dealers will give you one.
> 
> 
> Best Regards,
> Don


Thank you Don...

Peace and blessings,

Azeke


----------



## egrady

I'm thinking of going with a FP and a Stewart G130 110" 16x9 screen. As my room is multi purpose I'm worried about the acoustic impact of placing such a large screen on the wall behind my speakers. Two channel audio is very important to me and the last thing I want to do is mess that up. 


What I'd like to know is how acoustically reflective is the G130? For those of you that have one do you find you need to cover it, say with curtains, when listening to music? A large, acoustically reflective object between your front two speakers isn't good for music. So anyone with experience with the G130, or other Stewart screens, I'd love to hear your thoughts. What I'm ultimately worried about is since a projector screen is designed to be light reflective, it must be acoustically reflective as well.


----------



## enricoclaudio

egrady said:


> I'm thinking of going with a FP and a Stewart G130 110" 16x9 screen. As my room is multi purpose I'm worried about the acoustic impact of placing such a large screen on the wall behind my speakers. Two channel audio is very important to me and the last thing I want to do is mess that up.
> 
> 
> What I'd like to know is how acoustically reflective is the G130? For those of you that have one do you find you need to cover it, say with curtains, when listening to music? A large, acoustically reflective object between your front two speakers isn't good for music. So anyone with experience with the G130, or other Stewart screens, I'd love to hear your thoughts. What I'm ultimately worried about is since a projector screen is designed to be light reflective, it must be acoustically reflective as well.


I have a 92" Stewart ST100 between my speakers and I have zero acoustic reflections. I have acoustic panels on the sides of the screen so they take care of any unwanted acoustic reflection, though. If you are concerned about sound reflections, the you can get ST130G3 perforated (AKA "AT" or Acoustically Transparent).


----------



## grendelrt

Is it better to go to a dealer or Stewart themselves for samples? I sent an email about a week ago to [email protected] but never heard anything back. 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


----------



## spinn74

Does anyone have experience with Phantom HALR?


----------



## spinn74

Or better yet Phantom on a Luminesse?


----------



## Killer

spinn74 said:


> Does anyone have experience with Phantom HALR?


Yes, I have the Gemini screen, a 104" 16:9 Phantom and 130" 2:35 StudioTek 130.

Phantom is a 1.0 gain so maybe not as bright as others with positive gain, but the colors are correct, no shifting to blue.

It's paired up with a JVC 770R @ 1800 lumens


----------



## Ericglo

Killer said:


> Yes, I have the Gemini screen, a 104" 16:9 Phantom and 130" 2:35 StudioTek 130.
> 
> Phantom is a 1.0 gain so maybe not as bright as others with positive gain, but the colors are correct, no shifting to blue.
> 
> It's paired up with a JVC 770R @ 1800 lumens


Is the Phantom in an ambient light room? How does it fair?


----------



## lukewayne

Don, 
Is there anywhere to see a price book for Stewart products? I keep getting blown off by dealers because my expectations are so far off of the pricing, I'd love to know where each option is starting at so I can stop wasting dealers time asking about 50k in screen when I'm looking for 5k 

Thanks


----------



## Killroy

lukewayne said:


> Don,
> Is there anywhere to see a price book for Stewart products? I keep getting blown off by dealers because my expectations are so far off of the pricing, I'd love to know where each option is starting at so I can stop wasting dealers time asking about 50k in screen when I'm looking for 5k
> 
> Thanks


Wait?!?! $50k for a screen?!?! Is it made out of fairy dust? Depending on size, your budget is right on the mid-to-top end of the scale from "reputable" dealers.


----------



## lukewayne

Killroy said:


> Wait?!?! $50k for a screen?!?! Is it made out of fairy dust? Depending on size, your budget is right on the mid-to-top end of the scale from "reputable" dealers.




I’m looking for 12’ AT 2.40 w/ masking to 16:9 preferably 1.0 gain 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Killroy

lukewayne said:


> I’m looking for 12’ AT 2.40 w/ masking to 16:9 preferably 1.0 gain


Masking... yeah, you be S.O.L!!!!


----------



## 996911

lukewayne said:


> Don,
> Is there anywhere to see a price book for Stewart products? I keep getting blown off by dealers because my expectations are so far off of the pricing, I'd love to know where each option is starting at so I can stop wasting dealers time asking about 50k in screen when I'm looking for 5k
> 
> Thanks





lukewayne said:


> I’m looking for 12’ AT 2.40 w/ masking to 16:9 preferably 1.0 gain
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Why don’t you give the dealer your requirements for specs and price and ask if they have anything in your price range. Or call Stewart and ask what they rec based on your room conditions, size, and budget. I spent a considerable amount of time talking to Don personally and he did just that for me. But I can tell you, 5K for what you want is not going to happen


----------



## Ericglo

Yeah, he may have to look at another manufacturer.

Have you spoken to Mike or Craig from AVScience? You probably aren't going to receive a better price quote.


----------



## Craig Peer

grendelrt said:


> Is it better to go to a dealer or Stewart themselves for samples? I sent an email about a week ago to [email protected] but never heard anything back.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


Any dealer should send you samples.


----------



## lukewayne

996911 said:


> Why don’t you give the dealer your requirements for specs and price and ask if they have anything in your price range. Or call Stewart and ask what they rec based on your room conditions, size, and budget. I spent a considerable amount of time talking to Don personally and he did just that for me. But I can tell you, 5K for what you want is not going to happen




I've had a couple dealers (multiple brands) start that process and then basically stop returning emails either before providing any information, or provide one astronomical quote and no further guidance. (Some seemed to only want to deal with design/install, add-ons etc, I'm very much a DIY builder and just want to purchase a screen)

I like to be an informed purchaser, that's why I'd like to see a price list, even if it's bloated MSRP so that I can make decisions based on numbers. I did the same thing before buying the sound door to my theater, and I ended up spending twice what I planned, but getting exactly what I wanted. It's just that with absolutely no prices listed online, it's like shopping by throwing darts. 

I do appreciate your response, but your answer is exactly what I've been getting from salesmen, "can't get what you want for that price" ... Well, what CAN i get for that price? 

Screens aren't made of magic, there isn't any reason not to list prices. Well, maximizing profit might be considered a reason. 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 996911

lukewayne said:


> I've had a couple dealers (multiple brands) start that process and then basically stop returning emails either before providing any information, or provide one astronomical quote and no further guidance. (Some seemed to only want to deal with design/install, add-ons etc, I'm very much a DIY builder and just want to purchase a screen)
> 
> I like to be an informed purchaser, that's why I'd like to see a price list, even if it's bloated MSRP so that I can make decisions based on numbers. I did the same thing before buying the sound door to my theater, and I ended up spending twice what I planned, but getting exactly what I wanted. It's just that with absolutely no prices listed online, it's like shopping by throwing darts.
> 
> I do appreciate your response, but your answer is exactly what I've been getting from salesmen, "can't get what you want for that price" ... Well, what CAN i get for that price?
> 
> Screens aren't made of magic, there isn't any reason not to list prices. Well, maximizing profit might be considered a reason.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Sorry you are getting such a lame response from your dealers. 

As I said though, what you after is not in your budget. My guess is the dealer realized that (a) you were nowhere close to budget on what you want; and (b) a DIY kinda guy which takes all the profit from a brick a mortar if you aren't buying the whole shooting match from them. It's a crappy move for dealers but they are in it to make money. 

I would take Ericglo's advice and call Mike or Craig. They will help you out and hopefully get you options in your budget. Or....as I suggested, contact Stewart directly. When I worked with Don, I was also given pricing for what I was after and of course it is what the dealer charges.


----------



## Ellebob

There is no price list because all screens are made to order and custom, there are no standard sizes except the Cima line and few quick ship products. Any Stewart dealer can do a quote with their online screen assistant for dealers, the masking screens the dealers have to call Stewart for the quote and can't be done with their screen assistant. It is shame some dealers didn't spend the time, even if they knew it was priced way out of the ball park. I'll give some ballparks based on old pricing as a guideline. It also depends which products you are considering. Something with fixed making between two aspect ratios will go for $10k to $15k depending on model, configuration and control options. Add $3k-$4k for microperf. If you are looking at something with variable 4 way masking like the Director's choice models you over $50k and add about $10k for microperf.


----------



## lukewayne

Ericglo said:


> Yeah, he may have to look at another manufacturer.
> 
> Have you spoken to Mike or Craig from AVScience? You probably aren't going to receive a better price quote.


Thanks for the suggestion, I just sent them a message on their site. Hopefully the'll be able to help me out. 

I also got a hold of Kevin at Stewart, and he's working up a quote on a screen w/o masking for me.


----------



## Pultzar

enricoclaudio said:


> I have a 92" Stewart ST100 between my speakers and I have zero acoustic reflections. I have acoustic panels on the sides of the screen so they take care of any unwanted acoustic reflection, though. If you are concerned about sound reflections, the you can get ST130G3 perforated (AKA "AT" or Acoustically Transparent).


Even with perfs it will still be highly reflective. I built some movable sound treatments which I can place in front of the screen during serious music listening.


----------



## Pultzar

lukewayne said:


> I’m looking for 12’ AT 2.40 w/ masking to 16:9 preferably 1.0 gain
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


You can save a lot if you build a masking system yourself. Masking a 2.40:1 screen isn't terribly difficult if you are okay with manual operation.


----------



## Moriie

Would the FireHawk G3 be a good screen for the new 4K projectors? Does it have a fine enough surface to preserve 4K detail?
I have a Sony 385ES and am looking at buying a used Firehawk G3.
Thanks


----------



## Killer

Moriie said:


> Would the FireHawk G3 be a good screen for the new 4K projectors? Does it have a fine enough surface to preserve 4K detail?
> I have a Sony 385ES and am looking at buying a used Firehawk G3.
> Thanks


Stewart screens are 16K+ rated and have been for decades. You are not going to have any issues resolving 4K. In fact, DPI and JVC used Stewart screens on their 8K (8K eshift for JVC) projectors at CEDIA this year.


----------



## garemz

Any news on the difference between Firehawk G4 and G5?


----------



## egrady

I've found a Stewart manual pull down screen on Ebay that is exactly what I'm looking for. But the housing is white. Since my room is a near bat cave I'm worried about reflections. Would I need to cover the housing in black velvet? It would look terrible so my wife would shoot me. 


Also, am I giving up any material performance over a fixed frame screen?


----------



## talon95

egrady said:


> I've found a Stewart manual pull down screen on Ebay that is exactly what I'm looking for. But the housing is white. Since my room is a near bat cave I'm worried about reflections. Would I need to cover the housing in black velvet? It would look terrible so my wife would shoot me.
> 
> 
> Also, am I giving up any material performance over a fixed frame screen?


Yes you'll need to cover it or maybe risk painting it. If your room is really that dark, then I doubt you'll be able to see what it is covered in. I did the same thing with my Dalite HP pull down and can barely see it even with the lights on.

You might get waves with the pull down.


----------



## Ellebob

You won't get waves with the Stewart pull down screens as they are tensioned screens. Most companies only have tensioned screens on their electric models.


----------



## Craig Peer

egrady said:


> I've found a Stewart manual pull down screen on Ebay that is exactly what I'm looking for. But the housing is white. Since my room is a near bat cave I'm worried about reflections. Would I need to cover the housing in black velvet? It would look terrible so my wife would shoot me.
> 
> 
> Also, am I giving up any material performance over a fixed frame screen?


Cover it in Protostar !


----------



## bytebuster

Don, just wanted to take the time to acknowledge your company's amazing customer service.
I am taking delivery of my new screen in the next few weeks and the customer service has been fantastic. The level of communication has been terrific. Special thanks to Lee in the Quality Assurance team.


----------



## Don Stewart

bytebuster said:


> Don, just wanted to take the time to acknowledge your company's amazing customer service.
> I am taking delivery of my new screen in the next few weeks and the customer service has been fantastic. The level of communication has been terrific. Special thanks to Lee in the Quality Assurance team.


Thank you for taking the time to make a positive comment. Normally, I only get to hear feedback if something goes South. Fortunately, that only happens once in a while. Again, thank you for posting.


----------



## sloebric

*Identify screen type*

I bought a house with dedicated theater room with Stewart Firehawk screen. Anyway to identify exactly which one? Would like to know the gain. 

Pic attached.


----------



## Killer

sloebric said:


> I bought a house with dedicated theater room with Stewart Firehawk screen. Anyway to identify exactly which one? Would like to know the gain.
> 
> Pic attached.


There may be some slight variance between generations, but its been designed at 1.1 gain.
http://stewartfilmscreen.com/screen-materials/flexible-front-projection/firehawk%C2%AE


----------



## Don Stewart

sloebric said:


> I bought a house with dedicated theater room with Stewart Firehawk screen. Anyway to identify exactly which one? Would like to know the gain.
> 
> Pic attached.


The FireHawk screen with vertical electric masking frame system you have was manufactured in 2004. Since the single chip DLP's back then put out lower lumens, the standard FH gain was 1.3 at that time.

The screen was originally purchase through our dealer, Audio Advice, located in Raleigh, NC.


Hope that helps.


Don


----------



## sloebric

Don Stewart said:


> The FireHawk screen with vertical electric masking frame system you have was manufactured in 2004. Since the single chip DLP's back then put out lower lumens, the standard FH gain was 1.3 at that time.
> 
> The screen was originally purchase through our dealer, Audio Advice, located in Raleigh, NC.
> 
> 
> Hope that helps.
> 
> 
> Don


Thanks and honored you took the time to look it up.

Funny story...didn't realize it was electric masking until a few months ago when I disconnected power from a mystery relay in the AV closet. Heard humming and took me a few on/offs to figure out it was the screen. Does the masking change aspect ratio to 4:3 on my screen given its age? Never took the time to figure it out, but now intrigued.

Any benefits to going with a 1.1 gain screen? Room is dedicated theater room with no windows, so I can get it really dark. Walls are medium brown. Epson 4010 projector.

Thanks!


----------



## Alanlee

Don Stewart said:


> The FireHawk screen with vertical electric masking frame system you have was manufactured in 2004. Since the single chip DLP's back then put out lower lumens, the standard FH gain was 1.3 at that time.
> 
> The screen was originally purchase through our dealer, Audio Advice, located in Raleigh, NC.
> 
> 
> Hope that helps.
> 
> 
> Don


Hello

I am working on a plan of action to have a projection system in my living room to be completed by the end of 2019.

My living room is far from ideal for both light and sound, but that has not stopped me from working on the sound aspect. There are large windows on two sides of the room and an open wall in the back. I have installed dark shades which helps.

It seems to me I need to walk through the following steps to get this thing done:

1.	Install electricity in the attic for the projector and the screen. I can do that myself.

2.	Move the fan

3.	Install two more ceiling speakers to complete Atmos and Auro 3-D configuration.

4.	Locate and install a screen

5.	Install a projector

I want to do each step a few months apart, so I can absorb the costs as I go. I am thinking I will choose and install the screen before the projector. So, while I am working on the electricity and the fan, I will be looking for a screen.

My ceilings are 12 feet high. It is 16 feet from the front speakers to the open wall in the rear of the living room.

Are you the guy to work with in choosing a screen?

I have yet to build a budget for this project, consequently I am not sure what to expect for the cost of a screen. I am assuming the projector I buy will be at least 4K. I have not had any experience with home 3-D, but I am guessing my grandkids will want the latest and greatest for the games they play.

I have attached some pix for your perusal. There have been a few changes to the audio system since I took these pictures, but the room is the same.

I would appreciate any advice you want to give.

Regards
Alanlee


----------



## Craig Peer

Alanlee said:


> Hello
> 
> I am working on a plan of action to have a projection system in my living room to be completed by the end of 2019.
> 
> My living room is far from ideal for both light and sound, but that has not stopped me from working on the sound aspect. There are large windows on two sides of the room and an open wall in the back. I have installed dark shades which helps.
> 
> It seems to me I need to walk through the following steps to get this thing done:
> 
> 1.	Install electricity in the attic for the projector and the screen. I can do that myself.
> 
> 2.	Move the fan
> 
> 3.	Install two more ceiling speakers to complete Atmos and Auro 3-D configuration.
> 
> 4.	Locate and install a screen
> 
> 5.	Install a projector
> 
> I want to do each step a few months apart, so I can absorb the costs as I go. I am thinking I will choose and install the screen before the projector. So, while I am working on the electricity and the fan, I will be looking for a screen.
> 
> My ceilings are 12 feet high. It is 16 feet from the front speakers to the open wall in the rear of the living room.
> 
> Are you the guy to work with in choosing a screen?
> 
> I have yet to build a budget for this project, consequently I am not sure what to expect for the cost of a screen. I am assuming the projector I buy will be at least 4K. I have not had any experience with home 3-D, but I am guessing my grandkids will want the latest and greatest for the games they play.
> 
> I have attached some pix for your perusal. There have been a few changes to the audio system since I took these pictures, but the room is the same.
> 
> I would appreciate any advice you want to give.
> 
> Regards
> Alanlee


Where are you in Northern CA ( I forget ) ? I'm in the Sacramento area.


----------



## Alanlee

Craig Peer said:


> Where are you in Northern CA ( I forget ) ? I'm in the Sacramento area.


See PM


----------



## dgkula

Hi Everyone,

I would like to get some help understanding what to take away from what I'm seeing with screen samples of ST100, Neve and ST130.

I have a dedicated, light-controlled room with no windows. The room is 14W x 12D x 7H. The projector (JVC RS620, 645H on bulb) is ceiling mounted 10' from the screen on 6" mounting pole and I have a row of 4 seats right below the projector with eye distance about 9.5' from the screen. Current screen is a 92" elite cinewhite screen rated by mfg at 1.1 gain. I have 2 x 3 velvet panels on the ceiling above the screen, velvet on speakers, black shag rug on the floor, and velvet curtains to the left and right side of the screen (especially to the right of the screen where there is a wall; entry door is to left of the sceeen so no reflections there). 

I get plenty of brightness and have headroom for SDR (Normal picture mode with LOW lamp, iris at -9; THX picture mode with LOW lamp, iris at -6) and HDR (HIGH lamp, iris 0) with Manni's Dolby Cinema Emulation (107 nits) 1000 nit / 4000 nit curves. Even Netflix HDR looks good (ugh!).

I received 8' x 11" samples of ST100, Neve and ST130 from Craig and taped them to my screen in that order. I am a little confused by what I'm seeing so am asking for help. At the low end (darker images) the four materials provide a similar picture. As the image brightness increases (e.g. moving from black to brown to blue to white) the samples show brighter colors, with the ST100 showing more detail in mid-brightness images. However at the brighter end of the spectrum (e.g. blue sky image below), I am seeing colors change substantially with the higher gain material. This is evident specifically in the last picture. Note the color of the sky as light blue on the right side (ST130). Maybe this is because my proj is mounted right at the minimum throw for the ST130?

In my situation should I not consider the ST130 based on this brighter color shifting? My only question about the ST100 is that I am planning to go from a 92" screen to a 100" screen (18% increase in area) and while my 92" is bright enough for HDR specifically, I don't know if the 100" 1.0 screen will be bright enough. I would hate to get the ST100, find out it isn't bright enough and then not have an option to buy the ST130 material for the frame. 

Based on a discussion with Craig I had decided on the ST130 conceptually prior to receiving the samples. Would appreciate input.


----------



## Craig Peer

dgkula said:


> Hi Everyone,
> 
> I would like to get some help understanding what to take away from what I'm seeing with screen samples of ST100, Neve and ST130.
> 
> I have a dedicated, light-controlled room with no windows. The room is 14W x 12D x 7H. The projector (JVC RS620, 645H on bulb) is ceiling mounted 10' from the screen on 6" mounting pole and I have a row of 4 seats right below the projector with eye distance about 9.5' from the screen. Current screen is a 92" elite cinewhite screen rated by mfg at 1.1 gain. I have 2 x 3 velvet panels on the ceiling above the screen, velvet on speakers, black shag rug on the floor, and velvet curtains to the left and right side of the screen (especially to the right of the screen where there is a wall; entry door is to left of the sceeen so no reflections there).
> 
> I get plenty of brightness and have headroom for SDR (Normal picture mode with LOW lamp, iris at -9; THX picture mode with LOW lamp, iris at -6) and HDR (HIGH lamp, iris 0) with Manni's Dolby Cinema Emulation (107 nits) 1000 nit / 4000 nit curves. Even Netflix HDR looks good (ugh!).
> 
> I received 8' x 11" samples of ST100, Neve and ST130 from Craig and taped them to my screen in that order. I am a little confused by what I'm seeing so am asking for help. At the low end (darker images) the four materials provide a similar picture. As the image brightness increases (e.g. moving from black to brown to blue to white) the samples show brighter colors, with the ST100 showing more detail in mid-brightness images. However at the brighter end of the spectrum (e.g. blue sky image below), I am seeing colors change substantially with the higher gain material. This is evident specifically in the last picture. Note the color of the sky as light blue on the right side (ST130). Maybe this is because my proj is mounted right at the minimum throw for the ST130?
> 
> In my situation should I not consider the ST130 based on this brighter color shifting? My only question about the ST100 is that I am planning to go from a 92" screen to a 100" screen (18% increase in area) and while my 92" is bright enough for HDR specifically, I don't know if the 100" 1.0 screen will be bright enough. I would hate to get the ST100, find out it isn't bright enough and then not have an option to buy the ST130 material for the frame.
> 
> Based on a discussion with Craig I had decided on the ST130 conceptually prior to receiving the samples. Would appreciate input.


Remember that you will want to re-calibrate your projector with the new screen material. So some of the differences you see vs your current screen might change due to the new calibration.


----------



## Don Stewart

dgkula said:


> Hi Everyone,
> 
> I would like to get some help understanding what to take away from what I'm seeing with screen samples of ST100, Neve and ST130.
> 
> I have a dedicated, light-controlled room with no windows. The room is 14W x 12D x 7H. The projector (JVC RS620, 645H on bulb) is ceiling mounted 10' from the screen on 6" mounting pole and I have a row of 4 seats right below the projector with eye distance about 9.5' from the screen. Current screen is a 92" elite cinewhite screen rated by mfg at 1.1 gain. I have 2 x 3 velvet panels on the ceiling above the screen, velvet on speakers, black shag rug on the floor, and velvet curtains to the left and right side of the screen (especially to the right of the screen where there is a wall; entry door is to left of the sceeen so no reflections there).
> 
> I get plenty of brightness and have headroom for SDR (Normal picture mode with LOW lamp, iris at -9; THX picture mode with LOW lamp, iris at -6) and HDR (HIGH lamp, iris 0) with Manni's Dolby Cinema Emulation (107 nits) 1000 nit / 4000 nit curves. Even Netflix HDR looks good (ugh!).
> 
> I received 8' x 11" samples of ST100, Neve and ST130 from Craig and taped them to my screen in that order. I am a little confused by what I'm seeing so am asking for help. At the low end (darker images) the four materials provide a similar picture. As the image brightness increases (e.g. moving from black to brown to blue to white) the samples show brighter colors, with the ST100 showing more detail in mid-brightness images. However at the brighter end of the spectrum (e.g. blue sky image below), I am seeing colors change substantially with the higher gain material. This is evident specifically in the last picture. Note the color of the sky as light blue on the right side (ST130). Maybe this is because my proj is mounted right at the minimum throw for the ST130?
> 
> In my situation should I not consider the ST130 based on this brighter color shifting? My only question about the ST100 is that I am planning to go from a 92" screen to a 100" screen (18% increase in area) and while my 92" is bright enough for HDR specifically, I don't know if the 100" 1.0 screen will be bright enough. I would hate to get the ST100, find out it isn't bright enough and then not have an option to buy the ST130 material for the frame.
> 
> Based on a discussion with Craig I had decided on the ST130 conceptually prior to receiving the samples. Would appreciate input.


Looking at the StudioTek 100 sample on the far left, (which has a true honest gain of 1.0) is quite a bit brighter than your existing screen which is published with a gain of 1.1. I would estimate from photos that your existing screen has a gain in the neighborhood of 0.85 or so. Looking at the StudioTek 130 on the far right side is not what we traditional call color shift. What you are witnessing is a much brighter image luminance, approximately 40% brighter than the existing screen surrounding the sample. As Graig mentioned above, after installing any new screen material, it pays to re-calibrate the PJ.



Best,
Don


----------



## Ellebob

Go with the 100" ST100! Your projector is bright enough and compared to your current screen will still be the same brightness or possibly brighter at 100". The ST100 is a reference screen that gives the best picture quality but it needs a reference environment to get the most out of it. I would normally only recommend it in a bat cave environment that has all black walls, ceiling, etc. with no ambient light. Your set up is pretty close to that bat cave and I would go for it. Any gain screen where you try to direct more light to the viewers is going to have some artifacts and not show as much definition. This is not a criticism of Stewart's or any other manufacturer's screen with gain, it is simply the laws of physics in redirecting light. Actually, I think Stewart does an excellent job with their screen materials, some of the best, if not the best in the industry. If you have the environment to use a reference screen, go for it! You will never regret it and that screen will last for many projectors. And if trends continue projectors will continue to get brighter and brighter so when you upgrade that 620 you'll enjoy HDR even more in the future.

As a side not I find screen samples tough to tell the real differences, you simply don't get the whole picture. Like the brighter ST130 sample where the color looks off but if the whole screen was brighter and not just the sample you would get a different perspective. When you see two screens side by side or the image at least divided between two halves of the screen what seemed like little differences in samples are now bigger differences. Samples are also tough to tell uniformity especially for gain screens. Another poster just did a comparison where he moved the screen samples to different areas of the screen to see how much different it is at the side of the screen. While this gives some idea of the difference from the middle to the sides it doesn't how it transitions and whether hot spotting would be a problem or not.


----------



## Don Stewart

Ellebob said:


> Go with the 100" ST100! Your projector is bright enough and compared to your current screen will still be the same brightness or possibly brighter at 100". The ST100 is a reference screen that gives the best picture quality but it needs a reference environment to get the most out of it. I would normally only recommend it in a bat cave environment that has all black walls, ceiling, etc. with no ambient light. Your set up is pretty close to that bat cave and I would go for it. Any gain screen where you try to direct more light to the viewers is going to have some artifacts and not show as much definition. This is not a criticism of Stewart's or any other manufacturer's screen with gain, it is simply the laws of physics in redirecting light. Actually, I think Stewart does an excellent job with their screen materials, some of the best, if not the best in the industry. If you have the environment to use a reference screen, go for it! You will never regret it and that screen will last for many projectors. And if trends continue projectors will continue to get brighter and brighter so when you upgrade that 620 you'll enjoy HDR even more in the future.
> * As a side not I find screen samples tough to tell the real differences, you simply don't get the whole picture. Like the brighter ST130 sample where the color looks off but if the whole screen was brighter and not just the sample you would get a different perspective. When you see two screens side by side or the image at least divided between two halves of the screen what seemed like little differences in samples are now bigger differences. Samples are also tough to tell uniformity especially for gain screens. Another poster just did a comparison where he moved the screen samples to different areas of the screen to see how much different it is at the side of the screen. While this gives some idea of the difference from the middle to the sides it doesn't how it transitions and whether hot spotting would be a problem or not*.



Just wanted to say that your answer above is better than I could have articulated. It is a pleasure to read your post, plus some other members in this forum, who understand the physics of screens plus how the human eye and brain interact with projected images. There are some forum members here who better understand screens than some professionals who are actually in the projection screen industry. 

Thank you and others for posting excellent technical advice here.


----------



## dgkula

Thanks for the feedback - ST100 it is.


----------



## tnaik4

Hi guys, i m finally deciding to upgrade to a well known high quality screen but i need your help deciding whay to get.

First i live in the middle east so i dont have a way to test the screen material or to see it in person, do these expensive screens ( st100, st130, cima neve ) looks vastly superior to the budget ones?

I have carl's flexiwhite 135" 16:9 1.1gain screen.
My 2 projectors are Jvc x5900 and Benq Lk970 in a dedicated room covered mostly in black velvet, projectors are on a shelf about 14feet away from the screen and the shelf is at the same level of the top of the screen.
I want to know what is the best in my situation , if it ll make a big difference in picture quality, sine i m shipping it overseas i have to be absolutely sure which one to get.

Thanks a lot


----------



## Alex Hindman

So I have decided on the vast majority of my new HT setup. The final piece is the Stewart Screen. Based on the following info, which screen material would you all recommend?

1. 14x11 room
2. room/ceiling painted dark gray
3. carpeted
4. Windows will have blackout blinds so I will be able to 100% light control
5. Will want to have friends over to watch games watch easy comedies with my wife with the lights on (only 2 bucket lights in the room

Sorry to interject with noob stuff but any insight would be great.


----------



## 996911

Alex Hindman said:


> So I have decided on the vast majority of my new HT setup. The final piece is the Stewart Screen. Based on the following info, which screen material would you all recommend?
> 
> 1. 14x11 room
> 2. room/ceiling painted dark gray
> 3. carpeted
> 4. Windows will have blackout blinds so I will be able to 100% light control
> 5. Will want to have friends over to watch games watch easy comedies with my wife with the lights on (only 2 bucket lights in the room
> 
> Sorry to interject with noob stuff but any insight would be great.


I have both the Firehawk (120" 1.78) and the ST130 (152" 2.35). The Firehawk performs better when I have some light on in the room to watch football games, TV shows, etc., but not as sharp a picture in dark conditions compared to the ST130. The ST130 completely knocks it out of the park when the lights are down ultra low (or off) as we primarily use that for movies, Netflix, etc. But make no mistake, if there is any light in the room, it degrades the picture very quickly as the light in the room increases. 

Full disclosure, the ST130 is in our custom theatre built for movies when we designed the home. The Firehawk was moved to a gaming/media room on another floor. The Firehawk was first in the theatre and had a great picture for sports and TV but I was so wanting more when watching movies, which is what the room was designed for. So, the Firehawk moved to another location in the home and the ST130 was installed in the theatre and the picture is amazing and everything I could hope for in a theatre for watching movies. If we watch something other than movies in the theatre (like TV shows) we just watch at the same lighting we have for movies or very close to it.


----------



## Erod

Has anyone built felt borders for a ST130 screen to eliminate the black bars on a 16:9 screen? 

I so wish this was an item available for purchase.


----------



## Scott MS

I have a 123" Stewart Cima Tiburon (original version) that has a 0.95 gain and is slightly gray. I'm looking to move to a larger screen with a Sony VPL-VW600ES projector. Since I bought my Tiburon I've improved the room in several aspect to make it more of a darkened theater. I've installed motorized blackout shades on the two windows and re-painted the ceiling a dark base color and the walls a medium base color to eliminate light reflections. I feel like I've taken appropriate steps to move up to a larger 140-145" StudioTek 100 screen.

One question I have for this group. I realize that the StudioTek 100 screen has a 1.0 gain and only 15% ambient light rejection. I can't stand the sparkles of higher gain screens and I think the StudioTek 100 would be the best screen for me so I'm willing to improve the room to make it work.

*When we talk about the StudioTek 100 and a "bat cave", does the room have to really be 100% dark? * I have a very little bit of light that can enter the room around the edges of the shades (which can be further reduced with side rails), and I tend to turn on some recessed wall washing LEDs at night to give the room a little light when watching.


----------



## Don Stewart

Scott MS said:


> I have a 123" Stewart Cima Tiburon (original version) that has a 0.95 gain and is slightly gray. I'm looking to move to a larger screen with a Sony VPL-VW600ES projector. Since I bought my Tiburon I've improved the room in several aspect to make it more of a darkened theater. I've installed motorized blackout shades on the two windows and re-painted the ceiling a dark base color and the walls a medium base color to eliminate light reflections. I feel like I've taken appropriate steps to move up to a larger 140-145" StudioTek 100 screen.
> 
> One question I have for this group. I realize that the StudioTek 100 screen has a 1.0 gain and only 15% ambient light rejection. I can't stand the sparkles of higher gain screens and I think the StudioTek 100 would be the best screen for me so I'm willing to improve the room to make it work.
> 
> *When we talk about the StudioTek 100 and a "bat cave", does the room have to really be 100% dark? * I have a very little bit of light that can enter the room around the edges of the shades (which can be further reduced with side rails), and I tend to turn on some recessed wall washing LEDs at night to give the room a little light when watching.


From your description I think you are fine. Even the professional Studio Review Rooms and post production facilities are not full bat caves.


----------



## Ericglo

From those pictures, it looks like the screens are recessed, which should help with light control. Do you recommend to recess a 100? If one doesn't have a lot of off axis viewing than it should not be an issue.


----------



## Craig Peer

Erod said:


> Has anyone built felt borders for a ST130 screen to eliminate the black bars on a 16:9 screen?
> 
> *I so wish this was an item available for purchase*.


I asked Don to think about making this. Maybe some day ! Manual masking panels would be nice !


----------



## golden78

how do you get a sample of the st100? do you order it online?


----------



## Craig Peer

golden78 said:


> how do you get a sample of the st100? do you order it online?


Send me an email or PM - I have some.


----------



## golden78

Is there a electric tensioned 2:35.1 or 2:40.1 screen in the Stewart neve Cima material? If so Anyone have one ?


----------



## Ellebob

The Cima line comes in 2.35 up to 153" diagonal. I've installed the Cima line and have never had any problems. Except for the Studiotek 100 material the Neve is my favorite material of all manufacturers and really a tremendous value for the performance it gives. Both the Cima screen materials are a great value. Of course you want to get the best screen material for your environment. For white screens I like Neve better than the Studiotek 130, of course if you need the added brightness of the 130 that is a understandable and it is still excellent. I think Craig has a Cima Neve electric in 2.35.


----------



## Craig Peer

Ellebob said:


> The Cima line comes in 2.35 up to 153" diagonal. I've installed the Cima line and have never had any problems. Except for the Studiotek 100 material the Neve is my favorite material of all manufacturers and really a tremendous value for the performance it gives. Both the Cima screen materials are a great value. Of course you want to get the best screen material for your environment. For white screens I like Neve better than the Studiotek 130, of course if you need the added brightness of the 130 that is a understandable and it is still excellent. I think Craig has a Cima Neve electric in 2.35.


Actually, I have a 123" 1.78:1 Cima Neve and a 128"diagonal 2.35:1 StudioTek 130. I do comparisons weekly ( if not daily ). 




























Two screens might be crazy, but it's a fine madness !


----------



## golden78

@Craig Peer ,
ever have issue with any wrinkles/waves in the cima or studiotek 130 screen?


----------



## Craig Peer

golden78 said:


> @Craig Peer ,
> ever have issue with any wrinkles/waves in the cima or studiotek 130 screen?


No. And I've had mine over 5 years. Very smooth and flat.


----------



## Erod

golden78 said:


> @Craig Peer ,
> ever have issue with any wrinkles/waves in the cima or studiotek 130 screen?


My ST130 looks exactly the same as it did when it was installed 11 years ago.


----------



## golden78

Craig Peer said:


> golden78 said:
> 
> 
> 
> @Craig Peer ,
> ever have issue with any wrinkles/waves in the cima or studiotek 130 screen?
> 
> 
> 
> No. And I've had mine over 5 years. Very smooth and flat.
Click to expand...

Oh man that's tempting.. I wonder if I could cross something off my kids xmas list to santa and change it to 120" stewart cima scope screen


----------



## Scott MS

This may be a question for Don Stewart because I can't seem to find too many details anywhere.

I have one of the original Cima Tiburon screens (0.95 gain) and I love it. There is a new Cima Tiburon G2 with a 0.80 gain. I'm not sure what specifically changed, but from photos the new G2 looks to have a darker gray screen. Not sure if the screen reflective coating changed at all. 

The original Cima Tiburon has a very mild gain coating. Not anywhere near as sparkly as the StudioTek 130 or FireHawk I reviewed with them.


----------



## dgkula

Wanted to thank everyone for input on this thread. Just received and installed a new 100" 16:9 ST100 luxus screenwall screen to replace my 92" Elite Cinewhite screen. Very happy with the image in both SDR and HDR with custom curves. ChadB coming to celebrate my JVC RS620 in June 2019. Appreciate the input and support during this decision.


----------



## Venger99

Really pleased with my 330 cm wide studiotek 130 screen. 
Screen was easy to assemble, but stressful snapping on as it felt vulnerable!
Just remember to allow extra height clearance to lift screen up onto the wall bars.
In a black painted room the contrast is excellent and my epson 9100 projector never looked better. Watching 3d hardly seems dimmer and is also outstanding. 
Plan to put black velvet all round the room for an extra tweak.
Family all happy.


----------



## dgkula

Very glad I went from 92” to 100” for my 9.5 foot viewing distance. Really makes a difference!


----------



## ScottieBoysName

How and what do you clean your screen with? I make sure we all never even touch the thing, but due to me velveting the walls among other projects going on in the room it appears to have some dust/material on it. I have a Stewart ST130. 

The Stewart manual suggests a “drafting” brush - which it says I can get at an office supply store. 

Any thoughts or suggestions?


----------



## 996911

ScottieBoysName said:


> How and what do you clean your screen with? I make sure we all never even touch the thing, but due to me velveting the walls among other projects going on in the room it appears to have some dust/material on it. I have a Stewart ST130.
> 
> The Stewart manual suggests a “drafting” brush - which it says I can get at an office supply store.
> 
> Any thoughts or suggestions?


I use this on my ST130. I think it was suggested here a few pages ago and works great.


----------



## ScottieBoysName

996911 said:


> I use this on my ST130. I think it was suggested here a few pages ago and works great.




Thank you!


----------



## jinrawke

Been thinking about finally grabbing up one of the Stewart screens. Are there any recommended dealers on the forums that sell the screens? Thanks!


----------



## ScottieBoysName

jinrawke said:


> Been thinking about finally grabbing up one of the Stewart screens. Are there any recommended dealers on the forums that sell the screens? Thanks!



Mike at AVScience has always been good to me.


----------



## dgkula

FYI Don you were right about the gain of the Elite Cinewhite being less than the 1.1 they publish. I have had to turn down my lamp to low with my ST100 screen on HDR video as my custom curves were way too bright with the new screen. I am getting 45fL on the screen with lamp on high and iris all the way open which allows for more than enough brightness for great HDR! My "Netflix Dark HDR curve" (e.g. Ozark, Haunting of Hill House) now pops - my wife noticed yesterday evening watching Sabrina. A cell phone snip from Blue Planet 2:


----------



## Don Stewart

dgkula said:


> FYI Don you were right about the gain of the Elite Cinewhite being less than the 1.1 they publish. I have had to turn down my lamp to low with my ST100 screen on HDR video as my custom curves were way too bright with the new screen. I am getting 45fL on the screen with lamp on high and iris all the way open which allows for more than enough brightness for great HDR! My "Netflix Dark HDR curve" (e.g. Ozark, Haunting of Hill House) now pops - my wife noticed yesterday evening watching Sabrina. A cell phone snip from Blue Planet 2:


I love it when I hear even the wife notices a big difference.

Thanks you for your purchase.


Best Regards
and Happy New Year.

Don


----------



## Scott MS

Hey Don, would you happen to know what changed between the original Cima Tiburon screens (0.95 gain) and the new Cima Tiburon G2 with a 0.80 gain? Seems like a slightly darker screen from the photos but have not seen both side to side. I have the original Cima Tiburon.


----------



## Don Stewart

Scott MS said:


> Hey Don, would you happen to know what changed between the original Cima Tiburon screens (0.95 gain) and the new Cima Tiburon G2 with a 0.80 gain? Seems like a slightly darker screen from the photos but have not seen both side to side. I have the original Cima Tiburon.


Hi Scott,


Yes, Tiburon G2 is a darker neutral gray than the G1. When the original product was introduced, it was a very light gray at .95 gain. Later, it was felt by our dealers that the original Tiburon gain was too close to the white Cima Neve so its gray shade was darkened and gain was lowered to .8


Best Regards,
Don


----------



## jsil

I found a used Stewart Luxus G3 fixed projector screen and was wondering if this is a step up from my Carada CCW screen. My projector is a JVC X590R set up in a family room with dark ceiling and walls.


----------



## alexccmeister

Craig Peer said:


> Actually, I have a 123" 1.78:1 Cima Neve and a 128"diagonal 2.35:1 StudioTek 130. I do comparisons weekly ( if not daily ).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Two screens might be crazy, but it's a fine madness !


Nice setup. How do you go from 16:9 to the 2.35:1 aspect ratio? The latter being much bigger? Your projector auto adjust?


----------



## Killer

jsil said:


> I found a used Stewart Luxus G3 fixed projector screen and was wondering if this is a step up from my Carada CCW screen. My projector is a JVC X590R set up in a family room with dark ceiling and walls.



Short answer, YES!
But don't take my word for it, @enricoclaudio a couple of pages before this swapped his Carada for a ST100 and loves it.


----------



## Craig Peer

alexccmeister said:


> Nice setup. How do you go from 16:9 to the 2.35:1 aspect ratio? The latter being much bigger? Your projector auto adjust?


Lens memory - lots of projectors do that these days !


----------



## groggrog

ScottieBoysName said:


> Thank you!


Wondering if same brush would be good for a Stewart Phantom HALR. I have visible dirty areas after installation and would like to clean them up without risking my investment. Anyone know?


----------



## jsil

So I read some reviews and they say that the Stewart Luxus G3 screen material has sparkling. People who have this material does it sparkle on bright scenes?


----------



## GrvChild

Can’t decide between the ST100 or ST130, looking for recommendations. 

Projector will be the new JVC NX7 in a light controlled room (no windows, dark walls and ceiling) mounted around 16.5 feet from the screen (can go back further if required as room is 16.5 ft wide by 22 ft deep by 9ft). Looking at going 2.35 and a 140” diagonal. Main seating position is about 13 ft from the screen. 

My concern with the ST100 is that it will not be bright enough (especially for HDR) so I think I should go ST130 but I would prefer ST100 if I can get enough brightness.

Any thoughts / input would be much appreciated.


----------



## dgkula

GrvChild said:


> Can’t decide between the ST100 or ST130, looking for recommendations.
> 
> Projector will be the new JVC NX7 in a light controlled room (no windows, dark walls and ceiling) mounted around 16.5 feet from the screen (can go back further if required as room is 16.5 ft wide by 22 ft deep by 9ft). Looking at going 2.35 and a 140” diagonal. Main seating position is about 13 ft from the screen.
> 
> My concern with the ST100 is that it will not be bright enough (especially for HDR) so I think I should go ST130 but I would prefer ST100 if I can get enough brightness.
> 
> Any thoughts / input would be much appreciated.


I had similar questions about my setup. I was worried abought brightness for HDR. After getting mixed opinions from dealers and posters on the forums, I called Stewart using the toll free number and went with their recommendation. They knew my projector's rated output and helped me choose the right material for my setup. I am extremely happy with the result.


----------



## Craig Peer

jsil said:


> So I read some reviews and they say that the Stewart Luxus G3 screen material has sparkling. People who have this material does it sparkle on bright scenes?


I don't see sparkle myself, even at 47 foot lamberts watching HDR. However, get samples and check it out yourself. Send me a PM - I have some extra samples, if you want.


----------



## Craig Peer

GrvChild said:


> Can’t decide between the ST100 or ST130, looking for recommendations.
> 
> Projector will be the new JVC NX7 in a light controlled room (no windows, dark walls and ceiling) mounted around 16.5 feet from the screen (can go back further if required as room is 16.5 ft wide by 22 ft deep by 9ft). Looking at going 2.35 and a 140” diagonal. Main seating position is about 13 ft from the screen.
> 
> My concern with the ST100 is that it will not be bright enough (especially for HDR) so I think I should go ST130 but I would prefer ST100 if I can get enough brightness.
> 
> Any thoughts / input would be much appreciated.


I love the extra brightness and " punch " the StudioTek 130 gives for HDR. But, same thing - get samples. PM me - I have several samples laying around - Cima Neve too. Be glad to send them.


----------



## Craig Peer

4K HDR movies just look really life like in my opinion on the StudioTek 130.


----------



## Thunderhank

*Looking to get a Stewart Screen*

Attached some images of my setup (just projecting on a wall currently), fully light controlled room. JVC x990 projector. Will be sitting 12''13' back...looking to go with as much screen as I can fit on the wall, so probably the near zero boarder on 2:35:1 will get be about 145" diagonal. I have not mounted projector yet, it will go either on ceiling or on shelf in back of room...won't mount it till I get the screen in. Want to watch moves, play games, and watch some TV.

Based on everything I've read, sounds like I have a setup that can take advantage of the Studiotek 100 material. I think, based on what I'm seeing....my next step is to just get some samples (Studiotek 100, 130, and maybe the firehawk/greyhawk)

I'm new to all this so been doing a lot of reading. Any advice or confirmation that "Yes, you should look at some samples to see what you like" would help. I'm also open to any and all advice.

Regards,

--Jason


----------



## spinn74

Craig Peer said:


> 4K HDR movies just look really life like in my opinion on the StudioTek 130.


That looks amazing


----------



## Craig Peer

Thunderhank said:


> Attached some images of my setup (just projecting on a wall currently), fully light controlled room. JVC x990 projector. Will be sitting 12''13' back...looking to go with as much screen as I can fit on the wall, so probably the near zero boarder on 2:35:1 will get be about 145" diagonal. I have not mounted projector yet, it will go either on ceiling or on shelf in back of room...won't mount it till I get the screen in. Want to watch moves, play games, and watch some TV.
> 
> Based on everything I've read, sounds like I have a setup that can take advantage of the Studiotek 100 material. I think, based on what I'm seeing....my next step is to just get some samples (Studiotek 100, 130, and maybe the firehawk/greyhawk)
> 
> I'm new to all this so been doing a lot of reading. Any advice or confirmation that "Yes, you should look at some samples to see what you like" would help. I'm also open to any and all advice.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> --Jason


I'd check out the ST100, ST130 and Cima Neve ( although Cima Neve only comes in 138" or 153" diagonal 2.35:1 ).


----------



## Killer

spinn74 said:


> That looks amazing


Last year, JVC had their RS4500 and Stewart StudioTek 130 at CES in a LARGE screen, using clips from a studio movie server, BEST FREAKING PICTURE I HAD EVER SEEN!!! And here Craig has the same set up.... minus the studios server.. lol..... #jealous


----------



## Ericglo

Craig had it first.


----------



## Craig Peer

Killer said:


> Last year, JVC had their RS4500 and Stewart StudioTek 130 at CES in a LARGE screen, using clips from a studio movie server, BEST FREAKING PICTURE I HAD EVER SEEN!!! And here Craig has the same set up.... minus the studios server.. lol..... #jealous


I've had mine for 2 years this Feb. I'm watching " The Equalizer 2 " on 4k Blu-ray tonite with friends in fact !


----------



## Chris Kane

Around 2004 I received my first Stewart Screen - a GrayHawk - and the only reason I've pulled it down is due to my new ST130 (Thanks Mike!). The first screen was meticulously packaged and the same goes today!

ck


----------



## Scott MS

Question for the screen experts. I have been reviewing two screens samples - ST100 and Cima Neve. Both are fairly close, but I can clearly see that the ST100 is a neutral as you can get in terms of screen gain while the Cima Neve has a very, very slight coating for gain. With the ST100 as a 1.0 gain screen and the Cima Neve as a 1.1 gain screen, when I review samples, I find the Neve to not only be slightly brighter, but the blacks look a little blacker. Does the higher contrast between light and dark potentially create darker blacks? Is this just a result of the higher gain?


----------



## Scott MS

spinn74 said:


> That looks amazing


It does. I need to get into HDR. Still running a very reliable and incredible Sony VPL-VW600ES I picked up 5 years ago.


----------



## Craig Peer

Chris Kane said:


> Around 2004 I received my first Stewart Screen - a GrayHawk - and the only reason I've pulled it down is due to my new ST130 (Thanks Mike!). The first screen was meticulously packaged and the same goes today!
> 
> ck


You've made the transition from a gray to a white screen too, just like I did. One of the best upgrades I've done in a long slow never ending theater upgrade !


----------



## Craig Peer

Scott MS said:


> Question for the screen experts. I have been reviewing two screens samples - ST100 and Cima Neve. Both are fairly close, but I can clearly see that the ST100 is a neutral as you can get in terms of screen gain while the Cima Neve has a very, very slight coating for gain. With the ST100 as a 1.0 gain screen and the Cima Neve as a 1.1 gain screen, when I review samples, I find the Neve to not only be slightly brighter, but the blacks look a little blacker. Does the higher contrast between light and dark potentially create darker blacks? Is this just a result of the higher gain?


Interesting observation. Maybe Don can chime in. Could be a result of a brighter picture.


----------



## dgkula

Chris Kane said:


> Around 2004 I received my first Stewart Screen - a GrayHawk - and the only reason I've pulled it down is due to my new ST130 (Thanks Mike!). The first screen was meticulously packaged and the same goes today!
> 
> ck


I received my new ST100 last month and it was possibly the best packed box i opened in 2018. Really well done, and made in the USA!


----------



## ScottieBoysName

dgkula said:


> I received my new ST100 last month and it was possibly the best packed box i opened in 2018. Really well done, and made in the USA!




I got my ST130 from AVScience - it was packed like a vault!


----------



## Don Stewart

Scott MS said:


> Question for the screen experts. I have been reviewing two screens samples - ST100 and Cima Neve. Both are fairly close, but I can clearly see that the ST100 is a neutral as you can get in terms of screen gain while the Cima Neve has a very, very slight coating for gain. With the ST100 as a 1.0 gain screen and the Cima Neve as a 1.1 gain screen, when I review samples, I find the Neve to not only be slightly brighter, but the blacks look a little blacker. Does the higher contrast between light and dark potentially create darker blacks? Is this just a result of the higher gain?


Hi Scott,
Since I was not present when you compared samples and do not know the configuration of your room, (wall, ceiling colors, etc) I can only speculate why you are witnessing increased black levels on the Neve sample.
StudioTek 100 is a true near perfect Lamberian diffusion screen which distributes light equally in all direction in both the vertical and horizontal axis. It also excepts ambient light, wall and ceiling reflections equally from all angles and will distribute said light back to the viewing area. The Cima Neve is a very slight angular reflective screen and has a half gain luminance out at 80 degrees off screen axis. Therefore, it distributes less light to the side walls and ceiling. Also, because of its angular reflectivity, light striking the screen from extreme off axis angles is distributed back into the viewing area at a much lower level. See attached screen gain graphs for comparison of materials. Hope that helps.


----------



## Wastingmytime

Questions for the experts here. I was recommended to check these screens out but not sure which one would be best for me or where to start. My room size is 23’Lx12’Wx9’H. I haven’t bought the projector yet but will likely be going with JVC RS540 or maybe a RS1000 if I can find a good deal. With the narrow width I will likely need acoustically transparent screen to be able to enjoy a larger screen for the more distant viewing, rear seats at about 18’ and front at 12’. I do like a little bit of ambient light but also understand it could fade the blacks, etc. I don’t have to have it and will plan to keep things dark. What screens should I be looking at? Thanks!


----------



## Th601

ScottieBoysName said:


> I got my ST130 from AVScience - it was packed like a vault!




Is the ST130 an AT screen? I’m looking for a screen and I heard great things about this one. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ScottieBoysName

Th601 said:


> Is the ST130 an AT screen? I’m looking for a screen and I heard great things about this one.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk




Nadda. Non-AT. From what I’ve heard the ST130 is basically the industry standard in screens.


----------



## Scott MS

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Scott,
> Since I was not present when you compared samples and do not know the configuration of your room, (wall, ceiling colors, etc) I can only speculate why you are witnessing increased black levels on the Neve sample.
> StudioTek 100 is a true near perfect Lamberian diffusion screen which distributes light equally in all direction in both the vertical and horizontal axis. It also excepts ambient light, wall and ceiling reflections equally from all angles and will distribute said light back to the viewing area. The Cima Neve is a very slight angular reflective screen and has a half gain luminance out at 80 degrees off screen axis. Therefore, it distributes less light to the side walls and ceiling. Also, because of its angular reflectivity, light striking the screen from extreme off axis angles is distributed back into the viewing area at a much lower level. See attached screen gain graphs for comparison of materials. Hope that helps.


Thanks Don. That's very helpful. The graphs and information you presented would make it also appear that the Cima Neve would do a slightly better job handling ambient light from the sides. Both are fantastic materials, just trying to figure out the size at this point.


----------



## Scott MS

Craig Peer said:


> You've made the transition from a gray to a white screen too, just like I did. One of the best upgrades I've done in a long slow never ending theater upgrade !


Same thing I am doing now! Gray to white screen.


----------



## Scott MS

Another question for the group. What is your seating distance from your screen in terms of screen WIDTH? I saw on Projector Central they recommend 1.5x as seating distance, with a range of 1.2x to 1.8x.

I'm currently sitting 11'3" from a 123" Cima Tiburon which is 107.2" wide. My viewing distance is 1.26x screen width. What's yours?


----------



## Don Stewart

Th601 said:


> Is the ST130 an AT screen? I’m looking for a screen and I heard great things about this one.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


All Stewart front projection screens are available with an AT option. We do our own THX certified micro-perfing in house on our own machine so we have compete control over the perforation process.


----------



## Craig Peer

Scott MS said:


> Another question for the group. What is your seating distance from your screen in terms of screen WIDTH? I saw on Projector Central they recommend 1.5x as seating distance, with a range of 1.2x to 1.8x.
> 
> I'm currently sitting 11'3" from a 123" Cima Tiburon which is 107.2" wide. My viewing distance is 1.26x screen width. What's yours?


I have two screens. My wife would prefer we didn't sit closer, so this is where we are at currently - 

Stewart Luxus Model A ElectriScreen, StudioTek 130 G3 material - 50.2 x 118 x 128.2 diagonal, 2.35:1 aspect ratio - 108" viewing distance - .915 screen widths.

Stewart Luxus Model A ElectriScreen, Neve 1.1 material – 59.5 x 106 x 122 diagonal - 1.78:1 aspect ratio - 122" viewing distance - 1.15 screen widths.


----------



## Killer

10 ft away from a 91" wide 1.78 and 120" wide 2.35 so I'm close, and I have no issues.


----------



## bytebuster

Just installed my 115 inch firehawk electric screen. Wow. It’s beautiful. The firehawk is a much superior fabric than the SI slate. I don’t see any shimmering artifacts. No ripples or wrinkles.
Can’t say enough about stewart’s customer service. I was kept updated throughout the manufacturing process. At my behest they even sent me pics and videos of my screen before it was shipped out


----------



## Wastingmytime

Wastingmytime said:


> Questions for the experts here. I was recommended to check these screens out but not sure which one would be best for me or where to start. My room size is 23’Lx12’Wx9’H. I haven’t bought the projector yet but will likely be going with JVC RS540 or maybe a RS1000 if I can find a good deal. With the narrow width I will likely need acoustically transparent screen to be able to enjoy a larger screen for the more distant viewing, rear seats at about 18’ and front at 12’. I do like a little bit of ambient light but also understand it could fade the blacks, etc. I don’t have to have it and will plan to keep things dark. What screens should I be looking at? Thanks!


Anybody?


----------



## Dave in Green

@Wastingmytime, when I recommended in another thread that you post questions in the Stewart thread I wasn't aware that you were considering an AT screen. The previous response from @Don Stewart to another poster also applies to your question:



Don Stewart said:


> All Stewart front projection screens are available with an AT option. We do our own THX certified micro-perfing in house on our own machine so we have compete control over the perforation process.


So, for example, if viewing mostly in the dark you might want to go with Stewart's reference StudioTek 130 and if viewing mostly with minimal lighting you might want to consider Phantom HALR.


----------



## Th601

Noob question. On the specs for this Stewart screen it says minimum throw distance of 1.3 X Image Width. What does the minimum throw distance represent? Distance in achieving 1.3 gain?










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Killer

Th601 said:


> Noob question. On the specs for this Stewart screen it says minimum throw distance of 1.3 X Image Width. What does the minimum throw distance represent? Distance in achieving 1.3 gain?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Has to do with potential for hotspotting. any screen with gain can exhibit a "hotspot" if the projector is too close.


----------



## Craig Peer

Th601 said:


> Noob question. On the specs for this Stewart screen it says minimum throw distance of 1.3 X Image Width. What does the minimum throw distance represent? Distance in achieving 1.3 gain?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Hotspotting and other potential problems are eliminated by having your projector throw at the minimum screen throw or further. In the case of the ST130, it would be hard with most projectors ( JVC or Sony 4K models for instance ) to be too close - the projector throw range won't allow it.


----------



## Th601

Killer said:


> Has to do with potential for hotspotting. any screen with gain can exhibit a "hotspot" if the projector is too close.




Ok so as long as I’m no closer than the minimum throw distance given I shouldn’t be experiencing hot spotting correct?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Th601

Craig Peer said:


> Hotspotting and other potential problems are eliminated by having your projector throw at the minimum screen throw or further. In the case of the ST130, it would be hard with most projectors ( JVC or Sony 4K models for instance ) to be too close - the projector throw range won't allow it.




Thank you. Now I understand 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Craig Peer

Th601 said:


> Thank you. Now I understand
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


And hotspotting is annoying. Basically the center of the image is a lot brighter than the sides. You want to avoid that.


----------



## Wastingmytime

Dave in Green said:


> @Wastingmytime, when I recommended in another thread that you post questions in the Stewart thread I wasn't aware that you were considering an AT screen. The previous response from @Don Stewart to another poster also applies to your question:
> 
> 
> 
> So, for example, if viewing mostly in the dark you might want to go with Stewart's reference StudioTek 130 and if viewing mostly with minimal lighting you might want to consider Phantom HALR.


That’s helpful thanks! Yes I wasn’t sure if I wanted or needed an AT screen either. It’s a consideration to increase my screen size for my viewing distance. My concern was whether using an AT screen degrades the quality of the picture as my HT guys says or if he’s wrong.


----------



## Dave in Green

Wastingmytime said:


> That’s helpful thanks! Yes I wasn’t sure if I wanted or needed an AT screen either. It’s a consideration to increase my screen size for my viewing distance. My concern was whether using an AT screen degrades the quality of the picture as my HT guys says or if he’s wrong.


I've never used an AT screen or even researched them, so I'll leave it to others to tell you how much perforations in AT screens affects the performance compared with the same screen material unperforated. If going with AT allows you to use an appropriately larger screen it may be a matter of understanding any trade-offs. For example, I would think that perforations would reduce a screen material's gain and make it less bright.


----------



## Th601

Dave in Green said:


> I've never used an AT screen or even researched them, so I'll leave it to others to tell you how much perforations in AT screens affects the performance compared with the same screen material unperforated. If going with AT allows you to use an appropriately larger screen it may be a matter of understanding any trade-offs. For example, I would think that perforations would reduce a screen material's gain and make it less bright.




Yes that’s what I’m curious about as well. I know AT will be less gain, but by how much. When the time is ready I’ll call them and ask. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Craig Peer

Dave in Green said:


> I've never used an AT screen or even researched them, so I'll leave it to others to tell you how much perforations in AT screens affects the performance compared with the same screen material unperforated. If going with AT allows you to use an appropriately larger screen it may be a matter of understanding any trade-offs. For example, I would think that perforations would reduce a screen material's gain and make it less bright.


You're correct - you have to pick your poison. AT isn't as bright, and sometimes I think it's not quite as sharp. But, center channel audio is better. it all depends on how you design your room.


----------



## Don Stewart

Th601 said:


> Yes that’s what I’m curious about as well. I know AT will be less gain, but by how much. When the time is ready I’ll call them and ask.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


The Stewart THX Micro-Perf pattern is 10.2% porous.


----------



## Dave in Green

Don Stewart said:


> The Stewart THX Micro-Perf pattern is 10.2% porous.


Eliminating ~10% of the screen material should reduce gain by ~10%, which perceptually is not a huge hit. So, for example, with Stewart's micro perfs StudioTek 130's 1.3 gain would be reduced to ~1.17 gain and Phantom HALR's 1.0 gain would go down to ~0.9 gain. That all needs to get factored in with screen size and projector lumens to optimize the total system.


----------



## Th601

Dave in Green said:


> Eliminating ~10% of the screen material should reduce gain by ~10%, which perceptually is not a huge hit. So, for example, with Stewart's micro perfs StudioTek 130's 1.3 gain would be reduced to ~1.17 gain and Phantom HALR's 1.0 gain would go down to ~0.9 gain. That all needs to get factored in with screen size and projector lumens to optimize the total system.




Perfect. I see that isn’t much of a hit at all. I’ll be looking into 130” 2:4:1 screen. Projector is a NX7 with 1900 lumens. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Th601

Don Stewart said:


> The Stewart THX Micro-Perf pattern is 10.2% porous.




Thank you 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Wastingmytime

Dave in Green said:


> I've never used an AT screen or even researched them, so I'll leave it to others to tell you how much perforations in AT screens affects the performance compared with the same screen material unperforated. If going with AT allows you to use an appropriately larger screen it may be a matter of understanding any trade-offs. For example, I would think that perforations would reduce a screen material's gain and make it less bright.


Thanks Dave, that makes sense. It seems that woven AT screens are superior in quality to the perforated screens. It that a safe assumption or too much variability?


----------



## Dave in Green

Wastingmytime said:


> Thanks Dave, that makes sense. It seems that woven AT screens are superior in quality to the perforated screens. It that a safe assumption or too much variability?


From the little I know too much variability. I can't imagine if woven were somehow inherently superior to perforated that Stewart Filmscreen wouldn't be offering woven rather than micro perf. But you really need input from the experts and more experienced folks here.


----------



## Pultzar

Wastingmytime said:


> Thanks Dave, that makes sense. It seems that woven AT screens are superior in quality to the perforated screens. It that a safe assumption or too much variability?


Woven = Better for audio
Perf = Better for video if you are far enough back which depends on your vision. Otherwise woven if you are super close.

That's my experience at least.


----------



## Wastingmytime

Thanks for the input guys!


----------



## Ellebob

I'll give you my opinion with installing projector systems and having both an AT and solid screen HT in my home. The advantages of better audio with an AT screen far outweigh the slight decrease in picture quality compared to the solid screen. Getting your speakers placed correctly, vertically oriented at the same height just makes the audio "right". Instead of poor audio locations like placing speakers in corners, the center near the floor or the ceiling and speakers not at the same height using proper placement in acoustics makes a HUGE difference. In my solid screen theater I currently have the speakers below the screen about 2 feet off the ground. I initially had them closer to ear height but I didn't like the screen higher on the wall. I've also tried placing them above the screen and if I had multiple rows that would be the better choice. Since I might make this room into an Atmos set up I felt below would be better for more height separation. 

With the AT screen I do notice it is not as sharp as the solid screen but most would not notice it unless I pointed it out. Most people including some enthusiast go into my AT room and say it is the best picture they have ever seen. Now I am an audio and video calibrator and can notice the differences but when watching a movie it never bothers me but I notice the speakers below the screen. When they are at ear height everything is just where it should be. The larger the screen the more AT makes sense. As far as woven vs perf each has its pros and cons and it depends on the application which I would recommend. Pultzar's summary is about right. There are exceptions of course but in general I think he hit the nail on the head.


----------



## Dave in Green

Again, I have no direct experience with AT screens so I defer to those who do. But my understanding is that the much smaller holes produced by micro perf offer a noticeable improvement in image quality over the older larger perforations due to being less visible even at closer distances. I know that Stewart Filmscreen also claims their custom micro perf reduces the potential for moire, which I've seen a number of AT screen users mention on this forum as an issue with some AT screens under certain conditions.


----------



## Ellebob

The larger holes are more for commercial theaters and not the home. Most of the perf'd screens I have seen or used in the professional realm I wouldn't use at home. The microperf at 12 feet and further you won't notice at all. From 10-12 feet most will not notice but on very bright scenes some might notice. With Stewart you spec the screen with the model projector you are using and they make sure moire is not a problem.


----------



## Steezo Jay

*Stewart firehawk balon screens*

Looking to get a stewart firehawk balon screen. I would like to watch in some ambient light as well as with blackout curtains when needed. Does anyone have experience or opinions on this screen?


----------



## hwoarang

Steezo Jay said:


> Looking to get a stewart firehawk balon screen. I would like to watch in some ambient light as well as with blackout curtains when needed. Does anyone have experience or opinions on this screen?


To be honest, I have had the fire hawk for 5 years now, and with 4k and bright content, the material is very bothersome. It was bearable with 1080p, and you could mostly ignore it. Now I hate it. It's very distracting from the otherwise really impressive picture my Sony puts out. All the advice I received was that my room would be too bright and I'd lose light from the white walls and light coming in from the window. I dont think it would have been anywhere near as bad based on recently comparing samples in the room for the non fire hawk and brighter Stewart offerings. Also, the picture is overall darker which in 4k and HDR content again is EVEN darker with the fire hawk. This is true, even with HDR turned off. If your room is facing the sun and is directly exposed with lots of windows, maybe, but if not, in would suggest looking at alternatives.


----------



## Steezo Jay

hwoarang said:


> To be honest, I have had the fire hawk for 5 years now, and with 4k and bright content, the material is very bothersome. It was bearable with 1080p, and you could mostly ignore it. Now I hate it. It's very distracting from the otherwise really impressive picture my Sony puts out. All the advice I received was that my room would be too bright and I'd lose light from the white walls and light coming in from the window. I dont think it would have been anywhere near as bad based on recently comparing samples in the room for the non fire hawk and brighter Stewart offerings. Also, the picture is overall darker which in 4k and HDR content again is EVEN darker with the fire hawk. This is true, even with HDR turned off. If your room is facing the sun and is directly exposed with lots of windows, maybe, but if not, in would suggest looking at alternatives.


Yeah, its never very bright in my room. Mostly all 4k hdr content I'll be using. Do you have thoughts on an alternative?


----------



## hwoarang

Steezo Jay said:


> hwoarang said:
> 
> 
> 
> To be honest, I have had the fire hawk for 5 years now, and with 4k and bright content, the material is very bothersome. It was bearable with 1080p, and you could mostly ignore it. Now I hate it. It's very distracting from the otherwise really impressive picture my Sony puts out. All the advice I received was that my room would be too bright and I'd lose light from the white walls and light coming in from the window. I dont think it would have been anywhere near as bad based on recently comparing samples in the room for the non fire hawk and brighter Stewart offerings. Also, the picture is overall darker which in 4k and HDR content again is EVEN darker with the fire hawk. This is true, even with HDR turned off. If your room is facing the sun and is directly exposed with lots of windows, maybe, but if not, in would suggest looking at alternatives.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, its never very bright in my room. Mostly all 4k hdr content I'll be using. Do you have thoughts on an alternative?
Click to expand...

I would collect samples and audition them in the room.


----------



## mdcubsfan

The projector that came with our house just died, and in the process of figuring out how to replace that also got the idea of replacing our current screen (that also came with the house). I had no idea until I looked it up that Stewart screens would cost that much!!!!

It's a Stewart 92" Firehawk (80 x 45, so 16:9 ratio) - I really don't know much about AV stuff, just trying to figure out stuff here and there. If I were to replace it with a Silver Ticket screen I see on Amazon for a couple of hundred dollars, would the size increase (was looking at 120 or 135") outweight any benefits of the much more expensive current screen? It's in a theater room with minimal ambient light (and we never use this during daylight hours anyways).

And is it worth trying to sell the old screen, or should I just donate it somewhere?


----------



## Ellebob

A better screen will give a better picture and it is easily noticeable if you ever compare full screens and not just samples. That being said you also need a screen that is suited for your application. if you don't have ambient light a white based screen with maybe a little gain to combat some wall and ceiling reflections would be a better choice. The Firehawk is definitely better for mild ambient light. I wouldn't go too big, stuffing your speakers in corners and the center on the floor is not a good formula for good sound. Acoustically transparent screens are usually better solutions for larger screens. 

If you didn't want to go bigger I would replace the Stewart material with one of their white materials but that would still be considerably more expensive than a silver ticket screen so budget may need to be considered. That screen still has value and I bet you could sell it locally and make enough to pay for a Silver ticket screen or use it towards a Stewart Cima with Neve material. it is not as expensive as your screen but still quite a bit more than a silver ticket but it is in my opinion one of the better white screens out there and a bargain for the performance it offers.


----------



## A7mad78

One of my friend tell me about a cinecurve screen (used) for sale and he told me that’s the measurement of the screen but i love to know is this a 160” diagonal or 150” 

Thx 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## GetGray

That is a 2:40:1 384 diagonal.


----------



## A7mad78

GetGray said:


> That is a 2:40:1 384 diagonal.



The image width is 355.5 cm and the hight is 148 cm the other it’s the room i think he draw it 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## pdxht

Does anyone here have the Balón Borderless screen? I’m interested in getting one of those but haven’t seen much information about it. I was looking for some opinions and pictures of the edges, side view and mount. I was also considering the LuminEsse, not sure if there would be any advantage of one vs the other. This will be mounted on a velvet covered wall so I don’t really need a border but I wasn’t sure how the edgeless screen would look vs having a very small edge. Thanks.


----------



## howiee

Ellebob said:


> I'll give you my opinion with installing projector systems and having both an AT and solid screen HT in my home. The advantages of better audio with an AT screen far outweigh the slight decrease in picture quality compared to the solid screen.


Hi mate. Out of interest, what screen do you have? I'm after an AT setup and am currently yo-yoing between fabrics and types. I was set on Seymour XD - partly because of the cheap manual masking options - and am now looking at V6 and micro perforated options. Viewing distance will be between 12 and 13.5ft


----------



## cargen

*Shipping Lead time?*

What is the current approximate production lead time for a custom Stewart screen? 

In other words, from date a screen is ordered from a Stewart dealer, approximately how long currently before the screen will ship?


----------



## Don Stewart

cargen said:


> What is the current approximate production lead time for a custom Stewart screen?
> 
> In other words, from date a screen is ordered from a Stewart dealer, approximately how long currently before the screen will ship?


Size and model you are looking at?


----------



## cargen

Don Stewart said:


> Size and model you are looking at?



Stewart ElectriScreen 240:1 153" StudeoTek 130 ordered about a week ago from AVScience. 

Just trying to provide my local installer a guesstimate of arrival.

Thanks,

Chris


----------



## Don Stewart

cargen said:


> Stewart ElectriScreen 240:1 153" StudeoTek 130 ordered about a week ago from AVScience.
> 
> Just trying to provide my local installer a guesstimate of arrival.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Chris


Hi Chris,


After receiving a PO from dealer, the manufacturing time is around 10 working days plus shipping time.


I hope that helps and thank you for your order.


Best regards,
Don


----------



## cargen

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Chris,
> After receiving a PO from dealer, the manufacturing time is around 10 working days plus shipping time.
> I hope that helps and thank you for your order.


Wow! That's a lot faster then was expecting. I expected production to take over a month. Pleasant surprise.
Thanks Don!


----------



## Ellebob

howiee said:


> Hi mate. Out of interest, what screen do you have? I'm after an AT setup and am currently yo-yoing between fabrics and types. I was set on Seymour XD - partly because of the cheap manual masking options - and am now looking at V6 and micro perforated options. Viewing distance will be between 12 and 13.5ft


I have two projector systems in my house. Both are 2.35 screens. one is a Seymour 130" curved with the UF material because the seating is close about 11 feet for the 1st row, I also use an anamorphic lens with this system. The other is a Stewart Cima 115" with Tiburon material, that is non-AT screen with all three speakers below the screen and using the zoom method for 2.35. Where I work we install over 200 projector systems a year and I'm one of two calibrators. We have a shop I can do some testing and often do. So I see a lot of screens.

Comparing my two systems I like the audio better with the AT screen and the video better with the solid screen. Most people that come to my home see the AT screen because that theater has two rows. I have heard from many that it is the best picture they have seen. When I show the other room and people see the difference they say I am being picky about the picture quality difference as the AT screen is still excellent, plus they like the look of the curved screen better even if the picture is not quite as good as the solid screen it is good enough for them.


----------



## howiee

Ellebob said:


> I have two projector systems in my house. Both are 2.35 screens. one is a Seymour 130" curved with the UF material because the seating is close about 11 feet for the 1st row, I also use an anamorphic lens with this system. The other is a Stewart Cima 115" with Tiburon material, that is non-AT screen with all three speakers below the screen and using the zoom method for 2.35. Where I work we install over 200 projector systems a year and I'm one of two calibrators. We have a shop I can do some testing and often do. So I see a lot of screens.
> 
> Comparing my two systems I like the audio better with the AT screen and the video better with the solid screen. Most people that come to my home see the AT screen because that theater has two rows. I have heard from many that it is the best picture they have seen. When I show the other room and people see the difference they say I am being picky about the picture quality difference as the AT screen is still excellent, plus they like the look of the curved screen better even if the picture is not quite as good as the solid screen it is good enough for them.


Thanks for that. At the risk of taking this off topic - do you mind sharing what pj you use with the UF screen and the size? And the lens. In the UK there are few places, if any, we can get demos of this stuff and user impressions from those in the know are very handy.


----------



## Todd G.

cargen said:


> Wow! That's a lot faster then was expecting. I expected production to take over a month. Pleasant surprise.
> Thanks Don!


I was also surprised at the turnaround time when we ordered our screen. Even though we had it quickly, quality-control of all pieces was superb.

Enjoy your new screen!


----------



## gwthacker

Don, 
I’m looking at the new Director’s Choice for my theater. I have 179” width between studs. I understand with 5” frame on the L/R it would have 19” depth. I have a baffle wall- would that mean that the baffle wall would need to be more than 19 inches away from the screen? Just trying to understand dimensions and whether I’ll have to redo my baffle wall. 

Thanks 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## ShadeRF

Joined the Stewart Screen family this week and replaced my 138" 2.35:1 Elite Screen with a 138" 2.35:1 Cima Neve screen. Had one little hiccup as the bolts to attach the frame pieces were mistakenly left out but Mike from AVScience (thanks Mike!) had Stewart overnight them to me and all is well in the world. The packaging itself was the most thorough and meticulously packaged item I think I have ever received. The frame itself is much sturdier and higher quality than my Elite Screen, mounting was much easier and I really love the snaps for attaching the screen itself. And of course the screen itself looks magnificent. The image is a touch brighter, feels more focused, and details appear sharper. A really worthwhile upgrade to pair with my RS3000 and Paladin DCR.


----------



## Don Stewart

gwthacker said:


> Don,
> I’m looking at the new Director’s Choice for my theater. I have 179” width between studs. I understand with 5” frame on the L/R it would have 19” depth. I have a baffle wall- would that mean that the baffle wall would need to be more than 19 inches away from the screen? Just trying to understand dimensions and whether I’ll have to redo my baffle wall.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Hi Gwthacker,


I sent you a PM with my company personal email so we can exchange drawing attachments if required.


Don


----------



## Th601

pdxht said:


> Does anyone here have the Balón Borderless screen? I’m interested in getting one of those but haven’t seen much information about it. I was looking for some opinions and pictures of the edges, side view and mount. I was also considering the LuminEsse, not sure if there would be any advantage of one vs the other. This will be mounted on a velvet covered wall so I don’t really need a border but I wasn’t sure how the edgeless screen would look vs having a very small edge. Thanks.




I am curious about this as well. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Ellebob

howiee said:


> Thanks for that. At the risk of taking this off topic - do you mind sharing what pj you use with the UF screen and the size? And the lens. In the UK there are few places, if any, we can get demos of this stuff and user impressions from those in the know are very handy.


Sorry, for the delayed response but haven't been on AVS much lately and missed the notification. Projectors change pretty often in my home or I "test" them in my home but I use the LS10500 with Panamorph Cinevista lens (replaced by the Phoenix model) on that one most of the time when not testing as I own that one. I have been playing with new JVC NX5 (aka RS1000) which looks great and is brighter so it will probably replace the LS10500 and I'll move the LS10500 to the other room for its zoom memory. A 6040 is there now. I'll wait until after Cedia before new upgrades to see if there is anything new with Epson or Sony to compete with this new JVC. But, I'm liking this JVC right now. Playing with the new JVCs the NX5 is definitely the best value and I personally wouldn't spend the extra for the NX7 (RS2000) or NX9 (RS3000). I'd spend the difference elsewhere before going to a better model than the NX5, better screen, speakers, acoustic treatments, remote, etc. YMMV.


----------



## Steezo Jay

*ALR screen*

Having trouble deciding on a screen. About to purchase an nx9 and want a ALR screen to go with it. I want to get a 138-140 inch 2:35.1 screen and my throw from the end of the nx9 will be ~180 inches. I was Looking at the FireHawk screen, however, you need 1.6x width of your screen so the next best looks like a greyhawk screen as the min. throw is 1.3. I can control light from windows but my walls are white - I will be adding some velvet on the walls around the screen. Does anybody have any suggestions? Thanks much!


----------



## GetGray

Gray hawk is NOT an ALR screen. Don’t get that material for the purpose.


----------



## MMC57

*Angle of Perforations for Microperf X2 THX Ultra Screen*

Hi

We currently have a Stewart Firehawk SST 16x9 110" screen which I use with a Marantz 15-S1 1080P DLP projector.

This combination has served us really well since we installed it in 2007. Our theater seats are about 18 feet from the screen.

We are thinking of doing some changes and we are thinking of going to an acoustically transparent screen so we can get a larger image and also changing the projector to a 2160P resolution.

We would want to use a Stewart AT screen for this change but I have a question about the perforations in the Stewart screens.

I have been told that with a Stewart AT screen you need to specify the projector that you intend to use so the perforations can be placed at a certain angle depending on the light source that projector uses.

Right now we are look at projectors with three different types of light sources which are (a) Traditional Lamp (b) Laser and (c) HLD LED (Philips Color Spark)

Is this true that the perforations are placed at different angles with the Stewart Microperf X2 THX Ultra screens depending on the light source?

Thanks for any help.


----------



## m Robinson

MMC57 said:


> Hi
> 
> We currently have a Stewart Firehawk SST 16x9 110" screen which I use with a Marantz 15-S1 1080P DLP projector.
> 
> This combination has served us really well since we installed it in 2007. Our theater seats are about 18 feet from the screen.
> 
> We are thinking of doing some changes and we are thinking of going to an acoustically transparent screen so we can get a larger image and also changing the projector to a 2160P resolution.
> 
> We would want to use a Stewart AT screen for this change but I have a question about the perforations in the Stewart screens.
> 
> I have been told that with a Stewart AT screen you need to specify the projector that you intend to use so the perforations can be placed at a certain angle depending on the light source that projector uses.
> 
> Right now we are look at projectors with three different types of light sources which are (a) Traditional Lamp (b) Laser and (c) HLD LED (Philips Color Spark)
> 
> Is this true that the perforations are placed at different angles with the Stewart Microperf X2 THX Ultra screens depending on the light source?
> 
> Thanks for any help.


MMC57,
Yes we request projector information for micro-perf screens. We consult a table of values from surveys we do with varying projector types, tested from very small image widths, to widths where the projector runs out of light. In years past, with lots more evident pixel structure on the screen, 720, 768 types etc., it was sort of complex. These days many projectors have so little pixel structure that they work perfectly with the perf. But some engine types do interact, and we manage that. As a matter of policy we rotate all screens to the most required degree, to make them future proof, for the event that someone changes projector type down the road. 
The basis of the need for rotation,however, is not the illuminant, be it Xenon, Laser, Mercury etc. It is the imaging engine type, LCD, DLP, SXRD, LCOS etc. which gives us the cue to rotate. This works well and the only moire issues we have these days are when some folks with fairly large, older screens, prior to our rotation program, change into certain projectors. We are good at predicting results and we work with this every day. 
Mark Robinson
Stewart Filmscreen


----------



## MMC57

m Robinson said:


> MMC57,
> Yes we request projector information for micro-perf screens. We consult a table of values from surveys we do with varying projector types, tested from very small image widths, to widths where the projector runs out of light. In years past, with lots more evident pixel structure on the screen, 720, 768 types etc., it was sort of complex. These days many projectors have so little pixel structure that they work perfectly with the perf. But some engine types do interact, and we manage that. As a matter of policy we rotate all screens to the most required degree, to make them future proof, for the event that someone changes projector type down the road.
> The basis of the need for rotation,however, is not the illuminant, be it Xenon, Laser, Mercury etc. It is the imaging engine type, LCD, DLP, SXRD, LCOS etc. which gives us the cue to rotate. This works well and the only moire issues we have these days are when some folks with fairly large, older screens, prior to our rotation program, change into certain projectors. We are good at predicting results and we work with this every day.
> Mark Robinson
> Stewart Filmscreen


Thanks for the reply Mark.

So if I understand you correctly it is the type of chip that is in the projector that needs to be specified rather then the light type.

I have not made a final decision on the projector yet but I know I am definitely going to go with a Stewart AT screen. The new size with be 135" 16x9 and I intend to place three speakers behind the screen.

Once I figure out the projector then I can decide the actual screen material to go with this time ... White vs Grey.

Thanks again for the reply and once I get closer to making a decision I will be back in touch.


----------



## MMC57

How far away from the AT Screen with Microperf should the speakers be placed?

Is there a recommended distance?

Thanks for any help.


----------



## abinav555

Is the Grayhawk only meant for 1080p content, in other words, would it still help in showing the true quality of a 4K image when projected on ? Or is it important to go for a 4K compatible screen ?


----------



## 996911

MMC57 said:


> How far away from the AT Screen with Microperf should the speakers be placed?
> 
> Is there a recommended distance?
> 
> Thanks for any help.


My speakers are flush mounted on the wall and the screen is mounted on the wall. So just a few mm behind the screen and it's perfect. Screen is a ST130 with microperf


----------



## satfam

*Neve vs ST100 vs ST130*

I have a new JVC RS2000 in a light controlled HT. I currently have a Da-lite 110” HCCV screen that I’m looking to replace. What are the pros and cons on the Neve vs ST100 vs ST130 in 110”. 

I realize there is a fairly big pice difference. I’m willing to pay extra for higher a higher quality screen but don’t want to go overboard. Recommendations? Thanks.


----------



## Craig Peer

satfam said:


> I have a new JVC RS2000 in a light controlled HT. I currently have a Da-lite 110” HCCV screen that I’m looking to replace. What are the pros and cons on the Neve vs ST100 vs ST130 in 110”.
> 
> I realize there is a fairly big pice difference. I’m willing to pay extra for higher a higher quality screen but don’t want to go overboard. Recommendations? Thanks.


The Neve would be a big improvement. I had an HCCV screen. The Neve will have no screen structure / texture in comparison, be brighter, and have next to no surface sheen in comparison. I replaced my HCCV with the Cima Neve over 5 years ago. Still couldn't be happier ! Screen shots -


----------



## Craig Peer

I also have a StudioTek 130. It's a little brighter, a little smoother, a bit more refined. But more expensive.


----------



## Th601

Craig Peer said:


> I also have a StudioTek 130. It's a little brighter, a little smoother, a bit more refined. But more expensive.




This is the screen I decided to go with. 130” scope. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Craig Peer

Th601 said:


> This is the screen I decided to go with. 130” scope.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Mine is 128" scope, so basically the same size.


----------



## genaccmiller

Th601 said:


> This is the screen I decided to go with. 130” scope.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


How much is the cost?

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk


----------



## genaccmiller

m Robinson said:


> MMC57,
> 
> Yes we request projector information for micro-perf screens. We consult a table of values from surveys we do with varying projector types, tested from very small image widths, to widths where the projector runs out of light. In years past, with lots more evident pixel structure on the screen, 720, 768 types etc., it was sort of complex. These days many projectors have so little pixel structure that they work perfectly with the perf. But some engine types do interact, and we manage that. As a matter of policy we rotate all screens to the most required degree, to make them future proof, for the event that someone changes projector type down the road.
> 
> The basis of the need for rotation,however, is not the illuminant, be it Xenon, Laser, Mercury etc. It is the imaging engine type, LCD, DLP, SXRD, LCOS etc. which gives us the cue to rotate. This works well and the only moire issues we have these days are when some folks with fairly large, older screens, prior to our rotation program, change into certain projectors. We are good at predicting results and we work with this every day.
> 
> Mark Robinson
> 
> Stewart Filmscreen


Hello - I also need some information on the screen. What details can I provide you?

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk


----------



## m Robinson

genaccmiller said:


> Hello - I also need some information on the screen. What details can I provide you?
> 
> Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk


Hello Genaccmiller, That specific question should be posed to our hosts here at AVS forum, and they will be delighted to quote you confidentially.


----------



## genaccmiller

m Robinson said:


> Hello Genaccmiller, That specific question should be posed to our hosts here at AVS forum, and they will be delighted to quote you confidentially.


Hello - who are the hosts to whom I should reach out?

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk


----------



## genaccmiller

Folks - any thoughts on potential costs involved in a 135 inch 16:9 acoustically transparent screen?

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk


----------



## Craig Peer

genaccmiller said:


> Hello - who are the hosts to whom I should reach out?
> 
> Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk


You need to contact a Stewart dealer for pricing.


----------



## genaccmiller

Hello folks - I am trying to construct a home theater with a 135 inch 16:9 AT screen. Can you advise if I could use Stewart screens for this? I have attached the dimensions below.









Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk


----------



## Craig Peer

genaccmiller said:


> Hello folks - I am trying to construct a home theater with a 135 inch 16:9 AT screen. Can you advise if I could use Stewart screens for this? I have attached the dimensions below.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk


Stewart makes a woven AT material- http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/screen-materials/flexible-front-projection/harmony™

Or, pretty much any material they make can be micro-perf'd - http://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/screen-materials/flexible-front-projection


----------



## jsil

I'm looking to upgrade from my Carada 106"screen to Stewart screen. My set up is in my family room that I have same light control. My projector is a JVC x590 and distance is 14'5" to screen. So which screen would be best for my set up?


----------



## drober30

I received a screen sample, is it the same on both sides? One side does have a label that says "NEVE" but I don't really see a difference from front or back?

How should I stick this 8x11 screen sample to my existing screen without damaging my screen? I think it will be tough to judge quality with this small sample, is there a best practice on where to position it?


----------



## Craig Peer

drober30 said:


> I received a screen sample, is it the same on both sides? One side does have a label that says "NEVE" but I don't really see a difference from front or back?
> 
> How should I stick this 8x11 screen sample to my existing screen without damaging my screen? I think it will be tough to judge quality with this small sample, is there a best practice on where to position it?


Sticker faces you. Try double face tape and a piece of cardboard the same size, that you can hang in front of your screen.


----------



## Don Stewart

For those who may be interested, we just went live with an all completely brand new, clean slate design website. Please come and visit when you get a chance.
Please click on link on my signature below.


Thanks,
Best Regards,
Don


----------



## MadMyers

Hello All (and Don!)

I'm likely going to get a Stewart Studiotek 130 for my RS500 projector. The throw distance is limited to about 12'2" so I'm going considering a 118" diag screen (16:9).

Note: I _might_ go down to a 115" to help future proof things because the newer 4k JVC projectors have a slightly longer throw.

The room is very dark and light controlled.

The projector will be mounted on the ceiling and end up at the top of the screen more or less. Is this a cause for any concern?

Now, I've got a 2nd projector that I use to play games (that RS500 is terrible for games, IMHO). This older Sony HW30ES will be mounted on the side of the RS500 and I'll use horizontal lens shift. I haven't mounted it yet, but I expect it to be 3' off center. How will this impact the ST 130 viewing?

I'm ok with compromises when using the HW30ES but I'd like to try and understand them before I'm surprised.

Thanks!

... Altan
www.aaarpinball.coim


----------



## Don Stewart

MadMyers said:


> Hello All (and Don!)
> 
> I'm likely going to get a Stewart Studiotek 130 for my RS500 projector. The throw distance is limited to about 12'2" so I'm going considering a 118" diag screen (16:9).
> 
> Note: I _might_ go down to a 115" to help future proof things because the newer 4k JVC projectors have a slightly longer throw.
> 
> The room is very dark and light controlled.
> 
> The projector will be mounted on the ceiling and end up at the top of the screen more or less. Is this a cause for any concern?
> 
> Now, I've got a 2nd projector that I use to play games (that RS500 is terrible for games, IMHO). This older Sony HW30ES will be mounted on the side of the RS500 and I'll use horizontal lens shift. I haven't mounted it yet, but I expect it to be 3' off center. How will this impact the ST 130 viewing?
> 
> I'm ok with compromises when using the HW30ES but I'd like to try and understand them before I'm surprised.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> ... Altan
> www.aaarpinball.coim


  Hi Alton,
 The vertical mounting positions of the projectors are fine near the top of the screen frame. In fact, that is the sweet spot for mounting on a positive gain angular reflective screen. For the HW30ES PJ being mounted at some degrees of the screen's center line, it will not be a problem in your case for gaming. The StudioTek 130 has a very wide Half Gain Angle out at 80 degrees. It simply means that the "slightly" brightest seat will be about, "two seats over" on the opposite side of center screen from where the HW30 is mounted. This will be very difficult to detect with the naked eye, especially when projecting the very saturated images as found with CG gaming content. That said, there will be no unpleasant surprises with the set up you describe above. Hope that helps.


 Best Regards.
 Don


Edit: For optical spec sheet for ST130 click on link then scroll down. https://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/en/materials/studiotek-130-g3


----------



## MadMyers

Thanks Don. Great info. 



Don Stewart said:


> MadMyers said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hello All (and Don!)
> 
> I'm likely going to get a Stewart Studiotek 130 for my RS500 projector. The throw distance is limited to about 12'2" so I'm going considering a 118" diag screen (16:9).
> 
> Note: I _might_ go down to a 115" to help future proof things because the newer 4k JVC projectors have a slightly longer throw.
> 
> The room is very dark and light controlled.
> 
> The projector will be mounted on the ceiling and end up at the top of the screen more or less. Is this a cause for any concern?
> 
> Now, I've got a 2nd projector that I use to play games (that RS500 is terrible for games, IMHO). This older Sony HW30ES will be mounted on the side of the RS500 and I'll use horizontal lens shift. I haven't mounted it yet, but I expect it to be 3' off center. How will this impact the ST 130 viewing?
> 
> I'm ok with compromises when using the HW30ES but I'd like to try and understand them before I'm surprised.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> ... Altan
> www.aaarpinball.coim
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Alton,
> The vertical mounting positions of the projectors are fine near the top of the screen frame. In fact, that is the sweet spot for mounting on a positive gain angular reflective screen. For the HW30ES PJ being mounted at some degrees of the screen's center line, it will not be a problem in your case for gaming. The StudioTek 130 has a very wide Half Gain Angle out at 80 degrees. It simply means that the "slightly" brightest seat will be about, "two seats over" on the opposite side of center screen from where the HW30 is mounted. This will be very difficult to detect with the naked eye, especially when projecting the very saturated images as found with CG gaming content. That said, there will be no unpleasant surprises with the set up you describe above. Hope that helps.
> 
> 
> Best Regards.
> Don
> 
> 
> Edit: For optical spec sheet for ST130 click on link then scroll down. https://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/en/materials/studiotek-130-g3
Click to expand...


----------



## MadMyers

Oh! And BTW, I placed my order for a 16:9 115" Studiotek 130 G3 last Friday.

Will post thoughts when I get it...



Don Stewart said:


> Hi Alton,
> The vertical mounting positions of the projectors are fine near the top of the screen frame. In fact, that is the sweet spot for mounting on a positive gain angular reflective screen. For the HW30ES PJ being mounted at some degrees of the screen's center line, it will not be a problem in your case for gaming. The StudioTek 130 has a very wide Half Gain Angle out at 80 degrees. It simply means that the "slightly" brightest seat will be about, "two seats over" on the opposite side of center screen from where the HW30 is mounted. This will be very difficult to detect with the naked eye, especially when projecting the very saturated images as found with CG gaming content. That said, there will be no unpleasant surprises with the set up you describe above. Hope that helps.
> 
> 
> Best Regards.
> Don
> 
> 
> Edit: For optical spec sheet for ST130 click on link then scroll down. https://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/en/materials/studiotek-130-g3


----------



## RickAVManiac

Hi, a post just to say thanks to Stewart for their excellent screen and service. 

I live in Canada and bought a Cima Neve 138 inch from my local dealer. The shipping was fast for a made in USA screen. I was also impress by the packaging. It’s the best package I ever received. The screen and frame are so well pack and so well protect that even for long ride like US to Canada I am not afraid of any damage... It is clear that some peoples have put times and thinking on that matter and it’s work. Also the quality of the packaging is the best. When you buy a Stewart you buy the best and the packaging scream quality.

As for the assembly, it was so easy, the instruction are simple and everything just go easy and fast. The manual is really well done. Once again the notation of different part is well done, simple, easy to follow and like the packaging, some people clearly have put times and thinking to make this fast and simple. Stewart is a mature business that have a long time experience in screen and it shows.

As for the screen material, the protection in the package for the material it’s almost crazy. Crazy good! The material is roll in a separate tube and also there’s a foam protection all hover it. Again, perfect.

Last but not least, the performance of the Cima Neve is just incredible. The added gain make my JVC NX5 really shine. Now my color are vivid, white is white and HDR as never look that good.

So yes I am very satisfied of Stewart screen. Agree they are not the cheapest around but everything is well think and the performance top notch.

Thanks Stewart for making that quality Screen and thanks to your team for all the hard work you put in the details and the quality. 

We live in a world where cheap product rules and it’s harder and harder for good quality company to survive. They have to work very hard to be able to compete. 

Please continue your good work, we need company and teams like yours...


----------



## Fargus777

Anyone in the Dallas area know of a local dealer? When I go to the Stewart website it only lists 2 in Texas and they are in Austin and near Houston. 
Also, Is the Balon Borderless a good screen for 2:35 ratio? Not sure if you need a little bit of border to help with parts of the image bleeding over.


----------



## Don Stewart

Fargus777 said:


> Anyone in the Dallas area know of a local dealer? When I go to the Stewart website it only lists 2 in Texas and they are in Austin and near Houston.
> Also, Is the Balon Borderless a good screen for 2:35 ratio? Not sure if you need a little bit of border to help with parts of the image bleeding over.


Actually, what you saw on our website for the Texas area is the listing of our residential factory rep who manages all the local retail dealers in your region.
Please give Elite Pro a call at 281 973-9991. They can match you up with several dealers in your local area.


Hope that helps.


Best Regards,
Don


----------



## scanido

I’m planning on a new cinemascope screen and narrowed it down to Balon Borderless or Wallscreen 1.5. I’m leaning towards the former do that little extra size but have not come across much reviews on it. 

Anyone that with a Balon Borderless, would you purchase again? 

Also, is the LED kit worth getting?


----------



## azkino

scanido said:


> I’m planning on a new cinemascope screen and narrowed it down to Balon Borderless or Wallscreen 1.5. I’m leaning towards the former do that little extra size but have not come across much reviews on it.
> 
> Anyone that with a Balon Borderless, would you purchase again?
> 
> Also, is the LED kit worth getting?


I have a 130” diagonal 2.4:1 Balón Borderless, I’m happy with my purchase and I think I would buy it again. I chose the borderless screen to maximize my available space. I was upgrading from an older Carada CCW 112”, the new screen ended up being about the same height, maybe even slightly shorter and quite a bit wider.

The screen arrived in a box as long as the screen, Stewart’s packaging was pretty amazing. The frame was easy to put together, it took a little effort to snap the screen onto the frame and I would have preferred a single wall mounting bracket instead of 2 but in my case it needed a back brace in the middle.

The screen is great but I do have a velvet covered wall behind it, not sure if I would choose it otherwise. And of course the ST100 material is excellent. Overall I’m pretty happy with this screen.

I did not get the LED kit as I would probably never use it.


----------



## scanido

azkino said:


> I have a 130” diagonal 2.4:1 Balón Borderless, I’m happy with my purchase and I think I would buy it again. I chose the borderless screen to maximize my available space. I was upgrading from an older Carada CCW 112”, the new screen ended up being about the same height, maybe even slightly shorter and quite a bit wider.
> 
> The screen arrived in a box as long as the screen, Stewart’s packaging was pretty amazing. The frame was easy to put together, it took a little effort to snap the screen onto the frame and I would have preferred a single wall mounting bracket instead of 2 but in my case it needed a back brace in the middle.
> 
> The screen is great but I do have a velvet covered wall behind it, not sure if I would choose it otherwise. And of course the ST100 material is excellent. Overall I’m pretty happy with this screen.
> 
> I did not get the LED kit as I would probably never use it.


Great to hear! I am set on that screen. 

.....but now questioning the material of choice. StudioTek 100 was my intial choice, but ST130 came up and i am leaning towards that now so i can run my VW500ES (same as vw600es), in LOW lamp mode most of the time so I am not sure if I go with StudioTek 100 or 130. 

I would envision using HIGH lamp for gatherings and watching TV / Sports events and having some low ambiant light, when projector fan noise is not an issue. I would be watching in total darkness for movies though. 

Here are my room details:

Room: 15' x 19'

Throw: 15.5 ft approx. 
screen: 120" width 2.40:1 
Room: Black flat ceilings, medium gray walls, medium gray carpet.
lighting: small window rear corner of room with room darkening. Cove lighting. 

So if I wanted to watch in low lamp mode most of the time for this setting, which material would you go with knowing that projectors are getting more lumens, and requirements for HDR, etc?


----------



## azkino

scanido said:


> Great to hear! I am set on that screen.
> 
> .....but now questioning the material of choice. StudioTek 100 was my intial choice, but ST130 came up and i am leaning towards that now so i can run my VW500ES (same as vw600es), in LOW lamp mode most of the time so I am not sure if I go with StudioTek 100 or 130.
> 
> I would envision using HIGH lamp for gatherings and watching TV / Sports events and having some low ambiant light, when projector fan noise is not an issue. I would be watching in total darkness for movies though.
> 
> Here are my room details:
> 
> Room: 15' x 19'
> 
> Throw: 15.5 ft approx.
> screen: 120" width 2.40:1
> Room: Black flat ceilings, medium gray walls, medium gray carpet.
> lighting: small window rear corner of room with room darkening. Cove lighting.
> 
> So if I wanted to watch in low lamp mode most of the time for this setting, which material would you go with knowing that projectors are getting more lumens, and requirements for HDR, etc?


Most people would probably recommend ST130 for added brightness for HDR. I think ST100 works great in a black room with proper tone mapping. I haven’t seen ST130 so I’m not sure how much difference there’s between them.


----------



## Craig Peer

scanido said:


> Great to hear! I am set on that screen.
> 
> .....but now questioning the material of choice. StudioTek 100 was my intial choice, but ST130 came up and i am leaning towards that now so i can run my VW500ES (same as vw600es), in LOW lamp mode most of the time so I am not sure if I go with StudioTek 100 or 130.
> 
> I would envision using HIGH lamp for gatherings and watching TV / Sports events and having some low ambiant light, when projector fan noise is not an issue. I would be watching in total darkness for movies though.
> 
> Here are my room details:
> 
> Room: 15' x 19'
> 
> Throw: 15.5 ft approx.
> screen: 120" width 2.40:1
> Room: Black flat ceilings, medium gray walls, medium gray carpet.
> lighting: small window rear corner of room with room darkening. Cove lighting.
> 
> So if I wanted to watch in low lamp mode most of the time for this setting, which material would you go with knowing that projectors are getting more lumens, and requirements for HDR, etc?


Get screen samples. The Studiotek 130 is THE go to screen for demos at Cedia. I have one, and i love it ( and I have a Cima Neve and I love that too ).

A lot of folks like the ST100 too. But to my eye it looks a bit dull. I like a bright picture and I like a little gain ( not too much, and the St130 is just right - a Goldilocks screen  ) !


----------



## scanido

Craig Peer said:


> Get screen samples. The Studiotek 130 is THE go to screen for demos at Cedia. I have one, and i love it ( and I have a Cima Neve and I love that too ).
> 
> A lot of folks like the ST100 too. But to my eye it looks a bit dull. I like a bright picture and I like a little gain ( not too much, and the St130 is just right - a Goldilocks screen  ) !


Good to hear..... I went with the ST130! Cant wait to get it setup


----------



## asharma

Craig Peer said:


> The Neve would be a big improvement. I had an HCCV screen. The Neve will have no screen structure / texture in comparison, be brighter, and have next to no surface sheen in comparison. I replaced my HCCV with the Cima Neve over 5 years ago. Still couldn't be happier ! Screen shots -


Hi Craig, I’m just in the process of getting an N7...considering the Cima and 130 for my bat cave, 110-115” 2.35...I know it’s hard to tell from your pictures, but to me, the Cima looks more “natural” where the 130 looks a bit “hotter”...Which one would u recommend for a bat cave? Thanks...
.


----------



## Stan-Lee

jsil said:


> I'm looking to upgrade from my Carada 106"screen to Stewart screen. My set up is in my family room that I have same light control. My projector is a JVC x590 and distance is 14'5" to screen. So which screen would be best for my set up?


How much light control? Can you post a photo? Any windows or light coming from there areas?


----------



## Stan-Lee

My system has changed and it has been quite some time since I have posted pics. 
NOTE #1 : I do not have a room large enough in my townhome for a nice theater.
NOTE #2 - I am female. Not male. I like audio and video about the same. Both are important to me.

I now have a StudioTek100. I still have a 120" SNDQ frame. (I started out with a FireHawk G3, then a G4, which I still have but they are rolled up currently behind the couch in livingroom)
I also went with a Sony VPL-VW675es Projector. https://hometheaterreview.com/-sony-vpl-675es-4k-sxrd-projector-reviewed/
I used to have a JVC projector. My throw distance is barely 13 feet from the lens to the screen.

I could not be happier! (I think!)

I do not have a dedicated theater room. My theater is in my living room, which has white walls, white carpeting, etc. The house came this way when I purchased it. I have yet to change that! Light coming from everywhere. All the no-no's for a home theater. I even have a giant picture window that I have to block with thick, dark drapes.

Guess what? It works. If I can do this, anyone can put a theater in their home and you don't need a dedicated black out room. I am proof.

Photo attached were taken with my Google Pixel 3XL:
- gaming in the afternoon. Not much light control. but some.
- evening movie watching. almost full light control. (Aquaman photo and GOT screenshot)
- The picture with the letterbox format and the boat is in the afternoon with some light in the room. You can tell, because you can see the wall.
- The golf photo is obviously in the afternoon with drapes partially open. Not the best image, but it IS still possible to watch something with ambient light. Amazing!

In the beginning of starting the theater-like room, everyone said get a FireHawk. And it is perfect for this room. We just decided that since we watch stuff 98% at night and getting a new brighter projector, we don't really need the FireHawk.


----------



## jsil

Just emailed you thanks.


----------



## Craig Peer

asharma said:


> Hi Craig, I’m just in the process of getting an N7...considering the Cima and 130 for my bat cave, 110-115” 2.35...I know it’s hard to tell from your pictures, but to me, the Cima looks more “natural” where the 130 looks a bit “hotter”...Which one would u recommend for a bat cave? Thanks...
> .


Either one, but can you get samples of each ? Send me an email and I can send you some.


----------



## scanido

Stan-Lee said:


> My system has changed and it has been quite some time since I have posted pics.
> NOTE #1 : I do not have a room large enough in my townhome for a nice theater.
> NOTE #2 - I am female. Not male. I like audio and video about the same. Both are important to me.
> 
> I now have a StudioTek100. I still have a 120" SNDQ frame. (I started out with a FireHawk G3, then a G4, which I still have but they are rolled up currently behind the couch in livingroom)
> I also went with a Sony VPL-VW675es Projector. https://hometheaterreview.com/-sony-vpl-675es-4k-sxrd-projector-reviewed/
> I used to have a JVC projector. My throw distance is 13.5 feet from the lens to the screen.
> 
> I could not be happier! (I think!)
> 
> I do not have a dedicated theater room. My theater is in my living room, which has white walls, white carpeting, etc. Light coming from everywhere. All the no-no's for a home theater. I even have a giant picture window that I have to block with thick, dark drapes.
> 
> Guess what? It works. If I can do this, anyone can put a theater in their home and you don't need a dedicated black out room. I am proof.
> 
> Photo attached were taken with my Google Pixel 3XL:
> - gaming in the afternoon. Not much light control. but some.
> - evening movie watching. almost full light control. (Aquaman photo and GOT screenshot)
> - The picture with the letterbox format and the boat is in the afternoon with some light in the room. You can tell, because you can see the wall.
> - The golf photo is obviously in the afternoon with drapes partially open. Not the best image, but it IS still possible to watch something with ambient light. Amazing!
> 
> In the beginning of starting the theater-like room, everyone said get a FireHawk. And it is perfect for this room. We just decided that since we watch stuff 98% at night and getting a new brighter projector, we don't really need the FireHawk.


Wow, nice setup you got there! Your review of the ST100 in that environment and with the equipment upfront is positive to hear for anyone in doubt that the ST100 needs a completely blacked out room.


----------



## Fargus777

Im looking into the Luxus Below Ceiling and when searching the thread for thoughts on them, I keep seeing people refer to some as Luxus Deluxe. Is there a link to this on the website to see what it adds over the Luxus? I only see Luxus, Luxus Medio and Grande on there.


----------



## Don Stewart

Fargus777 said:


> Im looking into the Luxus Below Ceiling and when searching the thread for thoughts on them, I keep seeing people refer to some as Luxus Deluxe. Is there a link to this on the website to see what it adds over the Luxus? I only see Luxus, Luxus Medio and Grande on there.


Hi Fargus,

The "Luxus Deluxe" is a fixed wall mounted screen and frame.
For below ceiling mount retractable screen models, you can choose between the Luxus retractable, the Cabaret, and the Cima below ceiling mount. All models are tab tension.


Hope that helps,
Don


----------



## cogdok

I am considering upgrading from a Severtson to a Stewart ST130. The Severtson is pretty good but with the NX7 I feel like there is quite a bit more clarity and highlight detail with HDR to be had with a better screen (also the sparkles on animated movies/brighter patches drive me nuts). 

Can anyone recommend a Canadian dealer (I am in Saskatchewan) that could send samples? I would like to see the Neve as well. Thanks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Killer

Fargus777 said:


> Im looking into the Luxus Below Ceiling and when searching the thread for thoughts on them, I keep seeing people refer to some as Luxus Deluxe. Is there a link to this on the website to see what it adds over the Luxus? I only see Luxus, Luxus Medio and Grande on there.


With their new website, Stewart renamed a few things. the Luxus products have slightly different chassis sizes, hence the Medio and Grande. 
mind
I also think they redesigned the chassis of the Luxus, ergo, MUCH better. The form factor of the chassis is installation based, but keep in mind, the material is what you are after!


----------



## Killer

cogdok said:


> I am considering upgrading from a Severtson to a Stewart ST130. The Severtson is pretty good but with the NX7 I feel like there is quite a bit more clarity and highlight detail with HDR to be had with a better screen (also the sparkles on animated movies/brighter patches drive me nuts).
> 
> Can anyone recommend a Canadian dealer (I am in Saskatchewan) that could send samples? I would like to see the Neve as well. Thanks.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Cogdok, try The Watershed group, http://www.thewatershedgroup.ca/ They are the Canadian distributor for Stewart. They will be able to assist you! +1 888-253-1207


----------



## Stan-Lee

jsil said:


> I'm looking to upgrade from my Carada 106"screen to Stewart screen. My set up is in my family room that I have same light control. My projector is a JVC x590 and distance is 14'5" to screen. So which screen would be best for my set up?


Come to a conclusion yet?


----------



## jsil

Did the testing over the weekend and looks like it's the studiotek 100 for me thanks.


----------



## asharma

*Cima Neve 120” Tab Tension Electric*

Hi folks...my understanding is Stewart has 115” and 125” versions of the Cima Neve Tab tensioned electric drop down...is 120” a custom build and therefore more $$ or will it fall in between the pricing of the 115” and 125”? 

Also, can u get the motorized version with black casing or does it only ship with white casing? Thanks folks...


----------



## Craig Peer

asharma said:


> Hi folks...my understanding is Stewart has 115” and 125” versions of the Cima Neve Tab tensioned electric drop down...is 120” a custom build and therefore more $$ or will it fall in between the pricing of the 115” and 125”?
> 
> 
> 
> Also, can u get the motorized version with black casing or does it only ship with white casing? Thanks folks...




The Cima Neve only comes in fixed sizes. And despite asking for black cases, only a white case. If you need a custom size, get a StudioTek 130. Then you can also get a black case.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## asharma

Craig Peer said:


> The Cima Neve only comes in fixed sizes. And despite asking for black cases, only a white case. If you need a custom size, get a StudioTek 130. Then you can also get a black case.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thanks Craig...would it be easy to cover the white case in a black velvet? I think u have a Cima so you can picture it better than me...


----------



## Craig Peer

asharma said:


> Thanks Craig...would it be easy to cover the white case in a black velvet? I think u have a Cima so you can picture it better than me...




You could put Protostar on the case.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Craig Peer

asharma said:


> Thanks Craig...would it be easy to cover the white case in a black velvet? I think u have a Cima so you can picture it better than me...


Technically what I have is Cima Neve material in a Luxus Electriscreen case. It's a one off / one of a kind screen.


----------



## asharma

Craig Peer said:


> Technically what I have is Cima Neve material in a Luxus Electriscreen case. It's a one off / one of a kind screen.


Thanks, yeah, I didn’t want to move to a ST130 for just a black case...I don’t think I need the gain in my triple velvet bat cave and a 1.1 gain on the Cima Neve should suffice although I would need to change the colour of the casing with some type of black material


----------



## Craig Peer

asharma said:


> Thanks, yeah, I didn’t want to move to a ST130 for just a black case...I don’t think I need the gain in my triple velvet bat cave and a 1.1 gain on the Cima Neve should suffice although I would need to change the colour of the casing with some type of black material


I put Protostar over part of my black painted case anyway, to cut the shine of the paint ( black or otherwise ). So that is what O would use .


----------



## asharma

Craig Peer said:


> I put Protostar over part of my black painted case anyway, to cut the shine of the paint ( black or otherwise ). So that is what O would use .


Sorry. Craig, I posted this in the pj thread also, would like your opinion too Sir...

I’m considering the Cima Neve 115 or 125 2.35...stated 1.1 gain...I’ll have about a 14ft throw, batcave, N7...do U think the N7 can adequately light up a 125 2.35 Cima Neve for HDR or would u stick with the 115”?


----------



## Th601

Good afternoon. Once mounted does anyone know how far from the wall the Balon Borderless screen is? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Craig Peer

asharma said:


> Sorry. Craig, I posted this in the pj thread also, would like your opinion too Sir...
> 
> I’m considering the Cima Neve 115 or 125 2.35...stated 1.1 gain...I’ll have about a 14ft throw, batcave, N7...do U think the N7 can adequately light up a 125 2.35 Cima Neve for HDR or would u stick with the 115”?


Absolutely. 125" scope is a nice size. Sit around 10' from it or even a little closer. You should get a nice bright punchy picture for sure ! Not too big by any means. My scope screen is 128" - about the same.


----------



## azkino

Th601 said:


> Good afternoon. Once mounted does anyone know how far from the wall the Balon Borderless screen is?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


The surface of my screen is 1” from the wall with the EZ mount.


----------



## Stan-Lee

azkino said:


> The surface of my screen is 1” from the wall with the EZ mount.


Nice! Can you add Pics?


----------



## azkino

Stan-Lee said:


> Nice! Can you add Pics?


Not sure if this shows it well enough but here are a couple of pictures.


----------



## scanido

Looking forward to getting my Baylon Borderless. 

Can anyone recommend what product/material would be best to surround the frame from overscan? I read velvet is best but the sticker ones available on amazon tend to be of low quality and even can transfer color/fibres which i would not want near my $$$ screen. 

Thanks.


----------



## Craig Peer

scanido said:


> Looking forward to getting my Baylon Borderless.
> 
> Can anyone recommend what product/material would be best to surround the frame from overscan? I read velvet is best but the sticker ones available on amazon tend to be of low quality and even can transfer color/fibres which i would not want near my $$$ screen.
> 
> Thanks.


You might ask in this thread - https://www.avsforum.com/forum/24-d...er-theater-better-image-210.html#post58305388


----------



## azkino

scanido said:


> Looking forward to getting my Baylon Borderless.
> 
> Can anyone recommend what product/material would be best to surround the frame from overscan? I read velvet is best but the sticker ones available on amazon tend to be of low quality and even can transfer color/fibres which i would not want near my $$$ screen.
> 
> Thanks.


I just use a triple black velvet thumbtacked to the wall. I’ve tried both, the one from Amazon (Fabric Outlet) and SY Fabrics and they are about the same.


----------



## cogdok

Hello, I recently upgraded my projector to an NX7 and the quality of the image has made me want to upgrade my screen as well. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Currently I have a 16:9, 106" (92x52) Severtson screen purchased in 2010. The picture is very good for most things - though sparkles are an issue in bright scenes and especially animated movies. My room is fully light controlled with black ceiling and medium brown walls.

With my throw distance (138") the biggest screen I can fit would be a 116.5" (103x54.5), 17:9 aspect ratio. 80% of viewing is standard def Bluray, 15% UHD, 5% 3D. There will be a shift towards more UHD as more titles become available. I am strongly considering the ST-130 or possibly the ST-100, just waiting on samples.

Is there any downside to a 17:9 aspect ratio other than side black bars on 16:9 content? 
Any downside to maximizing the screen size to match the projector's throw (leaving 1" buffer around the perimeter)? 
Are sparkles to be expected still on the ST-130? Is it worth changing the screen for the extra foot of width? Thanks in advance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Craig Peer

cogdok said:


> Hello, I recently upgraded my projector to an NX7 and the quality of the image has made me want to upgrade my screen as well. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> Currently I have a 16:9, 106" (92x52) Severtson screen purchased in 2010. The picture is very good for most things - though sparkles are an issue in bright scenes and especially animated movies. My room is fully light controlled with black ceiling and medium brown walls.
> 
> With my throw distance (138") the biggest screen I can fit would be a 116.5" (103x54.5), 17:9 aspect ratio. 80% of viewing is standard def Bluray, 15% UHD, 5% 3D. There will be a shift towards more UHD as more titles become available. I am strongly considering the ST-130 or possibly the ST-100, just waiting on samples.
> 
> Is there any downside to a 17:9 aspect ratio other than side black bars on 16:9 content?
> Any downside to maximizing the screen size to match the projector's throw (leaving 1" buffer around the perimeter)?
> Are sparkles to be expected still on the ST-130? Is it worth changing the screen for the extra foot of width? Thanks in advance.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That's a whole lot of questions. The screen samples should tell you a lot. Get a sample of Cima Neve while you are at it. I don't know if I'd get a 17:9 screen or not. I'd project that aspect ratio and play around with the projector before deciding.


----------



## cogdok

Craig Peer said:


> That's a whole lot of questions. The screen samples should tell you a lot. Get a sample of Cima Neve while you are at it. I don't know if I'd get a 17:9 screen or not. I'd project that aspect ratio and play around with the projector before deciding.




Thanks, I will check out the Neve as well. I could go as wide as 2:1 but I have a fairly short throw so making the aspect any wider would just be shrinking the height and not making the screen wider. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Beamis

I have had a Stewart studiotek 130 100 inch diagonal for about 16 years. I started out with a Runco 720P DLP and then on to an Epson 6020. I am now due to upgrade to a 4K projector. I also want to upgrade to a bigger screen and have it masking. 

Question to you experts out there:

1. Has Stewart screen upgraded their studiotek 130 screens in the last 16 years?
(It has been an amazing screen but I was curious if anything has been changed)

2. Can anyone comment on the masking screens by Stewart? I read through the whole thread and did not see any comments about the masking screens. I know they are 3-4 X more expensive. Was it worth it? Because my first Stewart screen performed so well and so long I am trying to justify the purchase! I know Seymour makes a way less expensive masking glacier white screen that could be comparable possibly?

I am a fan of Stewart. Based on the quality of Stewart screens this could be my last screen but definitely not my last projector! 
So, I am leaning toward the Stewart studiotek 130 electric masking screen. Any input or comments about the electric masking screens would be helpful. Thanks!


----------



## longbow

I don't know if they have made enhancements to the 130, but I have had mine for 20 years with 8 different projectors and the picture keeps improving as the projectors get better. Awesome purchase for me.


----------



## Craig Peer

Beamis said:


> I have had a Stewart studiotek 130 100 inch diagonal for about 16 years. I started out with a Runco 720P DLP and then on to an Epson 6020. I am now due to upgrade to a 4K projector. I also want to upgrade to a bigger screen and have it masking.
> 
> Question to you experts out there:
> 
> 1. Has Stewart screen upgraded their studiotek 130 screens in the last 16 years?
> (It has been an amazing screen but I was curious if anything has been changed)
> 
> 2. Can anyone comment on the masking screens by Stewart? I read through the whole thread and did not see any comments about the masking screens. I know they are 3-4 X more expensive. Was it worth it? Because my first Stewart screen performed so well and so long I am trying to justify the purchase! I know Seymour makes a way less expensive masking glacier white screen that could be comparable possibly?
> 
> *I am a fan of Stewart. Based on the quality of Stewart screens this could be my last screen but definitely not my last projector!
> So, I am leaning toward the Stewart studiotek 130 electric masking screen. Any input or comments about the electric masking screens would be helpful*. Thanks!


I believe the StudioTek 130 has been refined a few times. I have a current sample here if you want one to compare to yours - PM or email me. As for the masking screens, what's not to like ? I've only owned Stewart electric screens, but the masking screens are top notch too.


----------



## WCW

I’m really interested in a UST projector, particularly the Optoma P1. I do have some concerns regarding UST screens, not so much as to ambient light, but viewing angles and a white ceiling. What are best Stewart screen options for me and what should I expect as far as maximum viewing angle without to much loss in quality. I’d like to have a 110” to 120” screen.


----------



## Beamis

longbow said:


> I don't know if they have made enhancements to the 130, but I have had mine for 20 years with 8 different projectors and the picture keeps improving as the projectors get better. Awesome purchase for me.


I totally agree that the screen is one of the most important ingredients in a home theater! If I had put in a larger screen originally I wouldn't be upgrading now!


----------



## longbow

Beamis said:


> I totally agree that the screen is one of the most important ingredients in a home theater! If I had put in a larger screen originally I wouldn't be upgrading now!


I have been fortunate that even after moving my current screen size was optimal. Good luck with your research!


----------



## Beamis

Craig Peer said:


> I believe the StudioTek 130 has been refined a few times. I have a current sample here if you want one to compare to yours - PM or email me. As for the masking screens, what's not to like ? I've only owned Stewart electric screens, but the masking screens are top notch too.


Thanks for your input! I will PM you for a sample to see if I can notice a difference. 
The first picture is my current StudioTek 130 100 inch diagonal.
The second picture is a possible future screen size in 16 x 9
The third picture is what it would look like in 2:35 

Surprisingly, my old flawed Epson projector 6020(that is projecting a green line which is why I am replacing-LOL!) is putting out plenty of light output to the potential future screen size. 

I know my room is not ideal with no velvet, etc. But, what do you or anyone think about the proposed screen size?
Room is 13 feet wide & 9 foot tall ceiling, 23 feet long and then extending into our main kitchen

If I go masking I could start with 16 x 9 and then go 2:35 with the current pictures 2 & 3.
Or I could go 2:35 and mask to 16 x 9 back to my original 100 inch.

Thanks!


----------



## 996911

Beamis said:


> Thanks for your input! I will PM you for a sample to see if I can notice a difference.
> The first picture is my current StudioTek 130 100 inch diagonal.
> The second picture is a possible future screen size in 16 x 9
> The third picture is what it would look like in 2:35
> 
> Surprisingly, my old flawed Epson projector 6020(that is projecting a green line which is why I am replacing-LOL!) is putting out plenty of light output to the potential future screen size.
> 
> I know my room is not ideal with no velvet, etc. But, what do you or anyone think about the proposed screen size?
> Room is 13 feet wide & 9 foot tall ceiling, 23 feet long and then extending into our main kitchen
> 
> If I go masking I could start with 16 x 9 and then go 2:35 with the current pictures 2 & 3.
> Or I could go 2:35 and mask to 16 x 9 back to my original 100 inch.
> 
> Thanks!



Personally, I would prefer the 2.35:1 screen and then have black bars for 16x9 and 1.85:1 material than I would losing any real estate and having top/bottom black bars for scope movies which is what the room is designed for. I made that "mistake" and my first Stewart was a 16x9 and was great, but it got so old having small scope movies which really negated the whole reason for a MOVIE THEATER. 

FYI....in my setup I don't even notice the black bars on the side for non-scope material and have no desire to have a masking system. 

All of this though is completely personal preference. 

Here is the THREAD when I had my 16x9 replaced with the 2.35:1 screen.


----------



## Craig Peer

Beamis said:


> Thanks for your input! I will PM you for a sample to see if I can notice a difference.
> The first picture is my current StudioTek 130 100 inch diagonal.
> The second picture is a possible future screen size in 16 x 9
> The third picture is what it would look like in 2:35
> 
> Surprisingly, my old flawed Epson projector 6020(that is projecting a green line which is why I am replacing-LOL!) is putting out plenty of light output to the potential future screen size.
> 
> I know my room is not ideal with no velvet, etc. But, what do you or anyone think about the proposed screen size?
> Room is 13 feet wide & 9 foot tall ceiling, 23 feet long and then extending into our main kitchen
> 
> If I go masking I could start with 16 x 9 and then go 2:35 with the current pictures 2 & 3.
> Or I could go 2:35 and mask to 16 x 9 back to my original 100 inch.
> 
> Thanks!


Go with a fixed 16:9 screen on the wall and an electric drop down 2.35:1 screen.


----------



## Beamis

996911 said:


> Personally, I would prefer the 2.35:1 screen and then have black bars for 16x9 and 1.85:1 material than I would losing any real estate and having top/bottom black bars for scope movies which is what the room is designed for. I made that "mistake" and my first Stewart was a 16x9 and was great, but it got so old having small scope movies which really negated the whole reason for a MOVIE THEATER.
> 
> FYI....in my setup I don't even notice the black bars on the side for non-scope material and have no desire to have a masking system.
> 
> All of this though is completely personal preference.
> 
> Here is the THREAD when I had my 16x9 replaced with the 2.35:1 screen.


Wow, your dedicated theater is perfect for a scope screen! Great movie theater!

My room, both good and bad is really my primary TV/movie room. It really gets used for everything since it is attached to the kitchen in a mixed use room. I have to cater to the wife acceptance factor! Also my viewing is about 80% 16 x 9 and 20% movies. Daytime is sports/regular tv and night more movies. Ideally, I want the biggest 16 x 9 and 2:35 option for my room. I don't want to turn this thread into a CIH discussion! HA! So, please forgive me! In my room, my max wide is about 122" wide and 68" tall.
I am planning on some quotes for a motorized Stewart screen and see if it is doable. I'm not sure if the price is as expensive as one with a steering wheel! Ha!


----------



## Beamis

Craig Peer said:


> Go with a fixed 16:9 screen on the wall and an electric drop down 2.35:1 screen.


Thanks Craig! This could be a great option for me to get the best of both worlds and not get the CIH people mad at me!


----------



## Craig Peer

Beamis said:


> Thanks Craig! This could be a great option for me to get the best of both worlds and not get the CIH people mad at me!


It is the best of both worlds - had a 2 screen setup for over 10 years. Avatar / Super Bowl etc - 122" diagonal - nice and big. Scope - 128" diagonal 2.35:1 - also nice and big. Hard to beat ! And the picture always has masking !


----------



## Craig Peer

A few screen shots on my StudioTek 130 2.35:1 screen. I love this screen !


----------



## SJHT

Is there anyway to add masking to a Stewart retractable screen? Was never given the option when I ordered. Have a 110” 16:9 ST100 as we use our theater for lots of sports and gaming in addition to movies. I was thinking of adding a roller shade in front of the screen housing (with black material) as the entire mechanism is completely hidden behind a soffit so you wouldn’t see it. Plenty of room to add an electric roller. Since I have a Lumagen Pro, I can shift the entire image down to the bottom of the current screen (for 2.35 material) and therefore would just need to mask the top. I doubt Stewart sells anything, so may need to go DIY if I decide to pursue. Thanks. SJ


----------



## Craig Peer

SJHT said:


> *Is there anyway to add masking to a Stewart retractable screen? Was never given the option when I ordered. * Have a 110” 16:9 ST100 as we use our theater for lots of sports and gaming in addition to movies. I was thinking of adding a roller shade in front of the screen housing (with black material) as the entire mechanism is completely hidden behind a soffit so you wouldn’t see it. Plenty of room to add an electric roller. Since I have a Lumagen Pro, I can shift the entire image down to the bottom of the current screen (for 2.35 material) and therefore would just need to mask the top. I doubt Stewart sells anything, so may need to go DIY if I decide to pursue. Thanks. SJ


No, you can't add masking. And they are quite a bit more money. Which is one reason I have 2 electric screens !


----------



## SJHT

I'm surprised that companies don't sell a simple drop down roller with just screen masking. Guess I will look around. Likely could be easily built with an electric roller with the appropriate material. Wonder if you can purchase the same material that Stewart uses on their screens. It looks great on mine. Don't have room for another screen like you! SJ


----------



## scanido

*Baylon Borderless New Screen Purchase*

After some months of extensive research into such an important HT component as the screen, I decided to take the plunge and significant investment over other screen options into Stewart Screens.

I decided to go with StudioTek 100 over the trusted StudioTek 130G3 with some adjustments to the lighting in my theatre. I finally received my custom 130" diagonal 2:40:1 Baylon Borderless product after a grueling +3wks wait. 

I was excited to put the screen together this Labour day long weekend and finally sit back and cap the project off with a nice movie with the family. Started to assemble the frame and i could NOT locate the bolts that attach the framing members together! I cant believe something as important as the fastening screws would be missed as part of Stewart's QA, but things do happen. I couldnt help but also notice even some areas of the frame where screws would get assembled appear to be previously been fastened. The black paint appears to be ingrained with previous assemblers work. 

I never had an issue with any of my products until today, so really bummed i have to postpone the viewing party and tell my younger kids that its a no go . 

I have emailed the support folks over at Stewart so hopefully they can resolve this and another item i had ASAP.


----------



## azkino

scanido said:


> After some months of extensive research into such an important HT component as the screen, I decided to take the plunge and significant investment over other screen options into Stewart Screens.
> 
> I decided to go with StudioTek 100 over the trusted StudioTek 130G3 with some adjustments to the lighting in my theatre. I finally received my custom 130" diagonal 2:40:1 Baylon Borderless product after a grueling +3wks wait.
> 
> I was excited to put the screen together this Labour day long weekend and finally sit back and cap the project off with a nice movie with the family. Started to assemble the frame and i could NOT locate the bolts that attach the framing members together! I cant believe something as important as the fastening screws would be missed as part of Stewart's QA, but things do happen. I couldnt help but also notice even some areas of the frame where screws would get assembled appear to be previously been fastened. The black paint appears to be ingrained with previous assemblers work.
> 
> I never had an issue with any of my products until today, so really bummed i have to postpone the viewing party and tell my younger kids that its a no go .
> 
> I have emailed the support folks over at Stewart so hopefully they can resolve this and another item i had ASAP.


I have the same screen and I’m surprised you have anything missing, I was amazed at the quality of packaging and all the materials when I received mine. All the screws needed to assemble the frame were already in place, just needed to be removed to connect the pieces and then screwed back in. Hope you get it resolved quickly, it’s a great screen.


----------



## sunol

*Is the mask material AT?*

Is the black mask material on the Stewart Cima AC line AT? Looking to install one with a 12" drop and the center channel could potentially be behind the mask if it's AT.


----------



## scanido

azkino said:


> I have the same screen and I’m surprised you have anything missing, I was amazed at the quality of packaging and all the materials when I received mine. All the screws needed to assemble the frame were already in place, just needed to be removed to connect the pieces and then screwed back in. Hope you get it resolved quickly, it’s a great screen.



I was really surprised as well, but pleased to say that Stewart rectified the issue quickly and overnight the missing parts. I guess things happen even to the best of us. 

Finally was able to install the screen over the weekend and the 2:40:1 size is amazing. I ended up using Prostar velvet around the perimeter of the screen which is working well. I may have yet another issue with the screen and am working with my Dealer/Distributor on this one.


----------



## Don Stewart

sunol said:


> Is the black mask material on the Stewart Cima AC line AT? Looking to install one with a 12" drop and the center channel could potentially be behind the mask if it's AT.


On the Stewart Cima line of retractable screens, when ordering with the AT option, the black screen drop between the housing and top of the viewing area is also AT.
On Stewart's Premium screens, retractable designs can be ordered as follows. AT on black drop area only, or AT in viewing area only, or AT on both viewing area and black drop.

Hope that helps.

Don


----------



## sunol

Don Stewart said:


> On the Stewart Cima line of retractable screens, when ordering with the AT option, the black screen drop between the housing and top of the viewing area is also AT.
> On Stewart's Premium screens, retractable designs can be ordered as follows. AT on black drop area only, or AT in viewing area only, or AT on both viewing area and black drop.
> 
> Hope that helps.
> 
> Don


Thanks Don!


----------



## umjs78

Can any cima ff 123" owner measure actual width of the screen? cutsheet says 112" but my space 111 1/2..i can shave wall 1/2" little bit to fit in. just to make sure its not more than 112 or hopely its smaller than 112"


----------



## Eggmanslc

*Resizing or adding perf to existing Stewart Screen*

I'm looking to buy a used Stewart Screen, 140" 2.35:1, for a good price. I actually need it a little smaller. Anyone know if I can send it back to Stewart and have them adjust the size for me and send it back?

Second, is it possible to add the micro-perf to add acoustical transparency? I assume the answer is no, that they perf larger sheets and then cut down. But thought I'd ask.

I need something more in the 125" to 130" diagonal range in a 2.35 ratio, or perhaps even going to a 2.0 ratio. 

Maybe someone from Stewart is watching this thread.


----------



## Craig Peer

Eggmanslc said:


> I'm looking to buy a used Stewart Screen, 140" 2.35:1, for a good price. I actually need it a little smaller. Anyone know if I can send it back to Stewart and have them adjust the size for me and send it back?
> 
> 
> 
> Second, is it possible to add the micro-perf to add acoustical transparency? I assume the answer is no, that they perf larger sheets and then cut down. But thought I'd ask.
> 
> 
> 
> I need something more in the 125" to 130" diagonal range in a 2.35 ratio, or perhaps even going to a 2.0 ratio.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe someone from Stewart is watching this thread.



I doubt that it would ( if they can do it ) wind up costing less than a new screen by the time you are finished. Better to find a used screen the size you need to begin with.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Eggmanslc

Separate question. Anyone actually have a measurement for screen gain off the first generation Stewart firehawk? I watch in a fairly light controlled environment, as far as light sources. I haven’t tried to treat my viewing area with black matte surfaces. Normal basement family room environment. I’m wondering if the standard studiotek 100 or 130 would still product the same black levels and contrast and pop as this original firehawk material. I know it’s the reference standard, but still curious. So as I consider switching to another screen, also would like to maintain my existing brightness as much as possible. The firehawk has a published gain of 1.3, but I understand with the dark screen material, measures gain actually might be less.


----------



## Killer

Eggmanslc said:


> The firehawk has a published gain of 1.3, but I understand with the dark screen material, measures gain actually might be less.



Not with Stewart. If they say 1.3, its going to be 1.3. They test the materials as part of the QC process.

Seriously, seems that Stewart always has to defend its quality and price, yet its the one brand that others wish to be for quality and performance.


----------



## Killer

Eggmanslc said:


> I'm looking to buy a used Stewart Screen, 140" 2.35:1, for a good price. I actually need it a little smaller. Anyone know if I can send it back to Stewart and have them adjust the size for me and send it back?
> 
> Second, is it possible to add the micro-perf to add acoustical transparency? I assume the answer is no, that they perf larger sheets and then cut down. But thought I'd ask.
> 
> I need something more in the 125" to 130" diagonal range in a 2.35 ratio, or perhaps even going to a 2.0 ratio.
> 
> Maybe someone from Stewart is watching this thread.


Yea, the answer will be no, you are going to have to buy a new screen from them to get the size & ratio you want and micro perf'd. They perf the material after being sized and before the edging.


----------



## Eggmanslc

Killer said:


> Yea, the answer will be no, you are going to have to buy a new screen from them to get the size & ratio you want and micro perf'd. They perf the material after being sized and before the edging.


I called them and asked them. They didn’t flat out say no regarding resizing it but did suggest it wouldn’t save me much money. Adding the micro-perf seemed to be a bit of a non-starter.


----------



## Eggmanslc

Killer said:


> Not with Stewart. If they say 1.3, its going to be 1.3. They test the materials as part of the QC process.
> 
> Seriously, seems that Stewart always has to defend its quality and price, yet its the one brand that others wish to be for quality and performance.


This report by Accucal would suggest that the gain on their firehawks is actually a little overstated, hence my question. 

https://www.accucalav.com/wp-content/uploads/accucal_front_projection_screen_report.pdf

But he doesn’t measure the original firehawk.


----------



## Dave in Green

The measured Firehawk G3 and G4 performance in the AccuCal report is about the only place I've seen a Stewart product underperform specs. It's interesting that most other screens in that grouping also underperformed in gain measurements. ALR screens can be fussy to measure so there could be something about the setup that affected the performance of most screens in that category. Stewart's StudioTek 100 and 130 certainly performed up to spec in the AccuCal report.


----------



## Danonano

Is there a published minimum viewing distance for current perforated Stewart screens? thanks


----------



## Eggmanslc

Danonano said:


> Is there a published minimum viewing distance for current perforated Stewart screens? thanks


From browsing their website, they list 12’ for their microperf option.


----------



## Eggmanslc

Dave in Green said:


> The measured Firehawk G3 and G4 performance in the AccuCal report is about the only place I've seen a Stewart product underperform specs. It's interesting that most other screens in that grouping also underperformed in gain measurements. ALR screens can be fussy to measure so there could be something about the setup that affected the performance of most screens in that category. Stewart's StudioTek 100 and 130 certainly performed up to spec in the AccuCal report.


Thanks. 

I’m also trying to find out what the cone viewing angle is for the original firehawk. Anyone happen to know that? Just want to compare my viewing experience (which is very good), to other options out there as I consider a move to a larger screen. 
Also, is the original firehawk designed to do better with overhead lights or side lights?


----------



## akm3

Does Stewart compete in the ultra-short throw / ambient light rejection market? I have used and loved Stewart screens in the past and as I'm building my new theater, I'm blind or not seeing anything from them in that space.

To compete with the Screen Innovations Ultra Short or XY Screen PET Crystal screens, but at Stewart quality (and options like masking)

/edit: I'm aware of the Graymatte 70 but that doesn't seem to be the same type of product as the other "saw tooth" UST / ALR screens.


----------



## Killer

akm3 said:


> Does Stewart compete in the ultra-short throw / ambient light rejection market? I have used and loved Stewart screens in the past and as I'm building my new theater, I'm blind or not seeing anything from them in that space.
> 
> To compete with the Screen Innovations Ultra Short or XY Screen PET Crystal screens, but at Stewart quality (and options like masking)
> 
> /edit: I'm aware of the Graymatte 70 but that doesn't seem to be the same type of product as the other "saw tooth" UST / ALR screens.


Hey akm3, they do not have a solution currently for UST ALR. Their only options are StudioTek and Graymatte, which you have figured is NOT ALR. Their ALR options like Firehawk and Phantom require a longer throw. By in large, you can look at EPV and Draper as well since they all pretty much get the "sawtooth" material from similar sources for UST ALR.


----------



## tommarra

*Help decide between Studiotek 130 G4 or Neve*

All, 
Apologies in advance if this is an oft repeated question - I did search the forum but didn't get a conclusive answer. Also have read Jeff Meir's report on screen materials.

I am looking to redo my HT which will be a bat cave 100% light control. I have a JVC NX7 that I will be using to project on a 125 - 135 inch (130inch most likely) 16:9 screen from a distance of ~16ft.

I am looking at Stewart Cima Neve and Studiotek 130 screen material for the new screen.


I know Stewart screens are best in class, but I wanted to know from real world users the incidence of sparkles on the screens.

Any thoughts on how pronounced the sparkles are on these screen - would be very helpful.

Thanks in advance!


----------



## 996911

tommarra said:


> All,
> Apologies in advance if this is an oft repeated question - I did search the forum but didn't get a conclusive answer. Also have read Jeff Meir's report on screen materials.
> 
> I am looking to redo my HT which will be a bat cave 100% light control. I have a JVC NX7 that I will be using to project on a 125 - 135 inch (130inch most likely) 16:9 screen from a distance of ~16ft.
> 
> I am looking at Stewart Cima Neve and Studiotek 130 screen material for the new screen.
> 
> 
> I know Stewart screens are best in class, but I wanted to know from real world users the incidence of sparkles on the screens.
> 
> Any thoughts on how pronounced the sparkles are on these screen - would be very helpful.
> 
> Thanks in advance!


I have the ST130 (2.35 152") in a light controlled theater room with a calibrated JVC RS600 projecting from about 19 feet and the picture is amazing on the screen and I have never seen the sparkles you speak of.


----------



## tommarra

996911 said:


> I have the ST130 (2.35 152") in a light controlled theater room with a calibrated JVC RS600 projecting from about 19 feet and the picture is amazing on the screen and I have never seen the sparkles you speak of.




Thank you this is super helpful. Appreciate the inputs 

I know different people are sensitive differently to screen artifacts - would be great to hear from a few more owners.

I have also ordered a sample of the Neve and the Studiotek 130 material 



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 996911

tommarra said:


> Thank you this is super helpful. Appreciate the inputs
> 
> I know different people are sensitive differently to screen artifacts - would be great to hear from a few more owners.
> 
> I have also ordered a sample of the Neve and the Studiotek 130 material
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Very welcome. I'm guessing that Stewart produces a far superior product that reduces or eliminates this effect typically seen in lower end screens trying to artifically pump the gain. Also, my screen is AT so that probably reduced my chance of sparkles even further.


----------



## gwthacker

tommarra said:


> Thank you this is super helpful. Appreciate the inputs
> 
> I know different people are sensitive differently to screen artifacts - would be great to hear from a few more owners.
> 
> I have also ordered a sample of the Neve and the Studiotek 130 material
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk




I have studiotek 130- I’ve never once seen artifacts. Run a Barco Balder projector on 158 inch screen. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## tommarra

gwthacker said:


> I have studiotek 130- I’ve never once seen artifacts. Run a Barco Balder projector on 158 inch screen.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro




Thanks!

Any thoughts on the Neve material - it’s a bit more affordable and I am also looking at it as a potential screen


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## howiee

Does anyone know the difference between the StudioTek 130 G3 and G4 materials?


----------



## Bruce N

howiee said:


> Does anyone know the difference between the StudioTek 130 G3 and G4 materials?



I'd like to know as well since I have just ordered a Stewart StudioTek 130 screen. I wonder if it will come with the new material?


----------



## scanido

tommarra said:


> Thank you this is super helpful. Appreciate the inputs
> 
> I know different people are sensitive differently to screen artifacts - would be great to hear from a few more owners.
> 
> I have also ordered a sample of the Neve and the Studiotek 130 material
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


How come no StudioTek 100 while your at it? Your environment described sounds like it could also work with this material, and it does not show any sparkles whatsoever.


----------



## tommarra

scanido said:


> How come no StudioTek 100 while your at it? Your environment described sounds like it could also work with this material, and it does not show any sparkles whatsoever.




I may consider it - but I worry that I might not get enough light from a unity gain screen. 130 inch 16:9 screen I might not get 30fL for good HDR performance.

Hence Neve and ST130 

Am I not thinking about it right?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## howiee

tommarra said:


> I may consider it - but I worry that I might not get enough light from a unity gain screen. 130 inch 16:9 screen I might not get 30fL for good HDR performance.


On high with a newish bulb you should be starting around that. This is worth a watch if you haven't seen it. Kris talks about HDR on the new JVCs and ftL:


----------



## Craig Peer

Bruce N said:


> I'd like to know as well since I have just ordered a Stewart StudioTek 130 screen. I wonder if it will come with the new material?




I have a sample of G4 coming to compare to my G3 screen. But my Stewart rep told me the difference is minor and subtle. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Craig Peer

tommarra said:


> Thanks!
> 
> Any thoughts on the Neve material - it’s a bit more affordable and I am also looking at it as a potential screen
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk




I love my Neve screen. It’s very close to my StudioTek 130 ( I have both ). Get a sample of each and compare.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Craig Peer

tommarra said:


> I may consider it - but I worry that I might not get enough light from a unity gain screen. 130 inch 16:9 screen I might not get 30fL for good HDR performance.
> 
> Hence Neve and ST130
> 
> Am I not thinking about it right?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I much prefer the ST130 and Neve myself. You can probably watch most stuff - certainly regular 1080p stuff - in low lamp, and have a bright enough picture. 

What's not to like about the StudioTek 130 ?


----------



## Bruce N

Craig Peer said:


> I have a sample of G4 coming to compare to my G3 screen. But my Stewart rep told me the difference is minor and subtle.



Thanks Craig. That's what I figured!


----------



## Craig Peer

Bruce N said:


> Thanks Craig. That's what I figured!


It's so minor that Stewart didn't mention it when we saw them at Cedia. But I'll report back when i get my G4 sample - maybe this week.


----------



## tommarra

Craig Peer said:


> I much prefer the ST130 and Neve myself. You can probably watch most stuff - certainly regular 1080p stuff - in low lamp, and have a bright enough picture.
> 
> 
> 
> What's not to like about the StudioTek 130 ?




Sparkles or sheen on the screen? Is that an issue? 

I have an Elitescreens cinegrey screen and it’s terrible with sparkles and screens 

I am assuming ST130 has no such issues 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Craig Peer

tommarra said:


> Sparkles or sheen on the screen? Is that an issue?
> 
> I have an Elitescreens cinegrey screen and it’s terrible with sparkles and screens
> 
> I am assuming ST130 has no such issues
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I hardly saw sparkles when I was watching HDR at 45 foot lamberts. Now that Kris Deering has re - calibrated my RS4500 and Dynamic HDR tone mapping is here, I have a much better picture that doesn't need to be that bright to look great. Sparkles are not an issue in my theater on my ST130 ( or Neve for that matter ). Both Sony and JVC use the StudioTek 130 for their most important demos at Cedia. I think it has just the right amount of gain, and nearly zero surface texture / sheen.


----------



## Craig Peer

And I've had my Stewart Luxus Model A "Classic" Electriscreen with StudioTek 130 material since March of 2013, and my Neve electric screen ( actually a one off Luxus Model A "Classic" Electriscreen with Neve material ) since September of 2013. Zero issues, love them as much today as when I first got them. Spend the money once, and be done with it. I have no need to ever change screens again.


----------



## tommarra

Craig Peer said:


> I hardly saw sparkles when I was watching HDR at 45 foot lamberts. Now that Kris Deering has re - calibrated my RS4500 and Dynamic HDR tone mapping is here, I have a much better picture that doesn't need to be that bright to look great. Sparkles are not an issue in my theater on my ST130 ( or Neve for that matter ). Both Sony and JVC use the StudioTek 130 for their most important demos at Cedia. I think it has just the right amount of gain, and nearly zero surface texture / sheen.




Thank you so much! This is super helpful. 

I am almost ready to spend several thousands on the screen 

Any recommendations for good dealers with competitive pricing 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Ericglo

tommarra said:


> Thank you so much! This is super helpful.
> 
> I am almost ready to spend several thousands on the screen
> 
> Any recommendations for good dealers with competitive pricing
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


LOL, what about Craig?


----------



## Craig Peer

tommarra said:


> Thank you so much! This is super helpful.
> 
> I am almost ready to spend several thousands on the screen
> 
> Any recommendations for good dealers with competitive pricing
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Might as well get free screen samples first. I have some - email me.


----------



## longbow

I have had my StudioTek 130 for over 15 years now. Many projectors have passed through and I am now using an Epson 5040UB. The screen is the only thing in my system that I have had since the beginning of my home theater. It is terrific. No sparkles, just an appropriately bight and clean picture.It was expensive, but amortized over so many years it has become the least expensive item I have in the theater. Quality is worth paying for.


----------



## Ericglo

howiee said:


> On high with a newish bulb you should be starting around that. This is worth a watch if you haven't seen it. Kris talks about HDR on the new JVCs and ftL:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3eREBOLJ7m0


 @Krisdeering

LOL at first glance, I thought you were a Las Vegas magician doing an act.


----------



## SJHT

The ST130 looks a bit yellowish when you set a sample next to ST100. I’ve read comments about this from some, but likely makes little difference if calibrated. SJ


----------



## Craig Peer

SJHT said:


> The ST130 looks a bit yellowish when you set a sample next to ST100. I’ve read comments about this from some, but likely makes little difference if calibrated. SJ


It does have a slightly different appearance. But you are correct - after a calibration it will look fine. Here's a screen shot on my StudioTek 130 G3 - calibrated by Kris Deering -















I have a sample of StudioTek 130 G4. I can't really see any big difference compared to my G3 screen.


----------



## ERuiz

Good morning guys!

Just wanted to let you know I shall soon be part of the Stewart screens family! 

My 125" Stewart ST100 2.40:1 Balon screen is scheduled to ship out to me on Nov. 7th and I am extremely excited to finally do my JVC NX7 some justice! LOL

I've been throwing an image on a beige, textured wall for the past couple of weeks and I can't imagine how good everything will look once the screen is all set up.



Sent from my iPhone X


----------



## Craig Peer

ERuiz said:


> Good morning guys!
> 
> Just wanted to let you know I shall soon be part of the Stewart screens family!
> 
> My 125" Stewart ST100 2.40:1 Balon screen is scheduled to ship out to me on Nov. 7th and I am extremely excited to finally do my JVC NX7 some justice! LOL
> 
> I've been throwing an image on a beige, textured wall for the past couple of weeks and I can't imagine how good everything will look once the screen is all set up.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone X


4K on that screen / projector combo will look amazing !


----------



## ERuiz

Craig Peer said:


> 4K on that screen / projector combo will look amazing !




That's what everyone keeps telling me! Ughhhhhh The wait is killing me! lol


Sent from my iPhone X


----------



## scanido

ERuiz said:


> Good morning guys!
> 
> Just wanted to let you know I shall soon be part of the Stewart screens family!
> 
> My 125" Stewart ST100 2.40:1 Balon screen is scheduled to ship out to me on Nov. 7th and I am extremely excited to finally do my JVC NX7 some justice! LOL
> 
> I've been throwing an image on a beige, textured wall for the past couple of weeks and I can't imagine how good everything will look once the screen is all set up.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone X


Was exactly in your situation! Was using my Sony VW500es on a beige wall for years until the Theatre was finally completed. You will be blown away by the difference of using a proper screen, especially a reference one like the ST100. There are absolutely no sparkles on this screen

It will be worth the wait for the Baylon Borderless screen. I could not find much reviews of it when i ordered, but you will be pleased. It is beautiful and modern! Only drawback was finding a way to absorb the overscan image, which i found a solution using ProtoStar around the perimeter of the screen.


----------



## ERuiz

scanido said:


> Was exactly in your situation! Was using my Sony VW500es on a beige wall for years until the Theatre was finally completed. You will be blown away by the difference of using a proper screen, especially a reference one like the ST100. There are absolutely no sparkles on this screen
> 
> 
> 
> It will be worth the wait for the Baylon Borderless screen. I could not find much reviews of it when i ordered, but you will be pleased. It is beautiful and modern! Only drawback was finding a way to absorb the overscan image, which i found a solution using ProtoStar around the perimeter of the screen.



Yea man, I can't wait!

That is an absolutely beautiful set up you have there, Scanido!

Do you have a link to that ProtoStar?

I was thinking of purchasing triple black velvet from Joann's Fabrics and some foam-board. Wrap them and make a frame around the screen attached to the wall.

And is that a Balon ST100 screen as well?


Sent from my iPhone X


----------



## scanido

ERuiz said:


> Yea man, I can't wait!
> 
> That is an absolutely beautiful set up you have there, Scanido!
> 
> Do you have a link to that ProtoStar?
> 
> I was thinking of purchasing triple black velvet from Joann's Fabrics and some foam-board. Wrap them and make a frame around the screen attached to the wall.
> 
> And is that a Balon ST100 screen as well?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone X


THank you! Yeah, that is the Stewart Baylon with ST100. 

Only reason i went with the Protostar was it had an adhesive in it, so it was easy to apply. Not sure i could add the link but do a search on fpi-protostar, and its their Hi-Tack product.


----------



## Kris Deering

Hello All. I am currently reviewing the new G4 version of the ST130. I've casually glanced through the last page of comments on screens and seen lots of questions about the difference between a ST130 and ST100. The main difference visually is the lack of any coating signature on the image. Because the ST130 is a gain screen, there is the texture and artifacts associated with the coating. This results in some static texture that is typically visible in bright portions of the screen when the image is panning (more visible with a vertical pan typically). I see a lot of ST130 owners that say they never see the texture and sparkle, which is great (don't go looking for it!), but it is ALWAYS there. If you were to compare a tensioned ST100 to it, the difference is quite noticeable, especially with bright content (The Art of Flight is a perfect test case). I am pretty sensitive to it as I've used a ST100 for years now, but the ST130 is still miles better in this regard than most screens I see at shows or at client's homes for calibrations. 

The G4 is Stewart's latest version and looks to reduce the "texture/signature" of the coating to help with clarity and visual artifacts now that we've moved to 4K and brighter images. I'll have a review here in the next couple months that compares it to my ST100 and my experiences with the previous G3 version (which I also own and have used before). 

As for brightness differences between the ST130 and ST100, you will typically see somewhere around 20-25%. It usually doesn't hit 30% because of the angles in use (for ceiling mounted projectors). The ST130 has gain applied so its brightness uniformity across the screen will not be as consistent. The ST100 maintains its brightness uniformity much better (but remember, not all projectors have great uniformity so this could play into it as well). The ST100 should only be considered in a bat-cave like environment with extreme care for not only ambient light but the reflection of light in the room back to the screen. Think velvet lined with no light colored surfaces. Care still needs to be taken with the ST130, but not to the same extreme.


----------



## howiee

Kris Deering said:


> I'll have a review here in the next couple months that compares it to my ST100 and my experiences with the previous G3 version (which I also own and have used before).


Looking forward to that!


----------



## tommarra

Kris Deering said:


> The G4 is Stewart's latest version and looks to reduce the "texture/signature" of the coating to help with clarity and visual artifacts now that we've moved to 4K and brighter images. I'll have a review here in the next couple months that compares it to my ST100 and my experiences with the previous G3 version (which I also own and have used before).




Thank you! I look forward to it ... I am torn between ST130 and Neve and ST100 and cant make up my mind.
Part of me says go with ST100 to get a great no compromise picture ... because with Dynamic Tone mapping I can get by with lower gain. I might even go with a smaller screen and move my sofa closer to the screen.

Compromise compromise! 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Danonano

Kris Deering said:


> Hello All. I am currently reviewing the new G4 version of the ST130.


Any idea when it goes on sale? Or is it available already? (I don't see it on the website)


----------



## Bruce N

Danonano said:


> Any idea when it goes on sale? Or is it available already? (I don't see it on the website)



They are shipping G4 now. I just received my new ST130 yesterday and it says G4 on the tube.


----------



## howiee

tommarra said:


> I might even go with a smaller screen and move my sofa closer to the screen.


Never! Burn through bulbs first


----------



## Craig Peer

Bruce N said:


> They are shipping G4 now. I just received my new ST130 yesterday and it says G4 on the tube.


I have a sample. It really doesn't look any different than my G3 screen.


----------



## flyinrazrback

What is the best Stewart screen in the 120" range in a 100% light controlled room but also has the ability to watch with some lights on?


----------



## Craig Peer

flyinrazrback said:


> What is the best Stewart screen in the 120" range in a 100% light controlled room but also has the ability to watch with some lights on?


I've watched stuff on my Cima Neve with the recessed can lights with dimmers in our theater. It looks fine for sports / HDTV. Dark movies obviously look better in the dark .


----------



## ERuiz

Decided to pay for Internet onboard Majesty Of The Seas  and come to find out my 125" ST100 Balon 2.40 screen is scheduled for delivery on Monday! Same day I return home from our cruise. What a way to end a vacation!!!! 

Cheers from Cozumel!


Sent from my iPhone X


----------



## jasonwc07

I'm interested in purchasing a 123" fixed frame 16:9 screen with Studiotek130 screen material. I expect to keep the screen a long time since it is essentially the reference standard for a screen with a small amount of gain. Thus, I'm wondering how to go about packing the screen if I move in the future (no plans currently, just wondering). Can the screen material be rolled up in its original packaging? As for assembly, are there any videos of the process (I think it'll be a WallScreen Deluxe with the EZMount system, but I'll verify prior to purchase). I found written instructions here: https://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/Files/files/Support Material/OwnersManuals/Wallscreen Deluxe.pdf.


----------



## steevo123

*ST130 with short throw?*

Im considering the ST130 with a 100" screen and 10' throw. Right at the edge of the 1.3 times screen width Requirement. Small screen sample didn't really tell me much, so wondering - anyone use the ST130 with a short throw? 



Whats your experience with hot-spotting or sparkles? Any opinions would be great. Thanks!


----------



## ERuiz

What a way to end a cruise and come home to this!!!  It will be a loooong night for me tonight!










Sent from my iPhone X


----------



## scanido

Kris Deering said:


> ...
> The ST100 maintains its brightness uniformity much better (but remember, not all projectors have great uniformity so this could play into it as well). The ST100 should only be considered in a bat-cave like environment with extreme care for not only ambient light but the reflection of light in the room back to the screen. Think velvet lined with no light colored surfaces. Care still needs to be taken with the ST130, but not to the same extreme.


I was actually quite worried by this notion of having a blacked out bat cave prerequisite for the ST100, however after experiencing it with piano black speakers on either side and below my screen, and having a dark grey room - far from blacked out, my ST100 appears to work very well. I can even watch sports with the cove lights on with satisfaction on the image quality. I dont have any other screens to compare to but coming from a Pio Kuro plasma, the projected screen looks very good in my theatre. I agree though to get the absolute most performance out of the screen a blacked out light controlled environment will always work best but wanted to provide my experience that one close enough works very well too.


----------



## Craig Peer

ERuiz said:


> What a way to end a cruise and come home to this!!!  It will be a loooong night for me tonight!
> 
> View attachment 2639676
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone X


What a way to end a vacation ! Post photos once it's up please !


----------



## ERuiz

Let me start off by saying that this screen (ST100 material on Balon frame) has impressed me from the packaging, throughout the entire assembly and even up to the point where I finally hung the screen on the wall with the material all installed and done. The attention to detail and craftsmanship has by far been the best I have ever experienced. It definitely feels like a professional piece of equipment and well worth the premium price.

But being the unlucky fella that I always am, I have an issue with the final product. I don't know if it's just that the screen material is a tad too small but all 4 corners are showing the edge of the screen material.

The worst being the bottom right corner, which shows an almost 1/2" square. =(

I meticulously followed the instructions and made sure the frame was smack center of the screen material. I was jumping all over the place, aligning it and making sure it was centered before I started snapping the screen material to the frame.

I went from the top left corner and worked my way around it, as per the instructions.

All button snaps were done and it all looked great. I installed the frame bezels, they all snapped into place and I secured them with the supplied springs.

When I hung the screen, this is how all 4 corners look like:

































This is my first Stewart screen and I don't know what I can do to fix this, if it was an error on my part. Like I said, the frame was perfectly squared inside the screen material and all button snaps were snapped into place.

Any advice?

I'm sort of bummed out because up until the point of hanging the screen all assembled and noticing this issue, I was extremely excited. The screen is amazing and the NX7's image is now jaw dropping! But those corners though. =(

Can anyone help me, please?


Sent from my iPhone X


----------



## Craig Peer

ERuiz said:


> Let me start off by saying that this screen (ST100 material on Balon frame) has impressed me from the packaging up, throughout the entire assembly and even up to the point where I finally hung the screen in the wall with the material all installed and done. The attention to detail and craftsmanship has by far the best I have experienced.
> 
> But being the unlucky fella that I always am, I have an issue with the final product. I don't know if it's just that the screen material is a tad too small but all 4 corners are showing the edge of the screen material.
> 
> The worst being the bottom right corner, which shows an almost 1/2" square. =(
> 
> I meticulously followed the instructions, made sure the frame was smack center of the screen material. I was jumping all over the place, aligning it and making sure it was centered before I started snapping the material to the frame.
> 
> I went from the top left corner and worked my way around it, as per the instructions.
> 
> All button snaps were done and it all looked great. I installed the frame bezels, they all snapped into place and I secured them with the supplied springs.
> 
> When I hung the screen, this is how all 4 corners look like:
> 
> View attachment 2639924
> 
> 
> View attachment 2639922
> 
> 
> View attachment 2639920
> 
> 
> View attachment 2639918
> 
> 
> This is my first Stewart screen and I don't know what I can do to fix this, if it was an error on my part. Like I said, the frame was perfectly squared inside the screen material and all button snaps were snapped into place.
> 
> Any advice?
> 
> I sort of bummed out because up until the point of hanging the screen all assembled and noticing this issue, I was extremely excited. The screen is amazing and the NX7's image is now jaw dropping! But those corners though. =(
> 
> Can anyone help me, please?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone X




Contact your dealer and have them contact Stewart.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ERuiz

Craig Peer said:


> Contact your dealer and have them contact Stewart.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk




Uh oh, that doesn't sound good. =( I will contact my dealer right away.


Sent from my iPhone X


----------



## ProjectionHead

ERuiz said:


> Let me start off by saying that this screen (ST100 material on Balon frame) has impressed me from the packaging, throughout the entire assembly and even up to the point where I finally hung the screen on the wall with the material all installed and done. The attention to detail and craftsmanship has by far been the best I have ever experienced. It definitely feels like a professional piece of equipment and well worth the premium price.
> 
> But being the unlucky fella that I always am, I have an issue with the final product. I don't know if it's just that the screen material is a tad too small but all 4 corners are showing the edge of the screen material.
> 
> The worst being the bottom right corner, which shows an almost 1/2" square. =(
> 
> I meticulously followed the instructions and made sure the frame was smack center of the screen material. I was jumping all over the place, aligning it and making sure it was centered before I started snapping the screen material to the frame.
> 
> I went from the top left corner and worked my way around it, as per the instructions.
> 
> All button snaps were done and it all looked great. I installed the frame bezels, they all snapped into place and I secured them with the supplied springs.
> 
> When I hung the screen, this is how all 4 corners look like:
> 
> View attachment 2639924
> 
> 
> View attachment 2639922
> 
> 
> View attachment 2639920
> 
> 
> View attachment 2639918
> 
> 
> This is my first Stewart screen and I don't know what I can do to fix this, if it was an error on my part. Like I said, the frame was perfectly squared inside the screen material and all button snaps were snapped into place.
> 
> Any advice?
> 
> I'm sort of bummed out because up until the point of hanging the screen all assembled and noticing this issue, I was extremely excited. The screen is amazing and the NX7's image is now jaw dropping! But those corners though. =(
> 
> Can anyone help me, please?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone X


Here you go, fixed that for ya! 

You should expect Stewart to take care of this for you right away, they are the best.


----------



## ERuiz

ProjectionHead said:


> Here you go, fixed that for ya!
> 
> 
> 
> You should expect Stewart to take care of this for you right away, they are the best.



LMFAO!!!! Stewart should make these in ST100 material!! LOL

Guys, I reached out to my vendor @ProjectionHead and as always, I will be taken care of. Stewart will be reaching out to me very soon and help me get squared away.

Like stated earlier, the build quality is amazing and I already see Stewart's customer service already coming through.

Kudos to both ProjectionScreen and Stewart.

BTW, the image thrown by the NX7 on the ST100 is jaw dropping!!! Best image I have ever seen from a projector/screen combo. Simply beautiful.


Sent from my iPhone X


----------



## Pultzar

Kris Deering said:


> Hello All. I am currently reviewing the new G4 version of the ST130. I've casually glanced through the last page of comments on screens and seen lots of questions about the difference between a ST130 and ST100. The main difference visually is the lack of any coating signature on the image. Because the ST130 is a gain screen, there is the texture and artifacts associated with the coating. This results in some static texture that is typically visible in bright portions of the screen when the image is panning (more visible with a vertical pan typically). I see a lot of ST130 owners that say they never see the texture and sparkle, which is great (don't go looking for it!), but it is ALWAYS there. If you were to compare a tensioned ST100 to it, the difference is quite noticeable, especially with bright content (The Art of Flight is a perfect test case). I am pretty sensitive to it as I've used a ST100 for years now, but the ST130 is still miles better in this regard than most screens I see at shows or at client's homes for calibrations.
> 
> The G4 is Stewart's latest version and looks to reduce the "texture/signature" of the coating to help with clarity and visual artifacts now that we've moved to 4K and brighter images. I'll have a review here in the next couple months that compares it to my ST100 and my experiences with the previous G3 version (which I also own and have used before).
> 
> As for brightness differences between the ST130 and ST100, you will typically see somewhere around 20-25%. It usually doesn't hit 30% because of the angles in use (for ceiling mounted projectors). The ST130 has gain applied so its brightness uniformity across the screen will not be as consistent. The ST100 maintains its brightness uniformity much better (but remember, not all projectors have great uniformity so this could play into it as well). The ST100 should only be considered in a bat-cave like environment with extreme care for not only ambient light but the reflection of light in the room back to the screen. Think velvet lined with no light colored surfaces. Care still needs to be taken with the ST130, but not to the same extreme.


Please petition them to take these same steps with ST100 to remove what remaining sparkle is there as well  It is close but not perfect.


----------



## Kris Deering

The ST100’s coating is for color accuracy. The texture is so subtle you really have to look for it specifically and usually very closely. It is hardly an issue worth complaining about.


----------



## asharma

*Cima electric drop down question*

I’m trying to adjust the screen drop on my Cima Neve to raise it about an inch from the bottom position...the problem is the end of my screen Casing is about 4 inches from the side wall. I removed the white Dust cover and am using a Mirror and a flashlight to locate the “pod” (because I cannot fit my head in the 4” space) which I need to turn clockwise...

The manual says to use “an electricians style screwdriver” what ever that is or a .4 cm hex...I’ve tried everything and no luck so I just want to make sure I am trying to adjust the proper pod...it says it’s a white “switch” but says to use a hex...with my flashlight and mirror I see a hex pod which looks silver to me...the problem is the hex does not seem to be “cut out” to allow the insertion of the hex wrench...is someone able to locate the pod and see if a hex will fit it or something will fit it? just wanna make sure I’m trying to adjust the right “pod/switch”...

Edit: I see the big mother yellow UP switch, not touching that one...where is the white switch in relation to the yellow switch?

Edit 2: I don’t think the silver pod I’m seeing is an adjustment pod, it’s seems to just be part of the interior housing


----------



## SJHT

I have a different model, but the manual has detailed drawings as to the location of these. SJ

Just looked and your manual doesn’t have this. 

They turn really easy on mine.


----------



## ERuiz

Quick update:

Stewart came through and now my screen is FLAWLESS!!! I am in AWE with the level of customer service I have experienced with Stewart.

They overnighted a new screen material AND flew a field tech to my house in order to assemble the new screen material on my frame! Talk about taking care of their customers and making sure we are completely satisfied with our purchase.

The new screen material fit like a glove and all corners are perfect.

A huge shout out to Mike Walley from Stewart Screens for assembling my new screen and doing an amazing job.

They say you get what you pay for and in this case, it couldn't be any more true. You pay a premium for their screens but you are treated like royalty when it comes to standing by their products.

If you are thinking about buying a projector screen, Stewart Screens should be on top of your list.


Sent from my iPhone X. Excuse my grammar and pardon my brevity.


----------



## scanido

ERuiz said:


> Quick update:
> 
> Stewart came through and now my screen is FLAWLESS!!! I am in AWE with the level of customer service I have experienced with Stewart.
> 
> They overnighted a new screen material AND flew a field tech to my house in order to assemble the new screen material on my frame! Talk about taking care of their customers and making sure we are completely satisfied with our purchase.
> 
> The new screen material fit like a glove and all corners are perfect.
> 
> A huge shout out to Mike Walley from Stewart Screens for assembling my new screen and doing an amazing job.
> 
> They say you get what you pay for and in this case, it couldn't be any more true. You pay a premium for their screens but you are treated like royalty when it comes to standing by their products.
> 
> If you are thinking about buying a projector screen, Stewart Screens should be on top of your list.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone X. Excuse my grammar and pardon my brevity.



Great to hear everything got all sorted out. Now just sit back and enjoy the beautiful screen. 

I can also echo the amazing customer service from Stewart. Had a few hiccups with my purchase, but Stewart came through and went above and beyond in the end, which is what really matters.


----------



## 996911

ERuiz said:


> Quick update:
> 
> .........They say you get what you pay for and in this case, it couldn't be any more true. You pay a premium for their screens but you are treated like royalty when it comes to standing by their products.
> 
> If you are thinking about buying a projector screen, Stewart Screens should be on top of your list.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone X. Excuse my grammar and pardon my brevity.


Agree 100%.

It's why I have purchased 2 of their screens and won't consider another brand for my next screen. Quality and CS is top notch.


----------



## Craig Peer

I've had my Stewart Filmscreen Luxus Electriscreen with StudioTek 130 G3 material for over 6 1/2 years now ( bought March 2013 ). No wrinkles, or other problems. As good now as day one ! I love this screen !


----------



## ERuiz

Craig Peer said:


> I've had my Stewart Filmscreen Luxus Electriscreen with StudioTek 130 G3 material for over 6 1/2 years now ( bought March 2013 ). No wrinkles, or other problems. As good now as day one ! I love this screen !




Nice screen! I can definitely see me using my new screen for years to come. The build quality on it is top notch. The new material wraps around the corners so well now, that I could have easily left the frame off and use it as a borderless screen if I wanted to. That's how good the fit is now. Stewart really did a good job rectifying this issue.

I will take a few shots of my screen this evening so you guys can check it out.


Sent from my iPhone X. Excuse my grammar and pardon my brevity.


----------



## ERuiz

Finished putting up the foam boards wrapped with triple black velvet from Joann's Fabrics. This will do until we move out from this apartment to a house in a year or so.

I think this should help "a bit" with reflections.




















Sent from my iPhone X. Excuse my grammar and pardon my brevity.


----------



## yrnron

I found an old, used motorized 110" Videomatte 200 Stewart screen for $60 and was thinking of pairing it with my Optoma HD142x. I've read they were not meant for very high lumen PJ's and the Optoma pushes around 3,000 lumens. Will this screen work for me? It's in great condition and I figured $60 was a steal for a 110" Stewart screen and not to mention that it's motorized! Thoughts?


----------



## Craig Peer

yrnron said:


> I found an old, used motorized 110" Videomatte 200 Stewart screen for $60 and was thinking of pairing it with my Optoma HD142x. I've read they were not meant for very high lumen PJ's and the Optoma pushes around 3,000 lumens. Will this screen work for me? It's in great condition and I figured $60 was a steal for a 110" Stewart screen and not to mention that it's motorized! Thoughts?


What do you have to lose besides $ 60.00.


----------



## Craig Peer

My StudioTek 130 makes even Deadpool look great !


----------



## thompsob1987

Hey everyone, I recently purchased my first projector (JVC RS2000) so I'm in the market for a screen. I was looking to pickup a Stewart Cima with Tiburon G2 as the projector is in a shared den area with some ambient light.

I noticed the gain on that material is .8, which made me concerned about the brightness possible for HDR content. Would I be better off going up market to a Balon with Firehawk G5 (1.1 gain) or similar or am I making much ado about nothing and the .8 gain will be fine with HDR?


Lighting condition info if that is a deciding factor: 
I have windows, but they have blackout blinds with blackout curtains pulled over them. 

Room is a large shared area with PCs that could generate light ~20' from the screen as well a hallway can light ~ 30' away from the screen.


----------



## LJG

Just wondering the actual loss in gain on Stewart 100 Microperf?


----------



## Craig Peer

LJG said:


> Just wondering the actual loss in gain on Stewart 100 Microperf?


I believe Microperf reduces light by 10%.


----------



## Craig Peer

thompsob1987 said:


> Hey everyone, I recently purchased my first projector (JVC RS2000) so I'm in the market for a screen. I was looking to pickup a Stewart Cima with Tiburon G2 as the projector is in a shared den area with some ambient light.
> 
> I noticed the gain on that material is .8, which made me concerned about the brightness possible for HDR content. Would I be better off going up market to a Balon with Firehawk G5 (1.1 gain) or similar or am I making much ado about nothing and the .8 gain will be fine with HDR?
> 
> 
> Lighting condition info if that is a deciding factor:
> I have windows, but they have blackout blinds with blackout curtains pulled over them.
> 
> Room is a large shared area with PCs that could generate light ~20' from the screen as well a hallway can light ~ 30' away from the screen.


I'd consider the Firehawk. Get samples of each. Can you eliminate those light sources with curtains that can be closed while watching movies ? If so, consider the Cima Neve. Add that to your sample list. Maybe get the projector first and test the samples in the actual viewing conditions prior to choosing the screen.


----------



## mrvideo

ERuiz said:


> Stewart came through and now my screen is FLAWLESS!!!


Did you ever find out what caused the corner issues?


----------



## ERuiz

mrvideo said:


> Did you ever find out what caused the corner issues?




The way the screen was cut, I guess. The new screen had a different cutout in the corners which provided perfect coverage.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mrvideo

I'm looking at the Wallscreen series of frames. What I have not been able to determine is what the total width/height is for the "1.5" and "Deluxe" versions of the frames. For any of the screen sizes, what is added to the screen width and height so that one knows the exact amount of space that is required?


----------



## Danonano

I'm helping my Dad setup a Luxux motorized screen and we need to adjust the down limit. I can see the white hex adjuster, but with the bottom panel on I can't access it. Do I just remove the few screws on either end to remove the bottom panel so that I can access the limit adjuster?

thanks and Happy New Year to everyone.


----------



## cdnscg

In the market for a new screen and it was suggested a Stewart Cima 1.25 gain. I prefer a tension tab motorized screen, but was surprised at how much more expensive the Stewart is compared to my present Grandview. While not discussed specific pricing, can someone advise the advantages to the Stewart product versus other less expensive units?


----------



## Th601

Kris Deering said:


> Hello All. I am currently reviewing the new G4 version of the ST130. I've casually glanced through the last page of comments on screens and seen lots of questions about the difference between a ST130 and ST100. The main difference visually is the lack of any coating signature on the image. Because the ST130 is a gain screen, there is the texture and artifacts associated with the coating. This results in some static texture that is typically visible in bright portions of the screen when the image is panning (more visible with a vertical pan typically). I see a lot of ST130 owners that say they never see the texture and sparkle, which is great (don't go looking for it!), but it is ALWAYS there. If you were to compare a tensioned ST100 to it, the difference is quite noticeable, especially with bright content (The Art of Flight is a perfect test case). I am pretty sensitive to it as I've used a ST100 for years now, but the ST130 is still miles better in this regard than most screens I see at shows or at client's homes for calibrations.
> 
> 
> 
> The G4 is Stewart's latest version and looks to reduce the "texture/signature" of the coating to help with clarity and visual artifacts now that we've moved to 4K and brighter images. I'll have a review here in the next couple months that compares it to my ST100 and my experiences with the previous G3 version (which I also own and have used before).
> 
> 
> 
> As for brightness differences between the ST130 and ST100, you will typically see somewhere around 20-25%. It usually doesn't hit 30% because of the angles in use (for ceiling mounted projectors). The ST130 has gain applied so its brightness uniformity across the screen will not be as consistent. The ST100 maintains its brightness uniformity much better (but remember, not all projectors have great uniformity so this could play into it as well). The ST100 should only be considered in a bat-cave like environment with extreme care for not only ambient light but the reflection of light in the room back to the screen. Think velvet lined with no light colored surfaces. Care still needs to be taken with the ST130, but not to the same extreme.




Good evening Kris. In the near future I will be getting either a G3 or G4 ST130 screen. I was wondering how you are coming along with your review. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Kris Deering

cdnscg said:


> In the market for a new screen and it was suggested a Stewart Cima 1.25 gain. I prefer a tension tab motorized screen, but was surprised at how much more expensive the Stewart is compared to my present Grandview. While not discussed specific pricing, can someone advise the advantages to the Stewart product versus other less expensive units?


As a professional calibrator and reviewer, I am constantly working in different projects with different screen materials on site. One thing that consistently stands out about Stewart products are their build quality and measured results. For build quality the first thing I focus on is the quality of the frames and tension systems. Stewart frames are typically properly level and plumb with no sag or obvious compromises. I see a LOT of frames from other resellers that are warped or sagging, creating their own geometry issues. I also see issues with tab tension systems from other manufacturers that start to degrade or have geometry issues. Stewart screens also meet their performance specs more often to most "value" brands.



Th601 said:


> Good evening Kris. In the near future I will be getting either a G3 or G4 ST130 screen. I was wondering how you are coming along with your review.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Review is nearly complete. At this point in time I don't think you have an option for a G3 vs a G4, I would think that Stewart would make this a running change where all future ST130 orders would be G4. I am not a dealer for Stewart, so I am not 100% on that, but it would make sense.


----------



## cdnscg

Kris Deering said:


> As a professional calibrator and reviewer, I am constantly working in different projects with different screen materials on site. One thing that consistently stands out about Stewart products are their build quality and measured results. For build quality the first thing I focus on is the quality of the frames and tension systems. Stewart frames are typically properly level and plumb with no sag or obvious compromises. I see a LOT of frames from other resellers that are warped or sagging, creating their own geometry issues. I also see issues with tab tension systems from other manufacturers that start to degrade or have geometry issues. Stewart screens also meet their performance specs more often to most "value" brands.
> 
> Have done some further review of the Stewart screens and they appear to be the 'reference' screen of choice if one can afford them. I'm presently on the fence with a Stewart CIMA Neve, or SI Slate 1.2 OR Stewart ST130 or SI Solar white 1.3 all 16:9 135".
> Have to say that my 10 year old Grandview motorizes tab-tension is well built and has shown no sizes of where.


----------



## Craig Peer

I'm pretty sure the StudioTek 130 G3 material is gone at this point, and it's all G4. In fact there is a shortage of StudioTek 130 material right now, probably due to switching to the new G4, and the holiday period we just had.


----------



## mrvideo

@Kris Deering:

Please look at my post #3310 . Do you know the values I am looking for?


----------



## Craig Peer

mrvideo said:


> I'm looking at the Wallscreen series of frames. What I have not been able to determine is what the total width/height is for the "1.5" and "Deluxe" versions of the frames. For any of the screen sizes, what is added to the screen width and height so that one knows the exact amount of space that is required?




The frame dimensions are on Stewart’s website.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mrvideo

Craig Peer said:


> The frame dimensions are on Stewart’s website.


I finally found it. It wasn't on the web site in plain view. You had to download the brochure which had the numbers. No idea why they didn't put those same numbers in the spec section of the web page.


----------



## asharma

*Cima Neve vs StudioTek 100 material*

Hi folks...

Could someone please help me understand the benefits of the 100 material vs the Neve...? I’m in a bat cave with velvet walls and ceiling...

I think the gain is less on the 100...is that correct? Is there a noticeable brightness loss? What are the benefits of the 100 over the Cima Neve and is there an area where the Cima Neve performs better than than the 100? Thanks folks...

Edit...also interested in opinions on ST130 because I feel with the ST100 I may see a brightness difference vs the Cima Neve and I really wouldn’t prefer to lose brightness...perhaps you may feel brightness may be a none issue in a velvet bat cave but interested in your opinions...thanks


----------



## asharma

asharma said:


> Hi folks...
> 
> Could someone please help me understand the benefits of the 100 material vs the Neve...? I’m in a bat cave with velvet walls and ceiling...
> 
> I think the gain is less on the 100...is that correct? Is there a noticeable brightness loss? What are the benefits of the 100 over the Cima Neve and is there an area where the Cima Neve performs better than than the 100? Thanks folks...
> 
> Edit...also interested in opinions on ST130 because I feel with the ST100 I may see a brightness difference vs the Cima Neve and I really wouldn’t prefer to lose brightness...perhaps you may feel brightness may be a none issue in a velvet bat cave but interested in your opinions...thanks


Any input would be sincerely appreciated folks, thanks...


----------



## Craig Peer

asharma said:


> Hi folks...
> 
> Could someone please help me understand the benefits of the 100 material vs the Neve...? I’m in a bat cave with velvet walls and ceiling...
> 
> I think the gain is less on the 100...is that correct? Is there a noticeable brightness loss? What are the benefits of the 100 over the Cima Neve and is there an area where the Cima Neve performs better than than the 100? Thanks folks...
> 
> Edit...also interested in opinions on ST130 because I feel with the ST100 I may see a brightness difference vs the Cima Neve and I really wouldn’t prefer to lose brightness...perhaps you may feel brightness may be a none issue in a velvet bat cave but interested in your opinions...thanks


Here's my 2 cents - the ST100 is a unity gain screen ( gain of 1 ). It's the most neutral and has more or less zero screen artifacts. It's also the least bright. 

The Neve is 1.1 gain, and will be brighter. It will also send more light back towards the projector and less towards the walls ceiling and floor. It comes in fixed sizes and is the least expensive.

The ST130 is brighter than the Neve ( or the ST100 ), at 1.3 gain. It comes in custom sizes like the ST100. I find it a little finer / smoother looking than the Cima Neve ( I own a Cime Neve screen and an ST130 G3 screen ). It will have more screen artifacts than the ST100, but be brighter and add more " punch " for HDR. Pick your poison. 

Get screen samples of each !


----------



## asharma

Craig Peer said:


> Here's my 2 cents - the ST100 is a unity gain screen ( gain of 1 ). It's the most neutral and has more or less zero screen artifacts. It's also the least bright.
> 
> The Neve is 1.1 gain, and will be brighter. It will also send more light back towards the projector and less towards the walls ceiling and floor. It comes in fixed sizes and is the least expensive.
> 
> The ST130 is brighter than the Neve ( or the ST100 ), at 1.3 gain. It comes in custom sizes like the ST100. I find it a little finer / smoother looking than the Cima Neve ( I own a Cime Neve screen and an ST130 G3 screen ). It will have more screen artifacts than the ST100, but be brighter and add more " punch " for HDR. Pick your poison.
> 
> Get screen samples of each !


Thanks Craig...I’ve been scouring this thread...thanks for the info...I’m considering an “upgrade”...is the 100 considered an upgrade over the Neve? Why? It has less gain than the Cima Neve...I do like brightness and punch so the 130 does interest me but I’m sure any artifacts will bother me...I’m the guy who picks out the pin head size paint chip on the Ferrari...also when you say the Cima throws more light back towards the pj, what do they 100 and 130 do? More towards the immediate side walls? My sides are black velvet...

Edit: off axis viewing not important to me...room only 12 ft wide and I’m centered right down Main Street!


----------



## Craig Peer

asharma said:


> Thanks Craig...I’ve been scouring this thread...thanks for the info...I’m considering an “upgrade”...is the 100 considered an upgrade over the Neve? Why? It has less gain than the Cima Neve...I do like brightness and punch so the 130 does interest me but I’m sure any artifacts will bother me...I’m the guy who picks out the pin head size paint chip on the Ferrari...also when you say the Cima throws more light back towards the pj, what do they 100 and 130 do? More towards the immediate side walls? My sides are black velvet...
> 
> Edit: off axis viewing not important to me...room only 12 ft wide and I’m centered right down Main Street!


Gain = more light back towards the projector ( and you ). No gain like the ST100 - tends to reflect light in every direction. Best in a velvet lined pit. Personally, I like the Neve and the ST 130 better. The ST100 can look " dull " to me. Other people love the ST100. Get samples and take your time. For me an ST100 would not be an upgrade. For you - who knows.


----------



## Todd G.

asharma said:


> Edit: off axis viewing not important to me...room only 12 ft wide and I’m centered right down Main Street!


Even if it was, I tested Lucy (4K) today and got as close as I could to the front corner of our 12'-10" wide room to look at our 100" G3 ST130--about two feet away. I didn't notice any appreciable fall off in brightness or color. Focus got a tad hazy, but no one would ever view our screen from such an angle in our configuration. As you are, we're "right down Main Street" as you put it. No issues--we love our Stewart screen. 

YMMV.


----------



## asharma

Todd G. said:


> Even if it was, I tested Lucy (4K) today and got as close as I could to the front corner of our 12'-10" wide room to look at our 100" G3 ST130--about two feet away. I didn't notice any appreciable fall off in brightness or color. Focus got a tad hazy, but no one would ever view our screen from such an angle in our configuration. As you are, we're "right down Main Street" as you put it. No issues--we love our Stewart screen.
> 
> YMMV.


Thanks, any artifacting such as horizontal banding during vertical pans on bright skies or any other artifacting that is distracting?


----------



## asharma

Craig Peer said:


> Gain = more light back towards the projector ( and you ). No gain like the ST100 - tends to reflect light in every direction. Best in a velvet lined pit. Personally, I like the Neve and the ST 130 better. The ST100 can look " dull " to me. Other people love the ST100. Get samples and take your time. For me an ST100 would not be an upgrade. For you - who knows.


Thanks Craig...I’m not sure 8x11 samples will tell me anything except for color tone...I would have to have a much larger sample to determine if there were any sparkles or artifacting...Am I wrong?


----------



## Todd G.

asharma said:


> Thanks, any artifacting such as horizontal banding during vertical pans on bright skies or any other artifacting that is distracting?




Nothing like you’ve described.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## asharma

Todd G. said:


> Nothing like you’ve described.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Sorry, for clarity, any artifacting at all? Apologies...


----------



## Todd G.

asharma said:


> Sorry, for clarity, any artifacting at all? Apologies...




Negative. And no worries about wanting to clarify. If you were close you could come see for yourself. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Ericglo

Kris Deering said:


> As a professional calibrator and reviewer, I am constantly working in different projects with different screen materials on site. One thing that consistently stands out about Stewart products are their build quality and measured results. For build quality the first thing I focus on is the quality of the frames and tension systems. Stewart frames are typically properly level and plumb with no sag or obvious compromises. I see a LOT of frames from other resellers that are warped or sagging, creating their own geometry issues. I also see issues with tab tension systems from other manufacturers that start to degrade or have geometry issues. Stewart screens also meet their performance specs more often to most "value" brands.


My Stewart frame is excellent. I like the fact that if you want to order new material that they keep your serial number on file to easily match your frame with the new material.


----------



## Craig Peer

asharma said:


> Thanks Craig...I’m not sure 8x11 samples will tell me anything except for color tone...I would have to have a much larger sample to determine if there were any sparkles or artifacting...Am I wrong?




If you hang them in front of your existing screen and take your time, yes, you can tell a lot from samples.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## scanido

asharma said:


> Hi folks...
> 
> Could someone please help me understand the benefits of the 100 material vs the Neve...? Iâ€™️m in a bat cave with velvet walls and ceiling...
> 
> I think the gain is less on the 100...is that correct? Is there a noticeable brightness loss? What are the benefits of the 100 over the Cima Neve and is there an area where the Cima Neve performs better than than the 100? Thanks folks...
> 
> Edit...also interested in opinions on ST130 because I feel with the ST100 I may see a brightness difference vs the Cima Neve and I really wouldnâ€™️t prefer to lose brightness...perhaps you may feel brightness may be a none issue in a velvet bat cave but interested in your opinions...thanks


I started off with this same dilemma. Started off with the Neve and then to the ST130 and finally landed on ST100. My room is far from being a Batcave with dark grey walls and lots of ambient lights from my amps and chairs, I still find the St100 puts out an awesome image even with cove lighting in the room. But when lights go out the picture is amazing. My reasoning for choosing the st100 was I wanted as dark blacks as possible so no additional gain, and with the trend of projectors getting brighter I didn’t feel the extra gain would be needed. With a my Sony vw500es I still have lamp on low and brightness down and find it very bright. Of course the screen depends on your projector.


----------



## asharma

scanido said:


> I started off with this same dilemma. Started off with the Neve and then to the ST130 and finally landed on ST100. My room is far from being a Batcave with dark grey walls and lots of ambient lights from my amps and chairs, I still find the St100 puts out an awesome image even with cove lighting in the room. But when lights go out the picture is amazing. My reasoning for choosing the st100 was I wanted as dark blacks as possible so no additional gain, and with the trend of projectors getting brighter I didn’t feel the extra gain would be needed. With a my Sony vw500es I still have lamp on low and brightness down and find it very bright. Of course the screen depends on your projector.


Thanks, very helpful...how big is the st100? 2.35 or 16x9 What did u not like about the st130? What is better about the 100 compared to the Neve? Just blacks or is the st100 sharper at all? Does the 100 look dimmer to you compared to Neve? Sorry for all the questions...very interested in your findings...


----------



## scanido

asharma said:


> scanido said:
> 
> 
> 
> I started off with this same dilemma. Started off with the Neve and then to the ST130 and finally landed on ST100. My room is far from being a Batcave with dark grey walls and lots of ambient lights from my amps and chairs, I still find the St100 puts out an awesome image even with cove lighting in the room. But when lights go out the picture is amazing. My reasoning for choosing the st100 was I wanted as dark blacks as possible so no additional gain, and with the trend of projectors getting brighter I didnâ€™️t feel the extra gain would be needed. With a my Sony vw500es I still have lamp on low and brightness down and find it very bright. Of course the screen depends on your projector.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, very helpful...how big is the st100? 2.35 or 16x9 What did u not like about the st130? What is better about the 100 compared to the Neve? Just blacks or is the st100 sharper at all? Does the 100 look dimmer to you compared to Neve? Sorry for all the questions...very interested in your findings...
Click to expand...

It really came down to the type and size of cinescope frame for my application. Unfortunately the Cima Neve didn’t have the size screen to maximize my wall otherwise I would have gone with it. But I wanted the largest possible screen so it had to be Stewart’s Baylon Borderless product in 2.40:1 in 130” diagonal. Literally have 1.5” on either side of the screen! The design of the frame is what really sold me. As for St130 vs st100 there’s another thread here on AVS on that. Really depending on what you are looking for. Can’t go wrong with either really as they are both reference screens.


----------



## WCW

Love our G4 ST130 2:35.1 127”. No artifacts what so ever.


----------



## asharma

scanido said:


> It really came down to the type and size of cinescope frame for my application. Unfortunately the Cima Neve didn’t have the size screen to maximize my wall otherwise I would have gone with it. But I wanted the largest possible screen so it had to be Stewart’s Baylon Borderless product in 2.40:1 in 130” diagonal. Literally have 1.5” on either side of the screen! The design of the frame is what really sold me. As for St130 vs st100 there’s another thread here on AVS on that. Really depending on what you are looking for. Can’t go wrong with either really as they are both reference screens.


Thanks, doesn’t look like you are suffering from any brightness issues with a 1.0 gain...what projector?


----------



## asharma

WCW said:


> Love our G4 ST130 2:35.1 127”. No artifacts what so ever.


G4 is the new material, correct?


----------



## asharma

*Aspect ratio question*

Hi folks

For scope screens, in the past I’ve had 2.35 but I find most movies today are 2.39 or 2.40 (correct me if I am wrong please) resulting in slight overlap on each side on to the black masking...

What are most of you using/ordering these days for scope screens? 2.35, 2.39, or 2.40? Thanks folks...


----------



## Craig Peer

asharma said:


> Hi folks
> 
> 
> 
> For scope screens, in the past I’ve had 2.35 but I find most movies today are 2.39 or 2.40 (correct me if I am wrong please) resulting in slight overlap on each side on to the black masking...
> 
> 
> 
> What are most of you using/ordering these days for scope screens? 2.35, 2.39, or 2.40? Thanks folks...




I’d probably go with a 2.40:1 myself. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Craig Peer

asharma said:


> G4 is the new material, correct?




Yes - that’s the new material.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## asharma

Craig Peer said:


> I’d probably go with a 2.40:1 myself.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thanks Craig, is that because most new flicks are 2.40 or do u find ones say up to 20 years old are also?


----------



## asharma

Craig Peer said:


> Yes - that’s the new material.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thanks Craig, Do we know what the specific benefits are over G3?


----------



## Craig Peer

asharma said:


> Thanks Craig, is that because most new flicks are 2.40 or do u find ones say up to 20 years old are also?




I think most scope films are closer to 2.40:1 that I have. You could split the difference with a 2.37:1 screen too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Craig Peer

asharma said:


> Thanks Craig, Do we know what the specific benefits are over G3?




Less screen artifacts. I think there could be a review coming from Kris Deering soon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## pink soda

I had a great experience with AV Science and Stewart that I wanted to share. 

I talked to @*Mike Garrett* at AV Science about two months ago while shopping for a new screen, and he recommended the Cima FF with Neve material for my dark home theater setup. Before, I was using an Elite Cinegrey which I chose at the time because I do often use the HT while keeping dim ambient light on (but walls are blacked out and no direct ambient light reaches the screen). Mike insisted that a white screen like the Neve should still work great in my particular setup.

I received the Cima Neve and I was pleased with the results -- colors popped like never before and bright whites could get blinding at times but resulted in a much more realistic look. Blacks were still excellent with my JVC X790R, so my overall contrast improved considerably. Sharpness was incredible and allowed me to focus my projector better than on my previous screen. I once saw a comment that said upgrading to the Cima Neve felt like updating one's glasses prescription, which sounded funny to me at the time, but I couldn't agree more. 

I did notice what I would call horizontal "screen ripples" at the time, that appeared most prominently in very bright panning shots, but I wasn't sure if these would go away with time or not. I did double check screen tension and it seemed properly tensioned everywhere from what I could tell. One month later, I had Chad B over to do a calibration with the new Cima Neve screen, which showed off how good the screen is even more. But the screen ripples were still there, so Chad suggested I ask my screen dealer about it. 

I reached out to Mike again, sent him some photos of the screen ripples, and he suggested that I use lens shift to confirm that the ripples were coming from the screen rather than the projector. With lens shift I was able to confirm that the screen was the issue, so Mike forwarded my issue to Stewart, and they ended up deciding to send me an ST130 G4 fabric replacement as a one-time accommodation. Great customer service!

I just installed the ST130 G4 replacement fabric yesterday, and it's absolutely perfect. No screen ripples at all. I was concerned about changing screen materials after Chad had already calibrated against the Neve, but from my subjective viewing tests, at least, I was relieved to see that there were no noticeable color or gamma shifts at all. It just looks slightly better than the Neve was in every way that I could tell, even though the calibration was done against the Neve and not the ST130. I know people say the Neve and ST130 are very close fabrics and my experience confirms that for me. But despite how close they are, the difference was enormous for me, because the screen ripples are finally gone. The result is just stunning. It looks so good I am constantly distracted from actually watching the movie I'm trying to watch. 

Thanks AV Science, Mike, and Stewart! I can't imagine ever needing to buy another HT screen. But I know where I'll be telling my friends to shop.


----------



## Craig Peer

Stewart's customer service is 2nd to none !


----------



## Skimanfz1

My motorized 123" Stewart Luxus screen will not lower anymore. I've checked the 115V power and 12V trigger. I've tried tapping numerous times. Nothing. It's in a recessed ceiling and is way too heavy to move. Any suggestions?


----------



## Craig Peer

Skimanfz1 said:


> My motorized 123" Stewart Luxus screen will not lower anymore. I've checked the 115V power and 12V trigger. I've tried tapping numerous times. Nothing. It's in a recessed ceiling and is way too heavy to move. Any suggestions?




Contact your dealer or Stewart customer service.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Skimanfz1

After plugging and unplugging everything repeatedly, and banging on the screen case, it finally did lower itself.


----------



## SJHT

Skimanfz1 said:


> After plugging and unplugging everything repeatedly, and banging on the screen case, it finally did lower itself.


May want to check the connections inside the case if made during installation..


----------



## stef2

Is is possible to purchase some ST130 screen material without the frame? I have a nice frame from SeymourAV and I would rather keep the frame but change the screen material for the ST130.


----------



## Craig Peer

stef2 said:


> Is is possible to purchase some ST130 screen material without the frame? I have a nice frame from SeymourAV and I would rather keep the frame but change the screen material for the ST130.


Do you have a Stewart dealer there ? You would need to ask them.


----------



## markmon1

I got a sample of StudioTek ST130 G4 material and compared it to my G3 sample and liked it a lot. However, stewart now says they're out of the ST130 until mid Feb and is offering to sub for ultramatte 130 and says its the same. However, this seems dubious as the ultramatte did not get a rev from G3 to G4 this year. So either ST130 G3 and G4 are identical and the same to ultramatte 130 or the ST130 G4 and ultramatte are not the same. There's also the possiblity of going to 1.5 gain with ultramatte. Can anyone comment on the comparison between ultramatte and studiotek?

I was sold on studio tek ST130 G4. I'm not sold on ultramatte 130 instead. I am now intrigued by possibility of ultramatte 150 (higher gain allows me to crank my iris lower and increase contrast).


----------



## howiee

markmon1 said:


> I got a sample of StudioTek ST130 G4 material and compared it to my G3 sample and liked it a lot.


Hi mate. Did notice much difference between them? I'm still on the fence re. screen material and don't have a pj atm to test samples.


----------



## Craig Peer

markmon1 said:


> I got a sample of StudioTek ST130 G4 material and compared it to my G3 sample and liked it a lot. However, stewart now says they're out of the ST130 until mid Feb and is offering to sub for ultramatte 130 and says its the same. However, this seems dubious as the ultramatte did not get a rev from G3 to G4 this year. So either ST130 G3 and G4 are identical and the same to ultramatte 130 or the ST130 G4 and ultramatte are not the same. There's also the possiblity of going to 1.5 gain with ultramatte. Can anyone comment on the comparison between ultramatte and studiotek?
> 
> 
> 
> I was sold on studio tek ST130 G4. I'm not sold on ultramatte 130 instead. I am now intrigued by possibility of ultramatte 150 (higher gain allows me to crank my iris lower and increase contrast).




I asked Stewart about this. They said the Ultramatte 130 is getting the new finer coating - same as the ST130. It’s just a slightly thicker material. That said, I couldn’t see more than a slight difference to my G3 screen. G4 is a refinement of G3. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tommarra

markmon1 said:


> I got a sample of StudioTek ST130 G4 material and compared it to my G3 sample and liked it a lot. However, stewart now says they're out of the ST130 until mid Feb and is offering to sub for ultramatte 130 and says its the same. However, this seems dubious as the ultramatte did not get a rev from G3 to G4 this year. So either ST130 G3 and G4 are identical and the same to ultramatte 130 or the ST130 G4 and ultramatte are not the same. There's also the possiblity of going to 1.5 gain with ultramatte. Can anyone comment on the comparison between ultramatte and studiotek?
> 
> 
> 
> I was sold on studio tek ST130 G4. I'm not sold on ultramatte 130 instead. I am now intrigued by possibility of ultramatte 150 (higher gain allows me to crank my iris lower and increase contrast).




I am ordering a screen with Craig Peers help. He asked Stewart and the sales engineer said that they spray the material with the same exact coating. Craig forwarded me the email from Stewart rep - they are exactly the same material - except Ultramatte is a bit thicker since it’s used for commercial applications

I ordered the Ultramatte which hopefully should be shipping soon.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## cdnscg

Where would I find the screen size specs for the Stewart motorized screens (ie: tension bar length...)? I checked their site but couldn't locate. They where easily found for the CIMA products but not the Stewart.


----------



## Jmouse007

Question for Stewart screen/Epson 6050UB and 5050UB owners, especially those who own a STEWART ALR screen with approximately 1.2, 1.3 gain. 

I'm seriously thinking of purchasing a new Epson 4K 6050UB to replace my "long in the tooth" SONY VPL-VW60 1080p projector. I just have one area of concern.

I have a 100" 16/9 STEWART Firehawk SST retractable tab-tensioned screen with a 1.2 gain.
My current ceiling mounted projector lens throw is approximately 12 1/2 feet from the screen.

My question is this: because the Epson 6050UB is so much brighter than my current projector will I experience "hot spotting"? Or, based upon your experience does the STEWART screen do a great job in preventing "hot spotting". I.e., will I be ok, using the Epson 6050UB with tour 100" 16/9 STEWART Firehawk SST screen?

Any response, insight, information you can provide would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance.


----------



## xrtdr

Hi All
I have an 8 ft wide native 2:35 cinecurve firehawk G3 with microperf since 2012
I have come to realize that has significant moiré that shows in whiter areas of image. 
Now I can’t “not see” it.

I love having center channel come out of the screen so don’t want to give up the perf.

Is moiré always going to a factor for me?

Also nowadays is gray screen still in favor for a room that is mostly light controlled but some beige sidewalls?

Jvc RS540 (X790)

Thanks!


----------



## rossandwendy

tommarra said:


> I am ordering a screen with Craig Peers help. He asked Stewart and the sales engineer said that they spray the material with the same exact coating. Craig forwarded me the email from Stewart rep - they are exactly the same material - except Ultramatte is a bit thicker since it’s used for commercial applications
> 
> I ordered the Ultramatte which hopefully should be shipping soon.


Based on this, do we know if the Neve material is also getting sprayed with this finer coating? Maybe @Don Stewart can chime in or perhaps @Craig Peer knows.

Ross


----------



## Craig Peer

rossandwendy said:


> Based on this, do we know if the Neve material is also getting sprayed with this finer coating? Maybe @Don Stewart can chime in or perhaps @Craig Peer knows.
> 
> Ross


I don't think the Cima Neve is changing. Then again, I don't have a problem with it the way it is now.


----------



## rossandwendy

Craig Peer said:


> I don't think the Cima Neve is changing. Then again, I don't have a problem with it the way it is now.


Just wondered if for efficiency they were now using the finer coating on everything, especially since the quoted rep said "all product" and "across the board". And since Neve so closely mimics ST130 G3 previously, perhaps it is now quite close to G4 if the newer coating is their new standard? 

Ross


----------



## Craig Peer

rossandwendy said:


> Just wondered if for efficiency they were now using the finer coating on everything, especially since the quoted rep said "all product" and "across the board". And since Neve so closely mimics ST130 G3 previously, perhaps it is now quite close to G4 if the newer coating is their new standard?
> 
> Ross


There aren't any " new and improved " Cima Neve screen samples. So I'd say no.


----------



## Jmouse007

Advice needed: I have a wonderful 100" 16/9 STEWART Firehawk SST Electriscreen. My problem is my room/ht set up couldn't accommodate an auto 12 volt trigger from my projector to my screen to automatically lower and raise my screen. 

I was therefore originally restricted to installing the STEWART manual switch to lower and raise the screen by physically pushing the switch.

Fortunately, technology has moved forward and "smart switches" have now become available.

Does anyone you know of, or has anyone installed any "smart switch" that would solve my problem and allow me to lower and raise the electriscreen screen automatically via an app AND/OR voice commands?

Any recommendations/advice would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## cdnscg

Looking to hook up a Stewart screen with a trigger cable. My present screen has the same input as my Sony pj which I believe is a 3.5mm mono input. The screen has an RJ25 input. Who has managed to work through this, and where can I purchase an adapter for the wire in my ceiling which I will not be changing.


----------



## Don Stewart

rossandwendy said:


> Based on this, do we know if the Neve material is also getting sprayed with this finer coating? Maybe @Don Stewart can chime in or perhaps @Craig Peer knows.
> 
> Ross


The Stewart Cima Line of screens have no change in surface finish. That said, the biggest change is with our StudioTek 130 reference screen. The optical coating now has an even finer grain and smoother surface reducing screen gain artifacts that were even at a minimum with the G3 version. For those interested, "Sound and Vision" is doing a product review article on the new StudioTek 130 G4 and should be out fairly soon.


----------



## Don Stewart

cdnscg said:


> Looking to hook up a Stewart screen with a trigger cable. My present screen has the same input as my Sony pj which I believe is a 3.5mm mono input. The screen has an RJ25 input. Who has managed to work through this, and where can I purchase an adapter for the wire in my ceiling which I will not be changing.


Please give Scott Kimber a call at 800 762-4999, ext 145. He is our screen control expert in our customer support department.
Hope that helps.


----------



## cdnscg

Don Stewart said:


> Please give Scott Kimber a call at 800 762-4999, ext 145. He is our screen control expert in our customer support department.
> Hope that helps.


Many thanks Don. I'm impressed receiving a response directly from yourself. I'll drop your name as the person directing me to call. Hope it's okay that I'm in Canada. By the way, finalizing the purchase of the Lexus ST130 G4 133" dia. Just waiting for pricing without the RTS motor. Very excited. In mean time, I have a few other technical questions that I hope Scott Kimber can answer.


----------



## cdnscg

Placed my order for the Lexus ST130 G4. Hope I don't have to wait too long. Just wanted to mentioned that Scott Kimber at Stewart was a great help.


----------



## Kevin 3000

After receiving a quote of
£3,600 + shipping at approx. £350 + VAT @20% for a
Lexus ST130 G4 120” Diag 2,35:1AR 
I went looking elsewhere.


----------



## xrtdr

I've had a Firehawk G3 w microperf that was installed in 2012, 8ft wide native Cinecurve-V in a room where seating is 10 and 15 feet for movie and streamed content (no gaming, no sports)
Room is mostly light controlled with black ceiling and front, beige on sidewalls and some light color on carpet.
I have always been aware of moire-type artifact and want to move on from the screen (which just snaps onto the frame)

Projector is JVC-RS540.

Can I poll peoples opinion on Grayhawk vs ST100 vs ST130?

There is no off axis viewing. Also, I wonder how the screen curve interplays with gain values (if at all since it's relatively small screen)

Thanks!


----------



## tommarra

xrtdr said:


> I've had a Firehawk G3 w microperf that was installed in 2012, 8ft wide native Cinecurve-V in a room where seating is 10 and 15 feet for movie and streamed content (no gaming, no sports)
> 
> Room is mostly light controlled with black ceiling and front, beige on sidewalls and some light color on carpet.
> 
> I have always been aware of moire-type artifact and want to move on from the screen (which just snaps onto the frame)
> 
> 
> 
> Projector is JVC-RS540.
> 
> 
> 
> Can I poll peoples opinion on Grayhawk vs ST100 vs ST130?
> 
> 
> 
> There is no off axis viewing. Also, I wonder how the screen curve interplays with gain values (if at all since it's relatively small screen)
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks!




I don’t have other screens but my ST130 G4 is phenomenal. Great colors, no visible artifacts and super sharp. Couldn’t be happier with my purchase 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## xrtdr

tommarra said:


> I don’t have other screens but my ST130 G4 is phenomenal. Great colors, no visible artifacts and super sharp. Couldn’t be happier with my purchase
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thanks for the rec.
Is it perforated?
Is your room totally light controlled?
How did you choose between the 100 and the 130?


----------



## tommarra

xrtdr said:


> Thanks for the rec.
> Is it perforated?
> Is your room totally light controlled?
> How did you choose between the 100 and the 130?


No perforated, regular. 

Yes the room is totally light controlled, black velvet curtains, black carpet in front of the screen, flat black ceilings. No lights in the basement at all.

How did I choose:

1. I called up stewart sales support line and told them that I have a NX7, I want ~130 inch 16:9 screen and wnat to run decent HDR in Low lamp. They said that ST130 is a no brainer.

2. I called up Craig Peer and he echoed the same recommendation

3. Craig sent me samples of ST130, ST100, and Neve. I compared the three - to me all were very very close. but ST130 and Neve were noticeable brighter than the ST100. I would have come for Neve, but it only comes in either 123ich or 135 inch, so that didnt work for me, hence I went with ST130. 

Now during the order process, Stewart sales engineer had incorrect information, and told Craig and me that ST130 G4 and Ultramatte 130 are the same materials, and if I am okay swapping the two out. I agreed, but when I received the screen, it was evident that Ultramatte was a horrid mess of sparkles and artifacts and not at all what the ST130 G4 sample showed. So i contacted Craig (who is a fantastic fantastic dealer to deal with), who contacted Stewart (which is a fantastic company to deal with) and they made it right for me. The sent me the ST130 G4 fabric, which I installed on my screen, and lo behold the image was as I had imagined, sharp, bright, beautiful colors.

Even my wife noticed the difference, and she is happy watching movies on my 70 inch Sharp LCD TV from 2013


----------



## rossandwendy

tommarra said:


> Now during the order process, Stewart sales engineer had incorrect information, and told Craig and me that ST130 G4 and Ultramatte 130 are the same materials, and if I am okay swapping the two out. I agreed, but when I received the screen, it was evident that Ultramatte was a horrid mess of sparkles and artifacts and not at all what the ST130 G4 sample showed. So i contacted Craig (who is a fantastic fantastic dealer to deal with), who contacted Stewart (which is a fantastic company to deal with) and they made it right for me. The sent me the ST130 G4 fabric, which I installed on my screen, and lo behold the image was as I had imagined, sharp, bright, beautiful colors.


This is very interesting, I remember that series of posts where one member was questioning if the two materials truly were identical and it was insisted via the Stewart rep's passed on email that they were exactly the same, other than Ultramatte being thicker. I wonder if any other people ordered based on that reassurance of same material only to be disappointed? I'm glad you posted about this. My screen has been on order for a couple weeks and I will make sure I am getting the ST130 G4, not the Ultramatte substitute.

Ross


----------



## Don Stewart

tommarra said:


> No perforated, regular.
> 
> Yes the room is totally light controlled, black velvet curtains, black carpet in front of the screen, flat black ceilings. No lights in the basement at all.
> 
> How did I choose:
> 
> 1. I called up stewart sales support line and told them that I have a NX7, I want ~130 inch 16:9 screen and wnat to run decent HDR in Low lamp. They said that ST130 is a no brainer.
> 
> 2. I called up Craig Peer and he echoed the same recommendation
> 
> 3. Craig sent me samples of ST130, ST100, and Neve. I compared the three - to me all were very very close. but ST130 and Neve were noticeable brighter than the ST100. I would have come for Neve, but it only comes in either 123ich or 135 inch, so that didnt work for me, hence I went with ST130.
> 
> Now during the order process, Stewart sales engineer had incorrect information, and told Craig and me that ST130 G4 and Ultramatte 130 are the same materials, and if I am okay swapping the two out. I agreed, but when I received the screen, it was evident that Ultramatte was a horrid mess of sparkles and artifacts and not at all what the ST130 G4 sample showed. So i contacted Craig (who is a fantastic fantastic dealer to deal with), who contacted Stewart (which is a fantastic company to deal with) and they made it right for me. The sent me the ST130 G4 fabric, which I installed on my screen, and lo behold the image was as I had imagined, sharp, bright, beautiful colors.
> 
> Even my wife noticed the difference, and she is happy watching movies on my 70 inch Sharp LCD TV from 2013


I am sorry to hear that you got some bad info from someone in the sales chain. That said, the Utramatte 130 and StudioTek 130 are manufactured on completely different equipment here at Stewart Filmscreen. Ultrmatte 130 is available in hugh, "Seamless" sizes up to 40 x 90 feet and is intended for very large commercial venues that do not want seam artifacts in their image. StudioTek 130 is engineered for smaller screen sizes where the viewer(s) sit close to the screen. The two products have completely different uses.


If you don't mind, can you please send me a private message with where you got the bad information so we can make corrections to prevent this from happening again.


Thank you.
Don


----------



## xrtdr

Tom.,

Thanks for the info. i guess I need ot learn a little more about the higher vs neutral gain. Also, I love having center channel sound come out of the screen, but for the sake of image preservation and closer seating distance maybe I need to put the center speaker below the screen. 

Decisions decisions!


----------



## Craig Peer

Don Stewart said:


> I am sorry to hear that you got some bad info from someone in the sales chain. That said, the Utramatte 130 and StudioTek 130 are manufactured on completely different equipment here at Stewart Filmscreen. Ultrmatte 130 is available in hugh, "Seamless" sizes up to 40 x 90 feet and is intended for very large commercial venues that do not want seam artifacts in their image. StudioTek 130 is engineered for smaller screen sizes where the viewer(s) sit close to the screen. The two products have completely different uses.
> 
> 
> If you don't mind, can you please send me a private message with where you got the bad information so we can make corrections to prevent this from happening again.
> 
> 
> Thank you.
> Don




Give me a call Don or send an email. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## radchad3

Hi. I am picking up a Cima Neve screen in a couple of weeks. I also have a JVC RS500 headed my way. I am looking to purchase some 3D glasses for it as well. Can anyone tell me if the Neve screen retains polarity? 


Thank you!

Chad


----------



## kemannthey

ST100 Question 

Today I have a 16:9 100 ST130 G3 screen that I like very much. I had 1.0 gain screens before (not Stewart) and when I got the ST130 the blacks got better (and sharper and brighter). Not sure if it was the Gain / light rejection or what but blacks are better and I am sold on these screens. 

I am looking to get a 2.40 125-133 and go CIH. Sitting distance is around 9.5 feet (eyes to screen) and there is black velvet celing and side and back curtins (a quality space for a projector). View angle will be over 40 Degrees so there would be possibly better brightness uniformity with ST100 but I don't want to loose the blacks I have now. 

So are the good blacks on my ST130 becuse it is a Stewart or because it is 1.3 gain and helps in my space?


----------



## Craig Peer

kemannthey said:


> ST100 Question
> 
> Today I have a 16:9 100 ST130 G3 screen that I like very much. I had 1.0 gain screens before (not Stewart) and when I got the ST130 the blacks got better (and sharper and brighter). Not sure if it was the Gain / light rejection or what but blacks are better and I am sold on these screens.
> 
> I am looking to get a 2.40 125-133 and go CIH. Sitting distance is around 9.5 feet (eyes to screen) and there is black velvet celing and side and back curtins (a quality space for a projector). View angle will be over 40 Degrees so there would be possibly better brightness uniformity with ST100 but I don't want to loose the blacks I have now.
> 
> So are the good blacks on my ST130 becuse it is a Stewart or because it is 1.3 gain and helps in my space?


What projector are you using ?


----------



## kemannthey

Craig Peer said:


> What projector are you using ?


I plan to start this CIH setup with my TruVango I have today. I am getting an ISCO lens along with this screen. I plan to get a brighter projector when I move to 4K and HDR.


----------



## avsBuddy

kemannthey said:


> I am looking to get a 2.40 125-133 and go CIH. Sitting distance is around 9.5 feet (eyes to screen)...


I would get dizzy with that big of a screen at that sitting distance. I'm at 11.5 and 115" 2.35 looks about the largest I would go. I understand that you want to maintain same size for your 16:9 image, but I would test projecting larger size before buying new screen.


----------



## kemannthey

We did a blackout cloth for a day (and 2 movies). It was smiles from everyone. 

I looked into a drop down 2.35 screen but the cost was more then I wanted to pay. 

I am leaning to ST130.


----------



## Don Stewart

radchad3 said:


> Hi. I am picking up a Cima Neve screen in a couple of weeks. I also have a JVC RS500 headed my way. I am looking to purchase some 3D glasses for it as well. Can anyone tell me if the Neve screen retains polarity?
> 
> 
> Thank you!
> 
> Chad


Hi Chad,


Cima Neve material will not hold polarization for passive 3D projection. It is designed as a very smooth surface white matte diffusion screen with just a kiss of angular reflective gain added bringing the peak gain to 1.1 to 1.15.
For quality passive 3D, and to get a high quality extinction rate utilizing linear polarization, it requires a screen surface that will not diffuse and scatter the polarized light before it gets to the viewer's polarized glasses. Generally, this requires a metallic screen surface such as aluminum silver finish with a peak gain from 2.8 and up. That being said, a very good 3D screen does not make for a good 2D screen as it will introduce many undesirable artifacts in the image. 



Hope that helps.


----------



## radchad3

Thank you very much Don for your explanation. I am looking forward to get my new screen up!

Chad


----------



## Mike Garrett

xrtdr said:


> I've had a Firehawk G3 w microperf that was installed in 2012, 8ft wide native Cinecurve-V in a room where seating is 10 and 15 feet for movie and streamed content (no gaming, no sports)
> Room is mostly light controlled with black ceiling and front, beige on sidewalls and some light color on carpet.
> I have always been aware of moire-type artifact and want to move on from the screen (which just snaps onto the frame)
> 
> Projector is JVC-RS540.
> 
> Can I poll peoples opinion on Grayhawk vs ST100 vs ST130?
> 
> There is no off axis viewing. Also, I wonder how the screen curve interplays with gain values (if at all since it's relatively small screen)
> 
> Thanks!


What is your room like? With screen being curved, ST130 would be a better option than ST100. ST100 has 180 degree half angle, so the reflected light hits your curved screen. ST130 has a reduced half angle, so less reflected light hits your screen. If you have dark walls and ceiling, I would go ST130. If walls and ceilings are not dark, I would consider making them dark.


----------



## rossandwendy

For those of you who have ordered a Stewart fixed screen in the last few months, how long did it take before it shipped?
@Don Stewart do you know what the current production time is for a WallScreen Deluxe ST130 160” 16:9?

Thanks,
Ross


----------



## Craig Peer

rossandwendy said:


> For those of you who have ordered a Stewart fixed screen in the last few months, how long did it take before it shipped?
> 
> 
> @Don Stewart do you know what the current production time is for a WallScreen Deluxe ST130 160” 16:9?
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Ross




It will take 1 - 2 weeks to build and a week to ship, on average. Depends on how busy Stewart is at any particular time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## cdnscg

Craig Peer said:


> It will take 1 - 2 weeks to build and a week to ship, on average. Depends on how busy Stewart is at any particular time.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I placed an order 2 weeks ago for a motorized ST130 G4, do you know if there are any delays due to material availability or the Covid 19 virus?


----------



## Craig Peer

cdnscg said:


> I placed an order 2 weeks ago for a motorized ST130 G4, do you know if there are any delays due to material availability or the Covid 19 virus?


Electric screens can take longer - the previous question was for fixed screens. That said, your dealer should have an estimated ship date from Stewart sent to them after Stewart confirms the order in their system.


----------



## Don Stewart

cdnscg said:


> I placed an order 2 weeks ago for a motorized ST130 G4, do you know if there are any delays due to material availability or the Covid 19 virus?


So far, no issues with the Corona Virus and our employees. (Knocking on wood here) 

Myself, woke up with sniffles and a slight cough so I am staying home as I don't want freak out people around me.


----------



## cdnscg

Don Stewart said:


> So far, no issues with the Corona Virus and our employees. (Knocking on wood here)
> 
> Myself, woke up with sniffles and a slight cough so I am staying home as I don't want freak out people around me.


Thanks Don. Hope you feel better soon. I'm just getting over a cold myself. But fortunately that's all it is.


----------



## xrtdr

Mike Garrett said:


> xrtdr said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've had a Firehawk G3 w microperf that was installed in 2012, 8ft wide native Cinecurve-V in a room where seating is 10 and 15 feet for movie and streamed content (no gaming, no sports)
> Room is mostly light controlled with black ceiling and front, beige on sidewalls and some light color on carpet.
> I have always been aware of moire-type artifact and want to move on from the screen (which just snaps onto the frame)
> 
> Projector is JVC-RS540.
> 
> Can I poll peoples opinion on Grayhawk vs ST100 vs ST130?
> 
> There is no off axis viewing. Also, I wonder how the screen curve interplays with gain values (if at all since it's relatively small screen)
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> 
> 
> What is your room like? With screen being curved, ST130 would be a better option than ST100. ST100 has 180 degree half angle, so the reflected light hits your curved screen. ST130 has a reduced half angle, so less reflected light hits your screen. If you have dark walls and ceiling, I would go ST130. If walls and ceilings are not dark, I would consider making them dark.
Click to expand...

 some pictures attached. Thanks for the rec.


----------



## rossandwendy

Craig Peer said:


> It will take 1 - 2 weeks to build and a week to ship, on average. Depends on how busy Stewart is at any particular time.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thanks Craig. It's been 4 weeks since my order was placed. I've started to get concerned and had my dealer check on it today. Stewart gave no explanation, just stated it should ship in another week. So 5 weeks total before shipping. I'm guessing this is not normal. 

Ross


----------



## Craig Peer

rossandwendy said:


> Thanks Craig. It's been 4 weeks since my order was placed. I've started to get concerned and had my dealer check on it today. Stewart gave no explanation, just stated it should ship in another week. So 5 weeks total before shipping. I'm guessing this is not normal.
> 
> Ross



They were low on G4 material for a time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Craig Peer

rossandwendy said:


> Thanks Craig. It's been 4 weeks since my order was placed. I've started to get concerned and had my dealer check on it today. Stewart gave no explanation, just stated it should ship in another week. So 5 weeks total before shipping. I'm guessing this is not normal.
> 
> Ross


I'm sure the corona virus state lockdown in CA is slowing things quite a bit. You just might want to cut Stewart some slack right now. It's like being under house arrest without an ankle monitor here right now. :frown:


----------



## rossandwendy

Craig Peer said:


> I'm sure the corona virus state lockdown in CA is slowing things quite a bit. You just might want to cut Stewart some slack right now. It's like being under house arrest without an ankle monitor here right now. :frown:


My screen order problem had nothing to do with the lockdown - we found out today that someone at Stewart "dropped the ball" and my order was never sent to production, apparently misplaced or lost a month ago. No big deal, we all make mistakes, and there are far more important things that need my attention right now. We just had a friend die from this virus who was a single mother to 6 kids and only 42 years old:frown: Where I live many of us have already been on voluntary lockdown since Monday and apparently it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better - I was shocked yesterday when I saw the California governor say that based on their models "we project that roughly 56% of our state’s population – 25.5 million people – will be infected with the virus over an eight-week period”.  

Stay safe everyone.
Ross


----------



## Don Stewart

rossandwendy said:


> Thanks Craig. It's been 4 weeks since my order was placed. I've started to get concerned and had my dealer check on it today. Stewart gave no explanation, just stated it should ship in another week. So 5 weeks total before shipping. I'm guessing this is not normal.
> 
> Ross


Sent you a PM.


----------



## Craig Peer

rossandwendy said:


> My screen order problem had nothing to do with the lockdown - we found out today that someone at Stewart "dropped the ball" and my order was never sent to production, apparently misplaced or lost a month ago. No big deal, we all make mistakes, and there are far more important things that need my attention right now. We just had a friend die from this virus who was a single mother to 6 kids and only 42 years old:frown: Where I live many of us have already been on voluntary lockdown since Monday and apparently it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better - I was shocked yesterday when I saw the California governor say that based on their models "we project that roughly 56% of our state’s population – 25.5 million people – will be infected with the virus over an eight-week period”.
> 
> Stay safe everyone.
> Ross


And I'm right here in Northern California, locked down with everyone else. Sorry to hear about your friend.


----------



## rossandwendy

Craig Peer said:


> And I'm right here in Northern California, locked down with everyone else. Sorry to hear about your friend.


Thanks Craig, wishing you the absolute best through all this craziness!




Don Stewart said:


> Sent you a PM.


Ok, how cool is that when Don Stewart himself PM's to follow up on your order?! That makes me feel well taken care of - thanks @Don Stewart ! Email sent.

Ross


----------



## cdnscg

Ordered my new screen on Feb.26th and was advised it was picked up for delivery to Canada last week. Should be here soon


----------



## rossandwendy

cdnscg said:


> Ordered my new screen on Feb.26th and was advised it was picked up for delivery to Canada last week. Should be here soon


Nice! Let us know how you like the ST130 G4. I'm trying not to set my expectations too high but based on the sample I tested (of the previous G3) I think this material is going to be stunning.

Ross


----------



## cdnscg

rossandwendy said:


> Nice! Let us know how you like the ST130 G4. I'm trying not to set my expectations too high but based on the sample I tested (of the previous G3) I think this material is going to be stunning.
> 
> Ross


I'm being hesitant as well with my expectations so as not to be disappointed. In any event, it will be larger and brighter than what I have now. If the colours and blacks are better it's a real win.


----------



## Craig Peer

cdnscg said:


> I'm being hesitant as well with my expectations so as not to be disappointed. In any event, it will be larger and brighter than what I have now. If the colours and blacks are better it's a real win.


I think you are going to be very pleased.


----------



## rossandwendy

cdnscg said:


> I'm being hesitant as well with my expectations so as not to be disappointed. In any event, it will be larger and brighter than what I have now. If the colours and blacks are better it's a real win.


What have you been using? 

I've been projecting on Silver Ticket white which has an actual gain of .99, and the ST130 tested by Accucal at 1.27, so brightness should be a fantastic improvement at least in the broad center area. When testing my sample against my current screen all colors were noticeably brighter and punchier on the Stewart, and flesh tones were more natural and appealing (the Silver Ticket has a blue bias and I have not yet had a pro calibration off the screen).

Where I am trying to keep my expectations in check is periphery brightness compared to center, and the possibility of seeing artifacts in bright scenes. I originally thought I'd go with ST100 which I had tested a sample of, but seeing Craig Peer's screenshots led me to looking closer at ST130 and it sure does have great pop and vibrancy.

Ross


----------



## cdnscg

rossandwendy said:


> What have you been using?
> 
> I've been projecting on Silver Ticket white which has an actual gain of .99, and the ST130 tested by Accucal at 1.27, so brightness should be a fantastic improvement at least in the broad center area. When testing my sample against my current screen all colors were noticeably brighter and punchier on the Stewart, and flesh tones were more natural and appealing (the Silver Ticket has a blue bias and I have not yet had a pro calibration off the screen).
> 
> Where I am trying to keep my expectations in check is periphery brightness compared to center, and the possibility of seeing artifacts in bright scenes. I originally thought I'd go with ST100 which I had tested a sample of, but seeing Craig Peer's screenshots led me to looking closer at ST130 and it sure does have great pop and vibrancy.
> 
> Ross


The only screen has been a Grandview 1.0 gain. No complaints, but they don't make any other gain, and I was looking for larger but didn't want to reduce brightness. After much research decided on what has been described as 'reference' quality. I'm sure it won't disappoint.


----------



## markmon1

rossandwendy said:


> Nice! Let us know how you like the ST130 G4. I'm trying not to set my expectations too high but based on the sample I tested (of the previous G3) I think this material is going to be stunning.
> 
> Ross


I just got an ST130 G4 installed. It is fantastic. I went from a dalite da-mat to the stewart ST130 G4. I can see some sparkles very mild only on some super all white screens which don't happen very often. But the overall increase in brightness was fantastic. I was able to turn my projector iris down by 6 notches (which dramatically improves contrast). Picture never looked better. Doubt you'll be disappointed.


----------



## cdnscg

markmon1 said:


> I just got an ST130 G4 installed. It is fantastic. I went from a dalite da-mat to the stewart ST130 G4. I can see some sparkles very mild only on some super all white screens which don't happen very often. But the overall increase in brightness was fantastic. I was able to turn my projector iris down by 6 notches (which dramatically improves contrast). Picture never looked better. Doubt you'll be disappointed.


May-be a silly question, but did you have to adjust any of the settings on your projector due to the brighter screen?


----------



## Craig Peer

cdnscg said:


> May-be a silly question, but did you have to adjust any of the settings on your projector due to the brighter screen?


It's good to re-calibrate a projector if changing screen materials.


----------



## tommarra

Craig Peer said:


> It's good to re-calibrate a projector if changing screen materials.



Damn Coronavirus - no chance of any calibration till it settles down. Good thing is that JVC colors pretty good without any calibration. My lamp has 600 hours now and I am thinking of doing at least a gamma adjustment with my Spider 5


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## rossandwendy

cdnscg said:


> The only screen has been a Grandview 1.0 gain. No complaints, but they don't make any other gain, and I was looking for larger but didn't want to reduce brightness. After much research decided on what has been described as 'reference' quality. I'm sure it won't disappoint.


That was wise to go with the higher gain as you increased screen size. For me, I am actually stepping down in size (from 152" wide to 140" wide) while simultaneously increasing gain, in order to remain in the much quieter low lamp mode on my JVC even as the bulb ages.



markmon1 said:


> I just got an ST130 G4 installed. It is fantastic. I went from a dalite da-mat to the stewart ST130 G4. I can see some sparkles very mild only on some super all white screens which don't happen very often. But the overall increase in brightness was fantastic. I was able to turn my projector iris down by 6 notches (which dramatically improves contrast). Picture never looked better. Doubt you'll be disappointed.


Good report, thanks!

Ross


----------



## cdnscg

Received my new screen and was super stoked to instal and enjoy. Regretfully it does not appear to have the Somfy RTS motor as ordered. Waiting to hear back from my rep. Guess there's not much I can do but wait. Maybe they sent the wrong control which is the wall switch, but I highly doubt it. Too bad it turns a special occasion into a disappointing one.


----------



## rossandwendy

cdnscg said:


> Received my new screen and was super stoked to instal and enjoy. Regretfully it does not appear to have the Somfy RTS motor as ordered. Waiting to hear back from my rep. Guess there's not much I can do but wait. Maybe they sent the wrong control which is the wall switch, but I highly doubt it. Too bad it turns a special occasion into a disappointing one.


Man that is a bummer. Let us know how this works out.

Ross


----------



## cdnscg

rossandwendy said:


> Man that is a bummer. Let us know how this works out.
> 
> Ross


Will do. I'm thinking may-be the RTS motor, which is extra, doesn't come with a remote. That doesn't make sense, but...


----------



## tommarra

If I get a Stewart Wallscreen in one material, can I get a new material in a few years if I want to? I bought the ST130 but wonder that in a few years of I get a laser PJ with higher light output, can I change my screen and get ST100?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Craig Peer

tommarra said:


> If I get a Stewart Wallscreen in one material, can I get a new material in a few years if I want to? I bought the ST130 but wonder that in a few years of I get a laser PJ with higher light output, can I change my screen and get ST100?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Yes. The fixed Wallscreen with snaps is easy to change material. You will just need to have your screens serial number to get it made.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tommarra

Craig Peer said:


> Yes. The fixed Wallscreen with snaps is easy to change material. You will just need to have your screens serial number to get it made.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Thanks!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## rossandwendy

cdnscg said:


> Will do. I'm thinking may-be the RTS motor, which is extra, doesn't come with a remote. That doesn't make sense, but...


Any update? Have you been able to watch anything on the ST130 G4 to see how you like the material?

My screen is likely to arrive this week.

Ross


----------



## cdnscg

rossandwendy said:


> Any update? Have you been able to watch anything on the ST130 G4 to see how you like the material?
> 
> My screen is likely to arrive this week.
> 
> Ross


Regretfully, only silence. The Canadian distributor states they are still waiting for Stewart to advise. I've got a bad feeling about this. If it was simple, the response would have been quick. I'm not going to install the screen until I know if it stays or has to be sent back.


----------



## Don Stewart

cdnscg said:


> Regretfully, only silence. The Canadian distributor states they are still waiting for Stewart to advise. I've got a bad feeling about this. If it was simple, the response would have been quick. I'm not going to install the screen until I know if it stays or has to be sent back.


Hi,
I just checked on your order and it did ship from our factory on last Wednesday, March 25th. That said, I can't say if the C-19 virus will slow the freight down or not.
Hope that helps.
Don


----------



## cdnscg

Don Stewart said:


> Hi,
> I just checked on your order and it did ship from our factory on last Wednesday, March 25th. That said, I can't say if the C-19 virus will slow the freight down or not.
> Hope that helps.
> Don


Hello Don, thanks, but my issue is I have received the screen, but the distributor is not sure if it has the RTS motor as ordered since there is no remote shipped with the unit, only a wall switch. Attached is a picture of the info. tag on the box. PO 3582. S/N T2000526. JOB J000117077. If you could shed some light that would be great. Very frustrating having the screen finally at my finger tips, but can't install.


----------



## Don Stewart

cdnscg said:


> Hello Don, thanks, but my issue is I have received the screen, but the distributor is not sure if it has the RTS motor as ordered since there is no remote shipped with the unit, only a wall switch. Attached is a picture of the info. tag on the box. PO 3582. S/N T2000526. JOB J000117077. If you could shed some light that would be great. Very frustrating having the screen finally at my finger tips, but can't install.


I sent you a PM.


----------



## rossandwendy

My first ever Stewart screen has arrived! Incredibly well packaged. 160" 16:9 - the box is almost as long as my Tundra 

Ross


----------



## kemannthey

In just got a new 2.40 128 st130 screen this week. Professional quality about every thing /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif 

I would say the st130g4 has a bit less sparkle then the 100 inch st130g3 it replace when you get close with a light. So far so awesome! 

Awesome screen built right here in the USA. 

Now to decide if I really need a lens or not with the new Nx5.


----------



## cdnscg

rossandwendy said:


> My first ever Stewart screen has arrived! Incredibly well packaged. 160" 16:9 - the box is almost as long as my Tundra
> 
> Ross


My that's big. I'm jealous, if I could have gone bigger I would have. Will be finally giving my new 133" 16:9 ST130 G4 a serious spin this weekend. With self isolation having one of my adult children here it's been hard to find the time.


----------



## rossandwendy

kemannthey said:


> In just got a new 2.40 128 st130 screen this week. Professional quality about every thing


I agree, the packing quality alone is insane and screams premium product! I have never in my life seen such superb protective packaging. The box itself is so heavy duty that I plan to use it to construct my velvet masking panels.




cdnscg said:


> My that's big. I'm jealous, if I could have gone bigger I would have. Will be finally giving my new 133" 16:9 ST130 G4 a serious spin this weekend. With self isolation having one of my adult children here it's been hard to find the time.


And I'm actually downsizing with the Stewart, I've been living with a 175" 16:9. I'll be assembling and installing my screen Sunday.

Look forward to hearing what you think about the picture quality. Did you get the issue resolved about the motor and remote? 

Ross


----------



## cdnscg

And I'm actually downsizing with the Stewart, I've been living with a 175" 16:9. I'll be assembling and installing my screen Sunday.

Look forward to hearing what you think about the picture quality. Did you get the issue resolved about the motor and remote? 

Ross[/QUOTE]

175" How big is your room?


----------



## rossandwendy

cdnscg said:


> 175" How big is your room?


It's the main area of my finished basement, 9ft high ceiling, 33ft long and 15ft wide, plus a smaller dogleg section, about 5500cf.

Ross


----------



## Craig Peer

kemannthey said:


> In just got a new 2.40 128 st130 screen this week. Professional quality about every thing /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> I would say the st130g4 has a bit less sparkle then the 100 inch st130g3 it replace when you get close with a light. So far so awesome!
> 
> Awesome screen built right here in the USA.
> 
> Now to decide if I really need a lens or not with the new Nx5.


Same size I have - except mine is 2.35:1 and a G3. If I were doing it again today, I'd get a 2.40:1 aspect ratio too.


----------



## kemannthey

Craig Peer said:


> Same size I have - except mine is 2.35:1 and a G3. If I were doing it again today, I'd get a 2.40:1 aspect ratio too.


Craig a few of your posts help me decided on 2.40 and Mike helped me with the sale  

It is a great size for a single row of seats.


----------



## cdnscg

Gave my new ST130 G4 a spin. Pleased that the larger size (133" from 120") has no loss of brightness and the blacks are unchanged. There are no washed out issues or sparkles, image is solid. Being the first time with a gain higher than 1.0, I'm surprised it doesn't appear noticeably brighter, but I guess going from 1 go 1.3 and a larger screen the differences are subtle.


----------



## Don Stewart

cdnscg said:


> Gave my new ST130 G4 a spin. Pleased that the larger size (133" from 120") has no loss of brightness and the blacks are unchanged. There are no washed out issues or sparkles, image is solid. Being the first time with a gain higher than 1.0,* I'm surprised it doesn't appear noticeably brighter, but I guess going from 1 go 1.3 and a larger screen the differences are subtle*.


Thank you for your purchase of the ST 130 G4.

That is correct. With your past 1.0 gain 120" screen, and now replacing it with a 133' 1.3 gain screen the brightness should about the same. Here is the math. 

120" screen = 42.83 square feet of viewing surface.
133" screen = 56.56 square feet of viewing surface which is about 31% more screen area than your past 120".
The StudioTek 130 G4 has a gain of 1.3, or at least 30% brighter on screen axis than previous screen. That said, it should be about the same in the sweet seats.


Again, Thanks for your purchase
Best Regards and stay safe.
Don


----------



## cdnscg

Don Stewart said:


> Thank you for your purchase of the ST 130 G4.
> 
> That is correct. With your past 1.0 gain 120" screen, and now replacing it with a 133' 1.3 gain screen the brightness should about the same. Here is the math.
> 
> 120" screen = 42.83 square feet of viewing surface.
> 133" screen = 56.56 square feet of viewing surface which is about 31% more screen area than your past 120".
> The StudioTek 130 G4 has a gain of 1.3, or at least 30% brighter on screen axis than previous screen. That said, it should be about the same in the sweet seats.
> 
> 
> Again, Thanks for your purchase
> Best Regards and stay safe.
> Don


Many thanks for your personal touch. This is much appreciated by myself and I'm sure the forum community. Stewart is a name one can rely on


----------



## jazzrock

I have a question in regards to upgrading my Stewart screen. I’ve used an Ultramatte 130 on an electric roller with vertical masking for my Runco vx-22d. My dedicated home theater is completely light controlled. I just replaced the Runco with a SONY 5000es projector.



Now I notice the screen sparkle of the 130 surface much more than I ever have. My current screen is 147.75” diagonal, 2:35 aspect ration. I’d like to consider upgrading to a StudioTek 100 screen. It must be installed in my current above ceiling space. I was told that this screen material may not be suitable for an electric drop down because it may be susceptible to developing markings that will be visible while viewing a movie. Of course, if this is true it would not be an acceptable solution. I would very much appreciate input from someone that may have the StudioTek 100. 

Thx

JR


----------



## Don Stewart

jazzrock said:


> I have a question in regards to upgrading my Stewart screen. I’ve used an Ultramatte 130 on an electric roller with vertical masking for my Runco vx-22d. My dedicated home theater is completely light controlled. I just replaced the Runco with a SONY 5000es projector.
> Now I notice the screen sparkle of the 130 surface much more than I ever have. My current screen is 147.75” diagonal, 2:35 aspect ration. I’d like to consider upgrading to a StudioTek 100 screen. It must be installed in my current above ceiling space. I was told that this screen material may not be suitable for an electric drop down because it may be susceptible to developing markings that will be visible while viewing a movie. Of course, if this is true it would not be an acceptable solution. I would very much appreciate input from someone that may have the StudioTek 100.
> 
> Thx
> 
> JR



Interesting. We make seamless StudioTek 100 screens in electric roll up models all the way up to 25 feet high by 40 feet wide with choice of vertical or horizontal masking options. I believe you received some bad information from somebody out there. If you can get the serial number from your unit, we can take a look at the original order and the shop drawings. The serial number is located on the back of your bottom screen batten bar.


Hope that helps.
Don


----------



## Mike Garrett

kemannthey said:


> In just got a new 2.40 128 st130 screen this week. Professional quality about every thing /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
> 
> I would say the st130g4 has a bit less sparkle then the 100 inch st130g3 it replace when you get close with a light. So far so awesome!
> 
> Awesome screen built right here in the USA.
> 
> Now to decide if I really need a lens or not with the new Nx5.


Stewart packages the screens so well that we seldom have shipping problems. Yes, slightly less sparkle. Nice screen. Enjoy.


----------



## Kris Deering

I know some people asked about my review of the ST130G4. It is in the latest print edition of the magazine (I got a copy yesterday) and will probably be on the website in the coming weeks (I have not idea when, I don't have anything to do with operations). Overall I found the material fantastic and a noticeable upgrade from the G3. I am now using it full time in my own reference home theater. In fact, I am in the process of having a new Vari-mask screen built for the room with the ST130G4 material. Stewart has a new Vari-mask frame that isn't as big as before and uses some new solutions for setting pre-set points for the variable masking. I will likely post something about this once I have it installed on the blog on my website, so keep an eye out!


----------



## Don Stewart

Kris Deering said:


> I know some people asked about my review of the ST130G4. It is in the latest print edition of the magazine (I got a copy yesterday) and will probably be on the website in the coming weeks (I have not idea when, I don't have anything to do with operations). Overall I found the material fantastic and a noticeable upgrade from the G3. I am now using it full time in my own reference home theater. In fact, I am in the process of having a new Vari-mask screen built for the room with the ST130G4 material. Stewart has a new Vari-mask frame that isn't as big as before and uses some new solutions for setting pre-set points for the variable masking. I will likely post something about this once I have it installed on the blog on my website, so keep an eye out!


 Hi Kris,

Thank you for reviewing StudioTek 130 G4 for "Sound and Vision" magazine. I got a chance to read a pre-release copy and like all your reviews, it is very well written and articulated. I even had my wife read it, who is not technical at all, and she completely understood your writings. That said, I am looking forward to the release on Sound and Vision's website. Also, as I personally had a vary "Hands On" role in the lab development of the new G4 materiel so I really appreciate the positive review. Again, thanks for taking the time to do a very comprehensive study the StudioTek 130 G4 reference material.

Best Regards,
Don Stewart.


----------



## rossandwendy

@Kris Deering look forward to reading your review. Your previous writings comparing the ST130 G3 to the ST100 were helpful to me and I'm sure many others.

@Don Stewart that is great you were hands-on in the development of the G4 version of ST130. Thanks for checking on my order a couple weeks ago.

I have owned screens by Elite, and the current budget value leader Silver Ticket. For the last two years off and on I have been looking at samples of higher end screens from Seymour and Stewart, and what I saw in image quality, along with posts from Kris and Craig Peer, led me to finally place an order for ST130 G4 as a worthy screen upgrade for my first JVC projector I received this year. After watching several dozen hours of content on the new G4 I am happy to say the upgrade was worth every penny. Those of us who have been living with the budget screens are generally pretty happy but we don't know what we've been missing until we see the good stuff in direct comparison.

As a professional still photographer here are the main improvements my eyes notice:

HIGHLIGHTS: the ST130 produces gorgeous highlight color balance and detail. Highlights are the life of an image and Stewart nailed them - they are neither blue nor yellow but perfectly pure, and they are organically incorporated into the rest of the tonal range so that the picture is utterly natural. In comparison my previous screen highlights were cold and blue tinted and appeared unnatural, not smoothly incorporated into the scene but standing out artifically.

COLOR: the Stewart colors are more accurate, very natural appearing, bolder and more saturated when the content calls for that while also better revealing subtle shades.

SKINTONES: huge improvement here over the budget screens, I'm amazed how good skin looks, especially in darker scenes where my previous screen lost color and went grayish on faces, whereas the ST130 maintains the flesh color in these darker scenes and a true sense of life to faces. People feel real and present.

CONTRAST: the JVC RS540 brought a lot more contrast pop compared to the Sony I had been using, and the Stewart screen takes that a step further with a richness and depth, especially better contrast in darker mids and shadows.

BRIGHTNESS: I went from a .99 gain screen to the ST130 (previously measured in reviews to very close to its 1.3 rating), and this has been a welcome improvement since I project at up to 160" diagonal. With my throw distance at 1.5x I see no hot-spotting at all. The additional brightness is especially seen in the midtones where my previous screen lacked pop.

ARTIFACTS: I cannot see any at all. Overall the picture is sharper and has less sense of texture - I now see that my budget screen had a background layer of what I thought was grain or noise - that's gone with the Stewart. The material is quite smooth, way less texture than my Silver Ticket. The word that comes to mind while watching a film is transparency.

Small improvements are a big deal to me, and perhaps others would not find the differences as dramatic. But for me, I am full of gratitude to Stewart for making such a fine reference product and to my wife for supporting the purchase of my dream screen 

Ross


----------



## Kris Deering

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Kris,
> 
> Thank you for reviewing StudioTek 130 G4 for "Sound and Vision" magazine. I got a chance to read a pre-release copy and like all your reviews, it is very well written and articulated. I even had my wife read it, who is not technical at all, and she completely understood your writings. That said, I am looking forward to the release on Sound and Vision's website. Also, as I personally had a vary "Hands On" role in the lab development of the new G4 materiel so I really appreciate the positive review. Again, thanks for taking the time to do a very comprehensive study the StudioTek 130 G4 reference material.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Don Stewart.


Thanks for the kind words Don and I'm glad you guys enjoyed the review. I'll post the review when it publishes online. VERY much looking forward to the Vari-mask. Just what the doctor ordered now that so much content is coming out in between 1.78 and 2.4 now!


----------



## Don Stewart

rossandwendy said:


> @*Kris Deering* look forward to reading your review. Your previous writings comparing the ST130 G3 to the ST100 were helpful to me and I'm sure many others.
> 
> @*Don Stewart* that is great you were hands-on in the development of the G4 version of ST130. Thanks for checking on my order a couple weeks ago.
> 
> I have owned screens by Elite, and the current budget value leader Silver Ticket. For the last two years off and on I have been looking at samples of higher end screens from Seymour and Stewart, and what I saw in image quality, along with posts from Kris and Craig Peer, led me to finally place an order for ST130 G4 as a worthy screen upgrade for my first JVC projector I received this year. After watching several dozen hours of content on the new G4 I am happy to say the upgrade was worth every penny. Those of us who have been living with the budget screens are generally pretty happy but we don't know what we've been missing until we see the good stuff in direct comparison.
> 
> As a professional still photographer here are the main improvements my eyes notice:
> 
> HIGHLIGHTS: the ST130 produces gorgeous highlight color balance and detail. Highlights are the life of an image and Stewart nailed them - they are neither blue nor yellow but perfectly pure, and they are organically incorporated into the rest of the tonal range so that the picture is utterly natural. In comparison my previous screen highlights were cold and blue tinted and appeared unnatural, not smoothly incorporated into the scene but standing out artifically.
> 
> COLOR: the Stewart colors are more accurate, very natural appearing, bolder and more saturated when the content calls for that while also better revealing of subtle shades.
> 
> SKINTONES: huge improvement here over the budget screens, I'm amazed how good skin looks, especially in darker scenes where my previous screen lost color and went grayish on faces, whereas the ST130 maintains the flesh color in these darker scenes and a true sense of life to faces. People feel real and present.
> 
> CONTRAST: the JVC RS540 brought a lot more contrast pop compared to the Sony I had been using, and the Stewart screen takes that a step further with a richness and depth, especially better contrast in darker mids and shadows.
> 
> BRIGHTNESS: I went from a .99 gain screen to the ST130 (previously measured in reviews to very close to its 1.3 rating), and this has been a welcome improvement since I project at up to 160" diagonal. With my throw distance at 1.5x I see no hot-spotting at all. The additional brightness is especially seen in the midtones where my previous screen lacked pop.
> 
> ARTIFACTS: I cannot see any at all. Overall the picture is sharper and has less sense of texture - I now see that my budget screen had a background layer of what I thought was grain or noise - that's gone with the Stewart. The material is quite smooth, way less texture than my Silver Ticket. The word that comes to mind while watching a film is transparency.
> 
> Small improvements are a big deal to me, and perhaps others would not find the differences as dramatic. But for me, I am full of gratitude to Stewart for making such a fine reference product and to my wife for supporting the purchase of my dream screen
> 
> Ross


Hi Ross,


Thank you for posting the above.
Being you are professional photographer and have a trained eye for image fidelity, your skillful observations above are much appreciated.
Again, thanks for taking the time to post. Wishing you many years of enjoyment with you new screen.


Best Regards,
Don


----------



## SJHT

Just read the ST130 G4 view (magazine is included in Apple News+). Well done Kris! SJ


----------



## rossandwendy

SJHT said:


> Just read the ST130 G4 view (magazine is included in Apple News+). Well done Kris! SJ


Thanks for the heads up, I'm going to do the free trial of News+ to read that.

Ross


----------



## tommarra

Kris Deering said:


> I know some people asked about my review of the ST130G4. It is in the latest print edition of the magazine (I got a copy yesterday) and will probably be on the website in the coming weeks (I have not idea when, I don't have anything to do with operations). Overall I found the material fantastic and a noticeable upgrade from the G3. I am now using it full time in my own reference home theater. In fact, I am in the process of having a new Vari-mask screen built for the room with the ST130G4 material. Stewart has a new Vari-mask frame that isn't as big as before and uses some new solutions for setting pre-set points for the variable masking. I will likely post something about this once I have it installed on the blog on my website, so keep an eye out!



Thank you! Having owned and spent scores of hours on my ST130 G4, all I can say is wow! It’s a fantastic piece of chemistry and engineering. 

My only regret is why did I not just go with a Stewart as my first screen - why did I waste money on some other brands!

Absolutely fantastic screen and material - almost no artifacts except in super bright white scenes, and for my room there are no hot spots or anything.

Fantastic product from a fantastic company!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Spizz

Kris Deering said:


> . Stewart has a new Vari-mask frame that isn't as big as before and uses some new solutions for setting pre-set points for the variable masking. I will likely post something about this once I have it installed on the blog on my website, so keep an eye out!


Sounds great. Where is this product on their website? Or not listed yet as it is new?


----------



## Kris Deering

Spizz said:


> Sounds great. Where is this product on their website? Or not listed yet as it is new?


I may not be listed yet. I took a tour of their facility when I was doing a calibration tour in SoCal in January and they had one setup for me to look at. They said they would be announcing/shipping soon. I told them I'd want to buy one after getting to see it in action as I was considering a vari-mask anyways not that we're seeing so much content in between 16x9 and full scope.


----------



## cdnscg

Guess there is no masking system for their motorized screens?


----------



## Don Stewart

cdnscg said:


> Guess there is no masking system for their motorized screens?


Geez! Actually we have quite a few electric roll up models with many different electric masking options. That said, for some reason they are not showing on our newer version of our website. Thanks for bring this to my attention.


----------



## cdnscg

Having now given my ST130 G4 screen several viewings, I'm pleased to say the image is spectacular, especially when viewing top tier material. UHD content really shines. 4K Lucy, 1917, and Rambo: Last Blood (yea I know, but it was available on Amazon so gave it a shot), were all top notch. Also, standard blu-ray's which are solid look great too. Oblivion was a pleasure to watch once again. Wonder how the screen will perform once I upgrade my PJ. Probably next year after Sony and possibly JVC make any announcements this fall.


----------



## SJHT

Don Stewart said:


> Geez! Actually we have quite a few electric roll up models with many different electric masking options. That said, for some reason they are not showing on our newer version of our website. Thanks for bring this to my attention.


Is there a wall mounted (vs ceiling) retractable screen with horizontal top masking? Thanks. SJ


----------



## Spizz

Kris Deering said:


> I may not be listed yet. I took a tour of their facility when I was doing a calibration tour in SoCal in January and they had one setup for me to look at. They said they would be announcing/shipping soon. I told them I'd want to buy one after getting to see it in action as I was considering a vari-mask anyways not that we're seeing so much content in between 16x9 and full scope.


Thanks Kris. Looks like I will have to wait for Stewart to announce it and add it to their website. Don any info on when that should happen?


----------



## Erod

cdnscg said:


> Having now given my ST130 G4 screen several viewings, I'm pleased to say the image is spectacular, especially when viewing top tier material. UHD content really shines. 4K Lucy, 1917, and Rambo: Last Blood (yea I know, but it was available on Amazon so gave it a shot), were all top notch. Also, standard blu-ray's which are solid look great too. Oblivion was a pleasure to watch once again. Wonder how the screen will perform once I upgrade my PJ. Probably next year after Sony and possibly JVC make any announcements this fall.


Kris, can you describe the improvements of the G4 over the G3 (which I currently have). 

I get tempted to go woven at times for audio, but I worry I'd hate myself for giving up the image quality I have just to move the center channel up two feet behind my screen. 

I sit 11 feet away, so perf is not an option, and I've heard it doesn't sound that good either compared to woven.

My best move may very well be to stand pat, or perhaps upgrade to the G4 if it notably outperforms my G3.


----------



## Don Stewart

SJHT said:


> Is there a wall mounted (vs ceiling) retractable screen with horizontal top masking? Thanks. SJ


Hi SJ,


Yes, there is an a model with screen top variable masking called E-Mask. It is mainly designed for above ceiling or as an alternative, having a soffit built around the screen housing to match room decor.


Don


----------



## A7mad78

Don Stewart said:


> Hi SJ,
> 
> 
> Yes, there is an a model with screen top variable masking called E-Mask. It is mainly designed for above ceiling or as an alternative, having a soffit built around the screen housing to match room decor.
> 
> 
> Don



Hi Don

I found this one which is fixed screen and which is my prefer is this the one and what’s the difference between this 4 way-mask and director choice 










trinnov altitude32,Triad Gold system 9.4.6, Barco BalderCS, LumagenPro,kaleidescape strato& terra,
D-box,stewart ST100 165”, oppo203, APTV4k,QSC DCA amps


----------



## cdnscg

Erod said:


> Kris, can you describe the improvements of the G4 over the G3 (which I currently have).
> 
> I get tempted to go woven at times for audio, but I worry I'd hate myself for giving up the image quality I have just to move the center channel up two feet behind my screen.
> 
> I sit 11 feet away, so perf is not an option, and I've heard it doesn't sound that good either compared to woven.
> 
> My best move may very well be to stand pat, or perhaps upgrade to the G4 if it notably outperforms my G3.


Erod, as you quoted my post, not sure if your query was meant for me or actually Kris. If myself, this is my first Stewart screen, so no experience with G3.


----------



## Erod

cdnscg said:


> Erod, as you quoted my post, not sure if your query was meant for me or actually Kris. If myself, this is my first Stewart screen, so no experience with G3.


I apologize for my sloppy quoting. I appreciate the response nevertheless. 

I'll post the same for Kris.


----------



## Don Stewart

A7mad78 said:


> Hi Don
> 
> I found this one which is fixed screen and which is my prefer is this the one and what’s the difference between this 4 way-mask and director choice
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> trinnov altitude32,Triad Gold system 9.4.6, Barco BalderCS, LumagenPro,kaleidescape strato& terra,
> D-box,stewart ST100 165”, oppo203, APTV4k,QSC DCA amps


Hi A7Mad,


The difference is the "Director's Choice" has *variable *side masking as the "Wall Mask" system's side masking is two positions, either fully opened for Scope or fully closed for 1.78/1 images.
Please see links below.








Another Link: "More involved Screen Masking Screen Training" for our European Dealers in 2013. Most of it is still applicable in 2020.
.


----------



## rossandwendy

@Kris Deering just finished reading your ST130 G4 review, excellent writeup. I especially liked your comparisons to the previous G3 as well as the ST100. I am so thrilled to own this screen! Stewart quality is top class.
@Erod check out the review in Sound & Vision available on Apple News+, they offer a free month trial. 

Ross


----------



## Erod

For the new G4 material, which I am very interested in, what would be the loss in light and contrast if I chose to have Stewart perforate it to be acoustically transparent?

Also, I sit 11 feet from my screen. Will that be visible from my location?


----------



## Don Stewart

Erod said:


> For the new G4 material, which I am very interested in, what would be the loss in light and contrast if I chose to have Stewart perforate it to be acoustically transparent?
> 
> Also, I sit 11 feet from my screen. Will that be visible from my location?


Hi Erod,


I answered the PM you sent me and addressed all your questions. 

Hope that helps.
Don


----------



## Erod

Does anyone have experience or a firsthand impression of the Balon Edge frames?

Is there enough frame to consistently deal with needed overscan to fill the screen area?


----------



## tigerhonaker

Kris Deering said:


> I know some people asked about my review of the ST130G4. It is in the latest print edition of the magazine (I got a copy yesterday) and will probably be on the website in the coming weeks (I have not idea when, I don't have anything to do with operations). Overall I found the material fantastic and a noticeable upgrade from the G3. I am now using it full time in my own reference home theater. In fact, I am in the process of having a new Vari-mask screen built for the room with the ST130G4 material. Stewart has a new Vari-mask frame that isn't as big as before and uses some new solutions for setting pre-set points for the variable masking. I will likely post something about this once I have it installed on the blog on my website, so keep an eye out!


Kris,

Loved the article so much I'm having my A/V dealer contact Stewart.





T.


----------



## A7mad78

When I read this article from @Kris Deering I realize that his review for the ST100 makes me to go with it when I was build my theater even I was not aware about Kris that time but the review convince me to change from ST130 to 100 even both are great but really the ST 100 is out from this world 

Thanks stewart for such great product 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Erod

A7mad78 said:


> When I read this article from @Kris Deering I realize that his review for the ST100 makes me to go with it when I was build my theater even I was not aware about Kris that time but the review convince me to change from ST130 to 100 even both are great but really the ST 100 is out from this world
> 
> Thanks stewart for such great product
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


And now the G4 combines the advantages of both in the new ST130.

It's a brighter version of the 100 without sparkles.


----------



## A7mad78

Erod said:


> And now the G4 combines the advantages of both in the new ST130.
> 
> It's a brighter version of the 100 without sparkles.



Keep it as a next upgrade  this hobby are madness u can’t say last upgrade  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Erod

A7mad78 said:


> Keep it as a next upgrade  this hobby are madness u can’t say last upgrade
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


LOL, it is that.

I've had my ST130 G3 for 13 years. I love that screen except for those sparkles that show up from time to time. If they largely addressed that, that would be a nice differnce in my room. Any upgrade in HDR quality as Kris claims would be an added plus.


----------



## Craig Peer

Erod said:


> LOL, it is that.
> 
> I've had my ST130 G3 for 13 years. I love that screen except for those sparkles that show up from time to time. If they largely addressed that, that would be a nice differnce in my room. Any upgrade in HDR quality as Kris claims would be an added plus.


Ya, tempting to upgrade my G3 to a G4. But with an electric screen, a bit pricey. I need to wait. I don't have any complaints with my G3 screen now.


----------



## tigerhonaker

> Originally* Posted by Kris Deering View Post*
> I know some people asked about my review of the ST130G4. It is in the latest print edition of the magazine (I got a copy yesterday) and will probably be on the website in the coming weeks (I have not idea when, I don't have anything to do with operations). Overall I found the material fantastic and a noticeable upgrade from the G3. I am now using it full time in my own reference home theater. In fact, I am in the process of having a new Vari-mask screen built for the room with the ST130G4 material. Stewart has a new Vari-mask frame that isn't as big as before and uses some new solutions for setting pre-set points for the variable masking. I will likely post something about this once I have it installed on the blog on my website, so keep an eye out!





tigerhonaker said:


> Kris,
> 
> Loved the article so much I'm having my A/V dealer contact Stewart.
> 
> 
> 
> T.


Guys,

Friday morning,

Just sharing for those that are waiting to see the actual Hard-Copy in *May/June in Sound & Vision* or when it's released on-line.

These two images are the Last-Page of Kris Deering's article.
I thought some of you might enjoy his *Final Conclusion and of course The "Verdict"*

I'm working with Charles at  right now on getting mine ordered.

If I hadn't seen Kris Deering's article and *100% Totally-Trust* what he said I probably wouldn't have *Instantly-Jumped-on-It *!!!

I divided the last page so I could enlarge it for you guys to easily read it.





Terry


----------



## howiee

Cheers mate! That might have just convinced me to go the 130G4 route.


----------



## tigerhonaker

*It's official now guys ...........*

Greetings,

Mine is a done deal ..............

Left click on link below,

*https://www.avsforum.com/forum/15-g...g-up-dated-august-2018-a-20.html#post59543586*

*Latest post 4/25/2020 on the New ST 130 G4 material for my H/T.

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/15-g...g-up-dated-august-2018-a-20.html#post59547642 *


Terry


----------



## David Shapiro

Is it possible for me to change the material in my Stewart motorized screen?
Stuck at home and I’ve been wanting to upgrade my old Studiotek perfect screen.
I don’t really need a new mechanism, just the material.

Thanks
David


----------



## David Shapiro

That’s perf screen.


----------



## tigerhonaker

*Stewart Filmscreen Announces StudioTek 130 G4 ...*

Guys,

The more I have seen and read the more impressed I am !!!

*Click on the link below to see & read the Widescreen Review.

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/15-g...g-up-dated-august-2018-a-20.html#post59552344
*

Terry


----------



## SJHT

David Shapiro said:


> Is it possible for me to change the material in my Stewart motorized screen?
> Stuck at home and I’ve been wanting to upgrade my old Studiotek perfect screen.
> I don’t really need a new mechanism, just the material.
> 
> Thanks
> David


It’s pricey but doable. You will need to ship it back to Stewart in the original box. If you don’t have it, you will to purchase one as part of the re-screening process. SJ


----------



## matt-sf

*StudioTek 130 G4 vs Firehawk G5 vs ???*

Hi folks,

I've been reading through posts here and would love some guidance.

I'm in the process of a home theater buildout. The room is about 18' x 21' (screen on the shorter wall). It is in my basement with no windows, thus completely light controlled. The floors, ceilings, and furniture are a dark grey. The walls are acoustic panels by soundply in a walnut veneer - so a medium brown.

Projector will be a JVC-NX7: 1,900 rated Lumens but operating in HDR mode so at least a 10% drop in light output. It will be about 14' away from screen. Seating will be about 12' away.

Planning to do a 120" wide, 2:35:1 screen.

Audio-wise the system is all Wisdom Audio. LS75 speakers as mains, P4i surrounds, and P2i height.

I've been debating going with StudioTek 130 vs Firehawk. For my personal movie viewing I'm happy to have all the lights off. I have kids who might prefer some light, although optimizing for them isn't as high of a priority (they are less picky about video quality than I am). Planning on a Balon edgeless screen.

If the lights are completely out, will the walls reflect too much light for the StudioTek? If I'm watching with any amount of light on, will I be better off with the Firehawk? Should I consider anything else?


----------



## matt-sf

*Microperforation Audio performance*

Hi folks. I'm mid build-out on my home theater. Currently figuring out how to deal with the center channel audio.

Planning a 120" wide Stewart Balon screen in ST 130 or Firehawk material.

The audio system will be high-end. Wisdom Audio LS75 main speakers, with P4i surrounds and rears and 6x P2i atmos height speakers. The left / right speakers will be to the sides of the screen.

I could go with a horizontal center channel to avoid needing an AT screen. However my main speakers need to be mounted vertically (because they are line source speakers), so that would entail going with a different model. I'd love to have identical center and mains.

Does anyone have specs on the distortion of speakers behind a micro-perforated Stewart screen? I'd love to see a frequency response curve. Particularly curious about the difference between having the screen 2" vs 8-12" from the speaker. I'd prefer to have the screen closer to the wall (it is being wall mounted). I will have room correction (Diract Live), so that should be able to help with the response curve.

Thank you!


----------



## tigerhonaker

*Stewart's Narrated Tour of Our New Website video only 9-months old .....*

Greetings everyone,

I just now saw and viewed a very-very "Useful & Interesting" video about Stewart Filmscreen done by the owner.

If it would be something you think you might be interested in viewing click on link below.

*https://www.avsforum.com/forum/15-g...g-up-dated-august-2018-a-20.html#post59561222*

Terry


----------



## Kris Deering

My review of the new G4 Studiotek 130 went live online today. You can find it here:

Stewart Studiotek 130 Generation 4 Review

As I mentioned in the review, this is now what I am using full time in my room given the benefit of the gain for HDR and the decrease in perceptual artifacts from the coating compared to the G3. It is still not a ST100, but it is close enough with the gain benefit for my needs.


----------



## jazzrock

Kris Deering said:


> My review of the new G4 Studiotek 130 went live online today. You can find it here:
> 
> Stewart Studiotek 130 Generation 4 Review
> 
> As I mentioned in the review, this is now what I am using full time in my room given the benefit of the gain for HDR and the decrease in perceptual artifacts from the coating compared to the G3. It is still not a ST100, but it is close enough with the gain benefit for my needs.



Great review on this new material. And very timely for me. 

I just replaced my 12 year old Runco vx-22d with a Sony 5000es. I’m still using my 12 year old Stewart 130 but the sparkles now stand out more than ever. I’ve be en very happy with the Stewart and have been considering a 100 but now may consider the new 130 G4. My Theater is completely light controlled and the room dimensions are approximately 27x21. I sit 13’ from the screen. My unit is above ceiling with electric vertical masking. The screen size is 136” wide. My big question Is do i give up about 30% of brightness for the ST100 or get the 130 4g? I’d really like to see both to compare but don’t have that ability in my area.


----------



## Kris Deering

jazzrock said:


> Kris Deering said:
> 
> 
> 
> My review of the new G4 Studiotek 130 went live online today. You can find it here:
> 
> Stewart Studiotek 130 Generation 4 Review
> 
> As I mentioned in the review, this is now what I am using full time in my room given the benefit of the gain for HDR and the decrease in perceptual artifacts from the coating compared to the G3. It is still not a ST100, but it is close enough with the gain benefit for my needs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Great review on this new material. And very timely for me.
> 
> I just replaced my 12 year old Runco vx-22d with a Sony 5000es. Iâ€™️m still using my 12 year old Stewart 130 but the sparkles now stand out more than ever. Iâ€™️ve be en very happy with the Stewart and have been considering a 100 but now may consider the new 130 G4. My Theater is completely light controlled and the room dimensions are approximately 27x21. I sit 13â€™️ from the screen. My unit is above ceiling with electric vertical masking. The screen size is 136â€ wide. My big question Is do i give up about 30% of brightness for the ST100 or get the 130 4g? Iâ€™️d really like to see both to compare but donâ€™️t have that ability in my area.
Click to expand...

Perf? The 5000 is quite capable in light output, so you’d probably be fine either way. But if you need a perf I might lean toward the 130.


----------



## Craig Peer

jazzrock said:


> Great review on this new material. And very timely for me.
> 
> I just replaced my 12 year old Runco vx-22d with a Sony 5000es. I’m still using my 12 year old Stewart 130 but the sparkles now stand out more than ever. I’ve be en very happy with the Stewart and have been considering a 100 but now may consider the new 130 G4. My Theater is completely light controlled and the room dimensions are approximately 27x21. I sit 13’ from the screen. My unit is above ceiling with electric vertical masking. The screen size is 136” wide. My big question Is do i give up about 30% of brightness for the ST100 or get the 130 4g? I’d really like to see both to compare but don’t have that ability in my area.



Get samples ! 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## jazzrock

Kris Deering said:


> Perf? The 5000 is quite capable in light output, so you’d probably be fine either way. But if you need a perf I might lean toward the 130.



No perf! Yes, plenty of light but giving up the gain of the 130 is a big jump no?


----------



## jazzrock

Craig Peer said:


> Get samples !
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Well, yes..... seems obvious .... and embarrassed to say I did not think of that! I’ll reach out to Stewart tomorrow.


----------



## Kris Deering

jazzrock said:


> Kris Deering said:
> 
> 
> 
> Perf? The 5000 is quite capable in light output, so youâ€™️d probably be fine either way. But if you need a perf I might lean toward the 130.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No perf! Yes, plenty of light but giving up the gain of the 130 is a big jump no?
Click to expand...

With no perf and that projector you won’t need the extra light in a light controlled theater.


----------



## COACH2369

Kris Deering said:


> My review of the new G4 Studiotek 130 went live online today. You can find it here:
> 
> Stewart Studiotek 130 Generation 4 Review
> 
> As I mentioned in the review, this is now what I am using full time in my room given the benefit of the gain for HDR and the decrease in perceptual artifacts from the coating compared to the G3. It is still not a ST100, but it is close enough with the gain benefit for my needs.


Great review Kris.
I assume you reviewed the standard screen and not the AT Micro Perf?
I'm giving the ST130 G4 huge consideration for my new room, but I do need something that is AT.

Thanks.


----------



## Kris Deering

COACH2369 said:


> Great review Kris.
> I assume you reviewed the standard screen and not the AT Micro Perf?
> I'm giving the ST130 G4 huge consideration for my new room, but I do need something that is AT.
> 
> Thanks.


My review was of the solid surface, no perf. Perf takes away about 10% of the light, effectively making it a 1.2 gain.


----------



## COACH2369

Kris Deering said:


> My review was of the solid surface, no perf. Perf takes away about 10% of the light, effectively making it a 1.2 gain.


Thanks Kris. That isn't too much of a drop off either.

Thanks again.


----------



## Ericglo

Great review, Kris!👍👍

I especially enjoyed the Factory Tour. I must say that I agree with your assessment that the company sets a high benchmark. A long time ago, I would say what so special about a Stewart screen until I purchased one. Now just like my Mercedes, I understand the difference.

I want to add that Stewart has some of the nicest people in the industry. In one instance, I believe it was Mark that was in a Cedia demo that a vendor threw Stewart under the bus. He handled it with dignity. 


One final thing. I want to play guess the calibrator in your article. Craig Rounds?


----------



## doc.evil

Kris, 

You mentioned sparkling elements in reference to the G3 material but didn't seem to follow up with your impression of this artifact on the G4 material. It is something that I am sensitive to and have observed on the G3 material aswell so am curious about this aspect.

Thanks,
Steve


----------



## tigerhonaker

*Just now heard back from Charles the Wait is over from Stewart Filmscreen on the Cost*

Guys,

My New Stewart Filmscreen ST 130 G4 material is now official.

*Click on Link below if interested ............

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/15-g...g-up-dated-august-2018-a-20.html#post59575156*

Happy Stewart owner,
Terry


----------



## cdnscg

tigerhonaker said:


> Guys,
> 
> My New Stewart Filmscreen ST 130 G4 material is now official.
> 
> *Click on Link below if interested ............
> 
> https://www.avsforum.com/forum/15-g...g-up-dated-august-2018-a-20.html#post59575156*
> 
> Happy Stewart owner,
> Terry


Congrats, I'm sure you'll be pleased.


----------



## Craig Peer

Ericglo said:


> Great review, Kris!👍👍
> 
> I especially enjoyed the Factory Tour. I must say that I agree with your assessment that the company sets a high benchmark. A long time ago, I would say what so special about a Stewart screen until I purchased one. Now just like my Mercedes, I understand the difference.
> 
> I want to add that Stewart has some of the nicest people in the industry. In one instance, I believe it was Mark that was in a Cedia demo that a vendor threw Stewart under the bus. He handled it with dignity.
> 
> 
> One final thing. I want to play guess the calibrator in your article. Craig Rounds?


I spent a couple of days back in 2013 at Stewart, and it was a great experience !


----------



## Ericglo

Craig Peer said:


> I spent a couple of days back in 2013 at Stewart, and it was a great experience !


Yes, I remember you telling me about your experience. 

Is that Kei Clark in the first picture?



One other thing that Kris mentioned is that Stewart is developing a new weave material. I have considered acoustic screens to be the one major weakness of Stewarts. If they bring to market a weave that exceeds the Dreamscreen and Seymour, that would be something to drool over.


----------



## Craig Peer

Ericglo said:


> Yes, I remember you telling me about your experience.
> 
> Is that Kei Clark in the first picture?
> 
> 
> 
> One other thing that Kris mentioned is that Stewart is developing a new weave material. I have considered acoustic screens to be the one major weakness of Stewarts. If they bring to market a weave that exceeds the Dreamscreen and Seymour, that would be something to drool over.


I believe that is Kei. Yes, a new AT weave material would be welcome - more choices are always good.


----------



## flyinrazrback

Just got my 2:40 138" ST130G4 on the wall. Very impressed with the quality, fit and finish. Second to none IMO. Quality blows away my DES screen. Now I just need to install my Paladin DCR lens on my NX7 tomorrow and get it all dialed in.


----------



## rossandwendy

flyinrazrback said:


> Just got my 2:40 138" ST130G4 on the wall. Very impressed with the quality, fit and finish. Second to none IMO. Quality blows away my DES screen. Now I just need to install my Paladin DCR lens on my NX7 tomorrow and get it all dialed in.


Congrats!

Ross


----------



## Craig Peer

flyinrazrback said:


> Just got my 2:40 138" ST130G4 on the wall. Very impressed with the quality, fit and finish. Second to none IMO. Quality blows away my DES screen. Now I just need to install my Paladin DCR lens on my NX7 tomorrow and get it all dialed in.


That lens / projector and screen will make for an outstanding picture !


----------



## flyinrazrback

I got my setup all dialed in. I was very happy with the picture with just the NX7 and the ST130G4, but after throwing on the Paldin DCR I was blown away by the picture.


----------



## tigerhonaker

*Stewart Filmscreen StudioTek 130 G4 material is on the way ...*

Latest Up-Date,

*Left click on Link below,

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/15-g...g-up-dated-august-2018-a-20.html#post59645412
*
Terry


----------



## Don Stewart

From time to time, I like to post photos of unique projects utilizing projection systems that some of you may find interesting. As some of you know, here at Stewart, we do many commercial projects including a lot of defense work for military and also civil flight simulation, utilizing collimated optics, for Boeing and Airbus jet airliners. As a G.A pilot myself, I really enjoy working on these projects.
First photo shows a Stewart F-16 rear projection visual system being assembled at a USAF base. Notice the screen at the pilot's 12:00 position has a cutout on the bottom to accommodate the cockpit's instrument panel. The second photo showing an in-air refueling training scenario. That said, we, at Stewart are considered by the DOD an essential business as we currently have many defense projects that we are currently working.


----------



## A7mad78

Don Stewart said:


> From time to time, I like to post photos of unique projects utilizing projection systems that some of you may find interesting. As some of you know, here at Stewart, we do many commercial projects including a lot of defense work for military and also civil flight simulation, utilizing collimated optics, for Boeing and Airbus jet airliners. As a G.A pilot myself, I really enjoy working on these projects.
> First photo shows a Stewart F-16 rear projection visual system being assembled at a USAF base. Notice the screen at the pilot's 12:00 position has a cutout on the bottom to accommodate the cockpit's instrument panel. The second photo showing an in-air refueling training scenario. That said, we, at Stewart are considered by the DOD an essential business as we currently have many defense projects that we are currently working.



The mean of perfect in a Pic 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## cdnscg

Don Stewart said:


> From time to time, I like to post photos of unique projects utilizing projection systems that some of you may find interesting. As some of you know, here at Stewart, we do many commercial projects including a lot of defense work for military and also civil flight simulation, utilizing collimated optics, for Boeing and Airbus jet airliners. As a G.A pilot myself, I really enjoy working on these projects.
> First photo shows a Stewart F-16 rear projection visual system being assembled at a USAF base. Notice the screen at the pilot's 12:00 position has a cutout on the bottom to accommodate the cockpit's instrument panel. The second photo showing an in-air refueling training scenario. That said, we, at Stewart are considered by the DOD an essential business as we currently have many defense projects that we are currently working.


Hope I live long enough to see this applied to home theatre


----------



## Ericglo

Don Stewart said:


> From time to time, I like to post photos of unique projects utilizing projection systems that some of you may find interesting. As some of you know, here at Stewart, we do many commercial projects including a lot of defense work for military and also civil flight simulation, utilizing collimated optics, for Boeing and Airbus jet airliners. As a G.A pilot myself, I really enjoy working on these projects.
> First photo shows a Stewart F-16 rear projection visual system being assembled at a USAF base. Notice the screen at the pilot's 12:00 position has a cutout on the bottom to accommodate the cockpit's instrument panel. The second photo showing an in-air refueling training scenario. That said, we, at Stewart are considered by the DOD an essential business as we currently have many defense projects that we are currently working.


That is really cool. I saw a set up like this one time at VDC. I recall Scott (tse) from VDC telling me that a lot of their CRT pjs went into rear pro sims like this. I haven't seen the instrument cutout. That took some ingenuity.


----------



## Azekecse

Don Stewart said:


> From time to time, I like to post photos of unique projects utilizing projection systems that some of you may find interesting. As some of you know, here at Stewart, we do many commercial projects including a lot of defense work for military and also civil flight simulation, utilizing collimated optics, for Boeing and Airbus jet airliners. As a G.A pilot myself, I really enjoy working on these projects.
> First photo shows a Stewart F-16 rear projection visual system being assembled at a USAF base. Notice the screen at the pilot's 12:00 position has a cutout on the bottom to accommodate the cockpit's instrument panel. The second photo showing an in-air refueling training scenario. That said, we, at Stewart are considered by the DOD an essential business as we currently have many defense projects that we are currently working.


OohRah!!!

Peace and blessings,

Azeke


----------



## liverpool_for_life

Kris Deering said:


> As I mentioned in the review, this is now what I am using full time in my room given the benefit of the gain for HDR and the decrease in perceptual artifacts from the coating compared to the G3. It is still not a ST100, but it is close enough with the gain benefit for my needs.


That's some endorsement (as if the review wasn't glowing enough without it). This is my new dream screen. Someday, when I buy a JVC NX 5/7...


----------



## jbm007

Kris Deering said:


> My review of the new G4 Studiotek 130 went live online today. You can find it here:
> 
> Stewart Studiotek 130 Generation 4 Review
> 
> As I mentioned in the review, this is now what I am using full time in my room given the benefit of the gain for HDR and the decrease in perceptual artifacts from the coating compared to the G3. It is still not a ST100, but it is close enough with the gain benefit for my needs.


Kris

Assume you have the projector with enough horse power on a directors screen configuration 72" x 144" with screen being perforated,

is there enough difference in images that you would update one's screen from a Studiotek 100 perforated installed 2016 to the new G4 Studiotek 130 perforated? Obviously one would have to recalibrate their system with the new screen.

Your thoughts?

Jim


----------



## Erod

Let me preface this by saying I'm not prone to hyperbole, and I always protect against confirmation bias. I've made HT purchases that I'd like to have back for sure, and I've said so. Also, I'm not a Stewart screen fanboy, even though I've owned three of them. I looked VERY hard at Seymour, Screen Inovations, and others during this search for a new screen. They all make solid screens and are worthy of their respective success.

Ultimately I chose to replace my 110-inch Studiotek 130 screen with......a 120-inch version of the same 16:9 screen, but with the new G4 material. I just didn't see an image anywhere I looked as good as the ST130 I already had, so I chose to stick with it. The G4 material was intriguing, though I didn't expect much of a perceptible difference.

Wow. After a couple of days of intense torture testing, I now know that this isn't a just a "slight" improvement. This G4 material is the real damn deal. 

Again, I loved my old screen, so I primarily hoped that this new G4 material would provide just a bit of brightness to account for the larger screen, so that I could reach close to the same level of brightness I'm accustomed to.

Not only did it retain the brightness, it increased it. So much so that I've had to go into my Panasonic UB820 and reduce the dynamic slider for both my SDR2020 and HDR settings (my JVC was calibrated by ChadB). My SDR2020 was at +2, and I reduced it to 0. Might even knock it down another notch. The HDR level was +4, and that's now at +1. 

Additionally, HDR gets a marked improvement as a result of the brightness capabilities of the G4 material. So much so that I'm seriously considering ditching SDR2020 because the HDR levels now don't lack the brightness in dark scenes like before. That will require more testing and time. 

Overall color also got a shot in the arm. It's just deeper and more dynamic. Hard to really put into words.

Lastly, the sparkle is reduced. It never really distracted me before because the G3 material didn't have much, but it's certainly lessened by the G4. I think you notice it most on sky or cloud scenes. It looks smoother, more reminiscent of the ST100 material.

I'm telling you, there is a meaningful difference, and it's more apparent the more test it with familiar material.


----------



## tigerhonaker

Erod said:


> Let me preface this by saying I'm not prone to hyperbole, and I always protect against confirmation bias. I've made HT purchases that I'd like to have back for sure, and I've said so. Also, I'm not a Stewart screen fanboy, even though I've owned three of them. I looked VERY hard at Seymour, Screen Inovations, and others during this search for a new screen. They all make solid screens and are worthy of their respective success.
> 
> Ultimately I chose to replace my 110-inch Studiotek 130 screen with......a 120-inch version of the same 16:9 screen, but with the new G4 material. I just didn't see an image anywhere I looked as good as the ST130 I already had, so I chose to stick with it. The G4 material was intriguing, though I didn't expect much of a perceptible difference.
> 
> Wow. After a couple of days of intense torture testing, I now know that this isn't a just a "slight" improvement. This G4 material is the real damn deal.
> 
> Again, I loved my old screen, so I primarily hoped that this new G4 material would provide just a bit of brightness to account for the larger screen, so that I could reach close to the same level of brightness I'm accustomed to.
> 
> Not only did it retain the brightness, it increased it. So much so that I've had to go into my Panasonic UB820 and reduce the dynamic slider for both my SDR2020 and HDR settings (my JVC was calibrated by ChadB). My SDR2020 was at +2, and I reduced it to 0. Might even knock it down another notch. The HDR level was +4, and that's now at +1.
> 
> Additionally, HDR gets a marked improvement as a result of the brightness capabilities of the G4 material. So much so that I'm seriously considering ditching SDR2020 because the HDR levels now don't lack the brightness in dark scenes like before. That will require more testing and time.
> 
> Overall color also got a shot in the arm. It's just deeper and more dynamic. Hard to really put into words.
> 
> Lastly, the sparkle is reduced. It never really distracted me before because the G3 material didn't have much, but it's certainly lessened by the G4. I think you notice it most on sky or cloud scenes. It looks smoother, more reminiscent of the ST100 material.
> 
> I'm telling you, there is a meaningful difference, and it's more apparent the more test it with familiar material.


Erod,

Thank-You for your review on the new ST 130 G4 material.
Mine came in to my local A/V dealer and will be installed next month.
I am very-very much looking forward to seeing movies with the G4 installed.
I also had Chad B do my Calibrating and in my case for both Audio & Video.
He will be once again coming back to redo those.



What actually sold me was the in-depth article that Kris Deering did in Sound & Vision.
It was an excellent article and from the way it read he ran the new G4 material through it's paces with all sorts of content.





Terry


----------



## Kris Deering

jbm007 said:


> Kris
> 
> Assume you have the projector with enough horse power on a directors screen configuration 72" x 144" with screen being perforated,
> 
> is there enough difference in images that you would update one's screen from a Studiotek 100 perforated installed 2016 to the new G4 Studiotek 130 perforated? Obviously one would have to recalibrate their system with the new screen.
> 
> Your thoughts?
> 
> Jim


The ST100 is still the benchmark and easily the best screen I've ever used or seen. The G4 just moves the ST130 closer to that performance in terms of visible texture, but it doesn't match it (either with texture or brightness uniformity). If I had a target brightness in mind for a screen setup and I could achieve it easily with either screen, I would probably lean toward the ST100 (so long as I had some headroom for lamp dimming and such). The ST130 would also allow you to use an aperture a bit more to increase contrast in the image, so that is a bonus. But if I had plenty of headroom already with a ST100, I'd stick with it.


----------



## cdnscg

Not sure if the increase in size has influence, but I am enjoying HDR disc's much more with my ST130 G4.


----------



## tigerhonaker

Up-Date,

*Both the "Install" dates and the "Audio/Video" Custom Calibration Dates are ... Set !
*

*https://www.avsforum.com/forum/15-g...g-up-dated-august-2018-a-21.html#post59708996*

Things guys are finally coming together nicely.

Terry


----------



## surroundsound99

I'm trying to decide on a retractable screen, scope, AT, anywhere from 100 to 120 wide, JVC NX7 is 16.5 from screen. I'm sitting about 10' away but my couch is small and light and i can easily slide it back and forth between 8' to 12' no problem.

Question 1) For those with a retractable screen, since the borders of Stewart screens are not velvet, can you (or can you not) see the overspray? I know my NX7 has the masking/cropping feature, and I know it also has the Aspect:Zoom feature, which should eliminate overspray. However my problem is my PJ is off-center and no matter how hard I try the image is not perfectly rectangular. Therefore I have some overspray and I will be relying on the border to hide the overspray. I'm also considering SI, and Seymour which claims to be the only manufacturer on the market with a velvet border on a retractable screen, therefore no need to worry about overspray.

Question 2) Am I reading Stewart's website wrong? I only see 3 AT materials: CinemaPerf, Perforado ("Cima FF only"), Microperf X2 THX Ultra. I thought the ST100 came AT? 

Any other comments or suggestions are welcome, thank you!


----------



## Craig Peer

surroundsound99 said:


> I'm trying to decide on a retractable screen, scope, AT, anywhere from 100 to 120 wide, JVC NX7 is 16.5 from screen. I'm sitting about 10' away but my couch is small and light and i can easily slide it back and forth between 8' to 12' no problem.
> 
> Question 1) For those with a retractable screen, since the borders of Stewart screens are not velvet, can you (or can you not) see the overspray? I know my NX7 has the masking/cropping feature, and I know it also has the Aspect:Zoom feature, which should eliminate overspray. However my problem is my PJ is off-center and no matter how hard I try the image is not perfectly rectangular. Therefore I have some overspray and I will be relying on the border to hide the overspray. I'm also considering SI, and Seymour which claims to be the only manufacturer on the market with a velvet border on a retractable screen, therefore no need to worry about overspray.
> 
> Question 2) Am I reading Stewart's website wrong? I only see 3 AT materials: CinemaPerf, Perforado ("Cima FF only"), Microperf X2 THX Ultra. I thought the ST100 came AT?
> 
> Any other comments or suggestions are welcome, thank you!



I can see a little of the overscan on the border. Not enough bother me.

Microperf can be done to most Stewart screen materials. They punch tiny holes through the material with a very expensive machine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## surroundsound99

Craig Peer said:


> I can see a little of the overscan on the border. Not enough bother me.
> 
> Microperf can be done to most Stewart screen materials. They punch tiny holes through the material with a very expensive machine.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thanks for the input Craig! Stewart is mailing me some AT screen material samples to try out and see.


----------



## skylarlove1999

Good evening gentleman. I had to share an amazing experience with Stewart Filmscreen that just occurred. Based upon @Kris Deering review and conversations I had with @Erod I ordered my first Stewart Filmscreen this past Friday, 140 inch ST 130 G4 2:39.

When Stewart put out the PR announcement last November about historic price drops, I read it with a bit of an eyeroll. Stewart IMHO had long been out of the budget for many home theater owners. I didn't even look into the price drop. I figured it was a modest drop and I still couldn't afford a Stewart screen. Boy was I WRONG. So wrong.

Always a showstopper when you saw a Stewart Filmscreen screen in all its glory, but at least for me, it was with the thought " Maybe someday I can afford that", knowing someday would probably never come. For two decades that was my reality. 

Let me be clear , SOMEDAY IS NOW. 

Historic was and is the correct word to describe the price drop on Stewart Screens. I was shocked when I received my quote. I picked up the phone immediately and placed the order. Honestly I thought it was a pricing error and wanted to get my order in before the saleswoman realized her mistake. It was not a pricing error. It is just a new reality. 

With this historic price drop, there really is no reason to buy another screen. Before it was always price that led people away from Stewart, not performance. Now you can have both. Stewart is now the leader in price and performance for reference screens. Do yourself a favor and get a quote. Then get your credit card out.

Now my saleswoman of unnamed company hadn't responded to 2 emails I sent this week. I could not confirm that the company was an authorized dealer for Stewart. So my mind starts racing about being swindled out of my money. So being the irrational lunatic that I am I decide to reach out to Adrian Silva, Vice-President for Residential Sales with Stewart, a man who doesn't know me from a hole in the ground , by the way. 

Not only does he reply to my communication but he says "Tristan why don't you just call at YOUR CONVENIENCE " and he sends me his cell number. I mean who responds so quickly to a complete stranger about an issue? Adrian Silva does, that's who. 

So I call him and he picks up on first ring . He asks if I have a quote or order number. Of course I do. He boots up the Stewart ordering system and confirms my order. Did we just become best friends? I think so. But in all seriousness this was such an unexpected level of customer service from Stewart that I just had to post about it.

I still have to work with the company I ordered the screen from on my delivery date, but Adrian offered his support further if I should need it. Just an astounding show of support and compassion. @Don Stewart you have a customer for life because of Adrian. That man is a keeper. 

I am beyond excited for my lifetime dream screen to arrive. In the immortal words of Bart Scott:

CAN'T WAIT






Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## Ericglo

Good story, Skylar.

AVScience with Craig Peer and Mike Garrett are an authorized dealer. Did you call them to get a price quote?


----------



## RapalloAV

Has anyone here gone from a Studiotek microperf 130 G3 to the new G4?
Im thinkling of the new upgrade but interested in those that have made the change...
I do see artifacts occasionally on bright scenes on my curved 145' scope Studiotek microperf 130 G3 screen.
Reducing the artifacts I think is the only advantage over the two, I have read the one review.


----------



## Craig Peer

skylarlove1999 said:


> Good evening gentleman. I had to share an amazing experience with Stewart Filmscreen that just occurred. Based upon @Kris Deering review and conversations I had with @Erod I ordered my first Stewart Filmscreen this past Friday, 140 inch ST 130 G4 2:39.
> 
> 
> I am beyond excited for my lifetime dream screen to arrive. In the immortal words of Bart Scott:
> 
> CAN'T WAIT
> 
> https://youtu.be/tKnG06-oYcg
> 
> Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


Your excitement is infectious! You are going to love the screen!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## jazzrock

Anyone here have a StudioTek 100 in an electric drop down system? Seriously considering replacing my 12 year old Ultramatt 130. I might be overthinking it but want to be sure this material will be ok on a roller.....no lasting marks/indentations left on the screen.....


----------



## Craig Peer

jazzrock said:


> Anyone here have a StudioTek 100 in an electric drop down system? Seriously considering replacing my 12 year old Ultramatt 130. I might be overthinking it but want to be sure this material will be ok on a roller.....no lasting marks/indentations left on the screen.....


In my experience any marks are only on the black masked edge of the screen. I've had my current two Stewart electric screens 6+ years and had a previous one at least that long. Same thing.


----------



## surroundsound99

jazzrock said:


> Anyone here have a StudioTek 100 in an electric drop down system? Seriously considering replacing my 12 year old Ultramatt 130. I might be overthinking it but want to be sure this material will be ok on a roller.....no lasting marks/indentations left on the screen.....


I too am curious about how the ST100 material (AT) holds up in a retractable case.


----------



## surroundsound99

I'm looking at a Stewart ST100 AT microperf or the Seymour Enlightor-Neo AT to go with my NX7, 110" to 120", sitting 10.5' away, 99% light-controlled room.

I'd love to hear from owners of these screens with your experience, specifically moire and artifacts are my biggest concern. Thank you!


----------



## GeorgeHolland

I have a StudioTek 130 screen that takes up much of my front wall. I want to add height speakers and while I can fit them outside the screen, they will be up against the side wall.

I have a blacked out window behind the screen with a shelf I could add some risers and set the speakers on.

Considering they are just height speakers, will a non-perforated ST 130 be acoustically transparent enough to make the height speakers work well enough?


----------



## SJHT

surroundsound99 said:


> I'm looking at a Stewart ST100 AT microperf or the Seymour Enlightor-Neo AT to go with my NX7, 110" to 120", sitting 10.5' away, 99% light-controlled room.
> 
> I'd love to hear from owners of these screens with your experience, specifically moire and artifacts are my biggest concern. Thank you!


I have a retractable ST100 but not AT. They just punch a bunch of holes in the material to make it so not maybe the same. My non-AT looks as good now as when the first time it came down. SJ


----------



## cdnscg

GeorgeHolland said:


> I have a StudioTek 130 screen that takes up much of my front wall. I want to add height speakers and while I can fit them outside the screen, they will be up against the side wall.
> 
> I have a blacked out window behind the screen with a shelf I could add some risers and set the speakers on.
> 
> Considering they are just height speakers, will a non-perforated ST 130 be acoustically transparent enough to make the height speakers work well enough?


I have height speakers for Dolby Atmos in the ceiling which are close to the side wall. May-be 6-8" away. Works fine. Given the sound field you're looking for from the speakers I wouldn't cover them with the screen material. But, may-be someone with that experience can advise you better.


----------



## surroundsound99

SJHT said:


> I have a retractable ST100 but not AT. They just punch a bunch of holes in the material to make it so not maybe the same. My non-AT looks as good now as when the first time it came down. SJ


Thanks for the info!


----------



## Don Stewart

Hi Surround Sound,
Any of Stewart's front projection line of screens can be ordered with the THX MicroPerf AT option. Please note that we skew the perforation pattern to prevent Moire. Keep in mind that screen Foot Lambert's output will drop by 10.2%, which is the amount of the open area of the screen surface. With that in mind, one may want to consider Studiotek 130G4. Also, we do all our own perforating in house on our custom built perforation machine built to our own specifications. Hope that helps.


----------



## surroundsound99

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Surround Sound,
> Any of Stewart's front projection line of screens can be ordered with the THX MicroPerf AT option. Please note that we skew the perforation pattern to prevent Moire. Keep in mind that screen Foot Lambert's output will drop by 10.2%, which is the amount of the open area of the screen surface. With that in mind, one may want to consider Studiotek 130G4. Also, we do all our own perforating in house on our custom built perforation machine built to our own specifications. Hope that helps.


Yes this is helpful information, thank you Mr. Stewart! BTW I've been very happy with my 16x9 92" Firehawk for the past 15 years so I just thought I'd say thank you in person.


----------



## Craig Peer

GeorgeHolland said:


> I have a StudioTek 130 screen that takes up much of my front wall. I want to add height speakers and while I can fit them outside the screen, they will be up against the side wall.
> 
> I have a blacked out window behind the screen with a shelf I could add some risers and set the speakers on.
> 
> *Considering they are just height speakers, will a non-perforated ST 130 be acoustically transparent enough to make the height speakers work well enough?*


I'd say no. I'd try and find a better mounting position not behind the screen.


----------



## JonnyVee

If I can bet a good price, I’m looking at upgrading from my SilverTicket 120” matte white to a StudioTek 130 G4. I have a 12’5” throw and seating is 9’ from the screen, so I’m above the minimum throw distance. Left and right seating is 20 degrees from centre of screen. Bat cave as well.

Anyone see any concerns with seating this close to this screen? 

Also, how is the wallscreen 1.5 vs the 3.25” frame? Is it more subject to bowing in the middle. Also, does the 1.5” frame carry a price premium over the 3.25”? The brochure on the Stewart website indicates that it doesn’t ... base MSRP shows the 1.5” should cost a little less.


----------



## Don Stewart

JonnyVee said:


> If I can bet a good price, I’m looking at upgrading from my SilverTicket 120” matte white to a StudioTek 130 G4. I have a 12’5” throw and seating is 9’ from the screen, so I’m above the minimum throw distance. Left and right seating is 20 degrees from centre of screen. Bat cave as well.
> 
> Anyone see any concerns with seating this close to this screen?
> 
> Also, how is the wallscreen 1.5 vs the 3.25” frame? Is it more subject to bowing in the middle. Also, does the 1.5” frame carry a price premium over the 3.25”? The brochure on the Stewart website indicates that it doesn’t ... base MSRP shows the 1.5” should cost a little less.


 The 1.5 frame is somewhat of a simpler design than the 3.25" frame. It is 1.5" by 1.5" square extrusions with our Black Velux finish. The screen fabric snaps directly to the back of the frame giving a shadow box effect to it. When designing a front projection system utilizing this frame, it is required that the center of projector lens be mounted about and inch or so below the bottom of the top frame member because of its shadowbox design. The frame is constructed with wall braced mounting brackets so there is no inward bowing of the frame members.


EDIT: I forgot to add that it is a little less cost than the 3.25 frame.


----------



## Don Stewart

From time to time, I like to post some other products that we manufacture that some may find interesting. I have always considered that Stewart is an optical house first in addition to being a screen manufacture.
That said, we also build very specialized optics for NVG's, (Night Vision Goggles) used by military aviators and special ground forces. The optical resolution specifications of these very small components are somewhat difficult to maintain so we do not have a 100% yield factor when manufacturing. The good news is we are always learning new manufacturing refinements and some of it is transferable to our Home Theater manufacturing processes.


----------



## JonnyVee

Don Stewart said:


> The 1.5 frame is somewhat of a simpler design than the 3.25" frame. It is 1.5" by 1.5" square extrusions with our Black Velux finish. The screen fabric snaps directly to the back of the frame giving a shadow box effect to it. When designing a front projection system utilizing this frame, it is required that the center of projector lens be mounted about and inch or so below the bottom of the top frame member because of its shadowbox design. The frame is constructed with wall braced mounting brackets so there is no inward bowing of the frame members.
> 
> 
> EDIT: I forgot to add that it is a little less cost than the 3.25 frame.


Thank you for the information. Not every day the VP of the company answers questions!

Looks like my projector lens would be 7-8” below the bottom of the top frame. Is your requirement for the frame of “an inch or so below” a minimum? 

Now that I see how the screen is mounted on the 1.5” frame, it’s a little different than the 3.25” frame. This may be a really dumb question, but how does the 1.5” frame get mounted to the wall with the EZ frame since the screen is mounted to the back of the frame?


----------



## Don Stewart

JonnyVee said:


> Thank you for the information. Not every day the VP of the company answers questions!
> 
> Looks like my projector lens would be 7-8” below the bottom of the top frame. Is your requirement for the frame of “an inch or so below” a minimum?
> 
> Now that I see how the screen is mounted on the 1.5” frame, it’s a little different than the 3.25” frame. This may be a really dumb question, but how does the 1.5” frame get mounted to the wall with the EZ frame since the screen is mounted to the back of the frame?


 The AT 1.5 frame utilizes "L" brackets which are attached to factory supplied spreader bar stringers. These two stringers attach to the frame at the frame's quarter points which keeps frame very rigid so there is definitely no frame warping. The back of the screen material floats about 1-1/2 inches off the wall. 

Also, with your lens 7 inches below the top frame member, you will be more than fine.


Hope that helps.
Don


----------



## JonnyVee

Don Stewart said:


> The AT 1.5 frame utilizes "L" brackets which are attached to factory supplied spreader bar stringers. These two stringers attach to the frame at the frame's quarter points which keeps frame very rigid so there is definitely no frame warping. The back of the screen material floats about 1-1/2 inches off the wall.
> 
> Also, with your lens 7 inches below the top frame member, you will be more than fine.
> 
> 
> Hope that helps.
> Don


That definitely helps and makes sense. I’ll make the Wallscreen Deluxe work then so I can utilize the EZ Mount. 

One last question. My screen is mounted below a bulkhead and I like to get the screen as close as possible. How much clearance do I need between the top of the frame and the bulkhead for the EZMount?


----------



## skylarlove1999

JonnyVee said:


> That definitely helps and makes sense. I’ll make the Wallscreen Deluxe work then so I can utilize the EZ Mount.
> 
> 
> 
> One last question. My screen is mounted below a bulkhead and I like to get te screen as close as possible. How much clearance do I need between the top of the frame and the bulkhead for the EZMount?


That is a great question. My screen will be near the top of my ceiling so I'm in the same situation I assumed you need three to 4 inch of clearance but hopefully Don can answer.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## Don Stewart

JonnyVee said:


> That definitely helps and makes sense. I’ll make the Wallscreen Deluxe work then so I can utilize the EZ Mount.
> 
> One last question. My screen is mounted below a bulkhead and I like to get the screen as close as possible. How much clearance do I need between the top of the frame and the bulkhead for the EZMount?


Hi Guys,


It is Sunday and I am working from home and do not have access engineering drawings. That said, the slot depth for the EZ is about one inch. So in order to have room to lift the frame and then lower it back down to catch the mounting slot, I would recommend a minimum of 1-1/2" of space from the very top of frame's permanent resting position and the ceiling or bulkhead.


Don


----------



## skylarlove1999

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Guys,
> 
> 
> It is Sunday and I am working from home and do not have access engineering drawings. That said, the slot depth for the EZ is about one inch. So in order to have room to lift the frame and then lower it back down to catch the mounting slot, I would recommend a minimum of 1-1/2" of space from the very top of frame's permanent resting position and the ceiling or bulkhead.
> 
> 
> Don


Thank you Don greatly appreciated. My Studiotek 130 G4 140 inch 2:39 screen is scheduled to be delivered Thursday. That day cannot arrive soon enough. I will finally have the Holy Grail of screens in my theater. My theater. I still won't believe it until it is up on the wall and I fire up my projector. 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## Don Stewart

skylarlove1999 said:


> Thank you Don greatly appreciated. My Studiotek 130 G4 140 inch 2:39 screen is scheduled to be delivered Thursday. That day cannot arrive soon enough. I will finally have the Holy Grail of screens in my theater. My theater. I still won't believe it until it is up on the wall and I fire up my projector.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


Great Tristan! Please let me know of your first impressions.
Don


----------



## GeorgeHolland

Craig Peer said:


> I'd say no. I'd try and find a better mounting position not behind the screen.


I was able to find the wall brackets that came with the Infinity Cascade Model Three V's. I had them both in storage but in different places. I mounted them between the StudioTek 130 G3 screen and the wall. The screen has only a bit over 9 inches of space between the wall and frame. Not ideal but will give me a chance to experience Height Speakers now that I have a pre-processor that supports them.

Thanks.


----------



## Don Stewart

GeorgeHolland said:


> I was able to find the wall brackets that came with the Infinity Cascade Model Three V's. I had them both in storage but in different places. I mounted them between the StudioTek 130 G3 screen and the wall. The screen has only a bit over 9 inches of space between the wall and frame. Not ideal but will give me a chance to experience Height Speakers now that I have a pre-processor that supports them.
> 
> Thanks.


Nice setup! After seeing your photo, it looks much more forgiving that your original, text only, post decribed. That said, the only change that comes to my mind is I would tilt all the outboard left and right speakers (first starting at about 8 to 10 degrees) inwards more towards the viewers. It appears in photo you have room to do this without interfering with viewer sight-lines.


Regards,
Don


----------



## GeorgeHolland

Don Stewart said:


> Nice setup! After seeing your photo, it looks much more forgiving that your original, text only, post described. That said, the only change that comes to my mind is I would tilt all the outboard left and right speakers (first starting at about 8 to 10 degrees) inwards more towards the viewers. It appears in photo you have room to do this without interfering with viewer sight-lines.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Don


I do that with my FL/FR mains and will adjust them again after I get my speaker wire and connect the heights. They've just been temporarily moved around. The heights will take more work. I considered angling them initially but need to fabricate angled mounting blocks to secure the brackets to.

Thank you.


----------



## SJHT

GeorgeHolland said:


> I was able to find the wall brackets that came with the Infinity Cascade Model Three V's. I had them both in storage but in different places. I mounted them between the StudioTek 130 G3 screen and the wall. The screen has only a bit over 9 inches of space between the wall and frame. Not ideal but will give me a chance to experience Height Speakers now that I have a pre-processor that supports them.
> 
> Thanks.


If that is a fabric boarder in that black velvet covering your subs, you can cut and then use a simple fushion tape to fold over for a good folded edge. I’ve done this for the fabric on a piece of front furniture. Works well. Product I used below....

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005572IKS/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1


----------



## GeorgeHolland

SJHT said:


> If that is a fabric boarder in that black velvet covering your subs, you can cut and then use a simple fushion tape to fold over for a good folded edge. I’ve done this for the fabric on a piece of front furniture. Works well. Product I used below....
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005572IKS/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1


That would give a cleaner look for sure. Even though the subs are stained black there can be some glare off the screen due to the semi-gloss finish. The velvet takes care of that and I don't see the ugly edge when the lights are out. Just never got around to cleaning it up. Thanks.

Edit: I ordered the tape, image attached shows a bit of angle I was able to add to the heights and the velvet is folded under until I get the tape.

Thanks.


----------



## skylarlove1999

Don Stewart said:


> Great Tristan! Please let me know of your first impressions.
> Don


Honestly never thought I would ever own a Stewart screen. I would have thought I would have seen a unicorn in my home before this screen. Unicorn came first much less assembly. LOL. Can't wait to get it on the wall. Dreams do come true.









Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## skylarlove1999

To quote Dennis Green " They are who we thought they were". 

Sometimes the thing you wait all your life for can actually be disappointing once you obtain it. 

THIS is not one of those times. 

Honestly I had built up 30 years of expectations. Saw the Studiotek 130 in my local AV store when I was 17. The salesperson actually said to me smugly " If you have to ask.." after I asked the price.

This is only day two of ownership and the Studiotek 130 G4 has already exceeded 30 YEARS of expectations. It is like looking through a window. Such a clear sharp pristine image.

I didn't know how many artifacts and hotspotting all my previous screens had until I hung this beauty and started watching my favorite movie clips. Ignorance truly is bliss. LOL. 

Thank you @Don Stewart for making my dream come true. This image isn't even a 4K disc. 1080P upscaled by my Shield through VUDU. Please tell Adrian Silva thank you for all of his help.









Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## rossandwendy

skylarlove1999 said:


> To quote Dennis Green " They are who we thought they were".
> 
> Sometimes the thing you wait all your life for can actually be disappointing once you obtain it.
> 
> THIS is not one of those times.
> 
> Honestly I had built up 30 years of expectations. Saw the Studiotek 130 in my local AV store when I was 17. The salesperson actually said to me smugly " If you have to ask.." after I asked the price.
> 
> This is only day two of ownership and the Studiotek 130 G4 has already exceeded 30 YEARS of expectations. It is like looking through a window. Such a clear sharp pristine image.
> 
> I didn't know how many artifacts and hotspotting all my previous screens had until I hung this beauty and started watching my favorite movie clips. Ignorance truly is bliss. LOL.
> 
> Thank you @Don Stewart for making my dream come true. This image isn't even a 4K disc. 1080P upscaled by my Shield through VUDU. Please tell Adrian Silva thank you for all of his help.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


Congrats Tristan! It is such a joy to view films on the ST130 G4 (Stewart was also my dream, just got mine a few months ago thanks to good pricing). I will never use any other brand.

Cheers,
Ross


----------



## skylarlove1999

rossandwendy said:


> Congrats Tristan! It is such a joy to view films on the ST130 G4 (Stewart was also my dream, just got mine a few months ago thanks to good pricing). I will never use any other brand.
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Ross


Thank you Ross. I could never go back. I would rather read a book than watch on any other screen. Seriously. 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## JonnyVee

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Guys,
> 
> 
> It is Sunday and I am working from home and do not have access engineering drawings. That said, the slot depth for the EZ is about one inch. So in order to have room to lift the frame and then lower it back down to catch the mounting slot, I would recommend a minimum of 1-1/2" of space from the very top of frame's permanent resting position and the ceiling or bulkhead.
> 
> 
> Don


Hi Don - Just wanted to say thank you. I ordered my 130 G4 120” Wallscreen Deluxe today. Looking forward to the upgrade from my Silver Ticket!


----------



## Don Stewart

FYI. Here is another StudioTek 130 G4 professional review from David Susilo, PHD, that was released yesterday. (David is a freelance technology journalist with 710,000 blog readers and 130,000 paid print-magazine subscribers worldwide). https://wifihifi.com/stewart-studiotek-130-g4-review/


----------



## tigerhonaker

Don Stewart said:


> FYI. Here is another StudioTek 130 G4 professional review from David Susilo, PHD, that was released yesterday. (David is a freelance technology journalist with 710,000 blog readers and 130,000 paid print-magazine subscribers worldwide). https://wifihifi.com/stewart-studiotek-130-g4-review/


Don,

Thanks for sharing that New article enjoyed it a lot. 

The guys are here this week installing all my Changes & Up-Dates .............

Terry


----------



## skylarlove1999

tigerhonaker said:


> Don,
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for sharing that New article enjoyed it a lot.
> 
> 
> 
> The guys are here this week installing all my Changes & Up-Dates .............
> 
> 
> 
> Terry


Christmas in June for you. Can't wait to hear your thoughts I think you will love the new screen and Atmos

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## kdog750

I've been interested in a ST130 35" inch screen but am having trouble locating where to buy one. Best Buy website says they have them but when I call Magnolia Center they say they only do SI now. The Steward website doesn't list any dealers either.

I didn't go through this whole thread but can anyone direct me to a dealer?


----------



## Don Stewart

kdog750 said:


> I've been interested in a ST130 35" inch screen but am having trouble locating where to buy one. Best Buy website says they have them but when I call Magnolia Center they say they only do SI now. The Steward website doesn't list any dealers either.
> 
> I didn't go through this whole thread but can anyone direct me to a dealer?


I think you got an uniformed sales person from Best Buy. That said, look up Craig Peer or Mike Garret here on the AVS forum. Both of these guys are very knowledgeable and respected by many here on the forum.


----------



## kdog750

Don Stewart said:


> I think you got an uniformed sales person from Best Buy. That said, look up Craig Peer or Mike Garret here on the AVS forum. Both of these guys are very knowledgeable and respected by many here on the forum.


Thanks for the reply. Those two were going to be my next step but I wasn't sure. I was just confused as to why it was so difficult to find anyone selling the screens lol.


----------



## Don Stewart

kdog750 said:


> Thanks for the reply. Those two were going to be my next step but I wasn't sure. I was just confused as to why it was so difficult to find anyone selling the screens lol.


If you are looking for a local dealer near you, then please contact Adrian Silva, our head of residential sales. His email is: [email protected]
We have many hundreds of dealers throughout the USA.


Hope that helps.
Don


----------



## sandyj

I am looking at getting a Studiotek 130 G4 110" fixed frame screen the dealer said they could “split” the horizontal frame pieces to significantly reduced freight cost is there down sides to this ? 



The screen will be my first Stewart screen as I currently have a Carada 1.4 brilliant white and have been using it for about 15 years hoping this one will be a step up. My Projector is a JVC NX9 in a light controller room. I can see many respected people here have the Studiotek 130 there is no way to see one here so I will be taking a leap of faith.


----------



## Azekecse

skylarlove1999 said:


> Thank you Ross. I could never go back. I would rather read a book than watch on any other screen. Seriously.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


You're killin' me Smalls. Just when I thought it was safe to get into the water.

Peace and blessings,

Azeke


----------



## skylarlove1999

Azekecse said:


> You're killin' me Smalls. Just when I thought it was safe to get into the water.
> 
> 
> 
> Peace and blessings,
> 
> 
> 
> Azeke


Sorry I knew it would be be brighter and have less hotspotting than previous screens but what was surprising is all the artifacting I had been oblivious to before because the background image just looks so much cleaner. It is like getting a new projector and that is with my Epson 6050. Can't even imagine how good it would look with a true 4k JVC projector. Colors just have more of a natural quality to them, especially skin tones. 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## Don Stewart

Hi All,


Today is our official release date of our new, "Director's Choice EVO" model which is the pinnacle of our screen line. The four way masking system is available with completely seamless screen sizes up to 25' wide by 14' high. The Director's Choice EVO is designed for professional studio post production viewing rooms and high end residential applications. For those interested, here is the link. 
https://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/en/screens/directors-choice


----------



## Azekecse

I am thinking about the following Stewart ST130 G4 2.40:1 (JVC NX-7 w/ DCR Lens) options max total width of screen is 117", height not restrictive:

1). Balon Edge (123" Diag)

2). WallScreen Deluxe (116.5 Diag)

3). WallScreen 1.5. (120.75)

The Balon Edge has a larger diagonal view with a 1.5" masking border.

WallScreen Deluxe - smaller diagonal view with a 3.5" masking border - also least expensive

WallScreen 1.5 - most expensive, custom build

I checked the spill over on the masking border of my current screen and it is no more than 1/2"-3/4". I was told that the Balon Edge is a little more difficult to dial in, but it looks more aesthetically pleasing, IMHO. What are your thoughts about these options? All opinions and comments are welcome .

Thanks Skylarlove 

Peace and blessings,

Azeke


----------



## Craig Peer

Azekecse said:


> I am thinking about the following Stewart ST130 G4 2.40:1 (JVC NX-7 w/ DCR Lens) options max total width of screen is 117", height not restrictive:
> 
> 1). Balon Edge (123" Diag)
> 
> 2). WallScreen Deluxe (116.5 Diag)
> 
> 3). WallScreen 1.5. (120.75)
> 
> The Balon Edge has a larger diagonal view with a 1.5" masking border.
> 
> WallScreen Deluxe - smaller diagonal view with a 3.5" masking border - also least expensive
> 
> WallScreen 1.5 - most expensive, custom build
> 
> I checked the spill over on the masking border of my current screen and it is no more than 1/2"-3/4". I was told that the Balon Edge is a little more difficult to dial in, but it looks more aesthetically pleasing, IMHO. What are your thoughts about these options? All opinions and comments are welcome .
> 
> Thanks Skylarlove
> 
> Peace and blessings,
> 
> Azeke


If you weren't short on wall width, I'd say get the WallScreen Deluxe. Looks like the Balon Edge is the best bet.


----------



## Spizz

Kris Deering said:


> In fact, I am in the process of having a new Vari-mask screen built for the room with the ST130G4 material. Stewart has a new Vari-mask frame that isn't as big as before and uses some new solutions for setting pre-set points for the variable masking. I will likely post something about this once I have it installed on the blog on my website, so keep an eye out!





Kris Deering said:


> I may not be listed yet. I took a tour of their facility when I was doing a calibration tour in SoCal in January and they had one setup for me to look at. They said they would be announcing/shipping soon. I told them I'd want to buy one after getting to see it in action as I was considering a vari-mask anyways not that we're seeing so much content in between 16x9 and full scope.


Has this product been released yet or still under wraps (not currently on the Stewart Site)? If it is special enough for Kris to buy as it meets his strict requirements I am very interested.


----------



## Kris Deering

Spizz said:


> Has this product been released yet or still under wraps (not currently on the Stewart Site)? If it is special enough for Kris to buy as it meets his strict requirements I am very interested.


Not sure. Don may know. Mine shipped yesterday, so I should be installing around the end of next week. Maybe they've been slow to update the website due to COVID.


----------



## DigsMovies

I'm also very interested in the "Vari-Mask" screen.

How does this differ from the "VistaScope" (which I own and love)???


----------



## Brandon Jolley

I am wondering what the recommendations would be for a screen? The screen area I am looking at is 10'-9 5/8" by 4'8" and looking at about 130-140". My first row will be about 10' 2" from the screen and ceiling height is only 7. I am looking at using a JVC NX5 for the projector. 
The room is in a basement with no windows so it will be completely dark. It does need to be a AT screen, fixed frame, wall mounted also.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Don Stewart

DigsMovies said:


> I'm also very interested in the "Vari-Mask" screen.
> 
> How does this differ from the "VistaScope" (which I own and love)???


I think what Kris might have been referring to as the Veri-Mask, which is correct by its operational function, is the newly released Directors Choice EVO.
It was just officially released two days ago.
https://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/en...rectors-choice


Hope that helps.
Don


----------



## Spizz

Kris Deering said:


> Not sure. Don may know. Mine shipped yesterday, so I should be installing around the end of next week. Maybe they've been slow to update the website due to COVID.


Thanks Kris. Looking forward to your Blog write up on it. How large a screen did you go for?


----------



## Kris Deering

Spizz said:


> Kris Deering said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure. Don may know. Mine shipped yesterday, so I should be installing around the end of next week. Maybe they've been slow to update the website due to COVID.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks Kris. Looking forward to your Blog write up on it. How large a screen did you go for?
Click to expand...

Same size I have now, 140” diagonal except I did a true 2.4 instead of 2.35.


----------



## Spizz

Kris Deering said:


> Same size I have now, 140” diagonal except I did a true 2.4 instead of 2.35.


Thanks Kris. Did you go for the ST100 or ST130?


----------



## skylarlove1999

Spizz said:


> Thanks Kris. Did you go for the ST100 or ST130?


He went ST130 G4. He is in love. LOL. As are all of us who bought after Kris review in Sound and Vision.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## tigerhonaker

Spizz said:


> Thanks Kris. Did you go for the ST100 or ST130?


Spizz,

Below is Kris Deering ...............







Terry


----------



## rossandwendy

Don Stewart said:


> FYI. Here is another StudioTek 130 G4 professional review from David Susilo, PHD, that was released yesterday. (David is a freelance technology journalist with 710,000 blog readers and 130,000 paid print-magazine subscribers worldwide). https://wifihifi.com/stewart-studiotek-130-g4-review/


Don, thanks for sharing that latest review link, it's another great read to complement and confirm Kris Deering's review. I could not be any happier with my ST130 G4!

Cheers,
Ross


----------



## JonnyVee

According to my dealer my screen is prepping to ship. Feel like a kid at Christmas! 

With regards to the StudioTek 130 G4 and the JVC. The G4 material is not listed in JVC’s Screen Adjustment Mode Table, just the older G3. Is the StudioTek 130 G3 value (#71) still relevant for the G4?


----------



## Craig Peer

JonnyVee said:


> According to my dealer my screen is prepping to ship. Feel like a kid at Christmas!
> 
> With regards to the StudioTek 130 G4 and the JVC. The G4 material is not listed in JVC’s Screen Adjustment Mode Table, just the older G3. Is the StudioTek 130 G3 value (#71) still relevant for the G4?


The G3 # 71 setting is probably close enough.


----------



## Don Stewart

JonnyVee said:


> According to my dealer my screen is prepping to ship. Feel like a kid at Christmas!
> 
> With regards to the StudioTek 130 G4 and the JVC. The G4 material is not listed in JVC’s Screen Adjustment Mode Table, just the older G3. Is the StudioTek 130 G3 value (#71 ) still relevant for the G4?


Hi Jonny,


The reference material for both StudioTek G3 and G4 are neutral (meaning non skewed) and the color reproduction for both materials are identical. I would recommend using setting 71 on your JVC.
Hope that helps.


Don


----------



## WTS

Craig Peer said:


> The G3 # 71 setting is probably close enough.


How does JVC account for the various types of screen, if it has zero gain then this setting or if it has a gain of 1.3 then this other setting. Or is more to do with gain and screen material - texture etc.


----------



## skylarlove1999

WTS said:


> How does JVC account for the various types of screen, if it has zero gain then this setting or if it has a gain of 1.3 then this other setting. Or is more to do with gain and screen material - texture etc.


JVC has worked with all the major screen manufacturers to determine these settings for use with the NX projector line.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## WTS

skylarlove1999 said:


> JVC has worked with all the major screen manufacturers to determine these settings for use with the NX projector line.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


Interesting, tks


----------



## cdnscg

WTS said:


> Interesting, tks


If your considering the ST130 G4, and can manage the $ tag, I recommend. The improvements are subtle at first, but after multiple viewings you quickly realize why they are the industry reference screen. A little hesitant to through in all the bells and whistles, but the value is in the screen material.


----------



## Don Stewart

WTS said:


> Well at the moment I have a 100`` Hurley 1.5 screen, have you ever heard of them. *They were making screens before Stewart was in diapers*(that was a quote from a former AVS member from 10+ years ago). I have a sample of the ST100 screen( I think it is the st100) that I still haven`t stuck on my screen to see what the difference is. Maybe I`ll get a sample of the new 130 G4 and have a look. I think the Hurley looks pretty damn nice and probably better than any other screen I`ve seen and I have seen the ST100 many times but it also comes down to the projector being used so it`s hard to compare unless it side by side or over laid. Yes I`m guessing you are probably correct in saying they are probably the king of screens now, although I thought there was a company in Norway or something like that who was making some pretty good looking screen material a few years ago. I`m guessing a 100`` would cost about $1000USD.


Actually, Stewart was building screens long before I was born and in diapers. My grandfather, Roy Stewart, founded the company with the help of Walt Disney back in 1947. Walt Disney was an extreme perfectionist and wanted his screens *"seamless" *in large venue sizes up to 40 X 90 feet. Just sayin.


----------



## cdnscg

WTS said:


> Well at the moment I have a 100`` Hurley 1.5 screen, have you ever heard of them. They were making screens before Stewart was in diapers(that was a quote from a former AVS member from 10+ years ago). I have a sample of the ST100 screen( I think it is the st100) that I still haven`t stuck on my screen to see what the difference is. Maybe I`ll get a sample of the new 130 G4 and have a look. I think the Hurley looks pretty damn nice and probably better than any other screen I`ve seen and I have seen the ST100 many times but it also comes down to the projector being used so it`s hard to compare unless it side by side or over laid. Yes I`m guessing you are probably correct in saying they are probably the king of screens now, although I thought there was a company in Norway or something like that who was making some pretty good looking screen material a few years ago. I`m guessing a 100`` would cost about $1000USD.


I think your reaction to my post is a little aggressive and over the top, especially for a fellow CDN. May-be your having a bad night


----------



## WTS

cdnscg said:


> I think your reaction to my post is a little aggressive and over the top, especially for a fellow CDN. May-be your having a bad night


Sorry didn't mean to get any sense of aggressiveness in there, maybe I should just delete my posts and start over on this. Cheers.


----------



## WTS

Don Stewart said:


> Actually, Stewart was building screens long before I was born and in diapers. My grandfather, Roy Stewart, founded the company with the help of Walt Disney back in 1947. Walt Disney was an extreme perfectionist and wanted his screens *"seamless" *in large venue sizes up to 40 X 90 feet. Just sayin.


Hey Don, no disrespect to the Stewart name or products. I was only taking a quote(10+ years ago or more actually) from a long time AVS member who was big into CRTs way back in the day for apparently decades and it was his comment that I just repeated. I've read about the Hurley history and it was impressive and they had their products in some big venues and I thought they also had their products in Disney as well. Yes they went out of business, why, I have no idea and it doesn't matter to me why. I've never said Stewart products were bad or not as good as Hurley or any other brands for that matter. Damn some people seem to be getting real offensive because of that comment. I doubt whether any of them have every seen a Hurley product to even make a judgement call on them, maybe you have I don't know.

As for the other gentleman(if I can use that word) who said you shouldn't sell to me after that comment, well I guess that's just a little over the top. I may still be looking to change screens some day(to go bigger) and if /when that days comes and we can do business great, if not then I'll find another top manufacturer or just keep what I'm presently using and be happy.

Cheers,


----------



## Don Stewart

WTS said:


> Hey Don, no disrespect to the Stewart name or products. I was only taking a quote(10+ years ago or more actually) from a long time AVS member who was big into CRTs way back in the day for apparently decades and it was his comment that I just repeated. I've read about the Hurley history and it was impressive and they had their products in some big venues and I thought they also had their products in Disney as well. Yes they went out of business, why, I have no idea and it doesn't matter to me why. I've never said Stewart products were bad or not as good as Hurley or any other brands for that matter. Damn some people seem to be getting real offensive because of that comment. I doubt whether any of them have every seen a Hurley product to even make a judgement call on them, maybe you have I don't know.
> 
> As for the other gentleman(if I can use that word) who said you shouldn't sell to me after that comment, well I guess that's just a little over the top. I may still be looking to change screens some day(to go bigger) and if /when that days comes and we can do business great, if not then I'll find another top manufacturer or just keep what I'm presently using and be happy.
> 
> Cheers,


No worries WT. 

Yes, I am very familiar with Hurley and their back then main competitor, Teknikote screens. We would occasionally have friendly conversations with the them at trade shows. Their main core business was supplying seamed screens for commercial theater exhibitors. When the theater chains went through massive expansion programs building mega-multiplexes in the late 80's and early 90's, all the large venue screen companies had a difficult time trying to keep up with orders. I was glad they where there to take some of the, "I need it tomorrow" pressure off of us. Anyway, that being said, have a wonderful day.


Best Regards,
Don


----------



## WTS

Don Stewart said:


> No worries WT.
> 
> Yes, I am very familiar with Hurley and their back then main competitor, Teknikote screens. We would occasionally have friendly conversations with the them at trade shows. Their main core business was supplying seamed screens for commercial theater exhibitors. When the theater chains went through massive expansion programs building mega-multiplexes in the late 80's and early 90's, all the large venue screen companies had a difficult time trying to keep up with orders. I was glad they where there to take some of the, "I need it tomorrow" pressure off of us. Anyway, that being said, have a wonderful day.
> 
> 
> Best Regards,
> Don


Don, thanks for the post.

Take care,
Walter


----------



## surroundsound99

Does anyone have a retractable screen with speakers in back, but the screen is NOT acoustically transparent?

In my setup there will be plenty of open air space to the left, right, and below the screen for the sound to wrap around, so do I really need the compromises that come with AT screen materials? Thanks


----------



## Erod

Craig Peer said:


> The G3 # 71 setting is probably close enough.


What does that even do? I never noticed a difference on my G3 before or after ChadB calibrated my projector. Now I have the G4, and it's still off.


----------



## Erod

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Jonny,
> 
> 
> The reference material for both StudioTek G3 and G4 are neutral (meaning non skewed) and the color reproduction for both materials are identical. I would recommend using setting 71 on your JVC.
> Hope that helps.
> 
> 
> Don


Hey, Don, still very much enjoying my new G4.

What does this setting change in the projector exactly, and does it interfere with professional calibration that's been done?


----------



## Don Stewart

Erod said:


> Hey, Don, still very much enjoying my new G4.
> 
> What does this setting change in the projector exactly, and does it interfere with professional calibration that's been done?


Hi Erod,
Actually, this would probably be a better question for the guys who work at JVC as they design the projectors. That being said, from what I understand, JVC, has factory presets for some of the more popular screen materials out there. For StudioTek 130, I believe it is preset 71. I know some of the top engineers at JVC and have worked with them in the past. In most instances, they use StudioTek reference screens to feature their products at the major trade shows, including their commercial, FAA approved simulation products and residential markets. Since they use the StudioTek 130 so frequently, I would have a high confidence level that their preset is very accurate. Perhaps some JVC projector owners here on the forum can add to this.


Regards,
Don


----------



## RapalloAV

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Erod,
> Actually, this would probably be a better question for the guys who work at JVC as they design the projectors. That being said, from what I understand, JVC, has factory presets for some of the more popular screen materials out there. For StudioTek 130, I believe it is preset 71. I know some of the top engineers at JVC and have worked with them in the past. In most instances, they use StudioTek reference screens to feature their products at the major trade shows, including their commercial, FAA approved simulation products and residential markets. Since they use the StudioTek 130 so frequently, I would have a high confidence level that their preset is very accurate. Perhaps some JVC projector owners here on the forum can add to this.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Don


I have always used the preset 71 on my JVC NX9 with my StudioTek 130 G3 curved 2.35 screen. The picture looks amazing with or without using 71


----------



## Craig Peer

Erod said:


> What does that even do? I never noticed a difference on my G3 before or after ChadB calibrated my projector. Now I have the G4, and it's still off.


You don't need or want to use it if you have had a calibration done by Chad.


----------



## Iceman777

I currently planned to upgrade my HT and start from the screen. Right now I am using a DIY 131 "screen 2.35 with Carli's Place Flexiwhite. I am wondering if it is possible to buy the original StudioTek 130 G3 / G4 bare fabric? Or find out which fabric from other manufacturers of bare canvas is comparable in quality to this canvas? If this is not for general discussion PM me please.


----------



## skylarlove1999

Iceman777 said:


> I currently planned to upgrade my HT and start from the screen. Right now I am using a DIY 131 "screen 2.35 with Carli's Place Flexiwhite. I am wondering if it is possible to buy the original StudioTek 130 G3 / G4 bare fabric? Or find out which fabric from other manufacturers of bare canvas is comparable in quality to this canvas? If this is not for general discussion PM me please.


I have had Elite Matte White, Screen Innovations Pure White and Seymour Glacier White in my theater.

Honestly not one of them is comparable. Cleanest, sharpest and brightest image by far from the ST130 G4. Depth is increased. More detail resolution in the foreground and the backgrounds are noise free.

The differences are stunning if you know what you are looking for in the image.

The only way to buy just the screen material is if you already own a Stewart screen . Stewart keeps your serial number on file to replace just the screen material. I have heard rumors of buying just the screen material but all dealers I contacted stated that is not possible. 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## Iceman777

My friend is selling his 100 inch Stewart screen. If I buy this screen, can I count on the purchase of updated material, but with a larger size and format of 2.35?


----------



## Craig Peer

Iceman777 said:


> My friend is selling his 100 inch Stewart screen. *If I buy this screen, can I count on the purchase of updated material, but with a larger size and format of 2.35?*


You can't make a 100" screen bigger. You can replace material in an existing fixed Stewart screen. If you want a larger 2.35:1 screen, you will need to buy one.


----------



## Iceman777

Unfortunately, the price tag for ready-made screens from Stewart goes beyond my capabilities, and I also do not want to buy a frame that I will have to throw away later (my frame is now part of the installation). Then I ask for help in choosing material from other manufacturers, which is close in quality to StudioTek 130 G4.


----------



## scanido

How are you folks cleaning off the screen from dust? 

I’ve got a ST100 that hasn’t been dusted off for awhile so wondering what to do.


----------



## Don Stewart

scanido said:


> How are you folks cleaning off the screen from dust?
> 
> I’ve got a ST100 that hasn’t been dusted off for awhile so wondering what to do.


Hi Scanido.


What we use to dust screen surfaces at the factory are soft horsehair brushes specifically designed for old school mechanical drafting, sometimes refereed to as a fox tail drafting brush.
We actually tape two brushes together so they become one brush with two rows of tufts.
Here is a link if you would like to purchase.
https://www.amazon.com/Alvin-2342-C...fting+supplies+brushes&qid=1593803910&sr=8-25


Hope that helps.
Don


----------



## Robert Holloway

Thanks to everyone for all the comments and advice. I was a Stewart owner and then strayed from the path. The subsequent bitter taste of low quality lingered long after the initial sweetness of the lower price. Now I have a Studiotek 130 G4 120" 2.39:1 arriving in about two weeks. Can't wait - thanks! Rob


----------



## rossandwendy

Robert Holloway said:


> Thanks to everyone for all the comments and advice. I was a Stewart owner and then strayed from the path. The subsequent bitter taste of low quality lingered long after the initial sweetness of the lower price. Now I have a Studiotek 130 G4 120" 2.39:1 arriving in about two weeks. Can't wait - thanks! Rob


That's cool you are returning to Stewart. Look forward to hearing your thoughts about the picture quality on your ST130 G4.

Ross


----------



## howiee

Does anyone know if there's visual representation of viewing angles and gain with Stewart screens? I'm weighing up 100 vs 130 G4 materials, as well as screen size, no.s of seats, viewing distance etc. I mostly want to work out how many seats will get the extra gain benefit.


----------



## Don Stewart

howiee said:


> Does anyone know if there's visual representation of viewing angles and gain with Stewart screens? I'm weighing up 100 vs 130 G4 materials, as well as screen size, no.s of seats, viewing distance etc. I mostly want to work out how many seats will get the extra gain benefit.


Hi Howiee.

Here are links to screen gain graphs. StudioTek 100 and StudioTek 130 G4.
https://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/en/materials/studiotek-100
https://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/en/materials/studiotek-130-g4


Regards,
Don


----------



## howiee

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Howiee.
> 
> Here are links to screen gain graphs. StudioTek 100 and StudioTek 130 G4.
> https://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/en/materials/studiotek-100
> https://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/en/materials/studiotek-130-g4
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Don


Thanks Don. Much appreciated!


----------



## scanido

Don Stewart said:


> scanido said:
> 
> 
> 
> How are you folks cleaning off the screen from dust?
> 
> Iâ€™️ve got a ST100 that hasnâ€™️t been dusted off for awhile so wondering what to do.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Scanido.
> 
> 
> What we use to dust screen surfaces at the factory are soft horsehair brushes specifically designed for old school mechanical drafting, sometimes refereed to as a fox tail drafting brush.
> We actually tape two brushes together so they become one brush with two rows of tufts.
> Here is a link if you would like to purchase.
> https://www.amazon.com/Alvin-2342-C...fting+supplies+brushes&qid=1593803910&sr=8-25
> 
> 
> Hope that helps.
> Don
Click to expand...

Thank you, I will get that brush.


----------



## Jrsred10

What is the recommended seating distance for a microperf 130 G4?


----------



## JonnyVee

Finally got my 120" 130 G4 up yesterday!!

The box took a little damage in transit, but there was so much bubble wrap that the frame and screen were fine. In fact, nothing came close to even being damaged. So it was definitely packed to take a hit. 

Really impressed with the build quality and ease of assembly as well. Night and day compared to my Silver Ticket. The snaps were a little harder to join than I was expecting and was the toughest part of the assembly. Definitely a workout and not a step to rush or get too aggressive - but the screen is nice and tight. 

With regards to image. We finished too late to watch a full movie .... but I was able to watch my son play The Witcher for 10 minutes. I still need to re-calibrate the projector ... but holy s**t... the image is so much brighter and the colors have a lot more vibrancy/pop/saturation. My son, who is quickly turning into a A/V snob, was quite surprised and commented it looked better than the OLED.

I'm looking forward to putting in some screen time. Beautiful image so far with my JVC! 

Oh yeah.... we're 9' from the screen with a 12.5" throw and I couldn't see any hotspotting. The minimum throw is stated as "1.3 x image width" and I'm 1.42.


----------



## rossandwendy

JonnyVee said:


> Finally got my 120" 130 G4 up yesterday!!
> 
> The box took a little damage in transit, but there was so much bubble wrap that the frame and screen were fine. In fact, nothing came close to even being damaged. So it was definitely packed to take a hit.
> 
> Really impressed with the build quality and ease of assembly as well. Night and day compared to my Silver Ticket. The snaps were a little harder to join than I was expecting and was the toughest part of the assembly. Definitely a workout and not a step to rush or get too aggressive - but the screen is nice and tight.
> 
> With regards to image. We finished too late to watch a full movie .... but I was able to watch my son play The Witcher for 10 minutes. I still need to re-calibrate the projector ... but holy s**t... the image is so much brighter and the colors have a lot more vibrancy/pop/saturation. My son, who is quickly turning into a A/V snob, was quite surprised and commented it looked better than the OLED.
> 
> I'm looking forward to putting in some screen time. Beautiful image so far with my JVC!
> 
> Oh yeah.... we're 9' from the screen with a 12.5" throw and I couldn't see any hotspotting. The minimum throw is stated as "1.3 x image width" and I'm 1.42.


Congrats! We have the same projector and screen, a phenomenal combo. You are right about the build quality and assembly also being superb.

Ross


----------



## JonnyVee

rossandwendy said:


> Congrats! We have the same projector and screen, a phenomenal combo. You are right about the build quality and assembly also being superb.
> 
> Ross


Thx. I'm extremely impressed with the image so far. I have 1800 hours on my bulb and its like I have a new bulb again - with better color and contrast.


----------



## Iam74Gibson

The wife and I are downsizing to get ready to retire, so may have to shop for a new screen... I apologize ahead of time for being a rookie on screen choice. I have been very happy with my 16:9 DA-Lite HP 2.4 150 inch diag motorized screen since 2013, so have not been following screen tech. The new home theater will be smaller, and I may barely be able to fit this current screen. Even if it fits, it may be a bit overwhelming due to sitting closer. DA-Lite no longer make this screen material so can't get a smaller one (love it by the way with my JVC NS3000)... I have even considered bastardizing this screen, cutting it down, and making a fixed frame... 

So I have a couple of questions in regard to Stewart screens


What is considered the best Stewart Material? I understand their are different situations so no "one size fits all" .. but I am looking at their gain material... the StudioTek G4 130 or the Ultramatte 150... I do not see any reviews that compare these


Can you tell any difference between Acoutic Perf vs Non-Perf? Visually?

How do I order samples? didn't see anything obvious on the web page...

I am considering going with a 235:1 this time around... I could get a larger screen with acoustically perf. But don't want to lose any noticeable resolution.

All advice is appreciated

PJ


----------



## tigerhonaker

Guys,

I just now completed what I think many would call an extensive post on the following.

Atmos W/Triad 6-Spkrs, SVS 4-PB16 ULTRA Subs, Stewart 130 G4, W/119 Pictures 3-Videos

Also multiple videos on the JVC RS4500 laser projector with (Internal-Heat-Issues).

*If your interested just click on the link below.
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/15-g...g-up-dated-august-2018-a-23.html#post59957364
*

Terry


----------



## stef2

Is it possible to order the screen without the frame? I currently own a Seymour AV screen, with their Premier frame / grommet + O-ring screen tension system. I would like to replace the screen material with the Studiotek 130 G4 microperf but keep the frame I already have.


----------



## tigerhonaker

stef2 said:


> Is it possible to order the screen without the frame? *I currently own a Seymour AV screen, with their Premier frame / grommet + O-ring screen tension system.* I would like to replace the screen material with the Studiotek 130 G4 microperf but keep the frame I already have.


Maybe you "Missed" seeing my Post right above your's   

I clearly show multiple pictures of just replacing the screen material from the "Firehawk" to the Newer "ST130 G4".

*However,* I already had the Stewart Filmscreen 16 x 9 123" 4-way remote masking screen frame.



> *I currently own a Seymour AV screen, with their Premier frame / grommet + O-ring screen tension system.*


*That is a question for Don Stewart I think ^^^*

Terry


----------



## stef2

tigerhonaker said:


> Maybe you "Missed" seeing my Post right above your's
> 
> I clearly show multiple pictures of just replacing the screen material from the "Firehawk" to the Newer "ST130 G4".
> 
> *However,* I already had the Stewart Filmscreen 16 x 9 123" 4-way remote masking screen frame.
> 
> 
> 
> *That is a question for Don Stewart I think ^^^*
> 
> Terry


No problem, I saw your post...
But my question remains, as my screen frame is not the same as yours, and I asked if it was possible to order the screen material to fit MY frame (SeymourAV)  Yes, I was expecting Don to answer this


----------



## Don Stewart

stef2 said:


> No problem, I saw your post...
> But my question remains, as my screen frame is not the same as yours, and I asked if it was possible to order the screen material to fit MY frame (SeymourAV)  Yes, I was expecting Don to answer this


Yes, we are in the custom screen business and can build for frame systems by others if we have the proper information supplied by customer. Since a drawing or sketch is worth a thousand words here is what we are looking for on a drawing.


1. Screen's overall dimensions. This is measured from the outside edge the outside edge, including screen edge binding.
2. Grommet's typical spacing. (Measured from center to center of grommets).
3. We typically work from the center-line of screen's edge binding out to the corners. Are there grommets on the screen edge binding positioned exactly at the center line of vertical and horizontal dimensions or are they offset from center line?
Note: On most smaller screens, Stewart's typical edge binding width is 1" starting from the very outside edge of screen.



Hope that helps.


Don


----------



## tigerhonaker

stef2 said:


> No problem, I saw your post...
> But my question remains, as my screen frame is not the same as yours, and I asked if it was possible to order the screen material to fit MY frame (SeymourAV)  Yes, I was expecting Don to answer this


stef2,

Just so you know I wasn't trying to be funny or sarcastic in my post.
I was just trying to let you know that I knew Stewart Filmscreen did do just the "Material" so a person didn't have to buy a completely new Frame & Screen material if you had a Stewart Filmscreen frame already that had the Snap-On replaceable screen material.

I was attempting to be helpful believe it or not. 

That's why I said Don Stewart would be answering for your Frame & Screen. 

Terry


----------



## stef2

Thank you Don and Terry!


I will then do a sketch of my screen with all the useful info on it. Since I live in Canada, to whom should I ask for a quote (screen material only)?


----------



## Don Stewart

stef2 said:


> Thank you Don and Terry!
> 
> 
> I will then do a sketch of my screen with all the useful info on it. Since I live in Canada, to whom should I ask for a quote (screen material only)?


Hi Stef,


What city in Canada? Also, it is best if you PM me the sketch first so I can check it out before contacting a dealer. Please note that most of our "screen only" builds are through our commercial dealers and it is fairly rare on the residential side. So to avoid confusion, let me approve drawing first prior to submitting to a residential dealer for pricing.


BTW, your location on your avatar says China?


Don


----------



## n.yoshi

Sorry if this question is overly broad but i'm still playing with major variables for my build. How much "brightness" do you lose going with an acoustically transparent screen vs not? Please be gentle, this will be my first projector system.


----------



## Craig Peer

n.yoshi said:


> Sorry if this question is overly broad but i'm still playing with major variables for my build. How much "brightness" do you lose going with an acoustically transparent screen vs not? Please be gentle, this will be my first projector system.


Depends on which screen material you are comparing, but it can be 30%, 40% or even more if talking about a .85 woven screen vs a non AT StudioTek 130. I enjoy brightness and that's why I have a StudioTek 130.


----------



## Don Stewart

n.yoshi said:


> Sorry if this question is overly broad but i'm still playing with major variables for my build. How much "brightness" do you lose going with an acoustically transparent screen vs not? Please be gentle, this will be my first projector system.


Hi Yoshi. For our THX MicroPerf, the total open area of the surface area is 10.2%, so the screens net gain loss will also be 10. 2% compared to the same solid material. There are 30,000 individual perforations per square foot of material. The diameter of each hole is 23 thousands of an inch.
Hope that helps.
Don


----------



## ckgolf

I installed my new ST130 G4 Microperf screen last night. It’s 144” diagonal 2.40 to go along with my RS2000 and DCR-C lens. It replaces a 141” 2.35 Seymour XD screen.

At my first row of about 11.5’ The increase in sharpness and detail is incredible! I was mostly upgrading for the increase in brightness, but I feel like I’m seeing 4K for the first time! The Seymour had a course texture that makes it soft in comparison. I now get that “looking through a window” feeling.

I don’t see any perfs at my seating distance at all. They disappear, and I’m left with a solid Image. I see no sparkles of any kind. If I really look for it on a very bright burst of light I can faintly make out some texture from the coating, but I have to be actively looking for it and it’s not distracting on normal relaxed viewing.

My biggest concern about this upgrade was how the Microperf would affect the sound compared to the weave. My fears were put at ease upon first listen. I left all my AVR settings the same and to my ears it sounds BETTER. I was having Issues with dialogue through the center where I’d get some harshness every now and then, and was never fully happy with intelligibility . It sounds so smooth now. Maybe it’s a little placebo effect, smother picture, smoother sound lol.

Overall, in my first impressions, I’m over the moon happy! If any one is looking to make a similar upgrade, do it!!


----------



## Charlie_L

ckgolf said:


> I installed my new ST130 G4 Microperf screen last night. It’s 144” diagonal 2.40 to go along with my RS2000 and DCR-C lens. It replaces a 141” 2.35 Seymour XD screen.
> 
> At my first row of about 11.5’ The increase in sharpness and detail is incredible! I was mostly upgrading for the increase in brightness, but I feel like I’m seeing 4K for the first time! The Seymour had a course texture that makes it soft in comparison. I now get that “looking through a window” feeling.
> 
> I don’t see any perfs at my seating distance at all. They disappear, and I’m left with a solid Image. I see no sparkles of any kind. If I really look for it on a very bright burst of light I can faintly make out some texture from the coating, but I have to be actively looking for it and it’s not distracting on normal relaxed viewing.
> 
> My biggest concern about this upgrade was how the Microperf would affect the sound compared to the weave. My fears were put at ease upon first listen. I left all my AVR settings the same and to my ears it sounds BETTER. I was having Issues with dialogue through the center where I’d get some harshness every now and then, and was never fully happy with intelligibility . It sounds so smooth now. Maybe it’s a little placebo effect, smother picture, smoother sound lol.
> 
> Overall, in my first impressions, I’m over the moon happy! If any one is looking to make a similar upgrade, do it!!


I have just made almost the same swap, from a 138” diagonal 16:9 Seymour XD to a Stewart ST130 G4 microperf, and have had the same experience as ckgolf. I expected the increased visual brightness and clarity - both of which I got in spades, but also was presently surprised at the improvement in the openness and clarity of the sound. To my inexpert ears, it now sounds brighter, but in a good sense. I have not recalibrated the sound since I installed the new screen, and don’t really see any urgency to so. I am very pleased!

—Charlie


----------



## howiee

ckgolf said:


> I installed my new ST130 G4 Microperf screen last night. It’s 144” diagonal 2.40 to go along with my RS2000 and DCR-C lens. It replaces a 141” 2.35 Seymour XD screen.
> 
> At my first row of about 11.5’ The increase in sharpness and detail is incredible! I was mostly upgrading for the increase in brightness, but I feel like I’m seeing 4K for the first time! The Seymour had a course texture that makes it soft in comparison. I now get that “looking through a window” feeling.
> 
> I don’t see any perfs at my seating distance at all. They disappear, and I’m left with a solid Image. I see no sparkles of any kind. If I really look for it on a very bright burst of light I can faintly make out some texture from the coating, but I have to be actively looking for it and it’s not distracting on normal relaxed viewing.
> 
> My biggest concern about this upgrade was how the Microperf would affect the sound compared to the weave. My fears were put at ease upon first listen. I left all my AVR settings the same and to my ears it sounds BETTER. I was having Issues with dialogue through the center where I’d get some harshness every now and then, and was never fully happy with intelligibility . It sounds so smooth now. Maybe it’s a little placebo effect, smother picture, smoother sound lol.
> 
> Overall, in my first impressions, I’m over the moon happy! If any one is looking to make a similar upgrade, do it!!


Cheers fot the impressions - the screen sounds great. One of my reservations about a perforated screen is seeing the holes. I know this varies from person to person, but at what distance can you make them out?


----------



## Craig Peer

howiee said:


> Cheers fot the impressions - the screen sounds great. One of my reservations about a perforated screen is seeing the holes. I know this varies from person to person, but at what distance can you make them out?


I'm interested to hear real world viewing impressions. Generally speaking 12' has been the minimum seating distance recommended. But, I did a projector replacement in South Lake Tahoe once and I didn't even realize that they had a ST130 Microperf screen until they told me, and I looked closer. I think I sat in that room under 12' for sure. I didn't see the perf. It might take a bright picture like the Winter Olympics on high lamp.


----------



## howiee

Craig Peer said:


> I'm interested to hear real world viewing impressions. Generally speaking 12' has been the minimum seating distance recommended. But, I did a projector replacement in South Lake Tahoe once and I didn't even realize that they had a ST130 Microperf screen until they told me, and I looked closer. I think I sat in that room under 12' for sure. I didn't see the perf. It might take a bright picture like the Winter Olympics on high lamp.


Cheers, that sounds good indeed! I'll try and get a sample.


----------



## Don Stewart

howiee said:


> Cheers, that sounds good indeed! I'll try and get a sample.


Hi Howie.
When viewing a sample, do not place the sample on an existing white wall or screen. Be sure to place something black, like black paper, directly behind the sample to simulate real world viewing. This will give you a more accurate feel for judging proper viewing distance with your particular existing system. 
Regards,
Don


----------



## LJG

Hi all:

I have a 4 way Stewart masking system with Bric, we recently had some lightning damage and have been replacing items systematically. I have just replaced my Crestron Pro2, the Bric is connected by RJ45 Cat 6 to Bric and adapter to Crestron. The RS232 control is not functioning between Crestron and Bric/masking screen. The 11 button keypad connected to Bric however is functioning perfectly. So could this be the RJ45 connector in Bric. Trying to trouble shoot this.


----------



## Don Stewart

LJG said:


> Hi all:
> 
> I have a 4 way Stewart masking system with Bric, we recently had some lightning damage and have been replacing items systematically. I have just replaced my Crestron Pro2, the Bric is connected by RJ45 Cat 6 to Bric and adapter to Crestron. The RS232 control is not functioning between Crestron and Bric/masking screen. The 11 button keypad connected to Bric however is functioning perfectly. So could this be the RJ45 connector in Bric. Trying to trouble shoot this.


Hi LJG. Sounds like the BRIC, or the Crestron, or both could have been smoked during the lightning damaged. Scott Kimber is our factory in house expert on controls systems. Please consult with Scott for trouble shooting. He can be reached at 800 762-4999, ext 145 or if you prefer, his email is: [email protected]
I would recommend calling him as he may have some questions when trouble shooting.
Hope that helps.
Don


----------



## Th601

Good evening, can anyone tell me the difference between the Wallscreen 1.5 and Wallscreen Deluxe other than that the 1.5 has a more narrow frame? I was also wondering if the Deluxe’s frame is more rigid than the 1.5 due to it’s width size. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Don Stewart

Hi Th601. The 1.5 x 1.5" frame is basically a very simplistic shadowbox style frame. It is mostly used for rear projection applications where the frame and screen is mounted into an aperture opening cutout in a wall. The Deluxe frame is more rigid because of its shape and has about twice as much aluminum material per linear foot. Both are finished with black Velux light adsorbing material.
.


----------



## Th601

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Th601. The 1.5 x 1.5" frame is basically a very simplistic shadowbox style frame. It is mostly used for rear projection applications where the frame and screen is mounted into an aperture opening cutout in a wall. The Deluxe frame is more rigid because of its shape and has about twice as much aluminum material per linear foot. Both are finished with black Velux light adsorbing material.
> .
> View attachment 3028297


Ok great. I have front projection system so I will go with the Deluxe. Thank you. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## joms

Hi,

I'm very new to projectors and I live in the Philippines so there aren't that much options here, specially projector screens. What we do have here is snowhite and elite screens. I've been doing research and i've read that stewart makes much greater screens than those i've mentioned but at a far greater cost thus made me shy away from them.

Recently though, i've read that Stewart made a 50%+ price drop with some of their screens (promo? discount?). With this in mind, do you think it would now be worthwhile to get a "lower end" Stewart screen (can't afford the higher end - too expensive) and have it shipped here as against the readily available snowhite/elite screens?

I'm looking into getting a manual pulldown 135" 16:9 White or grey screen. (Does Stewart offer this or are they all electric controlled?) (maybe a 125" can do for a 16:9 but it would be better to have some extra width for 2.39:1)


----------



## Don Stewart

Hi Joms.
Please note that all Stewart retractable screens are motorized and all have tab side tension systems. If you would like more information, please contact Thomas Cheong in our Singapore office which also covers the Philippines. You can email Thomas at: [email protected]
Best Regards,
Don


----------



## tommarra

I just wanted to say that I have had my ST130 G4 for about five months now and I can unequivocally say that it’s the best screen you can pair with JVC NX7 if you want to enjou glorious HDR.

The screen has almost no sparkles and the added gain makes the image pop like nothing I had seen with my previous screens.

Fantastic all the way!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Th601

Just received my 130” ST130 G4 screen 












Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tigerhonaker

Th601 said:


> Just received my 130” ST130 G4 screen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


*Th601*

Congratulations ...............

I got mine not long ago.




Terry


----------



## EV/AV

*Cima Neve Horizontal Banding Question*

I was hoping to get some opinions on my 16:9 135" Cima Neve screen that shows horizontal banding pattern (like a yellow jacket pattern of white/dark bands) during bright white scenes in the center of the screen. I got it last spring, noticed some banding with my old projector and partially attributed to the BenQ W1070 projector. Now with a JVC RS1000 sitting at 11' feet away it seems more obvious and I see it on every bright white scene. Tried to take a picture with white background attached, but my iphone does not really capture it well, seems more obvious on white sky scenes with panning. No issues with sparkles. If i pivot the projector the bands do not move and was seen on old projector as well so I'm convinced it's the screen.

1. Is this related to the gain of the screen or something else?
2. I ordered this from a local dealer, so I'll contact them next but wondered if others had any luck exchanging screens before (mine is now 6 months old) if they seem to have a defect.

Thanks for any thoughts. Overall happy with the screen, but for the money would like it to have no issues.


----------



## Craig Peer

EV/AV said:


> *Cima Neve Horizontal Banding Question*
> 
> I was hoping to get some opinions on my 16:9 135" Cima Neve screen that shows horizontal banding pattern (like a yellow jacket pattern of white/dark bands) during bright white scenes in the center of the screen. I got it last spring, noticed some banding with my old projector and partially attributed to the BenQ W1070 projector. Now with a JVC RS1000 sitting at 11' feet away it seems more obvious and I see it on every bright white scene. Tried to take a picture with white background attached, but my iphone does not really capture it well, seems more obvious on white sky scenes with panning. No issues with sparkles. If i pivot the projector the bands do not move and was seen on old projector as well so I'm convinced it's the screen.
> 
> 1. Is this related to the gain of the screen or something else?
> 2. I ordered this from a local dealer, so I'll contact them next but wondered if others had any luck exchanging screens before (mine is now 6 months old) if they seem to have a defect.
> 
> Thanks for any thoughts. Overall happy with the screen, but for the money would like it to have no issues.


That doesn't sound right. Contact your dealer ASAP.


----------



## surroundsound99

The manual says to use 2" screws for the EZ-Mount bars, and 2-3/8" screws for the magnets, but they only sent me 1-1/2" screws for the EZ-Mount bars, and 1-3/4" screws for the magnets. Do I use the ones they sent me or do I go get new ones?


----------



## Craig Peer

surroundsound99 said:


> The manual says to use 2" screws for the EZ-Mount bars, and 2-3/8" screws for the magnets, but they only sent me 1-1/2" screws for the EZ-Mount bars, and 1-3/4" screws for the magnets. Do I use the ones they sent me or do I go get new ones?


Source your own screws. Easy enough. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## EV/AV

Craig Peer said:


> That doesn't sound right. Contact your dealer ASAP.


Thanks Craig, I have done so.


----------



## Eggmanslc

How does studiotek 130 do in a room with some scattered light from the projector? I currently have a JVC X35 and want to upgrade to a JVC NX5 or NX7. I have a 110” g3 Firehawk screen in an unfinished basement. Our remodel will have some dark surfaces but as it’s more a traditional family room, may have a lighter colored ceiling, though with non reflective paint. Other surfaces should be on the darker side.
So my question is how well the studiotek 130 would do in that environment. I’m very accustomed to the deep blacks of my x35 and firehawk g3 and my eye is totally drawn to that every time I compare with other screen samples (though I haven’t sampled the 130 yet) Would proper calibration of my projector give me blacks as good as I’m getting now with my firehawk screen? Or I’m just giving up a certain degree of black level with ST130?


----------



## tigerhonaker

Eggmanslc said:


> How does studiotek 130 do in a room with some scattered light from the projector? I currently have a JVC X35 and want to upgrade to a JVC NX5 or NX7. I have a 110” g3 Firehawk screen in an unfinished basement. Our remodel will have some dark surfaces but as it’s more a traditional family room, may have a lighter colored ceiling, though with non reflective paint. Other surfaces should be on the darker side.
> So my question is how well the studiotek 130 would do in that environment. I’m very accustomed to the deep blacks of my x35 and firehawk g3 and my eye is totally drawn to that every time I compare with other screen samples (though I haven’t sampled the 130 yet) Would proper calibration of my projector give me blacks as good as I’m getting now with my firehawk screen? Or I’m just giving up a certain degree of black level with ST130?


Below are pictures I took changing screens.
Mine is the newest G4 material not the G3 ...............
The G4 is for improving 4K & HDR content.
















Terry


----------



## surroundsound99

surroundsound99 said:


> The manual says to use 2" screws for the EZ-Mount bars, and 2-3/8" screws for the magnets, but they only sent me 1-1/2" screws for the EZ-Mount bars, and 1-3/4" screws for the magnets. Do I use the ones they sent me or do I go get new ones?


I went to the hardware store and got longer screws. All set! Thanks


----------



## Eggmanslc

tigerhonaker said:


> Below are pictures I took changing screens.
> Mine is the newest G4 material not the G3 ...............
> The G4 is for improving 4K & HDR content.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Terry


Awesome. Thanks.


----------



## Eggmanslc

tigerhonaker said:


> Below are pictures I took changing screens.
> Mine is the newest G4 material not the G3 ...............
> The G4 is for improving 4K & HDR content.
> 
> Terry


Terry, so do you feel your blacks are just as good moving from firehawk to studiotek 130? Or you’re accepting a slight loss of black level for better HDR brightness? And what projector are you using?


----------



## tigerhonaker

Eggmanslc said:


> Terry, so do you feel your blacks are just as good moving from firehawk* to studiotek 130? *
> Or you’re accepting a slight loss of black level for better HDR brightness? And what projector are you using?


Here is the rest of the story.

1st off I don't have the ST130 G3 .............
I have the newest ST 130 G4.
Anyway, I am on hold at the preset time as I want to get my G4 and my JVC RS4500 laser projector Custom Calibrated for it.
That's going to happen maybe this month and if not certainly next month.
I don't think it would be fair for me to say anything on picture content until Chad B comes and does the Custom Calibrating.
From the Full article that Kris Deering did in Sound & Vision he didn't mention anything at all negative so my gut feeling is the G4 does not compromise on the Black-Level.
The reason I had the Stewart Firehawk was because back then I had several Runco projectors and to help with Black-Levels it was recommended to use the Firehawk.
That's the exact opposite recommendation for the current JVC RS4500 Laser Projector I have.

There are several members on AVS that have the new G4 material and I haven't seen even one mention loosing any Black-Level-Performance.

But the new G4 was designed for increasing overall performance of the newer formats 4K & HDR movies.

See my signature below for a complete list of my Components/Gear where it says to "Double Click" to view Full-Size.

Terry


----------



## magnetic

Eggmanslc said:


> How does studiotek 130 do in a room with some scattered light from the projector? I currently have a JVC X35 and want to upgrade to a JVC NX5 or NX7. I have a 110” g3 Firehawk screen in an unfinished basement. Our remodel will have some dark surfaces but as it’s more a traditional family room, may have a lighter colored ceiling, though with non reflective paint. Other surfaces should be on the darker side.
> So my question is how well the studiotek 130 would do in that environment. I’m very accustomed to the deep blacks of my x35 and firehawk g3 and my eye is totally drawn to that every time I compare with other screen samples (though I haven’t sampled the 130 yet) Would proper calibration of my projector give me blacks as good as I’m getting now with my firehawk screen? Or I’m just giving up a certain degree of black level with ST130?


I think for light scatter you should care about the base gain of the material. Let's ignore the optical coating for a second. If the base gain is say .7, you'd reflect .7x the projector's direct light back into the room. Then .7*.7 "bad" light would be coming off the screen from reflection off of white surfaces in the room (say the room is all white for this example). So you've attenuated the bad effect of the room by (.7 x .7) / (.7) = .7 (the denominator representing measuring relative to the direct image. And we're ignoring the infinite stack of further bounces which will further favor the lower gain.)

So I don't see how a base gain 1 screen like the ST130 could keep up with a screen like the Firehawk, unless your light colored surfaces are minimal.


----------



## Eggmanslc

magnetic said:


> I think for light scatter you should care about the base gain of the material. Let's ignore the optical coating for a second. If the base gain is say .7, you'd reflect .7x the projector's direct light back into the room. Then .7*.7 "bad" light would be coming off the screen from reflection off of white surfaces in the room (say the room is all white for this example). So you've attenuated the bad effect of the room by (.7 x .7) / (.7) = .7 (the denominator representing measuring relative to the direct image. And we're ignoring the infinite stack of further bounces which will further favor the lower gain.)
> 
> So I don't see how a base gain 1 screen like the ST130 could keep up with a screen like the Firehawk, unless your light colored surfaces are minimal.


That's an interesting way to look at it.

Maybe a follow up question for the community is this - in a very good, but not perfect, room, where reflected light is minimized - how will black levels compare between the Firehawk and Studiotek 130? Once the image is calibrated to the screen, will black levels be comparable? Or will the Firehawk always be better? Do you start to lose some detail in darker scenes with the Firehawk compared to the studiotek?


----------



## Craig Peer

Eggmanslc said:


> That's an interesting way to look at it.
> 
> Maybe a follow up question for the community is this - in a very good, but not perfect, room, where reflected light is minimized - how will black levels compare between the Firehawk and Studiotek 130? Once the image is calibrated to the screen, will black levels be comparable? Or will the Firehawk always be better? Do you start to lose some detail in darker scenes with the Firehawk compared to the studiotek?


Black levels can look just as good on the ST130. I did in fact go from a Firehawk to a ST130 G3 screen 5+ years ago - 

" I have a dedicated theater, but it was setup more like a media room. My SIM Lumis throws an outstanding picture. Could I make it look even better? I owe a lot of this to Rich Harkness. I read his theater build thread and realized I'd become complacent regarding my theater. Rich explained how and why he had picked the Stewart StudioTek 130 G3 screen over the Firehawk G3 screen. I was using a Firehawk screen myself. So I got a sample of StudioTek 130 and devised a screen sample holder that would allow me to put the sample in front of my Firehawk. The blacks / contrast on the StudioTek looked terrible compared to my Firehawk. I grabbed a big " police " type flashlight ( lots of D cells - bright ) and stood at the screen. I did the " flashlight test ". Lots of things in the room reflected back onto the screen. First I decided to cover the beige carpet with black carpet rugs from Walmart. That worked well, but the ST 130 still didn't look as good as the FH. Then I had a giant rug made that covered the entire front 2/3's of the theater. Better. Next, I re-painted the ceiling and the side walls darker grey. Now the ST was starting to look as good or better overall than the FH. I then painted the back walls much darker, put a black MDF board in front of the popcorn machines glass case, hung black curtains and Protostar material on part of the back wall, and hung another red velvet curtain over a white closet door. Now the blacks on space movies etc. looked as good on the StudioTek 130 sample as they did on the Firehawk. I then switched screens.

I first replaced my 2.35:1 Firehawk with a 2.35:1 StudioTek, and I also replaced my 16:9 High Contrast Cinema Vision screen with a 16:9 Neve 1.1. The Lumis looks totally awesome on these screens ! Making my room décor and walls dark and switching to white screens was one of the best things I've done to improve my picture in my theater.

Update – the back walls and front soffit got painted with Rosco Black Velour paint – even less room reflections now. " 
See my theater build thread for photos.


----------



## Eggmanslc

Craig Peer said:


> Black levels can look just as good on the ST130. I did in fact go from a Firehawk to a ST130 G3 screen 5+ years ago -


That's incredibly helpful! Thank you very much for the time you took to respond. So sounds like good black levels on a white screen is primarily about the viewing environment.

I think I'll just need to build it out as dark and light absorbing as my wife will allow and then do a proper screen material comparison. Right now, with an unfinished basement, probably getting a lot more reflections that I won't get once the basement is finished. I'm still not sure my wife will go for as many dark surfaces as you have, but I'll try.  However, sounds like the Firehawk is still a great choice if I'll be left with some lighter surfaces/can't tame all the reflections.

Doesn't look like you utilize an AT screen either. Just haven't found one you like? Mike sent me some samples several months ago, but again, in my less than ideal conditions, hard for me to get a good read on them. I haven't found anything that is close enough to what I'm looking for visually.


----------



## Eggmanslc

Craig Peer said:


> Black levels can look just as good on the ST130. I did in fact go from a Firehawk to a ST130 G3 screen 5+ years ago -


To the degree you're interested, I'd love your feedback, or others who are reading this, on the options depicted in the attached PDF.

For reference, I sit 11-12' away from the screen. Again, my current screen is a 110" Firehawk in a 3 3/8" frame. My ceiling height is 90" or so, after accounting for drywall ceiling and flooring. Wife wants cabinetry underneath the screen, but might be willing to forego that, but it's drawn as 18" high, which means the center speaker would sit right above it and have a "wall" that it reflects off of.

The PDF shows various scenarios with my 110" screen, a 2:1 screen and a 120" screen, in both standard and thin bezel configurations, and with the planned in-wall speakers (part of a 7.2.4 atmos configuration) as well as an option of replacing the center in-wall with the standard KEF R series center channel, which is less than 7' tall and it could be placed in front of the screen, allowing the screen to sit a little lower (the frame could overlap the vertical space of the speaker).

As noted on the drawings, I could also probably raise the cabinetry/shelving to the bottom of the screen and then hide the center channel in there (or talk the wife out of it altogether).

Obviously, an AT screen would solve these issues, but just haven’t found one that I can live with yet. Maybe once my basement is finished I can then sample the AT materials I have and will be more impressed.

I currently have the JVC X35 but plan on upgrading to the NX5 or NX7 (BTW, Craig, any specials on those right now?)

Also, I primarily watch movies, but that includes a good mix of classic Hollywood 4:3 films.


----------



## Craig Peer

Eggmanslc said:


> To the degree you're interested, I'd love your feedback, or others who are reading this, on the options depicted in the attached PDF.
> 
> For reference, I sit 11-12' away from the screen. Again, my current screen is a 110" Firehawk in a 3 3/8" frame. My ceiling height is 90" or so, after accounting for drywall ceiling and flooring. Wife wants cabinetry underneath the screen, but might be willing to forego that, but it's drawn as 18" high, which means the center speaker would sit right above it and have a "wall" that it reflects off of.
> 
> The PDF shows various scenarios with my 110" screen, a 2:1 screen and a 120" screen, in both standard and thin bezel configurations, and with the planned in-wall speakers (part of a 7.2.4 atmos configuration) as well as an option of replacing the center in-wall with the standard KEF R series center channel, which is less than 7' tall and it could be placed in front of the screen, allowing the screen to sit a little lower (the frame could overlap the vertical space of the speaker).
> 
> As noted on the drawings, I could also probably raise the cabinetry/shelving to the bottom of the screen and then hide the center channel in there (or talk the wife out of it altogether).
> 
> Obviously, an AT screen would solve these issues, but just haven’t found one that I can live with yet. Maybe once my basement is finished I can then sample the AT materials I have and will be more impressed.
> 
> I currently have the JVC X35 but plan on upgrading to the NX5 or NX7 (BTW, Craig, any specials on those right now?)
> 
> Also, I primarily watch movies, but that includes a good mix of classic Hollywood 4:3 films.


So what is your proposed seating distance ? I'd try and not put cabinets up front - it will be a distraction. And I like a regular width frame myself. Also, I'd try to keep the center channel below the the bottom frame member. You might want to put " Protostar " black velvet material on the top of the speaker so it doesn't reflect back on the screen.


----------



## Eggmanslc

Craig Peer said:


> So what is your proposed seating distance ? I'd try and not put cabinets up front - it will be a distraction. And I like a regular width frame myself. Also, I'd try to keep the center channel below the the bottom frame member. You might want to put " Protostar " black velvet material on the top of the speaker so it doesn't reflect back on the screen.


Just over 11'. The only reason to place the center channel in front of the frame, with some overlap, is to keep the center channel from being too low and the screen from being too high in my height constrained space, but I agree, it's not ideal. 

I'm also thinking that maybe a 110" screen will be better for HDR content, vs a 120" screen, though I'd really like the 120" size.


----------



## Craig Peer

Eggmanslc said:


> Just over 11'. The only reason to place the center channel in front of the frame, with some overlap, is to keep the center channel from being too low and the screen from being too high in my height constrained space, but I agree, it's not ideal.
> 
> I'm also thinking that maybe a 110" screen will be better for HDR content, vs a 120" screen, though I'd really like the 120" size.


Get the projector first, project different sizes on the wall, and use some painters tape to lay out different sizes if you have to !


----------



## Eggmanslc

Craig Peer said:


> Get the projector first, project different sizes on the wall, and use some painters tape to lay out different sizes if you have to !


BTW, what is the flashlight test you originally mentioned?


----------



## Craig Peer

Eggmanslc said:


> BTW, what is the flashlight test you originally mentioned?


Basically you stand in the pitch dark with your back to your screen, and shine a bright flashlight around your theater. See what reflects light back that lights up your screen. Those things will wash out your picture. Make those items darker / less reflective / black !


----------



## Th601

Craig Peer said:


> So what is your proposed seating distance ? I'd try and not put cabinets up front - it will be a distraction. And I like a regular width frame myself. Also, I'd try to keep the center channel below the the bottom frame member. You might want to put " Protostar " black velvet material on the top of the speaker so it doesn't reflect back on the screen.


I was actually looking at some black velvet adhesive covering on amazon for my center speaker. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tigerhonaker

Th601 said:


> I was actually looking at some black velvet adhesive covering on amazon for my center speaker.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I found this on Amazon Prime and it works perfect.
And it is *Black *................
With the Lights-Off ^^^



































*Current pictures of Home Theater ..............*








Terry


----------



## surroundsound99

Yahoo!! After years and years of reading about how good it is, and waiting for it and dreaming about it, I'm finally lucky enough to own the legendary and incredible StudioTek 100 screen material!! My NX7 has never looked so good. The colors pop, and some scenes look so good they actually look like 3D. No more sparkles like on my old Firehawk screen (no offense, the Firehawk just wasn't a good match for the NX7, but it was good for my old CL-510 for the previous 15 years.)

Thank you Mr. Stewart and thank the people at your company!

The packaging is very heavy-duty and first-class. If I have one small concern to report, when I was unrolling the screen, I noticed what looked like small black metal slivers impressed upon the screen, possibly "sawdust" that came from machining the frame. There was a dusting of them and they were limited to one small area of the screen. They created small individual impressions on the screen, but I dusted them off, and fortunately they were on the back of the screen and they did not puncture through to the front.

Other than that, I am ecstatic! My wife says she is now a home theater widow


----------



## Craig Peer

surroundsound99 said:


> Yahoo!! After years and years of reading about how good it is, and waiting for it and dreaming about it, I'm finally lucky enough to own the legendary and incredible StudioTek 100 screen material!! My NX7 has never looked so good. The colors pop, and some scenes look so good they actually look like 3D. No more sparkles like on my old Firehawk screen (no offense, the Firehawk just wasn't a good match for the NX7, but it was good for my old CL-510 for the previous 15 years.)
> 
> Thank you Mr. Stewart and thank the people at your company!
> 
> The packaging is very heavy-duty and first-class. If I have one small concern to report, when I was unrolling the screen, I noticed what looked like small black metal slivers impressed upon the screen, possibly "sawdust" that came from machining the frame. There was a dusting of them and they were limited to one small area of the screen. They created small individual impressions on the screen, but I dusted them off, and fortunately they were on the back of the screen and they did not puncture through to the front.
> 
> *Other than that, I am ecstatic! My wife says she is now a home theater widow*


Put " The Notebook " on for her. 😉 Congratulations on the new screen.


----------



## surroundsound99

Lol yes she loves "The Notebook", good idea  Thanks


----------



## rossandwendy

surroundsound99 said:


> Lol yes she loves "The Notebook", good idea  Thanks


I'm a dude and not ashamed to say I like The Notebook too 😁 My dad was a romantic at heart and I guess he passed that on to me, as I enjoy the same period romances and romcoms that my wife likes. Everything is better on a Stewart screen, including Pride & Prejudice or Love Actually 

Ross


----------



## Eggmanslc

flyinrazrback said:


> Just got my 2:40 138" ST130G4 on the wall. Very impressed with the quality, fit and finish. Second to none IMO. Quality blows away my DES screen. Now I just need to install my Paladin DCR lens on my NX7 tomorrow and get it all dialed in.


What color is your ceiling? Are you getting much reflection on the ceiling and back on the screen? I would assume the 1.3 gain actually helps with ceiling reflections compared to a pure lambertian surface.

My big dilemma is I am currently having to deal with a low white ceiling (not built yet so can’t test samples in the finished environment) so not sure if the ST130 is a good fit or if I need to go with an ALR screen. Otherwise, environment will be dark with no other light sources save for the projector (and ceiling, LOL).


----------



## Don Stewart

Hi all. Hope everyone is staying safe.
For more than twenty five consecutive years, my wife and I would host an annual outdoor movie night and BBQ party in either late August or early September. This pretty much has become a local tradition to our circle of friends. We are so disappointed that we could not do it this year as Covid pretty much has shut things down. We are keeping our fingers crossed for 2021. Anyway, stay safe all and enjoy your own private home theaters as it appears commercial theaters will be dark for many months ahead.

(BTW, the reason we are still use this older 15'-0" x 11'-3", 1.33 to 1 screen is many of the movies we show are are classic surfing films which were original shot in 16mm or NTSC video)


----------



## Killroy

Don Stewart said:


> BTW, the reason we are still use a 1.33 to 1 screen is many of the movies we show are are classic surfing films which were original shot 16mm or NTSC video.


I am sure Bruce Brown's Slippery When Wet and Barefoot Adventures would look awesome on that big screen!


----------



## EV/AV

EV/AV said:


> *Cima Neve Horizontal Banding Question*
> 
> I was hoping to get some opinions on my 16:9 135" Cima Neve screen that shows horizontal banding pattern (like a yellow jacket pattern of white/dark bands) during bright white scenes in the center of the screen. I got it last spring, noticed some banding with my old projector and partially attributed to the BenQ W1070 projector. Now with a JVC RS1000 sitting at 11' feet away it seems more obvious and I see it on every bright white scene. Tried to take a picture with white background attached, but my iphone does not really capture it well, seems more obvious on white sky scenes with panning. No issues with sparkles. If i pivot the projector the bands do not move and was seen on old projector as well so I'm convinced it's the screen.
> 
> 1. Is this related to the gain of the screen or something else?
> 2. I ordered this from a local dealer, so I'll contact them next but wondered if others had any luck exchanging screens before (mine is now 6 months old) if they seem to have a defect.
> 
> Thanks for any thoughts. Overall happy with the screen, but for the money would like it to have no issues.


Just wanted to report back that Stewart stands behind their product. New Neve screen material is perfect and no more issue I was seeing before. Now I can enjoy all the bright white scenes in Doom Patrol!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Craig Peer

Eggmanslc said:


> What color is your ceiling? Are you getting much reflection on the ceiling and back on the screen? I would assume the 1.3 gain actually helps with ceiling reflections compared to a pure lambertian surface.
> 
> My big dilemma is I am currently having to deal with a low white ceiling (not built yet so can’t test samples in the finished environment) so not sure if the ST130 is a good fit or if I need to go with an ALR screen. Otherwise, environment will be dark with no other light sources save for the projector (and ceiling, LOL).


Can’t you paint the ceiling a darker color?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Rondo1

Question for you guys. I am taking down my Stewart screen as I've replaced it with a new Vividstorm floor raising 120" UST/ALR screen now that I've purchased the Optoma Cinemax P1. I want to now sell my Stewart screen, but I don't remember which screen it is. It was either a Firehawk or a Greyhawk but I simply don't remember what it was. Is there anyway for me to tell which one it is? Here's some pics, though I doubt that will help at all. But I thought I'd ask the experts here.  It's a 110" fixed wall installation.


----------



## Craig Peer

Rondo1 said:


> Question for you guys. I am taking down my Stewart screen as I've replaced it with a new Vividstorm floor raising 120" UST/ALR screen now that I've purchased the Optoma Cinemax P1. I want to now sell my Stewart screen, but I don't remember which screen it is. It was either a Firehawk or a Greyhawk but I simply don't remember what it was. Is there anyway for me to tell which one it is? Here's some pics, though I doubt that will help at all. But I thought I'd ask the experts here.  It's a 110" fixed wall installation.
> 
> View attachment 3043198
> View attachment 3043199
> View attachment 3043200


Send the serial number to Stewart. They can tell you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Rondo1

Craig Peer said:


> Send the serial number to Stewart. They can tell you.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Great idea! Thank you. Now......Where would I find the serial number? Is it hidden behind the frame along the snapped in screen film somewhere?


----------



## Craig Peer

Rondo1 said:


> Great idea! Thank you. Now......Where would I find the serial number? Is it hidden behind the frame along the snapped in screen film somewhere?


It should be on the frame on the back. Just pull it off the wall.


----------



## tigerhonaker

Rondo1 said:


> Great idea! Thank you. Now......Where would I find the serial number? Is it hidden behind the frame along the snapped in screen film somewhere?





Rondo1 said:


> Great idea! Thank you. Now......Where would I find the serial number? Is it hidden behind the frame along the snapped in screen film somewhere?


Mine ended up being on the Lower-Center at the Bottom.
And NOT easy to see with mine still attached to the wall.
The tech ended-up doing several videos' with his cellphone and finally one of them actually picked it up where it could be easily read.

Terry


----------



## fredworld

My first post on this thread.
*Terry,* was your serial number on the screen back or frame back? I might be putting my screen up for sale and will be asking Stewart for some specifics on it.

*To all: *Probably going with a 2.35:1 (40" x 94") Balon Borderless but still deciding on screen material. I was quoted by the dealer on a Firehawk G5 because of my current 16 year old Firehawk 16:9. But I'm thinking, why not go for a greater half gain measurement that the G5's 35°? My room is 18' x 14' x 7.5' with center seat 11' from the screen (pics attached of present set-up).

Also, has any one installed the EZ Mount? The on-line instructions have me confused. Does any one know the back of frame to wall clearance and what the magnets and steel pucks are for?

Finally, although the instructions mention an option for a "Telescoping Mount" I couldn't find any information on that either.

My apologies for not reading the entire thread of posts but a "search" wasn't helpful either.
Thanks for any advice..


----------



## Craig Peer

fredworld said:


> My first post on this thread.
> *Terry,* was your serial number on the screen back or frame back? I might be putting my screen up for sale and will be asking Stewart for some specifics on it.
> 
> *To all: *Probably going with a 2.35:1 (40" x 94") Balon Borderless but still deciding on screen material. I was quoted by the dealer on a Firehawk G5 because of my current 16 year old Firehawk 16:9. But I'm thinking, why not go for a greater half gain measurement that the G5's 35°? My room is 18' x 14' x 7.5' with center seat 11' from the screen (pics attached of present set-up).
> 
> Also, has any one installed the EZ Mount? The on-line instructions have me confused. Does any one know the back of frame to wall clearance and what the magnets and steel pucks are for?
> 
> Finally, although the instructions mention an option for a "Telescoping Mount" I couldn't find any information on that either.
> 
> My apologies for not reading the entire thread of posts but a "search" wasn't helpful either.
> Thanks for any advice..


The serial number should be on the back of the frame.

The EZ mount is easy enough to figure out from the owners manual -



https://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/Files/files/Support%20Material/OwnersManuals/Bal%C3%B3n%20Series.pdf



The magnets keep the bottom of the frame from moving.

The " telescoping mount " is in the top picture -



https://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/Files/files/Support%20Material/Screen%20Data%20Sheets/Bal%C3%B3n%20Series.pdf



" For a more dramatic effect, Balón Borderless can be mounted away from the wall, creating on-screen images that seemingly appear to float in the room. " -

You have a choice of 5" to 16" away from the wall.


----------



## fredworld

Thanks for the replies. I would have never figured out that picture was of the telescope mount. 5" from the wall is great. I have a call in to Stewart Support, now I can discuss my options more intelligently.
Also, found a sticker (facing up) on the center back-inside of the bottom of the frame by feeling with my fingers. Unsnapped the screen at that part and was able to read all the info easily. Thanks loads.


----------



## tigerhonaker

fredworld said:


> Thanks for the replies. I would have never figured out that picture was of the telescope mount. 5" from the wall is great. I have a call in to Stewart Support, now I can discuss my options more intelligently.
> Also, found a sticker (facing up) on the center back-inside of the bottom of the frame by feeling with my fingers. Unsnapped the screen at that part and was able to read all the info easily. Thanks loads.


From what you just posted you have located the needed Stewart Filmscreen information.
And yes mine was at the Rear-Center-Lower-Bottom of the fixed frame.
It wasn't easy to locate or to take a picture of.
However the tech didn't give up and ended up taking numerous short videos until one of them took a clear enough image of the Serial #.



Terry


----------



## fredworld

Yes, once I determined that it wasn't on the screen or the frame back, I began running a finger along the "inside" face up back of the frame and found it quickly. As stated, "Unsnapped the screen at that part and was able to read all the info easily" AND snap a photo to boot!

Can anyone share any comments regarding Pros/Cons of the Firehawk G5's Half Gain (35°) vs others with higher Half Gain?


----------



## DigsMovies

fredworld said:


> Can anyone share any comments regarding Pros/Cons of the Firehawk G5's Half Gain (35°) vs others with higher Half Gain?


I've got a widescreen/2.40 G4. I think the off-axis viewing is surprisingly good. One can easily watch a football game at pretty extreme angles- 45+, although you probably wouldn't do that for critical viewing. If one is looking for it, you can notice the center of the screen slightly brighter than the edges, when viewing an entire screen of the same color. This is something that has never been distracting to me, or pulled me out of a movie. It's just the way screens like this work, and well worth the trade-off in the right installation. 

The Firehawk is an excellent product. That said- it's built for a specific application/environment. You use it because you need to- but even in a fully dark room, the contrast benefit is nice. Obviously not the best choice for a dedicated theater. Also keep in mind that it has specific requirements in terms of distances and angles. 

Here's a picture of the Firehawk, with a sample of a weave (Seymour XD) suspended in front.


----------



## fredworld

That's a beautiful image, even on my 14" laptop. Your comments were very helpful. After more reading and brain straining, I'm now leaning towards the StudioTek 100 since my dedicated room is completely light controlled with dark gray walls, black ceiling and black screen wall. The Lambertian spec of the StudioTek 100 is very attractive because where I sit when we have company over (remember those days?) it's the only seat with noticeable light drop off. The issue now is that Stewart's website says that the StudioTek 100's maximum size is 40" x 90" (2.25:1) and I was going after a 40" x 94" (2.35:1) screen. I guess I have more brain straining ahead.


----------



## SJHT

fredworld said:


> That's a beautiful image, even on my 14" laptop. Your comments were very helpful. After more reading and brain straining, I'm now leaning towards the StudioTek 100 since my dedicated room is completely light controlled with dark gray walls, black ceiling and black screen wall. The Lambertian spec of the StudioTek 100 is very attractive because where I sit when we have company over (remember those days?) it's the only seat with noticeable light drop off. The issue now is that Stewart's website says that the StudioTek 100's maximum size is 40" x 90" (2.25:1) and I was going after a 40" x 94" (2.35:1) screen. I guess I have more brain straining ahead.


It’s 40 FEET x 90 FEET. Lol. Should be big enough.


----------



## Don Stewart

Yep...any size up to 40 feet by 90 feet, completely seamless one piece construction.


----------



## fredworld

Egad!!! Another senior moment!!!!🤢


----------



## AVfile

After 11 years of ownership I have sold my 96” ST130G3. Looking forward to getting a 125” ST130G4. The grey screens are out because I do enjoy occasional 3D on my Sony 95ES projector.

Is it true Stewart has lowered pricing? I was quoted $4000 CAD two years ago. Yes shipping to Canada is not cheap and our dollar sucks.


----------



## tigerhonaker

AVfile said:


> After 11 years of ownership I have sold my 96” ST130G3. Looking forward to getting a 125” ST130G4. The grey screens are out because I do enjoy occasional 3D on my Sony 95ES projector.
> 
> Is it true Stewart has lowered pricing? I was quoted $4000 CAD two years ago. Yes shipping to Canada is not cheap and our dollar sucks.


Don Stewart below I feel sure can get you up to date on anything and everything regarding Stewart Filmscreens.










I changed out from my previous "Firehawk" to the New ST 130 G4 and it was definitely the right decision.








Terry


----------



## AVfile

No question in my mind the ST130 is the best choice again. At 125” my PJ will be at max zoom (throw distance is 13’ and I don’t feel like climbing in the roof and cutting more holes in the ceiling to move it back). The old Sony is no light cannon and I’ve become used to having that bit of gain. With the “small” screen I was running it on low lamp all the time (except occasional 3D).

I just wish some of the professional reviewers would give a brief assessment of 3D performance in case there are some surprises. I haven’t gone 4K yet but still enjoy 3D blu-rays now and then!


----------



## AVfile

Does Stewart have ready to ship 2.35 sizes?

This site leads me to believe that 125” is the “next size up” from 120”



Stewart WallScreen Deluxe 2.35:1 Cinemascope Fixed Projection Screen



I don’t want to do a “custom” order again, especially if it takes longer. Last time I ended up with a 96” for some reason, but I didn’t find out until years later I could have had 100” for the same price and quicker.


----------



## Kottan

Don Stewart said:


> Yes, we are in the custom screen business and can build for frame systems by others if we have the proper information supplied by customer. Since a drawing or sketch is worth a thousand words here is what we are looking for on a drawing.
> 
> 
> 1. Screen's overall dimensions. This is measured from the outside edge the outside edge, including screen edge binding.
> 2. Grommet's typical spacing. (Measured from center to center of grommets).
> 3. We typically work from the center-line of screen's edge binding out to the corners. Are there grommets on the screen edge binding positioned exactly at the center line of vertical and horizontal dimensions or are they offset from center line?
> Note: On most smaller screens, Stewart's typical edge binding width is 1" starting from the very outside edge of screen.
> 
> 
> 
> Hope that helps.
> 
> 
> Don


Hi Don,

wow, wasn´t aware of this possibility, this opens a new window of opportunity! I would be keen on replacing my current acoustically transparent woven screen with a perforated StudioTek 130 G4. However my current screen is not laced onto shock cords but fixed via cable ties through the grommets directly onto the frame .
Would this work for the studiotek as well?

Many thanks in advance!


----------



## fredworld

Does anyone have any tips on installing the EZ Mount? Yesterday, I ordered a 40" x 94" (102" diagonal) 2.35:1 Stewart StudioTek 100 Balon Borderless fixed frame screen. Reading the on-line instructions, it looks straight forward enough. Almost too "EZ." But having experienced many self-installations/assemblies of various products over my years and running into any number of issues that made me say during assembly, "Why didn't they explain blah, blah, blah..." I can't help but wonder if there's something that Stewart hasn't thought of for inclusion in the instructions. 

Any comments from those with the EZ mount? Would you do anything different that the instructions don't address?


----------



## Craig Peer

AVfile said:


> Does Stewart have ready to ship 2.35 sizes?
> 
> This site leads me to believe that 125” is the “next size up” from 120”
> 
> 
> 
> Stewart WallScreen Deluxe 2.35:1 Cinemascope Fixed Projection Screen
> 
> 
> 
> I don’t want to do a “custom” order again, especially if it takes longer. Last time I ended up with a 96” for some reason, but I didn’t find out until years later I could have had 100” for the same price and quicker.


All Stewart screens are built to order. So “ custom “ sizes shouldn’t take any longer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Craig Peer

fredworld said:


> Does anyone have any tips on installing the EZ Mount? Yesterday, I ordered a 40" x 94" (102" diagonal) 2.35:1 Stewart StudioTek 100 Balon Borderless fixed frame screen. Reading the on-line instructions, it looks straight forward enough. Almost too "EZ." But having experienced many self-installations/assemblies of various products over my years and running into any number of issues that made me say during assembly, "Why didn't they explain blah, blah, blah..." I can't help but wonder if there's something that Stewart hasn't thought of for inclusion in the instructions.
> 
> Any comments from those with the EZ mount? Would you do anything different that the instructions don't address?


You might check that your wall is straight and plumb ahead of time. Other than that, mounting the screen should be straight forward.


----------



## AVfile

Craig Peer said:


> All Stewart screens are built to order. So “ custom “ sizes shouldn’t take any longer.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


OK thanks. They do seem to have the more popular sizes ready to ship or at least priced out. 



Stewart WallScreen Deluxe 2.35:1 Cinemascope Fixed Projection Screen



How do they determine prices for the in-between sizes; do you just pay for the next size up or is there some more elaborate formula?


Ready to Order Screen Options:
Diagonal / Image Size
120" / 47 x 110.5"
125" / 49 x 115"
133" / 52" x 122.5"

Custom Screen Sizes and Materials (Call for Pricing)...


----------



## Craig Peer

AVfile said:


> OK thanks. They do seem to have the more popular sizes ready to ship or at least priced out.
> 
> 
> 
> Stewart WallScreen Deluxe 2.35:1 Cinemascope Fixed Projection Screen
> 
> 
> 
> How do they determine prices for the in-between sizes; do you just pay for the next size up or is there some more elaborate formula?
> 
> 
> Ready to Order Screen Options:
> Diagonal / Image Size
> 120" / 47 x 110.5"
> 125" / 49 x 115"
> 133" / 52" x 122.5"
> 
> Custom Screen Sizes and Materials (Call for Pricing)...


They are priced on a per size basis - a little bigger, a little more. A little smaller, a little less.


----------



## AVfile

All decided on the size (125”) thanks. Ready to order but hit a snag on the frame.

Dealer just found out that the Wallscreen Deluxe frames are temporarily unavailable from the factory. The “new” Wallscreen 2.5 is available and I heard that a new Wallscreen 3.25 may be a replacement for the Deluxe. 

Has anyone seen these new frames? Do they both have the latest EZ mount with the “hanging bar” or did they go back to the old sliding brackets?


----------



## AVfile

Anyone try active 3D on the ST130 G4?

I know it’s not a dedicated 3D material, but if it’s at least as good as the G3 then it will meet my needs for occasional 3D. Just don’t want an unpleasant surprise, since the professional reviews I’ve seen only mention 4K!


----------



## taxman2015

We will be moving to a new home in January, in which I will be converting a room in the basement to a dedicated home theater.

I will be brining my JVC DLA X590RB to the new hous,e but will be buying a new screen, probabably a 130 diagonal screen in 2:35 or 2:40 format

The room will be totaly light controlled and used mostly for watching blu ray/4K movies from an Oppop 203, but will also watch sports on TV. No gaming

From everything I've read the ST 130 G4 seems to be the best screen material out there but wondering since I'm not using a true 4K projector if I would still see the benefit from it

Since we don't take possession until January getting samples to try out at this point won't help, let alone that room is currently painted yellow so looking at choices on one of the remaining times we we still have access pre-closing won't help either


----------



## fredworld

I'm using an Epson 5050UB pixel shifter in a completely light controlled room. Based on my discussions with Stewart Filmscreen I ordered a StudioTek 100 screen. You should consider contacting Stewart to discuss your situation, you might become quite enlightened on choice of screen material.


taxman2015 said:


> We will be moving to a new home in January, in which I will be converting a room in the basement to a dedicated home theater.
> 
> I will be brining my JVC DLA X590RB to the new hous,e but will be buying a new screen, probabably a 130 diagonal screen in 2:35 or 2:40 format
> 
> The room will be totaly light controlled and used mostly for watching blu ray/4K movies from an Oppop 203, but will also watch sports on TV. No gaming
> 
> From everything I've read the ST 130 G4 seems to be the best screen material out there but wondering since I'm not using a true 4K projector if I would still see the benefit from it
> 
> Since we don't take possession until January getting samples to try out at this point won't help, let alone that room is currently painted yellow so looking at choices on one of the remaining times we we still have access pre-closing won't help either


----------



## JonnyVee

taxman2015 said:


> We will be moving to a new home in January, in which I will be converting a room in the basement to a dedicated home theater.
> 
> I will be brining my JVC DLA X590RB to the new hous,e but will be buying a new screen, probabably a 130 diagonal screen in 2:35 or 2:40 format
> 
> The room will be totaly light controlled and used mostly for watching blu ray/4K movies from an Oppop 203, but will also watch sports on TV. No gaming
> 
> From everything I've read the ST 130 G4 seems to be the best screen material out there but wondering since I'm not using a true 4K projector if I would still see the benefit from it
> 
> Since we don't take possession until January getting samples to try out at this point won't help, let alone that room is currently painted yellow so looking at choices on one of the remaining times we we still have access pre-closing won't help either


i’ve got a 120” 130 G4 paired with an x790 in a basement theatre. I’m very tight for space - the JVC has a 12’ throw (almost as close as you can get for 120”) and our seating is 10’ from the screen. Beautiful picture and no hotspotting with the added gain. I highly recommend the 130 G4.


----------



## AVfile

JonnyVee said:


> i’ve got 120” 130 G4 paired with x790


Please tell me you’ve tried 3D with that wonderful projector and how does it work on that screen?


----------



## AVfile

taxman2015 said:


> From everything I've read the ST 130 G4 seems to be the best screen material out there but wondering since I'm not using a true 4K projector if I would still see the benefit from it


You don’t need 4K to “benefit” from the ST130 G4 (or any previous generation for that matter). The alternative is a material with more gain or less gain. Since you have a 3D capable projector I would not go with less gain (ST100).


----------



## JonnyVee

AVfile said:


> Please tell me you’ve tried 3D with that wonderful projector and how does it work on that screen?


I actually haven’t tried 3d ... yet. I used my funds to upgrade to the two PSA subs, BOSS, and screen this year.


----------



## taxman2015

AVfile said:


> You don’t need 4K to “benefit” from the ST130 G4 (or any previous generation for that matter). The alternative is a material with more gain or less gain. Since you have a 3D capable projector I would not go with less gain (ST100).


Thanks for the quick responses everyone


----------



## AVfile

@Don Stewart ; Hi Mr Stewart,
Please shed some light on the new Wallscreen 3.25 frame, which is a (temporary?) replacement for the Wallscreen Deluxe, so we can understand the presumably minor differences.

I have attached sectional drawings of the Wallscreen 2.5 and Deluxe for reference. The back of the frame seems to be quite different. 

Thanks


----------



## Don Stewart

Hi AVFile,
The main difference between the 3.25 wallscreen frame and the 3.25 wallscreen frame deluxe is the male snap fasteners on the 3.25 frame are attached to the back of the frame with rivets. On the deluxe model, the snaps are attached via clips which can slide on a track for fine tuning adjustments. That said, every snap screen we manufacture is placed in the actual frame that will ship with it for final inspection to insure that screen layout is perfectly flat and the snap patterns are perfect. From the front viewing side, the frames are identical.
(Please note that our mill who extrudes our aluminum accidently cracked our custom tool die for the Wallscreen Deluxe and is now machining a brand new one for replacement)


----------



## AVfile

Thanks @Don Stewart ;that sounds great.

I just ordered my new screen, 125” cinemascope with ST130. It will be the first Wallscreen 3.25 in Canada, as it was news to the distributor here!


----------



## Imatk

Man I thought WE sat close


----------



## JonnyVee

Imatk said:


> Man I thought WE sat close


I'd go a little bigger if I could. Awesome for gaming too!


----------



## ece2k2

I have placed an order for a 150" wide 2.4:1 Stewart fixed frame screen (model number - WSDQ163CST13G4WBMX) and I am hoping to receive the screen by the end of this month. 

Masonry (brick) construction is my preferred option to construct the screen wall so as to mount the acoustically transparent Stewart screen. Since I am planning to locate large speakers (JBL M2) and subwoofers (4 numbers of 18" Rythmik subs) behind the screen, I would like to build a very minimalistic screen wall to mount the screen. I was wondering if there is a way to figure out the exact mounting locations on the wall before I receive the screen so that I could start building the screen wall right away. 

All I would like to understand is the location of the wall boards that comes with the screen. In addition, Wallscreen Deluxe owner's manual says "Please note that on some custom sized frames the use of additional “back support braces” is required". Please let me know if there is a way to know if my screen would include such back support braces and if yes, their locations/dimensions as well. 

Please see below the spec of the screen that I ordered.

Fixed Frame, Snap Screens with Various Framing Options
Model Name: WallScreen Deluxe
Model Number: WSDQ163CST13G4WBMX
Image Size: 62.5in x 150in (163in diag.) 2.4:1
Projection Type: Front Projection Seamless
Screen Material: StudioTek 130 G4
Perforation: MicroPerf -> Entire Screen
Material Overall Dim: 65.75in x 153.25in
Frame Overall Dim: 69.125in x 156.625in
Frame Color: Velux
Mounting: Wall Board Mount
Center Joint: True 

Thank you!


----------



## Craig Peer

ece2k2 said:


> I have placed an order for a 150" wide 2.4:1 Stewart fixed frame screen (model number - WSDQ163CST13G4WBMX) and I am hoping to receive the screen by the end of this month.
> 
> Masonry (brick) construction is my preferred option to construct the screen wall so as to mount the acoustically transparent Stewart screen. Since I am planning to locate large speakers (JBL M2) and subwoofers (4 numbers of 18" Rythmik subs) behind the screen, I would like to build a very minimalistic screen wall to mount the screen. I was wondering if there is a way to figure out the exact mounting locations on the wall before I receive the screen so that I could start building the screen wall right away.
> 
> All I would like to understand is the location of the wall boards that comes with the screen. In addition, Wallscreen Deluxe owner's manual says "Please note that on some custom sized frames the use of additional “back support braces” is required". Please let me know if there is a way to know if my screen would include such back support braces and if yes, their locations/dimensions as well.
> 
> Please see below the spec of the screen that I ordered.
> 
> Fixed Frame, Snap Screens with Various Framing Options
> Model Name: WallScreen Deluxe
> Model Number: WSDQ163CST13G4WBMX
> Image Size: 62.5in x 150in (163in diag.) 2.4:1
> Projection Type: Front Projection Seamless
> Screen Material: StudioTek 130 G4
> Perforation: MicroPerf -> Entire Screen
> Material Overall Dim: 65.75in x 153.25in
> Frame Overall Dim: 69.125in x 156.625in
> Frame Color: Velux
> Mounting: Wall Board Mount
> Center Joint: True
> 
> Thank you!


You need to ask your dealer to get you a drawing from Stewart.


----------



## Don Stewart

ece2k2 said:


> I have placed an order for a 150" wide 2.4:1 Stewart fixed frame screen (model number - WSDQ163CST13G4WBMX) and I am hoping to receive the screen by the end of this month.
> 
> Masonry (brick) construction is my preferred option to construct the screen wall so as to mount the acoustically transparent Stewart screen. Since I am planning to locate large speakers (JBL M2) and subwoofers (4 numbers of 18" Rythmik subs) behind the screen, I would like to build a very minimalistic screen wall to mount the screen. I was wondering if there is a way to figure out the exact mounting locations on the wall before I receive the screen so that I could start building the screen wall right away.
> 
> All I would like to understand is the location of the wall boards that comes with the screen. In addition, Wallscreen Deluxe owner's manual says "Please note that on some custom sized frames the use of additional “back support braces” is required". Please let me know if there is a way to know if my screen would include such back support braces and if yes, their locations/dimensions as well.
> 
> Please see below the spec of the screen that I ordered.
> 
> Fixed Frame, Snap Screens with Various Framing Options
> Model Name: WallScreen Deluxe
> Model Number: WSDQ163CST13G4WBMX
> Image Size: 62.5in x 150in (163in diag.) 2.4:1
> Projection Type: Front Projection Seamless
> Screen Material: StudioTek 130 G4
> Perforation: MicroPerf -> Entire Screen
> Material Overall Dim: 65.75in x 153.25in
> Frame Overall Dim: 69.125in x 156.625in
> Frame Color: Velux
> Mounting: Wall Board Mount
> Center Joint: True
> 
> Thank you!


Hi ECE. 
Thank you for your order. Your dealer should have the PDF drawing file. That said, we looked up your order and here is the spacing for the mounting uprights. Hope this helps. 
Regards, Don







p


----------



## howiee

ece2k2 said:


> I have placed an order for a 150" wide 2.4:1 Stewart fixed frame screen (model number - WSDQ163CST13G4WBMX) and I am hoping to receive the screen by the end of this month.
> 
> Masonry (brick) construction is my preferred option to construct the screen wall so as to mount the acoustically transparent Stewart screen. Since I am planning to locate large speakers (JBL M2) and subwoofers (4 numbers of 18" Rythmik subs) behind the screen, I would like to build a very minimalistic screen wall to mount the screen. I was wondering if there is a way to figure out the exact mounting locations on the wall before I receive the screen so that I could start building the screen wall right away.
> 
> All I would like to understand is the location of the wall boards that comes with the screen. In addition, Wallscreen Deluxe owner's manual says "Please note that on some custom sized frames the use of additional “back support braces” is required". Please let me know if there is a way to know if my screen would include such back support braces and if yes, their locations/dimensions as well.
> 
> Please see below the spec of the screen that I ordered.
> 
> Fixed Frame, Snap Screens with Various Framing Options
> Model Name: WallScreen Deluxe
> Model Number: WSDQ163CST13G4WBMX
> Image Size: 62.5in x 150in (163in diag.) 2.4:1
> Projection Type: Front Projection Seamless
> Screen Material: StudioTek 130 G4
> Perforation: MicroPerf -> Entire Screen
> Material Overall Dim: 65.75in x 153.25in
> Frame Overall Dim: 69.125in x 156.625in
> Frame Color: Velux
> Mounting: Wall Board Mount
> Center Joint: True
> 
> Thank you!


That's a beast of a screen! I'll be very interested in impressions once you've had time to get it setup. Mostly viewinfg distrance before perforations become visible etc


----------



## ece2k2

howiee said:


> That's a beast of a screen! I'll be very interested in impressions once you've had time to get it setup. Mostly viewinfg distrance before perforations become visible etc


Thank you Howiee. My MLP is 12’ from the screen wall and I will share my impressions once everything is set up -hopefully before the end of this year.


----------



## ece2k2

Don Stewart said:


> Hi ECE.
> Thank you for your order. Your dealer should have the PDF drawing file. That said, we looked up your order and here is the spacing for the mounting uprights. Hope this helps.
> Regards, Don
> View attachment 3054956
> p


Hi Don,

Very helpful, thank you!!!

Unfortunately, I just realised that the wall mount boards are going to end up right in front of my left and right speakers mounted in a baffle wall. Since this could potentially create issues to the sound, I was wondering if it is possible to swap the wall mount board that I ordered with EZ mount bracket system for mounting. I understand that the screen is still under production and I hope it isn’t too late to make this swap. Please advice.

I am also sending this request to my dealer (Avenue Sound), but it would be great if you could please look into this request ASAP.

Thanks again for all your help

edit: added the screen and speaker positioning in my setup


----------



## Don Stewart

ece2k2 said:


> Hi Don,
> 
> Very helpful, thank you!!!
> 
> Unfortunately, I just realised that the wall mount boards are going to end up right in front of my left and right speakers mounted in a baffle wall. Since this could potentially create issues to the sound, I was wondering if it is possible to swap the wall mount board that I ordered with EZ mount bracket system for mounting. I understand that the screen is still under production and I hope it isn’t too late to make this swap. Please advice.
> 
> I am also sending this request to my dealer (Avenue Sound), but it would be great if you could please look into this request ASAP.
> 
> Thanks again for all your help
> 
> edit: added the screen and speaker positioning in my setup
> View attachment 3055081
> View attachment 3055082


Please note that I posted this drawing as a courtesy only. If you would like to make changes you must go through your dealer to do so. If the outer wallboard brackets are going to interfere, then suppy your dealer where the proper dimensions to position. In the meantime I will put a hold on fabricating your frame. 

Best regards.
Don


----------



## ece2k2

Don Stewart said:


> Please note that I posted this drawing as a courtesy only. If you would like to make changes you must go through your dealer to do so. If the outer wallboard brackets are going to interfere, then suppy your dealer where the proper dimensions to position. In the meantime I will put a hold on fabricating your frame.
> 
> Best regards.
> Don


Hi Don,

I will talk to my dealer first thing in the morning and will ask him to send over the changes needed. Thank you for helping me out by putting a hold on my order. It is a big relief to hear that the screen is still under production and hasn’t shipped out yet. 

Thanks again!


----------



## ece2k2

Don Stewart said:


> Please note that I posted this drawing as a courtesy only. If you would like to make changes you must go through your dealer to do so. If the outer wallboard brackets are going to interfere, then suppy your dealer where the proper dimensions to position. In the meantime I will put a hold on fabricating your frame.
> 
> Best regards.
> Don


Hi Don,

Sorry to bother you, but I have a quick question about the EZ Mount bracket system. If I opt for EZ mount bracket system instead of wall board mount, I hope that there won't be any vertical back support braces/brackets necessary.

Ideally I would like to have the full screen area acoustically transparent with no braces/brackets behind the viewable screen surface and it looks like EZ mount is the best bet for me. Kindly confirm.

Thank you!


----------



## Don Stewart

ece2k2 said:


> Hi Don,
> 
> Sorry to bother you, but I have a quick question about the EZ Mount bracket system. If I opt for EZ mount bracket system instead of wall board mount, I hope that there won't be any vertical back support braces/brackets necessary.
> 
> Ideally I would like to have the full screen area acoustically transparent with no braces/brackets behind the viewable screen surface and it looks like EZ mount is the best bet for me. Kindly confirm.
> 
> Thank you!


Please be advised that I sent you a PM.


----------



## Th601

Good evening is there an updated list for the Screen Adjustment Mode Table that reflects the mode for ST130 G4?

Update: Nevermind, I believe this is a JVC question. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Brandon Lopez

Hello Everyone - lots of great info in this forum, so thank you all in advance for the great insight. I spent roughly 4 hours reading through everything last night, but I wanted to pose a question specific to my home application to see what you guys think.

I currently have a motorized 0.8 gain ALR screen that was installed back in April. Obviously, that material is good for what it does, but I've been super bothered by all of the artifacts and just the general durability of that ALR coating (dents, puncture marks, uniform horizontal lines across the screen as a result of the roll-up mechanism). Some of those issues are worse than others, but what I can't unsee when I watch a movie is the texture artifacts (horizontal lines that are especially noticeable for vertical panning shorts in bright or white scenes). I NEED to upgrade to a better screen and fortunately I'm not too concerned with cost. Sounds like Stewart is about as good as it gets, but I'd love to get recommendations on the material (I'll also reach out to a dealer to request samples, but you all are experts so I thought I'd ask!).

My set-up:

Epson 6050UB Projector
Throw distance is 186 inches from screen to lens, which translates into just over 1.5x throw ratio for my 133 inch 2.40:1 screen that is 122 inches wide. I could maybe add another few inches to the throw distance, but not much.
Pictures of room attached:
18x18 room with dark gray walls, a light gray ceiling and white windows/bookcase/mantle/trim. Unfortunately, the white and gray paint must remain. 
Currently have carpet that is being replaced with matte black LVP flooring (with an area rug as well).
When I get the new screen installed, I will also install blackout curtains on all the windows and the opening to the dining room that you see in the picture.


I'd absolutely love to upgrade to a motorized StudioTek 130 G4. How might this perform with my situation? Obviously, with the blackout curtains, I have the ability to block 100% of the outside light coming in. Will the white paint have much of an impact given it will mostly be behind the screen? The main concern is with the gray paint from the ceiling. 

IF (and fingers crossed I don't need to) I need to go for an ALR or gray screen instead, what Stewart material do you think would be the best for my room (keeping in mind that I want to minimize those texture/other artifacts as much as I possibly can). Thank you all so much in advance for the help!

Brandon


----------



## Craig Peer

Brandon Lopez said:


> Hello Everyone - lots of great info in this forum, so thank you all in advance for the great insight. I spent roughly 4 hours reading through everything last night, but I wanted to pose a question specific to my home application to see what you guys think.
> 
> I currently have a motorized 0.8 gain ALR screen that was installed back in April. Obviously, that material is good for what it does, but I've been super bothered by all of the artifacts and just the general durability of that ALR coating (dents, puncture marks, uniform horizontal lines across the screen as a result of the roll-up mechanism). Some of those issues are worse than others, but what I can't unsee when I watch a movie is the texture artifacts (horizontal lines that are especially noticeable for vertical panning shorts in bright or white scenes). I NEED to upgrade to a better screen and fortunately I'm not too concerned with cost. Sounds like Stewart is about as good as it gets, but I'd love to get recommendations on the material (I'll also reach out to a dealer to request samples, but you all are experts so I thought I'd ask!).
> 
> My set-up:
> 
> Epson 6050UB Projector
> Roughly 1.5x throw ratio, but have the room to go to right around 1.6x.
> Pictures of room attached:
> 18x18 room with dark gray walls, a light gray ceiling and white windows/bookcase/mantle/trim. Unfortunately, the white and gray paint must remain.
> Currently have carpet that is being replaced with matte black LVP flooring (with an area rug as well).
> When I get the new screen installed, I will also install blackout curtains on all the windows and the opening to the dining room that you see in the picture.
> 
> 
> I'd absolutely love to upgrade to a motorized StudioTek 130 G4. How might this perform with my situation? Obviously, with the blackout curtains, I have the ability to block 100% of the outside light coming in. Will the white paint have much of an impact given it will mostly be behind the screen? The main concern is with the gray paint from the ceiling.
> 
> IF (and fingers crossed I don't need to) I need to go for an ALR or gray screen instead, what Stewart material do you think would be the best for my room (keeping in mind that I want to minimize those texture/other artifacts as much as I possibly can). Thank you all so much in advance for the help!
> 
> Brandon


Get some samples of Firehawk G5, Phantom HALR and maybe Grayhawk, and compare them to your current screen. I think the StudioTek 130 will wash out too much in that room. But you could get a sample of that too and see for yourself. Materials - Stewart


----------



## Sittler27

I currently own a DaLite HD Progressive 0.9:





Dalite 24777V 138" Wall Projector Screen HD Progressive 1.3 | Projector Screen Store


The Dalite 24777V Cinemascope (2.35:1) Wall mounted projector screen is the best choice for home theaters. Shop the great prices on the fantastic selection of the best projection screens online at Projector Screen Store



www.projectorscreenstore.com





I used to own the 1.3 version of above as well.

I'm considering upgrading to the Stewart StudioTek 130 G4 Wallscreen 1.5 (WS25138CST13G4EZX).

1. Is the Studiotek above the same aspect ratio as my current screen? I've seen reports of it as 2.35 and also 2.41.

2. Anyone who has owned or tested both side by side care to provide feedback on how much the StudioTek would add any visible artifacts on bright content like hockey?
(I moved from the Dalite 1.3 to 0.9 to reduce those sparkles)


----------



## AVfile

@Sittler27 ; check out this review. Kris went from ST130 to ST100 to ST130G4 and he was sensitive to sparkles and panning artifacts:









Stewart Filmscreen StudioTek 130 G4 Projection Screen Review


Performance Setup Value PRICE $1,484 (material only, as tested) AT A GLANCE Plus




www.soundandvision.com


----------



## Sittler27

AVfile said:


> @Sittler27 ; check out this review. Kris went from ST130 to ST100 to ST130G4 and he was sensitive to sparkles and panning artifacts:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stewart Filmscreen StudioTek 130 G4 Projection Screen Review
> 
> 
> Performance Setup Value PRICE $1,484 (material only, as tested) AT A GLANCE Plus
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.soundandvision.com


Thanks for that, and yes read that. Was just looking for some other opinions too.


----------



## Craig Peer

Sittler27 said:


> I currently own a DaLite HD Progressive 0.9:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dalite 24777V 138" Wall Projector Screen HD Progressive 1.3 | Projector Screen Store
> 
> 
> The Dalite 24777V Cinemascope (2.35:1) Wall mounted projector screen is the best choice for home theaters. Shop the great prices on the fantastic selection of the best projection screens online at Projector Screen Store
> 
> 
> 
> www.projectorscreenstore.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I used to own the 1.3 version of above as well.
> 
> I'm considering upgrading to the Stewart StudioTek 130 G4 Wallscreen 1.5 (WS25138CST13G4EZX).
> 
> 1. Is the Studiotek above the same aspect ratio as my current screen? I've seen reports of it as 2.35 and also 2.41.
> 
> 2. Anyone who has owned or tested both side by side care to provide feedback on how much the StudioTek would add any visible artifacts on bright content like hockey?
> (I moved from the Dalite 1.3 to 0.9 to reduce those sparkles)


Get a sample of the ST130 G4. Also, you can order a 2.35:1 screen or a 2.40:1 screen.


----------



## Sittler27

Craig Peer said:


> Get a sample of the ST130 G4. Also, you can order a 2.35:1 screen or a 2.40:1 screen.


Which is preferred for scope? I had heard the 2.40:1 is that correct?


----------



## Craig Peer

Sittler27 said:


> Which is preferred for scope? I had heard the 2.40:1 is that correct?


I'd get a 2.40:1 screen myself.


----------



## Surge2018

GetGray said:


> No, the Grayhawk has no ambient rejection, none, nada. It is gray for different reasons. Any ambient rejection will come with some narrower viewing cone. When we did some side by side tests a few years ago, the GH washed worse than any material because of it's low (negative) gain. It is for a different purpose. Your dealer should be helping you pick the right screen. If you don't have one helping you, hire me  before you make a mistake.


This is wrong. 
From Stewart's own website: _"It is just the ticket when a projector is a bit more powerful than needed *or when room decor does not quite absorb enough light... This fabric will offer superior performance with moderate ambient light.*"_


----------



## Craig Peer

Surge2018 said:


> This is wrong.
> From Stewart's own website: _"It is just the ticket when a projector is a bit more powerful than needed *or when room decor does not quite absorb enough light... This fabric will offer superior performance with moderate ambient light.*"_


His quote was from 2014 - 6 years ago. I'm sure that Grayhawk has changed since then.


----------



## AVfile

Sittler27 said:


> Which is preferred for scope? I had heard the 2.40:1 is that correct?


I went with 2.35:1 and the widest bezel (Wallscreen 3.25”) so I can overscan as needed. I am not short on wall space so the thicker frame isn’t an issue, but I am very close to the limit of the zoom on my projector so I can’t go too wide. 

I would rather have a slightly bigger image for watching 16:9, 1.85 and all those weird ratios in between (Kubrick anyone?) on a 2.35 screen than have the extra width for 2.40 and have it go unused half of the time. Also the difference is small enough that I can just zoom in (if it bothers me) and overscan the sides of the image onto the Velux light absorbing material.


----------



## AVfile

Sittler27 said:


> Thanks for that, and yes read that. Was just looking for some other opinions too.


I have a ST130G4 screen on order so I’ll see. I was very happy with my previous ST130G3 screen. I only saw a few sparkles in 10 years, but I never watched ice hockey on it.

For me there is no alternative. The ST100 and grey screens are not good choices for 3D.


----------



## Sittler27

I have a choice


AVfile said:


> I went with 2.35:1 and the widest bezel (Wallscreen 3.25”) so I can overscan as needed. I am not short on wall space so the thicker frame isn’t an issue, but I am very close to the limit of the zoom on my projector so I can’t go too wide.
> 
> I would rather have a slightly bigger image for watching 16:9, 1.85 and all those weird ratios in between (Kubrick anyone?) on a 2.35 screen than have the extra width for 2.40 and have it go unused half of the time. Also the difference is small enough that I can just zoom in (if it bothers me) and overscan the sides of the image onto the Velux light absorbing material.


I went with the Wallscreen 1.5 in the 2.40:1.
My current DaLite Cinema Contour has a 3.5" bezel but is 2.35:1 and vertically fits perfectly on the wall (pushes to my limit).

I could have used the 5" or so of gained vertical real estate to increase my overall screen size from the 138" I've been watching, but I find my screen to be plenty big at my 13'6" viewing distance + I'm looking to preserve as much brightness as I can for HDR.
Also, I have a 15' throw so couldn't go much bigger than 138" 2.40:1 anyways.

So, was going with the Wallscreen 1.5 a mistake over the deluxe?

The other question I have is: 
Where should ideally the vertical center of a screen be in relation to the viewer's eyes? Should the screen be mounted lower so and as close to that ideal as possible?


----------



## Craig Peer

Sittler27 said:


> I have a choice
> 
> 
> I went with the Wallscreen 1.5 in the 2.40:1.
> My current DaLite Cinema Contour has a 3.5" bezel but is 2.35:1 and vertically fits perfectly on the wall (pushes to my limit).
> 
> I could have used the 5" or so of gained vertical real estate to increase my overall screen size from the 138" I've been watching, but I find my screen to be plenty big at my 13'6" viewing distance + I'm looking to preserve as much brightness as I can for HDR.
> Also, I have a 15' throw so couldn't go much bigger than 138" 2.40:1 anyways.
> 
> So, was going with the Wallscreen 1.5 a mistake over the deluxe?
> 
> The other question I have is:
> Where should ideally the vertical center of a screen be in relation to the viewer's eyes? Should the screen be mounted lower so and as close to that ideal as possible?


I like my eyes to look at about 1/3 up from the bottom of the screen at the highest. If you have multiple rows / recliners etc. , that may need modifying.


----------



## AVfile

Sittler27 said:


> I'm considering upgrading to the Stewart StudioTek 130 G4 Wallscreen 1.5 (WS25138CST13G4EZX).


Do you mean Wallscreen 2.5? The part number you quoted is WS25***

The 2.5 is very similar to the Deluxe and a bit cheaper. I think it gives you a beefy enough bezel to overscan. The 1.5 is a totally different design I am not familiar with.


----------



## yegor00

I'm thinking of ordering AT screen to use with new Sony 915 laser and put my towers behind it. That way I will get the biggest picture possible say 165' diagonally. My challenge would be is how to mount the screen - brackets from the top to the bottom? Or L shape from the back wall? How much will AT screen will take away from 915 light output? Has anyone have experience with Stewart AT screens?


----------



## Sittler27

AVfile said:


> Do you mean Wallscreen 2.5? The part number you quoted is WS25***
> 
> The 2.5 is very similar to the Deluxe and a bit cheaper. I think it gives you a beefy enough bezel to overscan. The 1.5 is a totally different design I am not familiar with.


You may be right, but the Stewart diagram has the attached for side view - is this the 2.5?


----------



## AVfile

Sittler27 said:


> You may be right, but the Stewart diagram has the attached for side view - is this the 2.5?


That looks like the 2.5 which has a 1” frame depth. You can also tell by subtracting your image width from your total frame width, which should equal 5”. 

The 1.5 is just a square tube (no beveled edge) and costs more for some reason. I would avoid.


----------



## Sittler27

AVfile said:


> That looks like the 2.5 which has a 1” frame depth. You can also tell by subtracting your image width from your total frame width, which should equal 5”.
> 
> The 1.5 is just a square tube (no beveled edge) and costs more for some reason. I would avoid.


Good to know, yes I confirmed it's the 2.5.

I current have a Dalite Cinema Contour - how would the frame compare to that? The 2.5 is 1" thinner I guess?


----------



## survivor

Anyone here using Stewart Balon Edge UST screen? I wonder how it compares to Screen Innovations Short Throw screen?


----------



## yegor00

yegor00 said:


> I'm thinking of ordering AT screen to use with new Sony 915 laser and put my towers behind it. That way I will get the biggest picture possible say 165' diagonally. My challenge would be is how to mount the screen - brackets from the top to the bottom? Or L shape from the back wall? How much will AT screen will take away from 915 light output? Has anyone have experience with Stewart AT screens?


----------



## Don Stewart

yegor00 said:


> Picture for reference


Hi Yegor. We have our own machine and welding departments at our manufacturing facility here in Torrance, CA. My suggestion would be that we custom build optional cantilever brackets to float the screen in front of your existing wall. That said, we would have to know the dimensions from back of screen to wall. Also, our screen materials 
lose 10.2 % of of its gain with AT option.


----------



## yegor00

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Yegor. We have our own machine and welding departments at our manufacturing facility here in Torrance, CA. My suggestion would be that we custom build optional cantilever brackets to float the screen in front of your existing wall. That said, we would have to know the dimensions from back of screen to wall. Also, our screen materials
> lose 10.2 % of of its gain with AT option.


----------



## Don Stewart

Deleted


----------



## jazzrock

My new Stewart StudioTek 100 filmscreen is scheduled to be installed this Friday. Really pumped!!

It’s replacing a Stewart StudioTek 130 electric drop down with masks. Is there a market for used? I don’t recall seeing any used screens for sale. I would like to sell mine but not sure the best place to list it. Any feedback will be appreciated.


----------



## Craig Peer

jazzrock said:


> My new Stewart StudioTek 100 filmscreen is scheduled to be installed this Friday. Really pumped!!
> 
> It’s replacing a Stewart StudioTek 130 electric drop down with masks. Is there a market for used? I don’t recall seeing any used screens for sale. I would like to sell mine but not sure the best place to list it. Any feedback will be appreciated.


I've sold two electric screens. If you are going to ship it, you will need the box. Try and sell locally - easier and shipping is expensive.


----------



## avsBuddy

Jazzrock, is your new screen same aspect ratio as old one? What drove your decision to switch materials?


----------



## McLuvin

jazzrock said:


> My new Stewart StudioTek 100 filmscreen is scheduled to be installed this Friday. Really pumped!!
> 
> It’s replacing a Stewart StudioTek 130 electric drop down with masks. Is there a market for used? I don’t recall seeing any used screens for sale. I would like to sell mine but not sure the best place to list it. Any feedback will be appreciated.


Just installed my StudioTek 100 this past week. I really love this screen so far. No grain, no texture, no hot-spotting, smooth surface, even light distribution out to the edges. Kris D was right on his review of this screen. I got the WallScreen Deluxe frame, so I can try different material in the future if I want, but I am not seeing a need at this point. This is a great screen.


----------



## jazzrock

avsBuddy said:


> Jazzrock, is your new screen same aspect ratio as old one? What drove your decision to switch materials?


Yes, exact same everything. I recently replaced a Runco vx-22d with a Sony 5000es. And while the 130 is an excellent screen and a great performer with the Runco I wanted the 100 which I expect will perform better with the Sony.


----------



## AVfile

jazzrock said:


> My new Stewart StudioTek 100 filmscreen is scheduled to be installed this Friday. Really pumped!!
> 
> It’s replacing a Stewart StudioTek 130 electric drop down with masks. Is there a market for used? I don’t recall seeing any used screens for sale. I would like to sell mine but not sure the best place to list it. Any feedback will be appreciated.


I sold my ST130G3 on canuckaudiomart or usaudiomart depending on your country. I still had the original box so I was able to ship to the new customer in Chicago. 

PS, got my new 130G4 installed this past week and I am surprised how punchy and clean the image is. Defies words really but even movie credits look more crisp and clear. Despite the larger size I am still running my ancient 1080p Sony on low lamp and it’s plenty bright!


----------



## jazzrock

AVfile said:


> I sold my ST130G3 on canuckaudiomart or usaudiomart depending on your country. I still had the original box so I was able to ship to the new customer in Chicago.
> 
> PS, got my new 130G4 installed this past week and I am surprised how punchy and clean the image is. Defies words really but even movie credits look more crisp and clear. Despite the larger size I am still running my ancient 1080p Sony on low lamp and it’s plenty bright!


I’ve heard the new G4 is amazing! Thx for the suggestion of USAUDIOMART.


----------



## fredworld

fredworld said:


> Does anyone have any tips on installing the EZ Mount? Yesterday, I ordered a 40" x 94" (102" diagonal) 2.35:1 Stewart StudioTek 100 Balon Borderless fixed frame screen. Reading the on-line instructions, it looks straight forward enough. Almost too "EZ." But having experienced many self-installations/assemblies of various products over my years and running into any number of issues that made me say during assembly, "Why didn't they explain blah, blah, blah..." I can't help but wonder if there's something that Stewart hasn't thought of for inclusion in the instructions.
> 
> Any comments from those with the EZ mount? Would you do anything different that the instructions don't address?





Craig Peer said:


> You might check that your wall is straight and plumb ahead of time. Other than that, mounting the screen should be straight forward.


Thanks for that advice. The installation went fairly smoothly. My most difficult time was in keeping my 4' bubble level, well, level, so that the Hanging Bars were aligned. I had to install 2x4's as a push-off so that the screen could skirt a door frame to maximize screen width. Did it all myself except for the final screen lift onto the Hanging Bars. Thanks again.


----------



## mdavis

Does anyone have any impression on the new Harmony G2? I'm looking for the best weave screen for my new Sony 715ES. Thoughts/impressions from shows/etc on Harmony G2 vs. Seymour XD/UF vs. Dreamscreen V6/V7 vs. SI Maestro vs. Screen Excellence Neo? I'm focused on weave given the short distance from speaker baffle to screen - likely 2-3" and desire for least db loss.

I requested samples of the new Stewart screen, but they are not available yet.

Coming soon - Stewart 

Thanks, -mark


----------



## Craig Peer

mdavis said:


> Does anyone have any impression on the new Harmony G2? I'm looking for the best weave screen for my new Sony 715ES. Thoughts/impressions from shows/etc on Harmony G2 vs. Seymour XD/UF vs. Dreamscreen V6/V7 vs. SI Maestro vs. Screen Excellence Neo? I'm focused on weave given the short distance from speaker baffle to screen - likely 2-3" and desire for least db loss.
> 
> I requested samples of the new Stewart screen, but they are not available yet.
> 
> Coming soon - Stewart
> 
> Thanks, -mark


Coming soon = I haven't even seen a sample yet. It will be hard to judge until I an see a full sized screen.


----------



## surroundsound99

Looking for ideas on how to install my retractable screen below a drop ceiling, suspended from the ceiling rafters above the drop ceiling. Thanks ahead of time for your input.


----------



## Fabricator

surroundsound99 said:


> Looking for ideas on how to install my retractable screen below a drop ceiling, suspended from the ceiling rafters above the drop ceiling. Thanks ahead of time for your input.


you should start your own thread. with pics


----------



## Craig Peer

surroundsound99 said:


> Looking for ideas on how to install my retractable screen below a drop ceiling, suspended from the ceiling rafters above the drop ceiling. Thanks ahead of time for your input.


Use threaded rod attached to those rafters, and Unistrut possibly.


----------



## Craig Peer

Wow - I just realized I've had my electric Cima Neve screen 7 years and 3 months ( bought Sept. 12th, 2013 ). Still looks / works great ! Sharp as a tack with 4K and a native 4K projector. A few screen shots from the " Ant Man " 4K Blu-ray on it -


----------



## A7mad78

Craig Peer said:


> Wow - I just realized I've had my electric Cima Neve screen 7 years and 3 months ( bought Sept. 12th, 2013 ). Still looks / works great ! Sharp as a tack with 4K and a native 4K projector. A few screen shots from the " Ant Man " 4K Blu-ray on it -
> View attachment 3068228
> View attachment 3068229
> View attachment 3068230
> View attachment 3068231
> View attachment 3068232
> View attachment 3068233


It’s Stewart and that’s enough  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## surroundsound99

Craig Peer said:


> Use threaded rod attached to those rafters, and Unistrut possibly.


How do I connect a Unistrut perpendicular to my ceiling joists? The holes are 9/16" wide, but there's no way I'm putting a 1/2" lag screw up into the ceiling joists. Ideas anyone? Thanks


----------



## Craig Peer

surroundsound99 said:


> How do I connect a Unistrut perpendicular to my ceiling joists? The holes are 9/16" wide, but there's no way I'm putting a 1/2" lag screw up into the ceiling joists. Ideas anyone? Thanks


You need a framer / construction guy to help out.


----------



## taxman2015

I just ordered my 130 inch StudioTek 130G4 2.40:1 screen for the new house we are moving into in the new year.
The Stewart automated masking systems are beyond my budget.
However, Stewart is now offering a manual masking system.
It's not on their website (or wasn't a couple of days ago when I last checked), nor was I able to get any marketing material.
Hopefully Stewart won't be upset about my posting about it, but I figured since I could order it, it was worth mentioning in case others are in a similar position


----------



## Craig Peer

taxman2015 said:


> I just ordered my 130 inch StudioTek 130G4 2.40:1 screen for the new house we are moving into in the new year.
> The Stewart automated masking systems are beyond my budget.
> However, Stewart is now offering a manual masking system.
> It's not on their website (or wasn't a couple of days ago when I last checked), nor was I able to get any marketing material.
> Hopefully Stewart won't be upset about my posting about it, but I figured since I could order it, it was worth mentioning in case others are in a similar position


I'm sure they won't mind. I believe it's only available on the Wallscreen Deluxe frame.


----------



## Don Stewart

surroundsound99 said:


> How do I connect a Unistrut perpendicular to my ceiling joists? The holes are 9/16" wide, but there's no way I'm putting a 1/2" lag screw up into the ceiling joists. Ideas anyone? Thanks


Pictures? Fixed or retractable screen?


----------



## DigsMovies

I would love to know more about the manual masking system!


----------



## SteveS78

I am considering the Stewart Firehawk G5 ALR/AT screen with zero edge, 120 inches and I have a few questions:

1. The gain on the screen is 1.1 while the Screen Innovations Slate AT is a 1.2 gain. Is the SI really 10% brighter? If so, would you say that is one advantage the SI Slate has over the Firehawk? Or is this offset by other characteristics? To be clear, I like a bright vibrant image.

2. I noticed tonight while researching, the specs for the Firehawk say that it has a minimum throw of 1.5x the width of the screen. I thought that the throw was determined by the projector and not the screen? What is up with this? I currently have an Epson 5050UB and a 120 zero edge screen I want to replace. I don't like the screen, but the projector is less than 1.5x the width of the screen in distance away from the screen and the image fits fine...because it is within the throw range of the projector. What am I missing here? Does this screen work differently? Why would the screen specs say that? My projector can be as close as 11'9" from a 120 inch screen. Can someone explain this specification for this screen and why this screen seems to be dictating the throw and not the pj?

Thanks

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## DigsMovies

SteveS78 said:


> I am considering the Stewart Firehawk G5 ALR/AT screen with zero edge, 120 inches and I have a few questions:
> 
> 1. The gain on the screen is 1.1 while the Screen Innovations Slate AT is a 1.2 gain. Is the SI really 10% brighter? If so, would you say that is one advantage the SI Slate has over the Firehawk? Or is this offset by other characteristics? To be clear, I like a bright vibrant image.
> 
> 2. I noticed tonight while researching, the specs for the Firehawk say that it has a minimum throw of 1.5x the width of the screen. I thought that the throw was determined by the projector and not the screen? What is up with this? I currently have an Epson 5050UB and a 120 zero edge screen I want to replace. I don't like the screen, but the projector is less than 1.5x the width of the screen in distance away from the screen and the image fits fine...because it is within the throw range of the projector. What am I missing here? Does this screen work differently? Why would the screen specs say that? My projector can be as close as 11'9" from a 120 inch screen. Can someone explain this specification for this screen and why this screen seems to be dictating the throw and not the pj?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Someone smarter than me needs to weigh in, but I'll say this...

1) Get samples and try them. You might not see any difference in brightness. Some screen companies are more accurate than others regarding published gain levels. You can trust Stewart. Your eyes don't perceive increases in brightness in a linear fashion anyway- so a light source (the light coming off your screen for example) might be measurably 10% brighter, but you would not perceive it as such.

2) You are correct in thinking that "throw is determined by the projector" with respect to image sizing, lens shift, etc... The specs on the Firehawk are a separate issue. Remember- the Firehawk is an ambient light rejecting screen with an optical coating. The way light reflects off the screen is affected by the angle at which the light hits the screen. The distance of the projector from the screen (the minimum throw Stewart specs) affects this angle. Imagine a (theoretical) projector 10 feet from the screen vs. one 50 feet away. The light from the projector 10 feet away hits the edge of the screen at a significantly different angle than the light from the projector 50 feet away.

Viewing angle is also important with the Firehawk. In the right application, installed within recommended parameters, the Firehawk is a fantastic solution. I love mine, but wouldn't recommend it for a dedicated HT room.


----------



## SteveS78

DigsMovies said:


> Someone smarter than me needs to weigh in, but I'll say this...
> 
> 1) Get samples and try them. You might not see any difference in brightness. Some screen companies are more accurate than others regarding published gain levels. You can trust Stewart. Your eyes don't perceive increases in brightness in a linear fashion anyway- so a light source (the light coming off your screen for example) might be measurably 10% brighter, but you would not perceive it as such.
> 
> 2) You are correct in thinking that "throw is determined by the projector" with respect to image sizing, lens shift, etc... The specs on the Firehawk are a separate issue. Remember- the Firehawk is an ambient light rejecting screen with an optical coating. The way light reflects off the screen is affected by the angle at which the light hits the screen. The distance of the projector from the screen (the minimum throw Stewart specs) affects this angle. Imagine a (theoretical) projector 10 feet from the screen vs. one 50 feet away. The light from the projector 10 feet away hits the edge of the screen at a significantly different angle than the light from the projector 50 feet away.
> 
> Viewing angle is also important with the Firehawk. In the right application, installed within recommended parameters, the Firehawk is a fantastic solution. I love mine, but wouldn't recommend it for a dedicated HT room.


Thanks for the info. My issue is that my 5050ub is ceiling mounted with its lense about 12 feet away and not sure I can get it further. 1.5x the image of a 120 inch diagonal screen is 13 ft. I will be a foot short. Will a foot really make that much of a difference?

What is the result of it if I can't get it far enough back (by about 12 inches) to meet the minimum throw recommendation for the screen? Less brightness? Hot spotting? A worse viewing cone/ange?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## SteveS78

Also, since the projector can't move back to improve the angle, would it work to lower the screen a few inches? I should be able to have that done. Would that work just like being back 13 ft?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## DigsMovies

SteveS78 said:


> Thanks for the info. My issue is that my 5050ub is ceiling mounted with its lense about 12 feet away and not sure I can get it further. 1.5x the image of a 120 inch diagonal screen is 13 ft. I will be a foot short. Will a foot really make that much of a difference?
> 
> What is the result of it if I can't get it far enough back (by about 12 inches) to meet the minimum throw recommendation for the screen? Less brightness? Hot spotting? A worse viewing cone/ange?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Hot spotting would be the concern, and it relates to viewing angle too. We're talking about shades of grey here. For example, my Firehawk is installed within guidelines, but if one is looking for it, one can find some uneven brightness (hot-spotting) on certain scenes. It doesn't bother me, and has never distracted me from a movie- but I don't look for it. I imagine the farther one gets from mfg. guidelines, the worse the issue will be. Some people are more bothered by things like this than others too. Nobody but a HT geek would notice with mine- friends and family have never seen it.

I wouldn't suggest anyone ignore the mfg. installation guidelines. I believe many who find fault with this screen are outside guidelines. That said- there are compromises and trade-offs in this game. Only you can judge whether the benefits outweigh the costs- which is admittedly difficult in your case. Caution would be advised.



SteveS78 said:


> Also, since the projector can't move back to improve the angle, would it work to lower the screen a few inches? I should be able to have that done. Would that work just like being back 13 ft?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


My guess is no.


----------



## David_SG

DigsMovies said:


> I would love to know more about the manual masking system!


I've had a Stewart Wallscreen 133" 2.39 aspect ratio with the masking panels for about a month now. It is the 3.25" frame option (but not the Deluxe as that wasn't available at the time I ordered). The panels hang over the top frame and are sized for 16:9 content - maybe not as cool as magnetic panels that others offer but it works well and pretty easy to get in the right spot (although one side seems to be more finicky than the other side in terms of getting the panel to sit perfectly). You can also slide them around to mask 1.85 and 2.0 content stuff, but it isn't designed for that and won't sit flush / perfectly square (but better then no masking at all, I guess). Overall a good "budget" option but just makes me want a motorized masking system all the more. I may try to figure out some DIY motorized curtain option at some point, but this works well for now.

Edit - adding a few pics


----------



## taxman2015

David_SG said:


> I've had a Stewart Wallscreen 133" 2.39 aspect ratio with the masking panels for about a month now. It is the 3.25" frame option (but not the Deluxe as that wasn't available at the time I ordered). The panels hang over the top frame and are sized for 16:9 content - maybe not as cool as magnetic panels that others offer but it works well and pretty easy to get in the right spot (although one side seems to be more finicky than the other side in terms of getting the panel to sit perfectly). You can also slide them around to mask 1.85 and 2.0 content stuff, but it isn't designed for that and won't sit flush / perfectly square (but better then no masking at all, I guess). Overall a good "budget" option but just makes me want a motorized masking system all the more. I may try to figure out some DIY motorized curtain option at some point, but this works well for now.
> 
> Edit - adding a few pics
> 
> View attachment 3069217
> View attachment 3069218
> View attachment 3069216


Thanks Dave that picture is very helpful as now I can see how they attach


----------



## SteveS78

So I recieved some samples today from Screen Innovations for their Slate AT material. They sent me samples for both the 1.2 gain and the 0.8 gain of the Slate AT. My old screen by Elite was a higher gain screen (Cinegray 5D, which was 1.5 gain). So I figured that I would like and prefer the higher gain sample better, but it turns out that I was WAY more impressed with the 0.8 gain material, especially since my new pj is the 5050ub which is an incredible projector when it comes to blacks.

Still waiting on the samples from Stewart which I expect to deliver either tomorrow or Tuesday. I am leaning towards Stewart, as everything I heard about their product is that it is better and superior and is right around the same as SI in terms of price.

I know Stewart is sending me one sample of their Firehawk G5 material that is 1.1 gain. My question is, do they offer the Firehawk G5 material is 0.8 gain or at least sub 1.0? 

I was really disappointed in some ways with the SI 1.2 gain. The material looks lighter and slightly more washed out when the image is playing with the lights in the room turned on (for being an ALR) than even my Elite screens material, which is disappointing. Hopefully, either the Stewart 1.1 gain material looks better or they offer a sub 1.0 material that is on par or better than SI's 0.8 sample.

Any insight or feedback here would be appreciated.


Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## SteveS78

Okay, I recieved the Stewart sample the other night. After an initial disappointment (I think my expectations were just unreasonable), I think Stewart does have the best material which looks the best with the image displaying on it. The main thing was that the image just seemed sharper and had better blacks.

One thing I noticed from the Stewart website about the Firehawk G5 material is that it has a recommended minimum throw of 1.6x the width of the image. In my case, I have a 120 inch diagonal 16:9 screen. Based on the width of that sized screen, 1.6x that would be about 13.8 ft or something close to that. Currently my projector (an Epson 5050UB) is ceiling mounted with its lense about 12 ft or 12 ft 2 inches from the screen. I can get back to about 13 ft (at which point the butt of the projector would be about 2 inches from the back wall). That is as far back as I can get it. From where it is mounted now, the sample looks fine. 

My question is, should I be fine with either leaving the projector where it currently is or moving it back 10 inches? I can't get it back to the specified throw that Stewart recommends.

The sample is obviously good enough that it is the best one and looks good. But hard to tell what a full 120 screen of the Firehawk would look like with the image projected on it.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Don Stewart

Hi Steve,
Our company culture has always been to publish accurate honest specs regarding screen gain, half gain angle, etc. That said, our optical engineering staff determines what specs are to be published and our marketing people are not allowed to fluff up those specs. As far as "Recommended" Throw Distance is concerned, this is a subjective 100% IRE white field uniformity test evaluation made by our team members who have what the industry calls trained eyes. If this was my room, I would start at your existing throw distance, evaluate, and then move the PJ back another 10" or so if needed.
Anyway, Happy Holidays and hope this helped some.
Regards,
Don


----------



## SteveS78

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Steve,
> Our company culture has always been to publish accurate honest specs regarding screen gain, half gain angle, etc. That said, our optical engineering staff determines what specs are to be published and our marketing people are not allowed to fluff up those specs. As far as "Recommended" Throw Distance is concerned, this is a subjective 100% IRE white field uniformity test evaluation made by our team members who have what the industry calls trained eyes. If this was my room, I would start at your existing throw distance, evaluate, and then move the PJ back another 10" or so if needed.
> Anyway, Happy Holidays and hope this helped some.
> Regards,
> Don


Thanks Don. Really appreciate the response. My main concern is that the image looks good. Would hate to put it up there and the entire thing looks bad because I have no way of meeting your recommended spec for the throw (my issue not yours). My read on it is that it should be fine at the current distance to the average viewer and if I feel it needs a little tweak, I can try having it moved back 10 inches or so? The 1.6x throw distance is more of an spec based upon trained eyes of your engineers and experts who know what to look for, especially for professional and commercial installations? I am not THAT picky. Haha. Just want a nice looking image for my space. I'm not running a THX certified theater chain.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## AVfile

David_SG said:


> Edit - adding a few pics


Yeah that is cool. Looks like it’s barely noticeable in those pics!


----------



## AVfile

SteveS78 said:


> Also, since the projector can't move back to improve the angle, would it work to lower the screen a few inches? I should be able to have that done. Would that work just like being back 13 ft?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Assuming your projector is ceiling mounted, that would make the angles more extreme, and it’s the angles that are the problem not distance per se. 

Does it have to be a grey screen with positive gain? The Firehawk rejects a lot more light from the extremes than the Studiotek or Grayhawk.


----------



## AVfile

SteveS78 said:


> I know Stewart is sending me one sample of their Firehawk G5 material that is 1.1 gain. My question is, do they offer the Firehawk G5 material is 0.8 gain or at least sub 1.0?


They do and I don't know why Stewart didn't recommend this for your "light cannon":






GrayHawk G4 - Stewart


Pioneering the use of neutral density black level enhancement, this flexible, front projection material reaches near unity gain on-axis and is coupled with a genuine ability to retain contrast.




www.stewartfilmscreen.com





_*GrayHawk G4 is an excellent tool for lowering the black floor with high output projectors without losing off-axis performance and viewing cone width.* _


----------



## SteveS78

AVfile said:


> Assuming your projector is ceiling mounted, that would make the angles more extreme, and it’s the angles that are the problem not distance per se.
> 
> Does it have to be a grey screen with positive gain? The Firehawk rejects a lot more light from the extremes than the Studiotek or Grayhawk.


Thanks for the info. I think I stated that wrong previously. I meant to say, "what it I raised my screen a few inches?" Didn't mean to say lower it...

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## SteveS78

AVfile said:


> They do and I don't know why Stewart didn't recommend this for your "light cannon":
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GrayHawk G4 - Stewart
> 
> 
> Pioneering the use of neutral density black level enhancement, this flexible, front projection material reaches near unity gain on-axis and is coupled with a genuine ability to retain contrast.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.stewartfilmscreen.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _*GrayHawk G4 is an excellent tool for lowering the black floor with high output projectors without losing off-axis performance and viewing cone width.* _


That is interesting info thanks. I just checked out that link and noticed the Grayhawk is only 41% ambient light rejecting, whereas the Firehawk is almost 70%? The thing with the SI Slate 1.2 vs 0.8 is that they are both equally ALR, correct? With the Grayhawk not being as ALR as the Firehawk, what is the difference between how those two are related and how the two different gains of Slate are related?

I want something that is as ALR as possible. To my mind 70% is better than 40%. I know I have a light canon technically, but getting a screen that is less ALR, I fear might start to really have the dark colors and blacks look faded with the lights on...no?

I know the Slate 0.8 material makes the image look darker (I have seen it with the sample they sent me) and a bit less bright, albeit with better looking blacks. Is it the same difference with the Grayhawk?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## ERuiz

After having my screen stowed away while we moved and settled in our new home, I finally was able to assemble the screen again and I now have this issue.










Will these go away on their own?

 I truly hope they do!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fredworld

If that's a Stewart screen and it was rolled when stored then stretched over the frame then I expect them to fade over a few weeks. Just be sure the screen is stretched properly on its frame. You should be fine. But if they are still prevalent in about a month, consider contacting the manufacturer. I might be wrong but deep dimples from the snaps might take longer to fade than simple linear creases.


----------



## ERuiz

fredworld said:


> If that's a Stewart screen and it was rolled when stored then stretched over the frame then I expect them to fade over a few weeks. Just be sure the screen is stretched properly on its frame. You should be fine. But if they are still prevalent in about a month, consider contacting the manufacturer. I might be wrong but deep dimples from the snaps might take longer to fade than simple linear creases.


Yes, it's a Stewart StudioTek 100 Balon frame.

I assembled it and it all looks good, sans those clip marks. I really do hope they go away over time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Don Stewart

Hi Eruiz,
It appears that the screen was rolled up on a core and stored with the vertical snaps at the 6:00 position which in turn put snap fastener impressions in the material. If you live where you get sunshine, I would lean the screen and frame against a south facing wall in direct sunlight with the viewing side towards the wall. This will speed up the material's memory return to flatness. If that can not be done, then leave it as is for 30 days or so. At that point, it may require some additional heat but first contact us prior to working with a heat gun as that requires a proper technique.

Regards,
Don


----------



## ERuiz

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Fred.
> It appears that the screen was rolled up on a core and stored with the vertical snaps at the 6:00 position which in turn put snap fastener impressions in the material. If you live where you get sunshine, I would lean the screen and frame against a south facing wall in direct sunlight with the viewing side towards the wall. This will speed up the material's memory return to flatness. If that can not be done, then leave it as is for 30 days or so. At that point, it may require some additional heat but first contact us prior to working with a heat gun as that requires a proper technique.
> 
> Regards,
> Don


Hi Don,

It's already mounted on the wall, so I'm just going to let it hang there. No rush to get the impressions immediately off. I'll keep you posted on the progress though. Thanks again and Merry Christmas!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ERuiz

@Don Stewart ; BTW, do you recommend to maintain a certain room temperature that would facilitate this? I currently keep the theater room at 68 degrees. Should I keep it warmer?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Don Stewart

ERuiz said:


> @Don Stewart ; BTW, do you recommend to maintain a certain room temperature that would facilitate this? I currently keep the theater room at 68 degrees. Should I keep it warmer?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I would heat up the room, perhaps 90 degrees F, for a while and then turn off the heat. The actual screen shrinkage, (which is what you want) happens when screen material cools back down. Repeat daily.


----------



## ERuiz

Perfect! Thanks again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## AVfile

Is it OK for direct sunlight to hit the screen on a regular basis?


----------



## Don Stewart

AVfile said:


> Is it OK for direct sunlight to hit the screen on a regular basis?


No worries. We put UV inhibitors in the mix during the batching and film manufacturing process.


----------



## SteveS78

Merry Christmas everyone!

Is there anyone who can answer my questions or give some insight into the Grayhawk material based my my previous post above?

Thanks!

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## fredworld

SteveS78 said:


> Merry Christmas everyone!
> 
> Is there anyone who can answer my questions or give some insight into the Grayhawk material based my my previous post above?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Is *this the post* you're referring to? If so, can you state your question more concisely? I'm having some trouble with your line of inquiry.


----------



## SteveS78

fredworld said:


> Is *this the post* you're referring to? If so, can you state your question more concisely? I'm having some trouble with your line of inquiry.


The main question I have is, the Grayhawk supposedly has great blacks and contrast compared to the Firehawk. Does it maintain those with lights on? And how much less of an ALR characteristic does it have compared to the Firehawk?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Don Stewart

Hi Steve,
Somehow I missed you earlier post. It is really not appropriate or ethical for me to comment on a competitors screen on a public forum.That said, here is a description of the GrayHawk. The GrayHawk screen fills in our line of screen materials that lies between our white StudioTek 100 reference screen and the FireHawk which is a much darker and higher Ambient Light Rejection screen. The Grayhawk has a much wider half gain angle and can be used with shorter throw setup than Firehawk. When manufacturing the GrayHawk material we start with a 0.72 Neutral Density gray base and our finished coats employ the same optical coating as our Studiotek 130 G4 upping the final coat to 0.9. (Please see attached chart of "Neutral Density Gray Darkness Levels" prior to final optical gain coatings). Also posted below are comparison grafts between FireHawk and GrayHawk.


----------



## AVfile

SteveS78 said:


> I want something that is as ALR as possible. To my mind 70% is better than 40%. I know I have a light canon technically, but getting a screen that is less ALR, I fear might start to really have the dark colors and blacks look faded with the lights on...no?
> 
> I know the Slate 0.8 material makes the image look darker (I have seen it with the sample they sent me) and a bit less bright, albeit with better looking blacks. Is it the same difference with the Grayhawk?


Sorry I haven’t seen it but should be the same idea. The Grayhawk will be “darker” but more uniform and provide a wider viewing angle than the Firehawk. It will also work better with your shorter throw. 

Personally I would sacrifice the “lights on” scenario for a better image during more critical viewing. However since I watch a fair bit of 3D a grey screen was out of the question so I went with the ST130.


----------



## SteveS78

AVfile said:


> Sorry I haven’t seen it but should be the same idea. The Grayhawk will be “darker” but more uniform and provide a wider viewing angle than the Firehawk. It will also work better with your shorter throw.
> 
> Personally I would sacrifice the “lights on” scenario for a better image during more critical viewing. However since I watch a fair bit of 3D a grey screen was out of the question so I went with the ST130.


Yes, I hear you about sacrificing that. But one of our main things is we like to watch sports and regular TV as well as game on the XBox with lights on. We do that as much or more than lights off movie watching....

Given that scenario, would the Grayhawk still be a good choice? Or should I stick with the Firehawk?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Don Stewart

SteveS78 said:


> Yes, I hear you about sacrificing that. But one of our main things is we like to watch sports and regular TV as well as game on the XBox with lights on. We do that as much or more than lights off movie watching....
> 
> Given that scenario, would the Grayhawk still be a good choice? Or should I stick with the Firehawk?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Next week, ask as a sample of GrayHawk. In your situation, I think it best to compare samples in your room under the conditions it is mostly like to be used. Have a Merry Christmas.


----------



## SteveS78

Don Stewart said:


> Next week, ask as a sample of GrayHawk. In your situation, I think it best to compare samples in your room under the conditions it is mostly like to be used. Have a Merry Christmas.


Thanks Don. Same to you. 

I did already get a sample of the Firehawk sent to me. It took about a week to get here since I am in the eastern United States. I know you guys are in California. 

If I call in Monday and ask for a perforated Grayhawk sample, do you think they would be able to overnight me one as a courtesy? I do plan on pulling the trigger through a dealer and buying one of your screens and was hoping to have it done either this past week (obviously that didn't happen) or the first half of next week. However, with the Grayhawk material just having been suggested to me, I do want to get it right. If I don't order whatever screen I decide on until late next week or early the following week, I am going to lose another week in terms of production and scheduling an install. I have another screen that I am not happy with from another manufacturer. I have an RMA for it, but have to get moving to get the installer back out to do everything. They need their screen back.

Will your people be willing to expedite that sample out to me knowing I am going to purchase my screen from you and that I want to order quickly?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Don Stewart

SteveS78 said:


> Thanks Don. Same to you.
> 
> I did already get a sample of the Firehawk sent to me. It took about a week to get here since I am in the eastern United States. I know you guys are in California.
> 
> If I call in Monday and ask for a perforated Grayhawk sample, do you think they would be able to overnight me one as a courtesy? I do plan on pulling the trigger through a dealer and buying one of your screens and was hoping to have it done either this past week (obviously that didn't happen) or the first half of next week. However, with the Grayhawk material just having been suggested to me, I do want to get it right. If I don't order whatever screen I decide on until late next week or early the following week, I am going to lose another week in terms of production and scheduling an install. I have another screen that I am not happy with from another manufacturer. I have an RMA for it, but have to get moving to get the installer back out to do everything. They need their screen back.
> 
> Will your people be willing to expedite that sample out to me knowing I am going to purchase my screen from you and that I want to order quickly?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Steve,
The best and quickest way to expedite an overnight sample is to have your dealer call in, then explain the circumstances for the rush.. Have them ask for Diana or July. Please note I am working from home next week because of the Covid lock down we have going on here in California. Hope that helps. Also, if your biggest concern is image black levels in a simi- lighted room, such as for watching sports broadcast, the FireHawk still would be your best choice.


----------



## SteveS78

Don Stewart said:


> Steve,
> The best and quickest way to expedite an overnight sample is to have your dealer call in, then explain the circumstances for the rush.. Have them ask for Diana or July. Please note I am working from home next week because of the Covid lock down we have going on here in California. Hope that helps. Also, if your biggest concern is image black levels in a simi- lighted room, such as for watching sports broadcast, the FireHawk still would be your best choice.


Thanks Don. I know that the Grayhawk is advertised as having better blacks and contrast due to the lower gain. I would assume then, that it is only the case when you have either minimal or zero ambient lighting due to the fact that it is less ALR than the Firehawk?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Don Stewart

SteveS78 said:


> Thanks Don. I know that the Grayhawk is advertised as having better blacks and contrast due to the lower gain.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


I am not sure were you heard that the GrayHawk has better black levels and contrast than the FireHawk. That is misinformation. The FireHawk has much darker Neutral Density base gray level and a brighter gain optical coating than the GrayHawk. Since projectors don't project black, it is the base ND gray level that produces the floor of the black level when any ambient light is present including room cross reflections. The FireHawk, on a scale of 1 to 10, base gray level is 4.9 and the Grayhawk is 7.2 which is a much lighter gray. Again, please study graph below showing different material Gray Levels.


----------



## Fullyestablished

I installed my ceiling mounted motorised Studiotek 130 19 years ago and it has delivered stellar service even though it saw projection technologies come and go. It lived through 7inch CRT, 9 inch CRT before moving onto JVCs and shortly getting another JVC. It still looks stunning, bright and clean with zero artefacts. The only issue is that it now needs a helping hand before starting to retract about four out of every five retractions. Now perhaps this is my fault as I have never had the screen adjusted or serviced. I bought it in the UK from my dealer so perhaps it is not the issue of a too low power transformer. It is an 8ft wide 3:4 screen. Is it time for the screen to go and live on a farm and be replaced by a G4 at a more sensible aspect ratio?


----------



## Craig Peer

Fullyestablished said:


> I installed my ceiling mounted motorised Studiotek 130 19 years ago and it has delivered stellar service even though it saw projection technologies come and go. It lived through 7inch CRT, 9 inch CRT before moving onto JVCs and shortly getting another JVC. It still looks stunning, bright and clean with zero artefacts. The only issue is that it now needs a helping hand before starting to retract about four out of every five retractions. Now perhaps this is my fault as I have never had the screen adjusted or serviced. I bought it in the UK from my dealer so perhaps it is not the issue of a too low power transformer. It is an 8ft wide 3:4 screen. Is it time for the screen to go and live on a farm and be replaced by a G4 at a more sensible aspect ratio?


You got great service from that screen. Might be time for a 16:9 ST130 G4 screen!


----------



## Fullyestablished

Craig Peer said:


> You got great service from that screen. Might be time for a 16:9 ST130 G4 screen!


Yep, no complaints here. I think that the only other items that have survived that time have been my five stack of Parasound JC1 amps for the first five channels.


----------



## Don Stewart

Fullyestablished said:


> I installed my ceiling mounted motorised Studiotek 130 19 years ago and it has delivered stellar service even though it saw projection technologies come and go. It lived through 7inch CRT, 9 inch CRT before moving onto JVCs and shortly getting another JVC. It still looks stunning, bright and clean with zero artefacts. The only issue is that it now needs a helping hand before starting to retract about four out of every five retractions. Now perhaps this is my fault as I have never had the screen adjusted or serviced. I bought it in the UK from my dealer so perhaps it is not the issue of a too low power transformer. It is an 8ft wide 3:4 screen. Is it time for the screen to go and live on a farm and be replaced by a G4 at a more sensible aspect ratio?


Does your unit have a screen trigger? Just off hand, it could be the coil on the screen trigger relay is getting tired.


----------



## Fullyestablished

Don Stewart said:


> Does your unit have a screen trigger? Just off hand, it could be the coil on the screen trigger relay is getting tired.


Thanks so much for taking the time to write. It does have a trigger. Sometimes it clicks and a little reluctantly starts up, usually it just clicks and stays down until I nudge it. Is there anything that I can try to eliminate the trigger?


----------



## Don Stewart

Fullyestablished said:


> Thanks so much for taking the time to write. It does have a trigger. Sometimes it clicks and a little reluctantly starts up, usually it just clicks and stays down until I nudge it. Is there anything that I can try to eliminate the trigger?


One more question. Does the cable from the screen go directly to the projector or are you using a separate 12v transformer to activate the trigger as shown below. If you have a transformer, then it probably needs replacing. Easy to do, just get the specs off the transformer and you can find online and order a replacement online from many electronic supply houses. If your relay is clicking, then it could be the transformer is not putting out the voltage anymore.


----------



## Fullyestablished

I believe that there is a transformer. I will get above the screen in the loft tomorrow to check. Why would helping it start work if the solenoid had not activated. If the screen has been left switched off but stuck down when I start it it is very slow to go back up. Thanks again for helping. It would be wonderful if there is a simple solution.



Don Stewart said:


> One more question. Does the cable from the screen go directly to the projector or are you using a separate 12v transformer to activate the trigger as shown below. If you have a transformer, then it probably needs replacing. Easy to do, just get the specs off the transformer and you can find online and order a replacement online from many electronic supply houses. If your relay is clicking, then it could be the transformer is not putting out the voltage anymore.
> View attachment 3072018


----------



## Don Stewart

Fullyestablished said:


> I believe that there is a transformer. I will get above the screen in the loft tomorrow to check. Why would helping it start work if the solenoid had not activated. If the screen has been left switched off but stuck down when I start it it is very slow to go back up. Thanks again for helping. It would be wonderful if there is a simple solution.


Also, I just went back and reread your original post. If it needs a helping hand to get the screen started to retract 4 out 5 times, you may want to have someone check to see if it is getting enough input voltage from your home's power output. Since the screen installation is 19 years old, maybe something has changed during that time.


----------



## Fullyestablished

I will try and see where it gets its power and I will try and get a meter on it. The trouble is one gets so accustomed to small changes it is hard to know what is abnormal; if I listen objectively I would say the mechanism sounds pretty 'graunchy' as the motor operates. Nothing squeaks but it does not sound like a smoothly running mechanism either. I will investigate and get back to you. If it helped I could record the screen so you could hear. I must say I am overwhelmed by your support for something that is this old. Truly world class products and support.


----------



## Fullyestablished

Don Stewart said:


> Also, I just went back and reread your original post. If it needs a helping hand to get the screen started to retract 4 out 5 times, you may want to have someone check to see if it is getting enough input voltage from your home's power output. Since the screen installation is 19 years old, maybe something has changed during that time.


I have been measuring around 236v so I assume that is OK.


----------



## Fullyestablished

Fullyestablished said:


> I have been measuring around 236v so I assume that is OK.


I was listening carefully this evening, when I switch off there is a click and a faint buzzing, the buzzing I assume is the motor trying to lift the screen. It only stops if I help lift it and the screen then retracts fully.


----------



## Don Stewart

Fullyestablished said:


> I was listening carefully this evening, when I switch off there is a click and a faint buzzing, the buzzing I assume is the motor trying to lift the screen. It only stops if I help lift it and the screen then retracts fully.


It can be difficult trouble shooting a 19 year old screen from my armchair here thousands of miles away. That said, since your screen is an old 4 by 3 aspect ratio, you can always pack it up and send back to the factory for a total rebuild including a new 16 by 9 StudioTek 130 G4 screen layout. Not sure if it would make economic sense since it would require shipping both ways across the pond. We could do the rebuild, including a new 240v motor if required, in 7-10 working days. Anyway, wishing you a Happy New Year.


----------



## Fullyestablished

Don Stewart said:


> It can be difficult trouble shooting a 19 year old screen from my armchair here thousands of miles away. That said, since your screen is an old 4 by 3 aspect ratio, you can always pack it up and send back to the factory for a total rebuild including a new 16 by 9 StudioTek 130 G4 screen layout. Not sure if it would make economics sense since it would require shipping both ways across the pond. We could do the rebuild, including a new 240v motor if required, in 7-10 working days. Anyway, wishing you a Happy New Year.


That is such a tempting offer. I will look into shipping costs. Of course it is also the emotional solution as I feel bad abandoning such a superb item. Given that it is in a dedicated cinema of course I could just leave it down. A mid course would be for me to buy a fixed StudioTek 130 G4 as that would probably be less money than the shipping and renovation.

So I assume that there are no service options in the UK.

Thanks again for all your support, even on New Year's Day. I will pop off and watch something on your screen now. Happy new Year.


----------



## jaapaap79

We're trying to build a home cinema space in our basement and I'm not sure where to find the information I'm looking for.

The wall on which we'll project has a height of 84" and a width of 123", there is a light switch on this wall and the width until the light switch would be 117". I'd like to follow the recommended screen height of 1/3 being at eye-height which would be approximately 46" high. This gives a maximum screen height of 58.5" assuming no borders and that it can start at the top of the wall, limiting the width on a 16:9 screen to 104" and a 2.4 screen to 123".

I would like to maximize the possible screen size given this wall dimensions. To do this I would like to have an acoustically transparent screen and have in-wall speakers. These speakers have a height of 49.25". And of course I would like the screen to cover the speakers fully.

The options that I'm considering so far are:

Get an electric screen that can cover most of the width of the wall using a 2.4:1 ratio like a Stewart Cabaret 48x115.5. What I'm wondering for this screen is what the highest possible starting point would be for the visible screen if the screen gets wall mounted at 85" so including the enclosure. So far I've found an option with a screen drop of 6", which would be ideal, but I don't think this included the enclosure.

Get a fixed screen with a visible height of more than 50", ideally with a thin or no border, so like a Stewart Balon 54x96 or perhaps if borderless even 58.75x104.5. What wasn't so clear to me is how the screen would be wall mounted. Would I be able to cover the 49.25" of the in-wall speakers (should I take off the grill?) because it looks like the screen is narrower at the back and I'm not sure what the frame dimensions are.

Does anyone have experience in this area and could advise me on above? Am I missing any other options?


----------



## wireburn

I have an older 120" 4:3 ratio horizontal electrimask in ST130 that I really love and has given over a decade of reliable service. I would like to be able to place speakers behind the screen. Do I need a new microperf screen surface or is it possible to have the existing one perforated?


----------



## Don Stewart

Hi Wireburn,
Yes, it would require new fabric. When we MicoPerf our screen materials, we start with a larger piece of material so it can fit on the rollers of our in-house perforation machine. That said, we do factory rescreens for existing retractable screen models from time to time. That can be arranged through your dealer.
Regards,
Don


----------



## wireburn

Thanks for the quick reply. Sounds good, I'm on it!


----------



## Technology3456

I heard that Stewart Studiotek 1.0 white screen 100 or 130 inches is the best there is. What is the best there is for 110 inches, 112, 115, that range that can be mounted on the ceiling and retracted down? I dont have my chair yet so it's hard to gauge exactly what I need but Im certain it is between 108 and 120, and I was recommended to get 1.0 white. If there is no endgame (new) screen in my budget, then my budget is $100 to $300. If I _can _get an endgame 1.0 white (new) screen that size for say $875 give or take, then that is my budget. Used is another discussion, would be great but not sure how often they come available.


----------



## Craig Peer

A photo of the new manual masking panels for 2.40:1 fixed Wallscreen Deluxe screens !


----------



## Craig Peer

Technology3456 said:


> I heard that Stewart Studiotek 1.0 white screen 100 or 130 inches is the best there is. What is the best there is for 110 inches, 112, 115, that range that can be mounted on the ceiling and retracted down? I dont have my chair yet so it's hard to gauge exactly what I need but Im certain it is between 108 and 120, and I was recommended to get 1.0 white. If there is no endgame (new) screen in my budget, then my budget is $100 to $300. If I _can _get an endgame 1.0 white (new) screen that size for say $875 give or take, then that is my budget. Used is another discussion, would be great but not sure how often they come available.


I prefer the StudioTek 130 G4, but the 100 has it's fans too. As far as retractable electric screens go, you'll need more than $ 875.00. Shipping alone on an electric screen can be $ 300.00.


----------



## jaapaap79

jaapaap79 said:


> We're trying to build a home cinema space in our basement and I'm not sure where to find the information I'm looking for.
> 
> The wall on which we'll project has a height of 84" and a width of 123", there is a light switch on this wall and the width until the light switch would be 117". I'd like to follow the recommended screen height of 1/3 being at eye-height which would be approximately 46" high. This gives a maximum screen height of 58.5" assuming no borders and that it can start at the top of the wall, limiting the width on a 16:9 screen to 104" and a 2.4 screen to 123".
> 
> I would like to maximize the possible screen size given this wall dimensions. To do this I would like to have an acoustically transparent screen and have in-wall speakers. These speakers have a height of 49.25". And of course I would like the screen to cover the speakers fully.
> 
> The options that I'm considering so far are:
> 
> Get an electric screen that can cover most of the width of the wall using a 2.4:1 ratio like a Stewart Cabaret 48x115.5. What I'm wondering for this screen is what the highest possible starting point would be for the visible screen if the screen gets wall mounted at 85" so including the enclosure. So far I've found an option with a screen drop of 6", which would be ideal, but I don't think this included the enclosure.
> 
> Get a fixed screen with a visible height of more than 50", ideally with a thin or no border, so like a Stewart Balon 54x96 or perhaps if borderless even 58.75x104.5. What wasn't so clear to me is how the screen would be wall mounted. Would I be able to cover the 49.25" of the in-wall speakers (should I take off the grill?) because it looks like the screen is narrower at the back and I'm not sure what the frame dimensions are.
> 
> Does anyone have experience in this area and could advise me on above? Am I missing any other options?


Spoke to someone at Stewart. The frame is 4” from the outside of the screen so the total height would be reduced by 8” total. Hence I’ll need a screen that’s at least 58”.


----------



## Technology3456

Craig Peer said:


> I prefer the StudioTek 130 G4, but the 100 has it's fans too. As far as retractable electric screens go, you'll need more than $ 875.00. Shipping alone on an electric screen can be $ 300.00.


Do I need it to be electric? I would be happy with any retractable so long as it was still straight once you pulled it down, and had top picture quality. I have no issues pulling it down with my hands as opposed to remote control, if it saves money on cost.


----------



## Technology3456

Does stewart make a studiotek in 110 inch to 115 inch size that is retractable from the ceiling?

And do they work for both 2d and 3d?


----------



## ERuiz

@Don Stewart ; Hey my friend, I sent you a PM. Thanks!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Craig Peer

Technology3456 said:


> Do I need it to be electric? I would be happy with any retractable so long as it was still straight once you pulled it down, and had top picture quality. I have no issues pulling it down with my hands as opposed to remote control, if it saves money on cost.


Manual pull down screens don’t usually have tab tensioning or the best screen fabric. Think “ grade school overhead projector “ type screens when it comes to manual pull down screens.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mels330

Hello guys I was able to get hold a of used Stewart StudioTech 130 G3 liked new @ 20% price. Those with same setup, what wall colors do you have? I have only painted the wall where the screen is dark, and the rest including the ceiling brown/beige. I notice the projected image is a bit bright compared to my cheap Silver Screen STR Series 6 screen. Appreciate any tips you guys can provide. TIA.


----------



## Craig Peer

mels330 said:


> Hello guys I was able to get hold a of used Stewart StudioTech 130 G3 liked new @ 20% price. Those with same setup, what wall colors do you have? I have only painted the wall where the screen is dark, and the rest including the ceiling brown/beige. I notice the projected image is a bit bright compared to my cheap Silver Screen STR Series 6 screen. Appreciate any tips you guys can provide. TIA.


This is what I did - it's all about cutting room reflections -


----------



## Craig Peer

Don't forget to darken the floor.


----------



## Technology3456

It looks like I can't fit more than 100 inches after all, which is good news to have a chance at a Stewart screen. However bad news, I need it to be 3D capable, I _think _passive 3D with linear polarization, not circular.

And motorized tensioned.

What Stewart screen offers these features all together? And what am I looking at price wise? In order to get 3D, I had a discussion in my household, and we agreed to raise the budget significantly if necessary to get a screen like this, but I need to know what Im looking at.


----------



## otismojo

Just pulled the trigger and am ordering a new screen for my room. Have had a Firehawk G3 140” 2.35:1 screen for almost 10 years. Was very happy with it. 

Have since upgraded to a Sony 885 with DCR lens and MadVR Envy Extreme over the last 2-3 years. Have been very happy with the picture. It’s in a dedicated room with good light control. With the laser I can’t help but notice the sparkles now. It doesn’t bother me too much, but you also can’t unsee it either. Was thinking it’s time to upgrade. 

Have been hesitant because it’s a electric drop down screen with motorized masking. Didn’t know it could be upgraded until I recently contacted Stewart. 

Was happy to know they can just upgrade the screen material. It is very expensive, but I guess you have to pay to play. Since I got 10 years from the last one, this one divided by the next 10 years won’t be too bad.

It’s being replaced with the new ST130 G4 screen. I’ve heard nothing but excellent things about it. I had a small 18” piece to see, but honestly it’s too small to really tell much. I hope it is as good as everyone has raved. 

My room has a normal white ceiling, but the screen has a generous top and bottom black border so reflected light won’t hopefully be too bad. The walls are medium grey with darker carpet and the room is pretty light controlled.

I’m assuming the lead time will be a few weeks. Looking forward to that last upgrade for the next decade (except maybe audio ). 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## howiee

Craig Peer said:


> A photo of the new manual masking panels for 2.40:1 fixed Wallscreen Deluxe screens !
> View attachment 3078191


They look spretty smart! Any idea what they're made of?


----------



## Craig Peer

howiee said:


> They look spretty smart! Any idea what they're made of?


I don't know - I'll ask.


----------



## AVfile

otismojo said:


> Was happy to know they can just upgrade the screen material. It is very expensive, but I guess you have to pay to play. Since I got 10 years from the last one, this one divided by the next 10 years won’t be too bad.
> 
> It’s being replaced with the new ST130 G4 screen. I’ve heard nothing but excellent things about it. I had a small 18” piece to see, but honestly it’s too small to really tell much. I hope it is as good as everyone has raved.
> 
> My room has a normal white ceiling, but the screen has a generous top and bottom black border so reflected light won’t hopefully be too bad. The walls are medium grey with darker carpet and the room is pretty light controlled.
> 
> I’m assuming the lead time will be a few weeks.


That’s an excellent way to go. You’ll save a ton on shipping by only buying the material. I just upgraded from ST130 G3 to G4 and it’s stunning. I was upgrading to get a wider screen but the improved picture was a nice surprise.

Sounds like we have similar room colours. While the screen was down I repainted the screen wall darker grey (one shade above black) and it looks really nice. On brighter programs the screen still lights up the room when watching in the dark. If you can keep the projector light output low it helps with the contrast.


----------



## AVfile

Technology3456 said:


> It looks like I can't fit more than 100 inches after all, which is good news to have a chance at a Stewart screen. However bad news, I need it to be 3D capable, I _think _passive 3D with linear polarization, not circular.
> 
> And motorized tensioned.
> 
> What Stewart screen offers these features all together? And what am I looking at price wise? In order to get 3D, I had a discussion in my household, and we agreed to raise the budget significantly if necessary to get a screen like this, but I need to know what Im looking at.


I just sold my 11-year old Wallscreen Deluxe ST130 96” for $1000. I know people sell them for a lot less. 

3D doesn’t add cost (the ST130 does it and probably costs the same at ST100) but motorized obviously adds major cost. 

If you want to learn about pricing I suggest looking at some Home Theater dealer websites that have an online store. I can’t post a link here but if you web search “stewart st130 deluxe screen” there will be a hit on the first page.


----------



## otismojo

AVfile said:


> That’s an excellent way to go. You’ll save a ton on shipping by only buying the material. I just upgraded from ST130 G3 to G4 and it’s stunning. I was upgrading to get a wider screen but the improved picture was a nice surprise.
> 
> Sounds like we have similar room colours. While the screen was down I repainted the screen wall darker grey (one shade above black) and it looks really nice. On brighter programs the screen still lights up the room when watching in the dark. If you can keep the projector light output low it helps with the contrast.


Not that lucky. Need the rollers too. $300 to ship it. Looking forward to losing them sparkles.


----------



## yegor00

Finally getting everything finalized - screen and projector are up!
This month has been a rollercoaster of sorts trying to get all components delivered in time for install. Huge thank you to Don Stewart for all his help with my new 165" ST130 G4 - a perfect choice for Barco Bragi. 
This is my 4th Stewart screen in last 15 years.


----------



## Technology3456

AVfile said:


> I just sold my 11-year old Wallscreen Deluxe ST130 96” for $1000. I know people sell them for a lot less.
> 
> 3D doesn’t add cost (the ST130 does it and probably costs the same at ST100) but motorized obviously adds major cost.
> 
> If you want to learn about pricing I suggest looking at some Home Theater dealer websites that have an online store. I can’t post a link here but if you web search “stewart st130 deluxe screen” there will be a hit on the first page.


Please PM me. Ive found a bunch of stewart sellers online, none list costs they want you to contact a dealer.


----------



## luckytwn

Deleted.


----------



## luckytwn

Craig Peer said:


> A photo of the new manual masking panels for 2.40:1 fixed Wallscreen Deluxe screens !
> View attachment 3078191


Hi, is this something new coming from Stewart or DIY? Thanks.


----------



## taxman2015

luckytwn said:


> Hi, is this something new coming from Stewart or DIY? Thanks.


It's new, but last I looked not on their website, but you can buy it

Mine is supposed to be shipped tomorrow


----------



## luckytwn

taxman2015 said:


> It's new, but last I looked not on their website, but you can buy it
> 
> Mine is supposed to be shipped tomorrow


Thanks. Is the masking only for a 2.35 or it’s also available to mask 16X9 to 2.35:1?


----------



## BrolicBeast

luckytwn said:


> Thanks. Is the masking only for a 2.35 or it’s also available to mask 16X9 to 2.35:1?


A quick heads up--the panels are not Acoustically Transparent. Depending on your setup, this could be a deal breaker. It was for me... cancelled my order a few weeks ago. I'm pretty sure it's only to mask scope screens down to 16:9.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Craig Peer

luckytwn said:


> Thanks. Is the masking only for a 2.35 or it’s also available to mask 16X9 to 2.35:1?


Only scope screens to 16:9.


----------



## luckytwn

BrolicBeast said:


> A quick heads up--the panels are not Acoustically Transparent. Depending on your setup, this could be a deal breaker. It was for me... cancelled my order a few weeks ago. I'm pretty sure it's only to mask scope screens down to 16:9.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


Thanks for the info. That shouldn’t impact the center channel if you get an AT transparent material, right? I can put the front speakers to the sides of the screen.


----------



## BrolicBeast

luckytwn said:


> Thanks for the info. That shouldn’t impact the center channel if you get an AT transparent material, right? I can put the front speakers to the sides of the screen.


Yup! You're good there.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## tapotti

Hi all,

I'm looking at setting up a theater in my family room.

I'm currently looking at a Samsung LSP9T or LG HU85LA with a Stewart Graymatte 70 120" screen with microperforations. The projector would be ceiling mounted. Anyone have a similar setup?

Is there any page on Stewart's website regarding setup guidelines? My seating will be about 10-11' from the screen. My left, front, and right speakers (Totem Tribe Vs) will be located behind the screen. 

One concern I have is distance of speaker from the screen. I doubt my center channel will be >12" from the screen. It will be probably around 8-10". In addition, the left and right speakers will be located near the periphery of the screen. Will the borders of the screen impact sound significantly? I imagine the interface could pose a minor problem, but whether it's audible is debatable I suppose. I would be using Anthem ARC, so maybe that will help some. Anyone have a similar speaker layout? 

I'm just trying to figure out how strict these guidelines are. If anyone has any advice, it would be much appreciated!


----------



## fredworld

tapotti said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I'm looking at setting up a theater in my family room.
> 
> I'm currently looking at a Samsung LSP9T or LG HU85LA with a Stewart Graymatte 70 120" screen with microperforations. The projector would be ceiling mounted. Anyone have a similar setup?
> 
> Is there any page on Stewart's website regarding setup guidelines? My seating will be about 10-11' from the screen. My left, front, and right speakers (Totem Tribe Vs) will be located behind the screen.
> 
> One concern I have is distance of speaker from the screen. I doubt my center channel will be >12" from the screen. It will be probably around 8-10". In addition, the left and right speakers will be located near the periphery of the screen. Will the borders of the screen impact sound significantly? I imagine the interface could pose a minor problem, but whether it's audible is debatable I suppose. I would be using Anthem ARC, so maybe that will help some. Anyone have a similar speaker layout?
> 
> I'm just trying to figure out how strict these guidelines are. If anyone has any advice, it would be much appreciated!


Sorry, I have nothing to offer except that you might, also, want to consider checking out the forums that address your specific concerns that don't involve Stewart Filmscsreen. Like the Dedicated Theater Design & Construction | AVS Forum


----------



## survivor

I received my Stewart Balon Edge UST screen early this month. The overall screen quality is good. The shipment packaging is very good with the screen material in thick tube and a lot of protective bubble wraps in the shipping box. Having said that, the powder coated paint on the screen mounting piece already came off when I opened up the package. Since the shipment packaging is good thus I don't believe it was damaged during delivery. It sits behind the screen and not visible so I'm ok with it but I expect better QC from Stewart on such an expansive screen. Assembly process is ok, but the edge trim pieces are a pain to put on.


----------



## deadwynter

Just ordered a Wallscreen with a 160" 2.35:1 StudioTek 130 G4 screen! Looking forward to finishing my theater and getting this bad boy installed. Any suggestions for a DIY masking solution? It would need to be acoustically transparent. I think I'm going to maybe make two lightly framed panels, wrapped in black spandex or something. Any better ideas?


----------



## JeffKB

deadwynter said:


> Any suggestions for a DIY masking solution? It would need to be acoustically transparent. I think I'm going to maybe make two lightly framed panels, wrapped in black spandex or something. Any better ideas?


I would look into using black speaker grille cloth for the material. It’s widely available and is acoustically transparent as you would expect. May not be the best at absorbing light but if you’re zooming for CIH than you won’t need to worry about absorbing projected black pillar bars, you just need to cover the white screen material. If you’re using a fixed anamorphic lens I would think it’s probably still fine for absorbing projected black but you’d probably want to test.


----------



## deadwynter

JeffKB said:


> I would look into using black speaker grille cloth for the material. It’s widely available and is acoustically transparent as you would expect. May not be the best at absorbing light but if you’re zooming for CIH than you won’t need to worry about absorbing projected black pillar bars, you just need to cover the white screen material. If you’re using a fixed anamorphic lens I would think it’s probably still fine for absorbing projected black but you’d probably want to test.


Oh really? I didn't know that! I thought you had to make the black bars darker (This is my first projector). Thanks for the tip! I'll check out the speaker grill cloth! That's a good idea.


----------



## Craig Peer

tapotti said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I'm looking at setting up a theater in my family room.
> 
> I'm currently looking at a Samsung LSP9T or LG HU85LA with a Stewart Graymatte 70 120" screen with microperforations. The projector would be ceiling mounted. Anyone have a similar setup?
> 
> Is there any page on Stewart's website regarding setup guidelines? *My seating will be about 10-11' from the screen.* My left, front, and right speakers (Totem Tribe Vs) will be located behind the screen.
> 
> One concern I have is distance of speaker from the screen. I doubt my center channel will be >12" from the screen. It will be probably around 8-10". In addition, the left and right speakers will be located near the periphery of the screen. Will the borders of the screen impact sound significantly? I imagine the interface could pose a minor problem, but whether it's audible is debatable I suppose. I would be using Anthem ARC, so maybe that will help some. Anyone have a similar speaker layout?
> 
> I'm just trying to figure out how strict these guidelines are. If anyone has any advice, it would be much appreciated!


I believe that 12' viewing distance is recommended for Microperf, so as to not see the perforations.


----------



## GeorgeHolland

I've had my Stewart Luxus Delux Projection Screen, Studiotek130G3 Screen Material for awhile and a small spot just a few inches from L/R center and about 1/3rd of the way up from the bottom has always annoyed me. It is a small blob, maybe 1/16th of an inch. It looks like a glue type material, possibly some of the sparkle material that blobbed up while spraying the screen? It almost looks like the sparkle material is also sprayed over it.

Any idea what it could be and what to do about it? I'm afraid to scrape it off thinking it may do more damage than good. I've attached a couple cropped macro shots.


----------



## Technology3456

GeorgeHolland said:


> I've had my Stewart Luxus Delux Projection Screen, Studiotek130G3 Screen Material for awhile and a small spot just a few inches from L/R center and about 1/3rd of the way up from the bottom has always annoyed me. It is a small blob, maybe 1/16th of an inch. It looks like a glue type material, possibly some of the sparkle material that blobbed up while spraying the screen? It almost looks like the sparkle material is also sprayed over it.
> 
> Any idea what it could be and what to do about it? I'm afraid to scrape it off thinking it may do more damage than good. I've attached a couple cropped macro shots.
> 
> View attachment 3084213
> View attachment 3084214


That seems like something Stewart should be replacing or custom fixing. I mean if anyone in this thread knows a way to DIY fix it to where you're happy with it, then that's best for everyone, but if not, you are entitled, paying a premium for a screen of that quality, to not have a frickin blob of tartar sauce in the middle of your screen (or at any part of your screen). And I don't think any reasonable Stewart rep, or any screen company rep, could disagree with that. 

If you got it used though, not sure how that would work...


----------



## GeorgeHolland

Technology3456 said:


> That seems like something Stewart should be replacing or custom fixing. I mean if anyone in this thread knows a way to DIY fix it to where you're happy with it, then that's best for everyone, but if not, you are entitled, paying a premium for a screen of that quality, to not have a frickin blob of tartar sauce in the middle of your screen (or at any part of your screen). And I don't think any reasonable Stewart rep, or any screen company rep, could disagree with that.
> 
> If you got it used though, not sure how that would work...


I purchased it new but it was many years ago. I don't expect Stewart to do anything after all this time. They have always been good to me, this is my 2nd 130, and my bad for not getting it addressed while under warranty. I forget it is there over the years until I watch something with a lot of white, (can't say I even notice it then while watching a movie), get close to the screen, tweak focus or calibration, etc. I just want to fix it as I'm considering my 3rd Stewart Screen, upgrading to 130G4, and the blob hurts resale.


----------



## AVfile

GeorgeHolland said:


> It is a small blob, maybe 1/16th of an inch. It looks like a glue type material, possibly some of the sparkle material that blobbed up while spraying the screen? It almost looks like the sparkle material is also sprayed over it.


Spider or other insect dropping?

What’s more strange is the amber tint to the speckles all over the screen. My 11-year old screen had nothing like that. Is there a lot of tobacco or fireplace smoke in your house?


----------



## GeorgeHolland

AVfile said:


> Spider or other insect dropping?
> 
> What’s more strange is the amber tint to the speckles all over the screen. My 11-year old screen had nothing like that. Is there a lot of tobacco or fireplace smoke in your house?


No, just adding contrast and light to show the blob. Not easy to take a macro picture of a small section of white screen or to focus on a tiny blob. Plus I am always surprised at how different things look in higher magnification macro photos. I wouldn't assume the colors or color balance are accurate. I've tried to scratch it off with my fingernail but I don't want to put too much pressure on it unless I know I won't do more damage.


----------



## fredworld

Call or write to *Stewart* for advice. I'm sure they'll offer suggestions.


----------



## GeorgeHolland

fredworld said:


> Call or write to *Stewart* for advice. I'm sure they'll offer suggestions.


I did earlier but haven't heard back yet. I'm sure I will soon. Thanks.


----------



## Don Stewart

GeorgeHolland said:


> I've had my Stewart Luxus Delux Projection Screen, Studiotek130G3 Screen Material for awhile and a small spot just a few inches from L/R center and about 1/3rd of the way up from the bottom has always annoyed me. It is a small blob, maybe 1/16th of an inch. It looks like a glue type material, possibly some of the sparkle material that blobbed up while spraying the screen? It almost looks like the sparkle material is also sprayed over it.
> 
> Any idea what it could be and what to do about it? I'm afraid to scrape it off thinking it may do more damage than good. I've attached a couple cropped macro shots.
> 
> View attachment 3084213
> View attachment 3084214


Hi George. Has this been there from day one??? (Please note that in our screen chemical formulations, we use no dark brown materials like shown in photo). If not, one of the inquiries we frequently receive is how to remove insect poop off the screen surface.To my eye, it looks like fly or moth poop. If you believe this could possibility be from that, then I would recommend trying this remedy. The best way to remove is with high tack masking tape. Form a round loop of masking tape with the sticky side out. Push masking tape against the affected area. Then pull masking tape directly up and away from affected area. Repeat as needed. Also, as helpful hint, sometimes it requires a second person hold a flat object such as a book behind the the affected area. This then allows you to put more pressure on the surface when applying the sticky side of the tape. Please give this method a try. Edit: Do not substitute duct tape for masking tape as it can leave a gummy residue on screen surface.
Best regards,
Don


----------



## Craig Peer

GeorgeHolland said:


> I've had my Stewart Luxus Delux Projection Screen, Studiotek130G3 Screen Material for awhile and a small spot just a few inches from L/R center and about 1/3rd of the way up from the bottom has always annoyed me. It is a small blob, maybe 1/16th of an inch. It looks like a glue type material, possibly some of the sparkle material that blobbed up while spraying the screen? It almost looks like the sparkle material is also sprayed over it.
> 
> Any idea what it could be and what to do about it? I'm afraid to scrape it off thinking it may do more damage than good. I've attached a couple cropped macro shots.
> 
> View attachment 3084213
> View attachment 3084214


If you see something like this when you first get your screen ( and you should always check out ALL new A / V equipment immediately when you receive it ), deal with any problems flaws right in the beginning, when it's under warranty.


----------



## GeorgeHolland

Don Stewart said:


> Hi George. Has this been there from day one??? (Please note that in our screen chemical formulations, we use no dark brown materials like shown in photo). If not, one of the inquiries we frequently receive is how to remove insect poop off the screen surface.To my eye, it looks like fly or moth poop. If you believe this could possibility be from that, then I would recommend trying this remedy. The best way to remove is with high tack masking tape. Form a round loop of masking tape with the sticky side out. Push masking tape against the affected area. Then pull masking tape directly up and away from affected area. Repeat as needed. Also, as helpful hint, sometimes it requires a second person hold a flat object such as a book behind the the affected area. This then allows you to put more pressure on the surface when applying the sticky side of the tape. Please give this method a try. Edit: Do not substitute duct tape for masking tape as it can leave a gummy residue on screen surface.
> Best regards,
> Don


Hi Don, I don't want to derail this thread so sent you a PM. I'm also emailing with one of your Engineers' who has been great. Thanks.


----------



## GeorgeHolland

Craig Peer said:


> If you see something like this when you first get your screen ( and you should always check out ALL new A / V equipment immediately when you receive it ), deal with any problems flaws right in the beginning, when it's under warranty.


Thank you Captain Obvious 😊. This is a very small blob, about the size you would make if dotting an I with a medium point sharpie. I never noticed it until I had it calibrated the first time and we spent a lot of time right up at the screen. I never notice it when watching content.

It could be a bug dropping as Don suggests and I’ll work with Stewart for suggestions and after all this time, am certainly not asking for warrantee, just advice, and Stewart is being great as always.


----------



## Craig Peer

GeorgeHolland said:


> Thank you Captain Obvious 😊. This is a very small blob, about the size you would make if dotting an I with a medium point sharpie. I never noticed it until I had it calibrated the first time and we spent a lot of time right up at the screen. I never notice it when watching content.
> 
> It could be a bug dropping as Don suggests and I’ll work with Stewart for suggestions and after all this time, am certainly not asking for warrantee, just advice, and Stewart is being great as always.


I'd try a Q Tip and distilled water to start. Sometimes I worry that the cure could wind up being worse that the aliment though.


----------



## bdy

I've got 3 Revel in wall speakers behind an AT Studiotek 130 G3. The speakers are about 3 inches behind the screen. The wall behind the screen is untreated painted drywall, which is essentially what the in-wall Revels are designed for. I''m trying to figure out how much high frequency dampening is happening from the screen. From what I've read, it is best to give the speakers more breathing room behind the screen, ideally 8-12 inches. However, most of what I have read is from quite a few years ago, so older screen products. What should I be expecting for high frequency dampening of the G3 AT material on speakers just a few inches behind it? My dealer is saying virtually none but they don't measure for it. What I've read online suggests it's on the order of 2-5 db once you get above 5-7 KHz. I'm looking into this to see if I should add a high frequency curve into the EQ to mitigate the dampening. Next step is to measure the speakers with and without the screen in place, but before I go to that trouble I'm trying to learn what to expect and see if it's even worth the trouble.


----------



## Don Stewart

bdy said:


> I've got 3 Revel in wall speakers behind an AT Studiotek 130 G3. The speakers are about 3 inches behind the screen. The wall behind the screen is untreated painted drywall, which is essentially what the in-wall Revels are designed for. I''m trying to figure out how much high frequency dampening is happening from the screen. From what I've read, it is best to give the speakers more breathing room behind the screen, ideally 8-12 inches. However, most of what I have read is from quite a few years ago, so older screen products. What should I be expecting for high frequency dampening of the G3 AT material on speakers just a few inches behind it? My dealer is saying virtually none but they don't measure for it. What I've read online suggests it's on the order of 2-5 db once you get above 5-7 KHz. I'm looking into this to see if I should add a high frequency curve into the EQ to mitigate the dampening. Next step is to measure the speakers with and without the screen in place, but before I go to that trouble I'm trying to learn what to expect and see if it's even worth the trouble.


Here is the SP graph, Speaker, 3" away with no EQ added. Measurement was done at Lucas Film's Skywalker Sound, for THX division.


----------



## SteveS78

I have a Stewart Screen on order and it is due to ship within the next two weeks. Does anyone know how Stewart ships the screens from their facility? Do they go by UPS/FedEx? Do they ship on a pallet or just the box? Do they usually ship with a required signature or will they leave on the porch?

Personally, I am done dealing with pallets. We had two large deliveries here since last year. Both were on pallets. One was a giant pallet. It was a real pain because then we had to discard it ourself and the regulartrash pickup will not take separate palletsor anythingnot in the can. Also, I would prefer a contactless delivery too with the pandemic. I had something deliver a few months ago where the shipper designated it as a shipment with a required signature. When it delivered, the FedEX guy rang the doorbell and was standing there to hand me the box and get my signature without a mask on. When I snapped at him and told him to put on a mask, he finally did. Would just prefer a contactless delivery. 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## fredworld

SteveS78 said:


> I have a Stewart Screen on order and it is due to ship within the next two weeks. Does anyone know how Stewart ships the screens from their facility? Do they go by UPS/FedEx? Do they ship on a pallet or just the box? Do they usually ship with a required signature or will they leave on the porch?
> 
> Personally, I am done dealing with pallets. We had two large deliveries here since last year. Both were on pallets. One was a giant pallet. It was a real pain because then we had to discard it ourself and the regulartrash pickup will not take separate palletsor anythingnot in the can. Also, I would prefer a contactless delivery too with the pandemic. I had something deliver a few months ago where the shipper designated it as a shipment with a required signature. When it delivered, the FedEX guy rang the doorbell and was standing there to hand me the box and get my signature without a mask on. When I snapped at him and told him to put on a mask, he finally did. Would just prefer a contactless delivery.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


*Call or email Stewart Filmscreen* with your questions and concerns. I ordered mine through my local A/V retailer and then picked it up at the store 2-3 weeks later. AFAIK, UPS won't ship anything over something like 104" in length.


----------



## Don Stewart

SteveS78 said:


> I have a Stewart Screen on order and it is due to ship within the next two weeks. Does anyone know how Stewart ships the screens from their facility? Do they go by UPS/FedEx? Do they ship on a pallet or just the box? Do they usually ship with a required signature or will they leave on the porch?
> 
> Personally, I am done dealing with pallets. We had two large deliveries here since last year. Both were on pallets. One was a giant pallet. It was a real pain because then we had to discard it ourself and the regulartrash pickup will not take separate palletsor anythingnot in the can. Also, I would prefer a contactless delivery too with the pandemic. I had something deliver a few months ago where the shipper designated it as a shipment with a required signature. When it delivered, the FedEX guy rang the doorbell and was standing there to hand me the box and get my signature without a mask on. When I snapped at him and told him to put on a mask, he finally did. Would just prefer a contactless delivery.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Thank you Steve for ordering a Stewart Filmscreen. I am not sure which product you ordered, but most of our products are too large and/or long for UPS and Fed-X, so they are shipped by comon carrier truck. For home theater size retractable electric screens and most fixed frame screens, they are shipped in a thick cardboard box with no pallet. If you have special shipping needs, it is best to call your dealer so they can make arrangements with our shipping department. Hope that helps.
Best Regards,
Don


----------



## SteveS78

Don Stewart said:


> Thank you Steve for ordering a Stewart Filmscreen. I am not sure which product you ordered, but most of our products are too large and/or long for UPS and Fed-X, so they are shipped by comon carrier truck. For home theater size retractable electric screens and most fixed frame screens, they are shipped in a thick cardboard box with no pallet. If you have special shipping needs, it is best to call your dealer so they can make arrangements with our shipping department. Hope that helps.
> Best Regards,
> Don


Thanks for the info Don. I was in an industry that does tons of shipping for about 15 years up until early 2019. So I am very familiar with it generally. I would assume when you say common carrier truck, you mean a standard LTL carrier like R&L, ABF, YRC or Conway? I am not 100% familiar with each specific carrier's policy, but I thought I was pretty sure that most LTL carriers will not deal with a freight shipment that is not on a pallet? In fact, I believe the only type of shipment that can typically go without a pallet are small parcel shipments like UPS and FedEX? It's been a little while for me, so my head is thankfully (haha) no longer in that world, but this is what I seem to recall.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## jazzrock

SteveS78 said:


> Thanks for the info Don. I was in an industry that does tons of shipping for about 15 years up until early 2019. So I am very familiar with it generally. I would assume when you say common carrier truck, you mean a standard LTL carrier like R&L, ABF, YRC or Conway? I am not 100% familiar with each specific carrier's policy, but I thought I was pretty sure that most LTL carriers will not deal with a freight shipment that is not on a pallet? In fact, I believe the only type of shipment that can typically go without a pallet are small parcel shipments like UPS and FedEX? It's been a little while for me, so my head is thankfully (haha) no longer in that world, but this is what I seem to recall.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


Don is, of course, correct. Received mine a few months ago delivered by courier NOT UPS or FedX and NOT on a pallet.


----------



## SteveS78

jazzrock said:


> Don is, of course, correct. Received mine a few months ago delivered by courier NOT UPS or FedX and NOT on a pallet.


Thanks.

Did they do a contactless delivery? Or did you have to sign for it?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## jazzrock

SteveS78 said:


> Thanks.
> 
> Did they do a contactless delivery? Or did you have to sign for it?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


I’m certain that whoever you are buying it from can/will arrange for contactless delivery.


----------



## Technology3456

Do they make studiotek in retractable 110 inches?


----------



## Craig Peer

Technology3456 said:


> Do they make studiotek in retractable 110 inches?


Yes. Pretty much any size you need. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## [email protected]

What's the difference between the Cascade and Visionary above ceiling screens? I have no need for masking.


----------



## BrolicBeast

Just installed my new 160" wide Studiotek 130 G4 and wow--the screen material is amazing. I'm getting zero sparklies (compared to two sparklies on the G3 I owned 9 years ago) and the image is absolutely amazing in every way conceivable!!! Also, the brightness!!! No gain artifacts whatsoever from my seating distance (14ft front row, 21ft rear row).


----------



## Don Stewart

BrolicBeast said:


> Just installed my new 160" wide Studiotek 130 G4 and wow--the screen material is amazing. I'm getting zero sparklies (compared to two sparklies on the G3 I owned 9 years ago) and the image is absolutely amazing in every way conceivable!!! Also, the brightness!!! No gain artifacts whatsoever from my seating distance (14ft front row, 21ft rear row).
> 
> View attachment 3093269
> View attachment 3093266


Nice Theater! Thank you for purchasing the ST 130 G4. Wishing you many years of enjoyment with you new screen.
EDIT: Also, I sent you a PM.


----------



## ERuiz

I know the minimum throw distance for a ST130 G4 is 1.3 x screen width.

My seating is at 12 feet, which would make the throw distance about 1.25 screen width (115" wide screen).

Is that ok? No need to sweat the fact that it's .5 too close than the minimum throw distance?

Or should I just move my seating 6" back so the throw distance is at exactly 1.3 x screen width? 

EDIT: Jesus nevermind... I just realized I was confusing throw distance with seating distance. Brain fart. 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Technology3456

Question: I see people talking about "moire" and stuff from acoustically transparent screens. My question is, does such a screen exist, by any company even the best ones like Stewart, that does not sacrifice _any _picture quality to be acoustically transparent compared to the exact same material of screen without the acoustic transparency?

Like a studiotek 1.0 gain screen that is not acoustically transparent compared to the same model studiotek 1.0 gain screen that _is _acoustically transparent. Is it always going to be at least a little trade off, even with brands like Stewart, between better audio quality and hiding the speakers, and better visual quality, or did they manage to make it transparent without changing the picture at all?


----------



## Craig Peer

Technology3456 said:


> Question: I see people talking about "moire" and stuff from acoustically transparent screens. My question is, does such a screen exist, by any company even the best ones like Stewart, that does not sacrifice _any _picture quality to be acoustically transparent compared to the exact same material of screen without the acoustic transparency?
> 
> Like a studiotek 1.0 gain screen that is not acoustically transparent compared to the same model studiotek 1.0 gain screen that _is _acoustically transparent. Is it always going to be at least a little trade off, even with brands like Stewart, between better audio quality and hiding the speakers, and better visual quality, or did they manage to make it transparent without changing the picture at all?


Microperf requires a 12' seating distance, and you lose 10% brightness, so yes, there is some compromise. There is with anything in home theater.


----------



## Don Stewart

Since being a kid, I have always been an aviation buff, aerospace nerd and to add to that both my wife and I are very active fixed wing pilots. That said, NASA and JPL have always been a hugh customer for Stewart Filmscreen. So congats to NASA for the successful landing of the Mars latest rover, Perseverance! I am always thrilled to see so many Stewart Filmscreen's being employed during these landings at NASA's JPL, (Jet Propulsion Laboratories) in Pasadena, CA. Photos show RP screens in JPL Mission Control and GrayHawk retractable FP screens in an auxiliary control room.


----------



## millerquad4

Just ordered my 16.9 120” 130 G4 WallScreen Deluxe! I’ve waited years for this. Looking forward to getting this in time for ChadB to calibrate my 6050.


----------



## Technology3456

Can anyone tell me their opinions how the Studiotek G4 1.3 gain compares to the Studiotek 1.0 gain? 

Is it just 30% brighter, and everything else is 100% the same, or is it 30% brighter but with other pros and weaknesses compared to the 1.0?


----------



## Sammie2980

@Don Stewart I have a quick question regarding the Luxus G2. Is the only way to adjust the screen deployment when the IMC-T is equipped by going in and using the White limit switch? Is it also possible to utilize the remote with the unit to make this adjustment?


----------



## Don Stewart

Sammie2980 said:


> @Don Stewart I have a quick question regarding the Luxus G2. Is the only way to adjust the screen deployment when the IMC-T is equipped by going in and using the White limit switch? Is it also possible to utilize the remote with the unit to make this adjustment?


Hi Sammie,
In order to adjust screen deployment when the IMC is equipped, you MUST adjust the white limit switch (refer to pages 22 & 23 in the owner’s manual)
Link to PDF file owners manual. https://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/Files/files/Support Material/OwnersManuals/Luxus.pdf

Hope that helps.
Best Regards,
Don


----------



## Don Stewart

Technology3456 said:


> Can anyone tell me their opinions how the Studiotek G4 1.3 gain compares to the Studiotek 1.0 gain?
> 
> Is it just 30% brighter, and everything else is 100% the same, or is it 30% brighter but with other pros and weaknesses compared to the 1.0?


Here is a link to a very comprehensive review written by the well respected Kris Deering. (Sound and Vision Magazine) Kriss has experience with both StudioTek 100 and now StudioTek 130 G4.








Stewart Filmscreen StudioTek 130 G4 Projection Screen Review


Performance Setup Value PRICE $1,484 (material only, as tested) AT A GLANCE Plus




www.soundandvision.com


----------



## Sammie2980

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Sammie,
> In order to adjust screen deployment when the IMC is equipped, you MUST adjust the white limit switch (refer to pages 22 & 23 in the owner’s manual)
> Link to PDF file owners manual. https://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/Files/files/Support Material/OwnersManuals/Luxus.pdf
> 
> Hope that helps.
> Best Regards,
> Don


Thanks @Don Stewart I assumed that was the case just figured I would ask. Thanks!


----------



## brookins

I currently have a FireHawk 120" screen. Not sure what generation, but purchased and installed six years ago. Throw distance is 16 feet.

My room has no windows and is mostly light controlled, though the wife and kids often leave a hall light on so they can walk around with some illumination. It isn't a full batcave, walls are not black. (A mid-taupe color, so not white either).

I've never really liked the sparkles on the FireHawk, but I tolerated it. However, I recently moved into the world of 4K with a new Sony VW-295ES. That brightened up my screen enough that the sparkles are now bothering me enough to be looking at a new screen. I like a bright image, and want my whites to be white. I currently run the Sony just a couple of notches less than full brightness.

I recently looked at a Screen Innovations Slate 1.2, which seemed very close to the FireHawk I am looking to swap out.

Is the GreyHawk a possible option for me? It still has some ALR for when the wife leaves the hall light on, but less than the FireHawk. I'm making the assumption that less ALR == less sparkles? I'm concerned about going all the way to a white screen with no ALR given the partial lighting.


----------



## Don Stewart

brookins said:


> I currently have a FireHawk 120" screen. Not sure what generation, but purchased and installed six years ago. Throw distance is 16 feet.
> 
> My room has no windows and is mostly light controlled, though the wife and kids often leave a hall light on so they can walk around with some illumination. It isn't a full batcave, walls are not black. (A mid-taupe color, so not white either).
> 
> I've never really liked the sparkles on the FireHawk, but I tolerated it. However, I recently moved into the world of 4K with a new Sony VW-295ES. That brightened up my screen enough that the sparkles are now bothering me enough to be looking at a new screen. I like a bright image, and want my whites to be white. I currently run the Sony just a couple of notches less than full brightness.
> 
> I recently looked at a Screen Innovations Slate 1.2, which seemed very close to the FireHawk I am looking to swap out.
> 
> Is the GreyHawk a possible option for me? It still has some ALR for when the wife leaves the hall light on, but less than the FireHawk. I'm making the assumption that less ALR == less sparkles? I'm concerned about going all the way to a white screen with no ALR given the partial lighting.


Before I would consider the Grayhawk, which has less gain and ALR than your existing FireHawk, please be advised perhaps you should consider our recently released FireHawk G5 which has less sparkle than previous generations. Its final top optical coating is the very same coating we use on our newer Studiotek 130 G4 Reference Screens which have received excellent reviews on this forum and other websites. You can contact your dealer to secure samples of the newer FH G5 material and if you wish, a GrayHawk sample too. Also, since you already own an existing Stewart frame, you can just order the screen by itself by recording the screen's serial number. We keep an "as built file "on every screen we ever produced going way back to the 1950's, so it is fairly simple process to assure the replacement screen will exactly match your existing frame.

Hope that helps.

Best Regards,
Don


----------



## brookins

Don Stewart said:


> Before I would consider the Grayhawk, which has less gain and ALR than your existing FireHawk, please be advised perhaps you should consider our recently released FireHawk G5 which has less sparkle than previous generations. Its final top optical coating is the very same coating we use on our newer Studiotek 130 G4 Reference Screens which have received excellent reviews on this forum and other websites. You can contact your dealer to secure samples of the newer FH G5 material and if you wish, a GrayHawk sample too. Also, since you already own an existing Stewart frame, you can just order the screen by itself by recording the screen's serial number. We keep an "as built file "on every screen we ever produced going way back to the 1950's, so it is fairly simple process to assure the replacement screen will exactly match your existing frame.
> 
> Hope that helps.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Don


Thanks! I will try that out.


----------



## brazensol

I am in the market for a new screen to replace my trusty 2.40:1, 135" DIY Spandex screen (which has really done a great job but looking for something brighter). The Studiotek 130 G4 looks fantastic but my primary seating position is approximately 10'-6" so from what I've been reading it looks like that won't work. Or would it? I'm looking for a screen with some gain (1.2 or 1.3) and it needs to be acoustically transparent. My projector is the JVC RS-540 and sits 16' from the screen. My theater is 100% light controlled. What are my options?


----------



## BrolicBeast

Hey all, just posted my Studiotek 130 G4 overview video. It's episode one of an episodic upgrade series covering several new aspects of the home cinema. 

Check it out: 




Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Killroy

BrolicBeast said:


> Hey all, just posted my Studiotek 130 G4 overview video. It's episode one of an episodic upgrade series covering several new aspects of the home cinema.
> 
> Check it out:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


SO JEALOUS!!!! That is the exact same size screen I will get next after I update/upgrade my audio in the next couple of years.


----------



## BrolicBeast

Killroy said:


> SO JEALOUS!!!! That is the exact same size screen I will get next after I update/upgrade my audio in the next couple of years.


Man DOOOO it! The level of immersion at this size is beyond words! The rear row feels like the front row experience, and front row still feels like the front row experience (albeit much more immersive) due to outstanding image sharpness and a great calibration on the Lumagen!

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## JonnyVee

brazensol said:


> I am in the market for a new screen to replace my trusty 2.40:1, 135" DIY Spandex screen (which has really done a great job but looking for something brighter). The Studiotek 130 G4 looks fantastic but my primary seating position is approximately 10'-6" so from what I've been reading it looks like that won't work. Or would it? I'm looking for a screen with some gain (1.2 or 1.3) and it needs to be acoustically transparent. My projector is the JVC RS-540 and sits 16' from the screen. My theater is 100% light controlled. What are my options?


I'm 9' from my 120" 130 G4 and my JVC projector is as close as you can go to achieve 120". No sparkles and nice and bright.


----------



## brazensol

JonnyVee said:


> I'm 9' from my 120" 130 G4 and my JVC projector is as close as you can go to achieve 120". No sparkles and nice and bright.


Can you see any texture in the screen while watching movies?


----------



## JonnyVee

brazensol said:


> Can you see any texture in the screen while watching movies?


Not at all and here's a shot of my room that shows how close I am. Lights are fully on, so the screen is a little washed out.


----------



## AVfile

brazensol said:


> Can you see any texture in the screen while watching movies?


Texture on a G4? Never!

edit: notwithstanding recent “microperf” discussion


----------



## JeffKB

@brazensol: since you mentioned the need for the screen to be acoustically transparent, the real concern is whether you'll be able to see the microperfs from your ~10 feet seating distance. Doesn't look like JonnyVee has an acoustically transparent screen(?). Typical recommendation is around 12' minimum seating I believe but you can get screen samples and check how visible the perfs are from your seating.


----------



## JonnyVee

JeffKB said:


> @brazensol: since you mentioned the need for the screen to be acoustically transparent, the real concern is whether you'll be able to see the microperfs from your ~10 feet seating distance. Doesn't look like JonnyVee has an acoustically transparent screen(?). Typical recommendation is around 12' minimum seating I believe but you can get screen samples and check how visible the perfs are from your seating.


Absolutely correct. I do not have a transparent screen.


----------



## otismojo

Can’t wait my ST130 G4 gets installed on Monday! Coming from a Firehawk G3 can’t wait to see the improvement. Scope 2.35:1 screen 130” wide. Sony 885 with DCR and MadVR Envy.

Jealous I’d love a 160” wide screen! Those extra 30” would be epic.


----------



## Phytonic13

Haven't followed this thread. Curious if anyone has created a solution for masking on a studiotek 100 16x9.


----------



## brazensol

JeffKB said:


> @brazensol: since you mentioned the need for the screen to be acoustically transparent, the real concern is whether you'll be able to see the microperfs from your ~10 feet seating distance. Doesn't look like JonnyVee has an acoustically transparent screen(?). Typical recommendation is around 12' minimum seating I believe but you can get screen samples and check how visible the perfs are from your seating.


Good catch. That's a bummer. I'll have to get a sample and see how it looks.


----------



## SJHT

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Sammie,
> In order to adjust screen deployment when the IMC is equipped, you MUST adjust the white limit switch (refer to pages 22 & 23 in the owner’s manual)
> Link to PDF file owners manual. https://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/Files/files/Support Material/OwnersManuals/Luxus.pdf
> 
> Hope that helps.
> Best Regards,
> Don


An owner of what looks to be a previous Luxus model, really like what you have done for mounting. Looks so much more secure/safe. SJ


----------



## merch19

Not sure if anyone can help me with this, but I just ordered a Wallscreen Deluxe which I will be importing into Canada. In speaking with a small-time customs broker, they confirmed their truck is only about 9' from back to front. If it won't fit, I'll have to have a trucking company bring it across the border. Can anyone tell me the dimensions of the packaging for a 120" 16:9 Wallscreen Deluxe? Also would be looking to confirm the weight. The company I purchased it from does not have the dimensions as the screens are direct-shipped to the purchaser.

From some online videos I have seen, it appears the box isn't much longer than the top/bottom frame pieces, which would be about 9'3". Depending on the girth of the box, it can likely be placed diagonally and fit in there. Worst-case for the truck is that it also has to be elevated in one corner (back bottom corner to opposite top-front corner). The literature for the screens says they should be stored flat on their side, but is there any real risk in having it propped up for transport? About 30 minutes in total... Any info would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## fredworld

merch19 said:


> Not sure if anyone can help me with this, but I just ordered a Wallscreen Deluxe which I will be importing into Canada. In speaking with a small-time customs broker, they confirmed their truck is only about 9' from back to front. If it won't fit, I'll have to have a trucking company bring it across the border. Can anyone tell me the dimensions of the packaging for a 120" 16:9 Wallscreen Deluxe? Also would be looking to confirm the weight. The company I purchased it from does not have the dimensions as the screens are direct-shipped to the purchaser.
> 
> From some online videos I have seen, it appears the box isn't much longer than the top/bottom frame pieces, which would be about 9'3". Depending on the girth of the box, it can likely be placed diagonally and fit in there. Worst-case for the truck is that it also has to be elevated in one corner (back bottom corner to opposite top-front corner). The literature for the screens says they should be stored flat on their side, but is there any real risk in having it propped up for transport? About 30 minutes in total... Any info would be greatly appreciated.


I just measured the length of the box that Stewart used to ship my 94" wide Studio 100. It's 103". Stewart really over-packs their screens with plenty of bubble wrap, spacers and in extra thick boxes. You're best bet for specifications is to *call or write to Stewart directly*. I had a similar issue because I was picking up my screen from my dealer and I needed to be sure I could transport it in my SUV.


----------



## merch19

fredworld said:


> I just measured the length of the box that Stewart used to ship my 94" wide Studio 100. It's 103". Stewart really over-packs their screens with plenty of bubble wrap, spacers and in extra thick boxes. You're best bet for specifications is to *call or write to Stewart directly*. I had a similar issue because I was picking up my screen from my dealer and I needed to be sure I could transport it in my SUV.


Thanks. I guess it would seem weird to post this question on here but I had emailed Stewart last week and haven't gotten a response. Not sure if the email address I used was an appropriate one for this question, or maybe they're just quite busy. I hadn't considered the webform you linked.


----------



## JonnyVee

merch19 said:


> Thanks. I guess it would seem weird to post this question on here but I had emailed Stewart last week and haven't gotten a response. Not sure if the email address I used was an appropriate one for this question, or maybe they're just quite busy. I hadn't considered the webform you linked.


LOL. Not weird at all. I asked this question last year for almost the same reason!

The carton for my 120" screen was 119" x 11" x 11" and weighed 62lbs.


----------



## Gates

Ordered my first ever Stewart Screen last week (Studiotek 130 G4 135" microperf). I have to put a Funk Audio 24.0 behind it (I know it's a nice sub to hide but...). How far should the sub be behind the screen? Just afraid that if it's too close the screen will be pushed from the air pressure. Right now with the plans it would be about 6 inches (wall not built yet).


----------



## otismojo

otismojo said:


> Can’t wait my ST130 G4 gets installed on Monday! Coming from a Firehawk G3 can’t wait to see the improvement. Scope 2.35:1 screen 130” wide. Sony 885 with DCR and MadVR Envy.
> 
> Jealous I’d love a 160” wide screen! Those extra 30” would be epic.


Install went poorly. Installers came and pulled down the old screen. They decided they couldn’t change the drop down screen without an electrician. Put the old one back up. Now rescheduling things. Something about the roller wiring wasn’t low voltage and they couldn’t work on 120v. After pulling out one my ceiling speakers and making a mess they left. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## JeffKB

Gates said:


> Ordered my first ever Stewart Screen last week (Studiotek 130 G4 135" microperf). I have to put a Funk Audio 24.0 behind it (I know it's a nice sub to hide but...). How far should the sub be behind the screen? Just afraid that if it's too close the screen will be pushed from the air pressure. Right now with the plans it would be about 6 inches (wall not built yet).


Sounds like you're probably good:








Question about Acoustically Transparent Screens


Quick question: Doesn't the air pushed by big speakers (and subwoofers) placed behind a screen, cause the screen to vibrate (especially when there is something with a lot of bass playing)?




www.avsforum.com


----------



## JeffKB

merch19 said:


> Worst-case for the truck is that it also has to be elevated in one corner (back bottom corner to opposite top-front corner). The literature for the screens says they should be stored flat on their side, but is there any real risk in having it propped up for transport? About 30 minutes in total... Any info would be greatly appreciated.


Man that's a tough decision. Sounds like you clearly won't be able to store the shipping box completely flat and the risk of that is potential damage to the screen material in the tube (sounds like non flat storage puts screen at risk of creasing or abrasions). With a slight elevation you're probably ok but.....

If it were me I'd pay the extra money for the larger truck and have peace of mind. You've spent all this money on the screen what's a little more.  Or is it a substantial price difference? Even though it may be only 30 minutes it'll be potentially bouncing up and down. And are there other stops the driver will be making, or are they loading the night before, etc? 

Probably not a great alternative option but I've seen a review of a Stewart screen where the reviewer requested the cross bars be 2 parts that are assembled together - assume Stewart still offers this. This cuts the shipping length in half but having a seam in your horizontal cross bars isn't very appealing, at least to me.


----------



## BrolicBeast

JeffKB said:


> Man that's a tough decision. Sounds like you clearly won't be able to store the shipping box completely flat and the risk of that is potential damage to the screen material in the tube (sounds like non flat storage puts screen at risk of creasing or abrasions). With a slight elevation you're probably ok but.....
> 
> If it were me I'd pay the extra money for the larger truck and have peace of mind. You've spent all this money on the screen what's a little more.  Or is it a substantial price difference? Even though it may be only 30 minutes it'll be potentially bouncing up and down. And are there other stops the driver will be making, or are they loading the night before, etc?
> 
> Probably not a great alternative option but I've seen a review of a Stewart screen where the reviewer requested the cross bars be 2 parts that are assembled together - assume Stewart still offers this. This cuts the shipping length in half but having a seam in your horizontal cross bars isn't very appealing, at least to me.


Mine is 160” wide and I installed a 148” wide a few weeks ago (both ST130 G4 Wallscreen Deluxe)—both screens had horizontal spans cut in half by default due to size, and connected with veryyy solid coupling plates. Once attached, there is zero indication that there’s a seam present. Even close examination of the center point after mounting does not reveal the seam until a flashlight is shone on the screen border and you are looking for it. This would certainly work on a 120” screen as well, even though the span doesn’t require it...this import situation yo are facing seems to require it—BUT....I think it’s only possible if the screen hasn’t already been manufactured. if it has, then the ship has probably sailed since Stewart screens are built to order. Might be cheaper to hire to longer truck than to order brand new horizontal spans cut in half). Then again...maybe not?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Gates

JeffKB said:


> Sounds like you're probably good:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Question about Acoustically Transparent Screens
> 
> 
> Quick question: Doesn't the air pushed by big speakers (and subwoofers) placed behind a screen, cause the screen to vibrate (especially when there is something with a lot of bass playing)?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.avsforum.com


Thanks for that info! I guess this 24" sub will put that to the test


----------



## AVfile

merch19 said:


> In speaking with a small-time customs broker, they confirmed their truck is only about 9' from back to front. If it won't fit, I'll have to have a trucking company bring it across the border. Can anyone tell me the dimensions of the packaging for a 120" 16:9 Wallscreen Deluxe? Also would be looking to confirm the weight. The company I purchased it from does not have the dimensions as the screens are direct-shipped to the purchaser.


Sounds like they have the wrong vehicle for the job. I just bought a 126” cinemascope screen through the Canadian dealer/distributor so I didn’t have to worry about importing it myself, but my dealer delivered it in a Ford Transit cargo van no problem. The box is 130” long (64 lbs) and fit within an inch of the back door. It did not have to go diagonally.


----------



## JeffKB

BrolicBeast said:


> Mine is 160” wide and I installed a 148” wide a few weeks ago (both ST130 G4 Wallscreen Deluxe)—both screens had horizontal spans cut in half by default due to size, and connected with veryyy solid coupling plates. Once attached, there is zero indication that there’s a seam present. Even close examination of the center point after mounting does not reveal the seam until a flashlight is shone on the screen border and you are looking for it. This would certainly work on a 120” screen as well, even though the span doesn’t require it...this import situation yo are facing seems to require it—BUT....I think it’s only possible if the screen hasn’t already been manufactured. if it has, then the ship has probably sailed since Stewart screens are built to order. Might be cheaper to hire to longer truck than to order brand new horizontal spans cut in half). Then again...maybe not?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro


Thanks for the info. It never occurred to me that some screen sizes would require a 2 part span. It also doesn't surprise me it's well executed by Stewart. I have a 126" wide cinemascope ST130G4. I had considered having the span split since I have a stair landing to my basement HT that you're not getting a 10' long anything thru, but then I figured out I could just feed the long cross members thru a casement window from outside the house (which is what I did).

(BTW I enjoy your youtube videos, nicely done )


----------



## merch19

AVfile said:


> Sounds like they have the wrong vehicle for the job. I just bought a 126” cinemascope screen through the Canadian dealer/distributor so I didn’t have to worry about importing it myself, but my dealer delivered it in a Ford Transit cargo van no problem. The box is 130” long (64 lbs) and fit within an inch of the back door. It did not have to go diagonally.


Thanks for this. I expect they passed it up between the seats whereas this company has a cage separating the cargo space from the cabin.


----------



## sund

This is a long thread and I tried to go through the most recent stuff, so I apologize if this was asked before. I see a lot of recommendations for StudioTek 130 and Neve, or so it seems. I'm replacing a 92" Da-Lite screen from 15 years ago as I'd like to go 4k and larger to 110". I have attached a picture. I received one recommendation from a dealer for StudioTek 100 as I have a light controlled room, but it isn't perfect. There is a white molding on the top of the ceiling that has an LED light strip and the carpet is a lighter beige. I keep reading 100 has to have perfect conditions. Is there something more forgiving? I'll be using an Epson 5050UB with it. Viewing distance is 9ft and 15 ft. I'm looking to confirm if the StudioTek 100 recommendation is good, or look for something else.


----------



## Craig Peer

sund said:


> This is a long thread and I tried to go through the most recent stuff, so I apologize if this was asked before. I see a lot of recommendations for StudioTek 130 and Neve, or so it seems. I'm replacing a 92" Da-Lite screen from 15 years ago as I'd like to go 4k and larger to 110". I have attached a picture. I received one recommendation from a dealer for StudioTek 100 as I have a light controlled room, but it isn't perfect. There is a white molding on the top of the ceiling that has an LED light strip and the carpet is a lighter beige. I keep reading 100 has to have perfect conditions. Is there something more forgiving? I'll be using an Epson 5050UB with it. Viewing distance is 9ft and 15 ft. I'm looking to confirm if the StudioTek 100 recommendation is good, or look for something else.


I'd say a Cima Neve would be a better choice, but get samples and test them out yourself, against your current screen.


----------



## JeffKB

sund said:


> I'm replacing a 92" Da-Lite screen from 15 years ago as I'd like to go 4k and larger to 110". I have attached a picture. I received one recommendation from a dealer for StudioTek 100 as I have a light controlled room, but it isn't perfect. There is a white molding on the top of the ceiling that has an LED light strip and the carpet is a lighter beige. I keep reading 100 has to have perfect conditions. Is there something more forgiving? I'll be using an Epson 5050UB with it. Viewing distance is 9ft and 15 ft. I'm looking to confirm if the StudioTek 100 recommendation is good, or look for something else.


Hi sund - in addition to screen material make sure you consider what AR you want too. I believe the Epson has lens memory and looks like you have room for a decent size 2.4:1 screen if you choose that route. A Stewart screen is an investment and you don't want buyers remorse down the road because you didn't consider all the options. Nothing wrong with 16:9 and it's the right AR for many people, especially those into sports. Regardless I would definitely play around with zooming to different screen sizes (including 2.4:1) and see what you prefer. Spend some time watching each. Even though it will overspill to your dark wall you'll still get a good sense. You may end up preferring a different size than 110".

As a side note in case you weren't aware, the main Stewart line (not Cima) is completely custom sized. You can order any size screen you want. The larger you go the more expensive, but there's no surcharge or anything if you don't get one of the standard screen sizes that other lines offer.


----------



## yoshihito

Hello, my name is Yoshihito. I'm participating from Japan.I've been using home theater for about 10 years, and I've always loved JVC projectors. I'm currently using an overseas 4K projector with model number 5900.

I really enjoy your lively opinions and I'm using them as a reference to purchase a Stewart screen.
This AVS forum has been very informative and helpful with many useful opinions. Thank you all.

I am buying my first Stewart screen in my lifetime. I'm 50 years old now, so I've forgiven myself that I'm in a good position to buy the world's most expensive screen.
Don't tell my wife the price of the screen.

I was considering using an acoustically transparent screen, but it's not in my budget.
I ordered a normal screen.
Still, the arrival of a huge Stewart screen in our living room theater is a historic event.
We don't have a dedicated room, and since it's a living room theater, we do get some outside light.
I ordered the WallScreen 2.5 "FireHawk G5 138" 2.35:1.

For the speakers, I had JBL 3677s in the bay window, but this time I'll be using them down on the floor. I've already purchased an anamorphic lens.
Standby OK!

I am expecting to have an impressive home theater open in April.
Thanks for reading.










Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)


----------



## Technology3456

Does anyone have an opinion on Stewart 1.0 vs Stewart 1.3 gain screens? For the 1.3 gain, I mean the G4. For 1.0 gain, Im not sure if they have a G4 or still G3? 

The best Stewart 1.0 gain screen, vs the best Stewart 1.3 gain screen... there, that makes it easy


----------



## GeorgeHolland

Technology3456 said:


> Does anyone have an opinion on Stewart 1.0 vs Stewart 1.3 gain screens? For the 1.3 gain, I mean the G4. For 1.0 gain, Im not sure if they have a G4 or still G3?
> 
> The best Stewart 1.0 gain screen, vs the best Stewart 1.3 gain screen... there, that makes it easy


This review compares the two screens.









Stewart Filmscreen StudioTek 130 G4 Projection Screen Review


Performance Setup Value PRICE $1,484 (material only, as tested) AT A GLANCE Plus




www.soundandvision.com


----------



## Everyone

This just arrived... Stewart Balon 160" 16:9 StudioTek 130Perf G4









Forklift obviously stabbed the box in a few places.  Have to inspect for damages now. Still going to be a couple of weeks before I'm ready to put it up.


----------



## jaapaap79

Just got my screen too. Super excited!
Any suggestions to open the metal clips?


----------



## Don Stewart

jaapaap79 said:


> Just got my screen too. Super excited!
> Any suggestions to open the metal clips?
> 
> View attachment 3109437


Use a large flat head screwdriver, insert under staple and pull up to get it copper staples started. Then take pliers to remove from box.


----------



## Don Stewart

Everyone said:


> This just arrived... Stewart Balon 160" 16:9 StudioTek 130Perf G4
> View attachment 3109425
> 
> 
> Forklift obviously stabbed the box in a few places.  Have to inspect for damages now. Still going to be a couple of weeks before I'm ready to put it up.
> 
> View attachment 3109427


Definitely inspect contents for damage ASAP. Lots of care is taken when we are packing, but when it comes to packing vs careless forklift driver, sometimes the forklift wins. If you see any damage to contents, take photos of damaged content and then immediately contact your dealer so it can be remedied. Lets keep our fingers crossed.

Best Regards,
Don


----------



## Everyone

Don Stewart said:


> Definitely inspect contents for damage ASAP. Lots of care is taken when we are packing, but when it comes to packing vs careless forklift driver, sometimes the forklift wins. If you see any damage to contents, take photos of damaged content and then immediately contact your dealer so it can be remedied. Lets keep our fingers crossed.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Don


I can tell! Soooo much bubble wrap!

Nothing appears to be bent or broken. Looks like it maybe nicked the bottom frame piece here. I don't think this will be visible when assembled, and it doesn't look like something that would prevent assembly/functionality?


----------



## Don Stewart

Everyone said:


> I can tell! Soooo much bubble wrap!
> 
> Nothing appears to be bent or broken. Looks like it maybe nicked the bottom frame piece here. I don't think this will be visible when assembled, and it doesn't look like something that would prevent assembly/functionality?
> 
> View attachment 3109461


Can you pull the packing back a little further and take another photo? I do see some aluminum shavings right where the packing ends.


----------



## Everyone

Don Stewart said:


> Can you pull the packing back a little further and take another photo? I do see some aluminum shavings right where the packing ends.


Sure... I don't see any obvious spot where the shavings might be coming from in this area...

















About 4 feet to the right of this, I did find another spot where it looks like the frame got nicked. I think I'm going to need to take this piece completely out of the packaging after my next conference call ends here.


----------



## Don Stewart

Thanks for the additional pictures. It appears the nicks are all on the back of the frame. As long as the frame member is true and correct, meaning not bent or tweaked, I think you are good to go. Looks we dogged a bullet on this one and the packing won over the forklift in this particular case.


----------



## Everyone

Don Stewart said:


> Thanks for the additional pictures. It appears the nicks are all on the back of the frame. As long as the frame member is true and correct, meaning not bent or tweaked, I think you are good to go. Looks we dogged a bullet on this one and the packing won over the forklift in this particular case.


Thanks for checking it out! Looks true and correct to me. I'm not ready to put the screen up yet, but I think I'll assemble the frame and leave the screen material in the tube just to be sure. 
Thanks again!


----------



## BrolicBeast

Congratulations to you @Everyone and @jaapaap79 on your new screens! Please be sure to post pics! 

...and @Everyone "WHEW"...that bullets whizzed by the ear on that one! Glad you dodged it.


----------



## ERuiz

@jaapaap79 @Everyone

Congrats guys! Welcome to the Stewart family. Unless you want to upgrade or downgrade in the future, this will be the last screen you will buy. These things are built for a lifetime! 

BTW, @Everyone, you really did dodge a bullet! These carriers are simply horrible but the way these screens are packaged, they are ready for battle!

Hopefully the next screenshots will be mine as I patiently wait for my new Stewart screen. *hint hint @Don Stewart ; * 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Everyone

BrolicBeast said:


> Congratulations to you @Everyone and @jaapaap79 on your new screens! Please be sure to post pics!





ERuiz said:


> @jaapaap79 @Everyone
> Congrats guys! Welcome to the Stewart family. Unless you want to upgrade or downgrade in the future, this will be the last screen you will buy. These things are built for a lifetime!


Thanks! This is only the 2nd screen I've ever purchased. HUGE upgrade from the 120" Elite Screens CineGray I've been using for the past ~10 years.



BrolicBeast said:


> ...and @Everyone "WHEW"...that bullets whizzed by the ear on that one! Glad you dodged it.





ERuiz said:


> BTW, @Everyone, you really did dodge a bullet! These carriers are simply horrible but the way these screens are packaged, they are ready for battle!


For sure! I was worried the screen got lost. The back brace pieces shipped separately via FedEx and arrived on time, but the freight company everything else shipped through did not. Called the freight company and was told it had been held up in Texas due to the extreme weather, which did NOT make sense since it shipped AFTER all that happened! Not to mention the fact that it shipped from California, and I live in Illinois. No reason to route through Texas. Now that it has arrived I am even more sure they were feeding me a line of BS on the delay. There's an air freight sticker on the box showing it went from LAX to ORD! I live 90 miles NW of ORD, used to drive there to fly somewhere for work every week. Pretty sure the box was never anywhere near Texas. 

I cannot wait to get it installed and start using it, but I haven't even started drywall yet. I still need to order a projector upgrade worthy of the screen too.


----------



## Technology3456

Don Stewart said:


> Definitely inspect contents for damage ASAP. Lots of care is taken when we are packing, but when it comes to packing vs careless forklift driver, sometimes the forklift wins. If you see any damage to contents, take photos of damaged content and then immediately contact your dealer so it can be remedied. Lets keep our fingers crossed.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Don


Can anyone please use photoshop or something to point arrows at the forklift marks? My projector came in the mail in a cardboard box with massive stab punctures in two places in the box, but there is tape over them _after_ the cuts so either the forklift people taped it afterwards to cover their mistake, or these holes were already in the box before the seller shipped it so no problem. But I don't even know how to recognize a forklift puncture compared to normal shipping cuts, so that's why I was asking for arrows to point out the specific look of a forklift puncture so I can compare if that's what it is on my box. It would obviously be better news if it was just normal shipping wear and tear on the box and not forklift cuts.


----------



## Eggmanslc

Quick Opinions - trying to make a final decision on screen material for our basement remodel. We will have good light control except for my wife is wanting a white ceiling. She is probably willing to compromise to a dark blue/navy ceiling (probably not midnight blue, but traditional navy). Wanting to put up a 120" screen. Viewing distance is about 12'. Projector distance is 14-16 ft. So option A is Studiotek 130 with the navy ceiling (or even white ceiling) vs the firehawk g5 with the white ceiling. Any thoughts on what would provide the best viewing? Plan to pair with JVC NX7 projector. Could I even get away with the studiotek 130 and a white ceiling? Or most folks would really recommend an ALR option with a white ceiling.


----------



## Craig Peer

Eggmanslc said:


> Quick Opinions - trying to make a final decision on screen material for our basement remodel. We will have good light control except for my wife is wanting a white ceiling. She is probably willing to compromise to a dark blue/navy ceiling (probably not midnight blue, but traditional navy). Wanting to put up a 120" screen. Viewing distance is about 12'. Projector distance is 14-16 ft. So option A is Studiotek 130 with the navy ceiling (or even white ceiling) vs the firehawk g5 with the white ceiling. Any thoughts on what would provide the best viewing? Plan to pair with JVC NX7 projector. Could I even get away with the studiotek 130 and a white ceiling? Or most folks would really recommend an ALR option with a white ceiling.


Go with the dark ceiling and the StudioTek 130. Ask your wife how many movie theaters she’s been in that had a white ceiling. You don’t want a white ceiling even with a Firehawk screen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Technology3456

Eggmanslc said:


> Quick Opinions - trying to make a final decision on screen material for our basement remodel. We will have good light control except for my wife is wanting a white ceiling. She is probably willing to compromise to a dark blue/navy ceiling (probably not midnight blue, but traditional navy). Wanting to put up a 120" screen. Viewing distance is about 12'. Projector distance is 14-16 ft. So option A is Studiotek 130 with the navy ceiling (or even white ceiling) vs the firehawk g5 with the white ceiling. Any thoughts on what would provide the best viewing? Plan to pair with JVC NX7 projector. Could I even get away with the studiotek 130 and a white ceiling? Or most folks would really recommend an ALR option with a white ceiling.


I am installing curtain rods on the ceiling to put black velvet curtains while watching movies, but then draw them during the day so it can be a multi-purpose room. Maybe your wife but would go for that? You could pick out some artistic looking curtain rods, and try to make it look cool like a unique sort of ceiling setup. Just an idea. Otherwise, like Craig said, paint it as dark as your wife would be happy with it.


----------



## JonnyVee

Eggmanslc said:


> Quick Opinions - trying to make a final decision on screen material for our basement remodel. We will have good light control except for my wife is wanting a white ceiling. She is probably willing to compromise to a dark blue/navy ceiling (probably not midnight blue, but traditional navy). Wanting to put up a 120" screen. Viewing distance is about 12'. Projector distance is 14-16 ft. So option A is Studiotek 130 with the navy ceiling (or even white ceiling) vs the firehawk g5 with the white ceiling. Any thoughts on what would provide the best viewing? Plan to pair with JVC NX7 projector. Could I even get away with the studiotek 130 and a white ceiling? Or most folks would really recommend an ALR option with a white ceiling.


My wife was also very much against a darker ceiling. She was under the mistaken impression it would make it feel small and closed in. Over the years we changed it gradually and it’s now painted black. Does she love the look of the black? ... No, but it’s the Theatre Room and she likes the outcome.

At the end of the day, no projector and screen combo is going to work wonders with a white ceiling. So paint it as dark blue as she’ll be happy with and try to go darkest on the ceiling and any close walls that may get reflection. Them do something lighter on other walls and other ceiling sections.

Also, make sure you get a flat paint on the ceiling! Don’t make the mistake of using eggshell or satin (and some mattes) which have too much sheen. Sherwin Williams makes a nice flat paint that is durable and wipeable.

If you have to do white, I’d consider a less expensive screen/projector combo. Makes no sense to spend so much on gear if the room can’t be treated properly.


----------



## Eggmanslc

Technology3456 said:


> I am installing curtain rods on the ceiling to put black velvet curtains while watching movies, but then draw them during the day so it can be a multi-purpose room. Maybe your wife but would go for that? You could pick out some artistic looking curtain rods, and try to make it look cool like a unique sort of ceiling setup. Just an idea. Otherwise, like Craig said, paint it as dark as your wife would be happy with it.


I've thought about doing something like this, but haven't seen any pictures of the final setup. I'd love to see how yours works when it's complete, or if you've come across any other photos where others have done something similar. I like this concept.


----------



## Eggmanslc

Craig Peer said:


> Go with the dark ceiling and the StudioTek 130. Ask your wife how many movie theaters she’s been in that had a white ceiling. You don’t want a white ceiling even with a Firehawk screen.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


LOL. I know. It's not a dedicated space, so it's giving her a little concern. We've all been there.


----------



## Technology3456

Eggmanslc said:


> I've thought about doing something like this, but haven't seen any pictures of the final setup. I'd love to see how yours works when it's complete, or if you've come across any other photos where others have done something similar. I like this concept.


I will post photos when it's complete for sure! I think "Zombie" in the "Blacker the better" thread also did this. I'm not sure if he has pictures but he'd be the one to ask for now.


----------



## Thomas Westling

How close to the LCR speakers can I put a retractable microperf screen for movie watching? I know that the recommendation is 12", but I want to retract the screen for critical music listening and keep it as close to the speakers as possible for movies. Any thoughts would be appreciated.


----------



## batlin27

I am looking into Stewart Screens, for my first theater I did a Spandex AT screen (gray) but that theater was only light controlled at night so the grey worked well. For my new theater, I plan on purchasing a screen rather than DIY.

I need an AT Screen
It will be setup as a constant height 2.35:1
It will be 100% light controlled BUT I do want the ability to watch the screen when there is some ambient light (I understand this will not be optimal but for things like eating dinner I need some light) but I will probably have the room drak 80% of the time
Looking for ~158" 2.35:1
4K Viewing
The screen will be on a false wall (speakers and sub behind)
There will be approx 2' behind the screen
Projector is currently planned to be the JVC NX5
Audio / Acoustics are very important (need to be as good if not better than my 2layers of mill skin spandex

On the Steward Website, there are so many options when I go through the screen configurator I need some help


----------



## fredworld

batlin27 said:


> I am looking into Stewart Screens, for my first theater I did a Spandex AT screen (gray) but that theater was only light controlled at night so the grey worked well. For my new theater, I plan on purchasing a screen rather than DIY.
> 
> I need an AT Screen
> It will be setup as a constant height 2.35:1
> It will be 100% light controlled BUT I do want the ability to watch the screen when there is some ambient light (I understand this will not be optimal but for things like eating dinner I need some light) but I will probably have the room drak 80% of the time
> Looking for ~158" 2.35:1
> 4K Viewing
> The screen will be on a false wall (speakers and sub behind)
> There will be approx 2' behind the screen
> Projector is currently planned to be the JVC NX5
> Audio / Acoustics are very important (need to be as good if not better than my 2layers of mill skin spandex
> 
> On the Steward Website, there are so many options when I go through the screen configurator I need some help


I'm sure others will chime in with their thoughts and perhaps Stewart will, also. Based on my discussions last October with a Stewart rep for my light controlled 18'x14'x7.5' HT room I went with a StudioTek100 white screen (not AT, couldn't accommodate it). It replaced a 15 year old Stewart Firehawk 1.2 gain gray screen and I'm very happy I took that advice. Contrast is better and colors are more natural than previously. Sitting way off axis is so much more enjoyable as I notice absolutely no light loss. I can, also, watch sports and do casual viewing with the lights up. Bear in mind that my Constant Height screen @ 2.35 is 94" wide and 41" high (82" diagonal for 16:9), so my set up is much more conservative that yours and to that of many others on these forums, plus my Epson 5050UB is a major light machine, even on Digital.Cinema. Be guided accordingly. YMMV.


----------



## dormie1360

batlin27 said:


> I am looking into Stewart Screens, for my first theater I did a Spandex AT screen (gray) but that theater was only light controlled at night so the grey worked well. For my new theater, I plan on purchasing a screen rather than DIY.
> 
> I need an AT Screen
> It will be setup as a constant height 2.35:1
> It will be 100% light controlled BUT I do want the ability to watch the screen when there is some ambient light (I understand this will not be optimal but for things like eating dinner I need some light) but I will probably have the room drak 80% of the time
> Looking for ~158" 2.35:1
> 4K Viewing
> The screen will be on a false wall (speakers and sub behind)
> There will be approx 2' behind the screen
> Projector is currently planned to be the JVC NX5
> Audio / Acoustics are very important (need to be as good if not better than my 2layers of mill skin spandex
> 
> On the Steward Website, there are so many options when I go through the screen configurator I need some help


I am upgrading from a 1080P to a 4K projector and have been told by more than one source to upgrade to the Studio Tek 130 G4. Our screens are the same size. I currently have a Studio Tek 130 G3 screen. I have the G4 on order with microperf. I have had no audio issues with the microperf G3 Screen....my current audio equipment is listed in my signature. I have the Wall Screen Series. You didn't mention your seating position. Less than 11 or 12 feet from the screen and you will see the microperf in bright areas. (With 20/20 vision ) You have a fairly large screen, not sure the light output of your projector.....1.0 gain is an option but might not be bright enough.


----------



## avsBuddy

fredworld said:


> I'm sure others will chime in with their thoughts and perhaps Stewart will, also. Based on my discussions last October with a Stewart rep for my light controlled 18'x14'x7.5' HT room I went with a StudioTek100 white screen


Interesting, I have a similar room and projector. I am considering StudioTek 130 to get better brightness for HDR and 3D and a bit better viewing with some lights for sports.


----------



## fredworld

avsBuddy said:


> Interesting, I have a similar room and projector. I am considering StudioTek 130 to get better brightness for HDR and 3D and a bit better viewing with some lights for sports.


I would never get another gain or gray screen again, as long as I have a completely light controlled room. Recall my post, in part, "Bear in mind that my Constant Height screen @ 2.35 is 94" wide and 41" high (82" diagonal for 16:9), so my set up is much more conservative ... than that of many others on these forums...."
I might feel differently if my screen area was much larger, but even then I'd be guided by Stewart's advice for my applications.


----------



## Craig Peer

avsBuddy said:


> Interesting, I have a similar room and projector. I am considering StudioTek 130 to get better brightness for HDR and 3D and a bit better viewing with some lights for sports.


Get a sample of each and compare them in person.


----------



## AVfile

Thomas Westling said:


> How close to the LCR speakers can I put a retractable microperf screen for movie watching? I know that the recommendation is 12", but I want to retract the screen for critical music listening and keep it as close to the speakers as possible for movies. Any thoughts would be appreciated.


Here you go:



Don Stewart said:


> Here is the SP graph, Speaker, 3" away with no EQ added. Measurement was done at Lucas Film's Skywalker Sound, for THX division.
> View attachment 3086492


----------



## AVfile

avsBuddy said:


> Interesting, I have a similar room and projector. I am considering StudioTek 130 to get better brightness for HDR and 3D and a bit better viewing with some lights for sports.


If you’re going to watch some 3D and only want to have one screen the ST130 is it!


----------



## Thomas Westling

AVfile said:


> Here you go:


That is exactly what I was looking for. Thank you!


----------



## Don Stewart

For those who have an interest in AT weave screens.
After well over a year in development, Stewart Filmscreen is now releasing its all new Harmony G2 AT screen. Please see link for specs.




__





Stewart







www.stewartfilmscreen.com




Best Regards,
Don


----------



## Craig Peer

I'm looking forward to getting a sample of this when available.


----------



## Technology3456

Does Stewart make a white screen between 2.2 - 3 gain? @Don Stewart what is the best 2.2 to 3 gain screen on the market?

I am going with either 1 gain or 1.3 gain Stewart screen for 2D, but I need a second screen with high gain for 3D. Depending what type of 3D filters I can get to work with my projectors, it may or may not have to be silver. If it has to be silver, then I already know the few choices available, and will have to decide. 

But I'm hoping I can get away with a non-silver screen, in which case the only options I've heard about for 2.2 gain or higher non-silver screens are the Severtson Stellar White 2.2, the StrongMDI Northview White 2.2 and 2.5 gain white screens, and Harkness might have a perlux hiwhite I think it's called.

Those are the only ones I've heard of. And I'm not familiar with any of those screen manufacturer's reputations like I am with Stewart. I figure if they can make a 2.2 - 3 gain white screen, then probably Stewart can make a better 2.2 - 3 gain white screen, you know what I mean? No offense to those other screen manufacturers, as I do believe they are three of the best on the market especially for specialty screens. But I would rather get the best one and if Stewart has a better one, I'd like to hear about it.


----------



## Craig Peer

Technology3456 said:


> Does Stewart make a white screen between 2.2 - 3 gain? @Don Stewart what is the best 2.2 to 3 gain screen on the market?
> 
> I am going with either 1 gain or 1.3 gain Stewart screen for 2D, but I need a second screen with high gain for 3D. Depending what type of 3D filters I can get to work with my projectors, it may or may not have to be silver. If it has to be silver, then I already know the few choices available, and will have to decide.
> 
> But I'm hoping I can get away with a non-silver screen, in which case the only options I've heard about for 2.2 gain or higher non-silver screens are the Severtson Stellar White 2.2, the StrongMDI Northview White 2.2 and 2.5 gain white screens, and Harkness might have a perlux hiwhite I think it's called.
> 
> Those are the only ones I've heard of. And I'm not familiar with any of those screen manufacturer's reputations like I am with Stewart. I figure if they can make a 2.2 - 3 gain white screen, then probably Stewart can make a better 2.2 - 3 gain white screen, you know what I mean? No offense to those other screen manufacturers, as I do believe they are three of the best on the market especially for specialty screens. But I would rather get the best one and if Stewart has a better one, I'd like to hear about it.


Here is the current lineup of screen materials - Materials - Stewart (stewartfilmscreen.com)


----------



## Technology3456

Craig Peer said:


> Here is the current lineup of screen materials - Materials - Stewart (stewartfilmscreen.com)


That's what was strange, I saw nothing on the website when I checked that is 2+ gain and non-silver. I was watching an interview of Stewart online, I think it was actually Don Stewart, talking about how Stewart always wants to be at the forefront of the new technology, and if there is a gap in their lineup that a customer needs, that pushes them to design something and make the best product for that need too, and that some of their screen lines started as custom design for a customer that needed something they didn't have.

Obviously he probably meant if a big cinema needed something special made, or NASA, or something, not me, lol. And there's no question Stewart is at the forefront regardless of this. I just am hoping to be able to use the best high gain white, or non-silver, screen, available, (if I can make the no-silver-screen-required 3D filters to work), and of course I am looking at Stewart because I figure Stewart will have the best version no matter what type of screen it is, Stewart will always have the best version, but, they don't have one at all on the website. So that's why I asked here if they can make it but it's just not listed on the website, or if Stewart doesn't make it period, where should I look instead?


----------



## Don Stewart

Technology3456 said:


> That's what was strange, I saw nothing on the website when I checked that is 2+ gain and non-silver. I was watching an interview of Stewart online, I think it was actually Don Stewart, talking about how Stewart always wants to be at the forefront of the new technology, and if there is a gap in their lineup that a customer needs, that pushes them to design something and make the best product for that need too, and that some of their screen lines started as custom design for a customer that needed something they didn't have.
> 
> Obviously he probably meant if a big cinema needed something special made, or NASA, or something, not me, lol. And there's no question Stewart is at the forefront regardless of this. I just am hoping to be able to use the best high gain white, or non-silver, screen, available, (if I can make the no-silver-screen-required 3D filters to work), and of course I am looking at Stewart because I figure Stewart will have the best version no matter what type of screen it is, Stewart will always have the best version, but, they don't have one at all on the website. So that's why I asked here if they can make it but it's just not listed on the website, or if Stewart doesn't make it period, where should I look instead?


As far as high gain white based screens go, we produced many tens of thousands of them in the late 80's, 90's and up through the early 2000's. The product names were VideoMatte 2000, 2.0 gain, UltraMatte 2.50, 2.5 gain and UltraMatte 300 at 3.0 gain. During those times, most video projectors were low lumen output CRT based and if one was going to light up, lets say, a 9' x 12' image or larger, the screen had to do a lot more work to get sufficient foot lamberts back to the viewers than with the projectors we have today. Therefore, the market and demand for high gain white screens completely dwindled out to almost nothing over time. That said, we can produce custom gain and color on demand. Please note that during manufacturing, most of our screens utilize a proprietary casting process on giant molds. In order to do a custom run for a customer, we have to produce a minimum of 800 square feet which results in a seamless 20' X 40' finished film. At that point, the customer owns the complete run and we will produce what ever finished screen size and mounting system that is required for that customer.

Best Regards,
Don


----------



## Technology3456

Don Stewart said:


> As far as high gain white based screens go, we produced many tens of thousands of them in the late 80's, 90's and up through the early 2000's. The product names were VideoMatte 2000, 2.0 gain, UltraMatte 2.50, 2.5 gain and UltraMatte 300 at 3.0 gain. During those times, most video projectors were low lumen output CRT based and if one was going to light up, lets say, a 9' x 12' image or larger, the screen had to do a lot more work to get sufficient foot lamberts back to the viewers than with the projectors we have today. Therefore, the market and demand for high gain white screens completely dwindled out to almost nothing over time. That said, we can produce custom gain and color on demand. Please note that during manufacturing, most of our screens utilize a proprietary casting process on giant molds. In order to do a custom run for a customer, we have to produce a minimum of 800 square feet which results in a seamless 20' X 40' finished film. At that point, the customer owns the complete run and we will produce what ever finished screen size and mounting system that is required for that customer.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Don


Thank you. Apparently Da-Lite 2.8 and others and stopped making high gain screens for the same reasons, so it's understandable. Although, I have seen many comments on avs say that if Da-Lite brought that back, it would be their most popular screen, and many people would buy one. And that because of the advent of HDR, getting more lumens is back in demand, so people would buy high gain screens again in order to put the extra brightness towards the HDR highlights.



> In order to do a custom run for a customer, we have to produce a minimum of 800 square feet which results in a seamless 20' X 40' finished film. At that point, the customer owns the complete run and we will produce what ever finished screen size and mounting system that is required for that customer.


20' X 40' sounds like about 16x the screen size I would need. I guess if I found fifteen other people who also wanted the screen material, then... lol... you never know. It sounds simpler to just buy one of the ones that are already on the market from the other companies... I just don't want to get lower quality, but if it is a regular screen they still make, then maybe their quality would be similar only for that screen surface. There are probably no reviews or comparisons of those screens to Stewart's high gain white screens if Stewart hasn't been making them regularly anymore, and these are newer models from other companies. So I'll probably never know which was better, but these others are available to the size I need so I'll probably go that direction for the high gain screen, and Stewart for 1.0 or 1.3. I'll come back with the exact details when I know. Everything in my project is still coming in one slow piece at a time but I will buy eventually.


----------



## Don Stewart

Just to add to the above, when we were producing a lot of high gain white based screens, the typical CRT projectors of the time were producing around 200 to 350 measured lumens. So the first goal of the system was to produce brightness. Also, most of the source and broadcast material was low resolution NTSC or PAL format projected in a 133:1 AR. Image artifacts were considered secondary as most customers were just happy to have the brightness that the higher gain screens produced. Today, with cheap lumens available and with HD and 4k images, the customer's eyes have become much more sophisticated and there is little tolerance for image artifacts such as poor white field uniformity, color shifting and very narrow screen half gain angles that higher gain screens can produce. Even though there have been many substantial changes and improvements with projector and source technology over the past 20 years, light physics have and will remain the same.


----------



## brazensol

Got my larger samples of the ST-100 and ST-130 in the mail (both are acoustical formats)! For some reason the ST-100 was attached to a backer board of some sort. The board looks to be bright white so I don't see how I'll be able to get a good look at it. It seems to be quite well attached so not sure if I can remove it or not.

Or perhaps I am misunderstanding something?


----------



## Don Stewart

brazensol said:


> Got my larger samples of the ST-100 and ST-130 in the mail (both are acoustical formats)! For some reason the ST-100 was attached to a backer board of some sort. The board looks to be bright white so I don't see how I'll be able to get a good look at it. It seems to be quite well attached so not sure if I can remove it or not.
> 
> Or perhaps I am misunderstanding something?


That is weird. Question, were the samples sent to you from one of our dealers or direct from the Stewart factory? A while back, we did make some 18" by 18" samples mounted on hardboard. That said, they were intended for dealers only and not for the dealers to distribute to their customers. Please advise. Thank you.


----------



## brazensol

Don Stewart said:


> That is weird. Question, were the samples sent to you from one of our dealers or direct from the Stewart factory? A while back, we did make some 18" by 18" samples mounted on hardboard. That said, they were intended for dealers only and not for the dealers to distribute to their customers. Please advise. Thank you.


I hope I am not getting anyone it trouble over this. Here is the shipper's name/address:

Esgar Soriano
Stewart Filmscreen
1161 Sepulveda Blvd
Torrance, California 90502

Only the ST-100 was on hardboard.


----------



## Don Stewart

brazensol said:


> I hope I am not getting anyone it trouble over this. Here is the shipper's name/address:
> 
> Esgar Soriano
> Stewart Filmscreen
> 1161 Sepulveda Blvd
> Torrance, California 90502
> 
> Only the ST-100 was on hardboard.


Thanks. No worries, Esgar works in our shipping department, signed the paperwork for shipping and is a very valued long time employee. I will dig into it and try to figure out why that sample was sent by mistake. That said, cutting out screen samples all day is by far not the most exciting job at Stewart, so that is were some of the new hires start out. Our more seasoned employees prefer to work in other departments which they find is much more rewarding. BTW, if you need another ST-100 AT sample, then please advise.

Best Regards,
Don


----------



## armyplace

I recently acquired a used studiotek g3 screen and it was packed in a tube casing with some bedlinen to protect it. Unfortunately there is a lot of wrinkles throughout the screen still which manifests itself with bright clear screens. I'm aware that there are methods to smooth out these wrinkles. Using a hairdryer on backside of screen or taking the whole screen out and letting some sunshine on the backside. The wrinkles seem quite excessive so I'm wondering if it's a lost cause with so many wrinkles? 

I've attached a photo of the screen. Hopefully it's salvageable.

Thanks in advance.


----------



## fredworld

armyplace said:


> I recently acquired a used studiotek g3 screen and it was packed in a tube casing with some bedlinen to protect it. Unfortunately there is a lot of wrinkles throughout the screen still which manifests itself with bright clear screens. I'm aware that there are methods to smooth out these wrinkles. Using a hairdryer on backside of screen or taking the whole screen out and letting some sunshine on the backside. The wrinkles seem quite excessive so I'm wondering if it's a lost cause with so many wrinkles?
> 
> I've attached a photo of the screen. Hopefully it's salvageable.
> 
> Thanks in advance.
> 
> View attachment 3121751


See* this post from Stewar*t.
I'm pretty sure that there's a mention in the manual about such, too.
When I got my first Stewart screen new in 2004 it had about a half dozen creases horizontally across the entire width. After several weeks they were gone. The screens have a "memory" and reshape themselves after installation. Two years later after we moved to our current home the screen was stored for over 6 months before I was able to install it. Once again there were creases and this time with more wrinkles than previously. They all dissipated in their entirety after a few weeks. Be patient. I wouldn't do anything other than wait a few weeks. Stewart says there's a "technique" to the hair dryer method, so unless you speak with them directly for instructions on that "technique" I wouldn't try it. The passive approach seems best, either via patience or exposure to sunlight as Stewart suggests. I hope this helps.


----------



## armyplace

fredworld said:


> See* this post from Stewar*t.
> I'm pretty sure that there's a mention in the manual about such, too.
> When I got my first Stewart screen new in 2004 it had about a half dozen creases horizontally across the entire width. After several weeks they were gone. The screens have a "memory" and reshape themselves after installation. Two years later after we moved to our current home the screen was stored for over 6 months before I was able to install it. Once again there were creases and this time with more wrinkles than previously. They all dissipated in their entirety after a few weeks. Be patient. I wouldn't do anything other than wait a few weeks. Stewart says there's a "technique" to the hair dryer method, so unless you speak with them directly for instructions on that "technique" I wouldn't try it. The passive approach seems best, either via patience or exposure to sunlight as Stewart suggests. I hope this helps.


Thanks for this, I'll just wait patiently. I will say other than the wrinkles, the screen is perfect, the frame was easy to assemble and the button method of affixing the screen to the frame works very well. I was surprised at how much forced was required to stretch the material, worked out a sweat!


----------



## Gates

Received my Studiotek 135" microperf today but the box is only 7' long. Is that normal? Thought the frame parts came in single pieces. Didn't open it yet because it seems like it would be a pain to repack it all, so that's why I'm asking here first. All I've seen online lead me to believe the frame borders only come in single pieces. Wallscreen deluxe by the way.

EDIT: Nevermind just opened it and it does come in a couple pieces. I'm a Stewart virgin lol


----------



## Don Stewart

Gates said:


> Received my Studiotek 135" microperf today but the box is only 7' long. Is that normal? Thought the frame parts came in single pieces. Didn't open it yet because it seems like it would be a pain to repack it all, so that's why I'm asking here first. All I've seen online lead me to believe the frame borders only come in single pieces. Wallscreen deluxe by the way.
> 
> EDIT: Nevermind just opened it and it does come in a couple pieces. I'm a Stewart virgin lol


Hi Gates,
Thank you for purchasing a Stewart 135" StudioTek AT screen. (Not sure if your AR is scope or 178:1) That said, on larger screen sizes such as yours, we center joint the top and bottom frame members to substantially reduce the cost of shipping. Also, it reduces the risk of damage during transit as many shippers do not deal well with long oversized cigar shaped cardboard containers. When assembling the frame, I think you will find the the center joint construction is well engineered and robust. Again, thanks for your purchase from the Stewart Team.

Best Regards,
Don


----------



## brazensol

Don Stewart said:


> Thanks. No worries, Esgar works in our shipping department, signed the paperwork for shipping and is a very valued long time employee. I will dig into it and try to figure out why that sample was sent by mistake. That said, cutting out screen samples all day is by far not the most exciting job at Stewart, so that is were some of the new hires start out. Our more seasoned employees prefer to work in other departments which they find is much more rewarding. BTW, if you need another ST-100 AT sample, then please advise.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Don


Glad to hear no one is in trouble! And yes, I do need another sample of the ST-100 (preferably in the 18" x 18" format if possible). Thanks for your time.


----------



## Don Stewart

brazensol said:


> Glad to hear no one is in trouble! And yes, I do need another sample of the ST-100 (preferably in the 18" x 18" format if possible). Thanks for your time.


Please DM me your address and I will forward it to our appropriate persons to replace the 18 by 18 inch ST 100 AT sample. 
Thanks,
Don


----------



## mrvideo

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Gates,
> (Not sure if your AR is scope or 178:1)


Damn, that is a really wide screen.


----------



## Technology3456

Question: I understand the G4 130 is brighter than the G3 100, but outside of brightness, are there any other benefits to the 130, specifically the "G4" technology compared to the "G3" 100, that make the G4 130 have maybe smoother motion, higher contrast, or any other advantages over the G3 100?

Or is it mainly increased brightness while retaining the picture quality of the G3 100 which by itself has been described as a great feat of engineering?


----------



## JonnyVee

Technology3456 said:


> Question: I understand the G4 130 is brighter than the G3 100, but outside of brightness, are there any other benefits to the 130, specifically the "G4" technology compared to the "G3" 100, that make the G4 130 have maybe smoother motion, higher contrast, or any other advantages over the G3 100?
> 
> Or is it mainly increased brightness while retaining the picture quality of the G3 100 which by itself has been described as a great feat of engineering?


Sound & Vision did a review and talks about both. I absolutely love my 130 G4 screen. 









Stewart Filmscreen StudioTek 130 G4 Projection Screen Review


Performance Setup Value PRICE $1,484 (material only, as tested) AT A GLANCE Plus




www.soundandvision.com


----------



## ERuiz

When adding the ST130 G4 to the "screen" setting on my JVC NX7, which code should I enter? I looked up the screen list online and I don't see a code for the ST130 G4.

I see a ST130 G3, but no ST130 G4.


----------



## Gates

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Gates,
> Thank you for purchasing a Stewart 135" StudioTek AT screen. (Not sure if your AR is scope or 178:1) That said, on larger screen sizes such as yours, we center joint the top and bottom frame members to substantially reduce the cost of shipping. Also, it reduces the risk of damage during transit as many shippers do not deal well with long oversized cigar shaped cardboard containers. When assembling the frame, I think you will find the the center joint construction is well engineered and robust. Again, thanks for your purchase from the Stewart Team.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Don


Thank you sir! It's a 2:35. I put the frame together and it's a excellently well built product. A joy to put together compared to my last Elunevision I had.


----------



## Don Stewart

ERuiz said:


> When adding the ST130 G4 to the "screen" setting on my JVC NX7, which code should I enter? I looked up the screen list online and I don't see a code for the ST130 G4.
> 
> I see a ST130 G3, but no ST130 G4.
> 
> View attachment 3122377


Use # 71, StudioTek G3. Both screens are studio reference surfaces with the identical color values and 1.3 screen gain brightness. The primary difference between the G3 and G4 is the final optical screen coating is constructed with much finer screen gain particles which makes a difference to the human eye, but no difference to the projector setting.
Hope that helps.

Best Regards.
Don


----------



## ERuiz

Don Stewart said:


> Use # 71, StudioTek G3. Both screens are studio reference surfaces with the identical color values and 1.3 screen gain brightness. The primary difference between the G3 and G4 is the final optical screen coating is constructed with much finer screen gain particles which makes a difference to the human eye, but no difference to the projector setting.
> Hope that helps.
> 
> Best Regards.
> Don


Thanks, Don! Really enjoying my new screen, these simply have no match when it comes to craftsmanship and performance.


----------



## etherealsound

Hello,

I am currently looking into getting a studio tek and have the option of buying used ones locally. However, they appear to be for a studiotek130 g3. My room is a completely light controlled, matte black ceiling/walls environment and my projector is a BenQ HT3550. Would the 130 G3 be fine considering it would be the most economical choice or would it be better to wait and get a studio tek 100 or a 130 G4?


----------



## Don Stewart

etherealsound said:


> Hello,
> 
> I am currently looking into getting a studio tek and have the option of buying used ones locally. However, they appear to be for a studiotek130 g3. My room is a completely light controlled, matte black ceiling/walls environment and my projector is a BenQ HT3550. Would the 130 G3 be fine considering it would be the most economical choice or would it be better to wait and get a studio tek 100 or a 130 G4?


When purchasing a used screen, the main risk is when the screen fabric is rolled back up and repacked by the seller, it is not done properly like we do at the factory. Many times, wrinkles are rolled into the fabric which may be difficult to get out. On the other hand, the screen frame is very durable and if not abused when repacking, will do well during transport. If the existing screen fabric is damaged during repacking, you still have an additional option and in most cases can save some expense. If you record the serial number located on the back of the frame, it can be summited to the factory by one of our dealers. Since we keep very accurate records of every screen system we ever produced, we can build a new screen fabric, including the StudioTek 100 or ST 130 G4, to fit perfectly in the existing frame.

Best Regards.
Don


----------



## etherealsound

Don Stewart said:


> When purchasing a used screen, the main risk is when the screen fabric is rolled back up and repacked by the seller, it is not done properly like we do at the factory. Many times, wrinkles are rolled into the fabric which may be difficult to get out. On the other hand, the screen frame is very durable and if not abused when repacking, will do well during transport. If the existing screen fabric is damaged during repacking, you still have an additional option and in most cases can save some expense. If you record the serial number located on the back of the frame, it can be summited to the factory by one of our dealers. Since we keep very accurate records of every screen system we ever produced, we can build a new screen fabric, including the StudioTek 100 or ST 130 G4, to fit perfectly in the existing frame.
> 
> Best Regards.
> Don


Hello,

thank you for that information! A lot of the local sellers have not even packed them into boxes so I was thinking of just loading it as is on a truck and bringing it over to avoid the wrinkles. Between the G3 and G4, do you think there would be a huge difference? I understand my projector isn't exactly ultra high end so I am of the opinion that it shouldn't be too big of an issue but I haven't been able to compare anything side by side so I wouldn't really know.


----------



## Don Stewart

etherealsound said:


> Hello,
> 
> thank you for that information! A lot of the local sellers have not even packed them into boxes so I was thinking of just loading it as is on a truck and bringing it over to avoid the wrinkles. Between the G3 and G4, do you think there would be a huge difference? I understand my projector isn't exactly ultra high end so I am of the opinion that it shouldn't be too big of an issue but I haven't been able to compare anything side by side so I wouldn't really know.


It would greatly reduce the risk of damage if screen and frame can be transported fully assembled in a coverd van or truck.
Here is a review of the material by a third party.








Stewart Filmscreen StudioTek 130 G4 Projection Screen Review


Performance Setup Value PRICE $1,484 (material only, as tested) AT A GLANCE Plus




www.soundandvision.com


----------



## Ericglo

Don,
This guy has a Starglas screen and was wondering if there is an upgrade option.








Thoughts on Starglas 60 vs current ALJ front projection...


Hi All, I currently have a 12' wide scope Starglas 60 + 25k lumens Christie 4K 3DLP install in a moderate-ambient-light room and am looking at upgrade options. At the time of install, circa 2013, Starglas was pretty much the only option for projection with high-contrast in ambient light...




www.avsforum.com


----------



## RarityAVS

Don Stewart said:


> The 1.5 x 1.5" frame is basically a very simplistic shadowbox style frame. It is mostly used for rear projection applications where the frame and screen is mounted into an aperture opening cutout in a wall.
> .


I'm a little confused by this answer. Isn't the WallScreen 1.5 equally good for usual front projection with the benefit of getting a bigger picture because of the thinner frame? I am considering this one over the popular Deluxe to get a bigger picture.

How much stray projection light overscan does the NX5 and 7 have? Will it be contained inside a 1.5 inch bezel? My old Sony overshoots my current DreamScreen which is a little bit annoying although I've gotten used to it.


----------



## mrvideo

RarityAVS said:


> My old Sony overshoots my current DreamScreen which is a little bit annoying although I've gotten used to it.


So why not change the zoom to reduce the image size to fit the screen?


----------



## RarityAVS

mrvideo said:


> So why not change the zoom to reduce the image size to fit the screen?


The projected image is perfectly adjusted to the screen. There's just stray light around the actual projected image hitting the back wall. I guess that's one of the reasons screens got black bezels. Zooming out would make the image not fill the entire screen.


----------



## mrvideo

RarityAVS said:


> The projected image is perfectly adjusted to the screen. There's just stray light around the actual projected image hitting the back wall.


That is not what you indicated in your posting, hence my response.


----------



## RarityAVS

mrvideo said:


> That is not what you indicated in your posting, hence my response.


I tried to be as precise as possible and actually used the words _stray projection light overscan_ straight from Stewart's WallScreen Deluxe description. Maybe I misinterpreted the meaning as english isn't my native language.


----------



## mrvideo

Overscan to me means that the projected imaged isn't perfectly hitting the white area of the screen and you got some of the image hitting the border. I prefer no overscan at all and will set up my projector so that it perfectly fills the screen, or just a tiny bit less, so that all of the video image is seen.


----------



## Gates

Just to be sure, this Studiotek 130 G4 Microperf isn't supposed to come with some type of AT black backing is it? My last screen had that but didn't see it here when setting up.


----------



## Don Stewart

Gates said:


> Just to be sure, this Studiotek 130 G4 Microperf isn't supposed to come with some type of AT black backing is it? My last screen had that but didn't see it here when setting up.


No separate black backing cloth required. That said, It is recommended, in most cases, to darken the very back wall that sits behind the speakers and screen. Most of the professional interrogators and installers use a black acoustic adsorbing material on the back wall. If your speaker's tweeter's happen to have have a chrome like finish, then it is important to use a black sharpie and gently black them out so they don't reflect their chrome like finish back to the viewer(s). EDIT: Added a MP photo that has been back lighted behind the screen to demo speakers.
Regards,
Don.


----------



## Gates

Don Stewart said:


> No separate black backing cloth required. That said, It is recommended, in most cases, to darken the very back wall that sits behind the speakers and screen. Most of the professional interrogators and installers use a black accoustic asorbong material on the back wall. If your speaker's tweeter's happen to have have a chrome like finish, then it is important to use a black sharpie and gently black them out so they don't reflect their chrome like finish back to the viewer(s).
> Best regards,
> Don


Thank you sir! Here's a picture of your wonderful product.


----------



## RarityAVS

Can the EZ Mount Hanging Bar for the WallScreen Deluxe be adjusted slightly up and down before tightening the screws to get it perfectly leveled (with a spirit tool)? Reason is I have to drill into a super hard concrete wall. It's very difficult to drill the holes perfectly in such hard material.


----------



## bull shark

I am installing a 150" Luxus and have a question. I will need to re-drill the wall hanging bar to hit the studs when the bar is centered on the wall. However, the nearest stud is about 12" from each end of the hanging bar. In other words, the last 12" of the hanging bar on the left and right are not attached to structure. (The 2 cleats on the screen casing sit close to the ends of the hanging bar.) Or, should I cut the hanging bar into 2 sections so that each cleat will sit in the middle of the shorter hanging bars (each bar attached to 4 studs)?


----------



## Don Stewart

RarityAVS said:


> Can the EZ Mount Hanging Bar for the WallScreen Deluxe be adjusted slightly up and down before tightening the screws to get it perfectly leveled (with a spirit tool)? Reason is I have to drill into a super hard concrete wall. It's very difficult to drill the holes perfectly in such hard material.


The EZ Mount hanging bar comes with factory pre-drilled "round" holes. I do under your concern since you are drilling into hard concrete. My suggestion is to drill the existing holes with an oversize drill bit to allow for some extra wiggle room. (The aluminum bar is very easy to work with and drills like butter). Then, when fastening to the concrete wall, use some oversize washers between the screw head and the bar holes to allow for additional compression to hold bar firmly and without slipping once you get it fine tuned and level to your liking.
Hope that helps.

Best Regards,
Don


----------



## fredworld

Don Stewart said:


> The EZ Mount hanging bar comes with factory pre-drilled "round" holes. I do under your concern since you are drilling into hard concrete. My suggestion is to drill the existing holes with an oversize drill bit to allow for some extra wiggle room. (The aluminum bar is very easy to work with and drills like butter). Then, when fastening to the concrete wall, use some oversize washers between the screw head and the bar holes to allow for additional compression to hold bar firmly and without slipping once you get it fine tuned and level to your liking.
> Hope that helps.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Don


I have another suggestion that might help. First I installed 24" long 2x4's as a push-off (so I could have the edge of the screen clear part of a door frame) on my QuietRock wall and then attached the hanging bar to the 2x4's. As it turned out it actually enabled easier leveling and an easier screen hanging due to the additional clearance from the wall.


----------



## Technology3456

Why does the G4 130 have "moderate" edge blending properties, and the ST 100 "excellent"? I'm not planning to edge blend but I'm curious if it indicates something important more broadly about how the screens function differently from each other, like is it saying the G4 130's surface is not as fine so perfectly blending the edges of two pixels together will be more blurred and less exact? 

I'm not saying it's that, it just made me wonder what it was, and if it meant anything along those lines.


----------



## Don Stewart

Technology3456 said:


> Why does the G4 130 have "moderate" edge blending properties, and the ST 100 "excellent"? I'm not planning to edge blend but I'm curious if it indicates something important more broadly about how the screens function differently from each other, like is it saying the G4 130's surface is not as fine so perfectly blending the edges of two pixels together will be more blurred and less exact?
> 
> I'm not saying it's that, it just made me wonder what it was, and if it meant anything along those lines.


The term, "Edge Blending" that you see on our material comparison charts on our website, has little to do with screen performance in "Home Cinema" applications. That said, Stewart Filmscreen is heavily involved in different markets and applications including military and civil simulation, VR centers, broadcast and specialty venues such as you would find at a museums and theme parks to name a few. Edge Blending applications is one of our specialties to create wide vista images where multiple projectors, sometimes 24 or more, are employed to create a single blended image. When doing Edge Blening, each projector image is overlapping the adjacent images by approximately 20%. In these the overlapping zones, the incident light angles from the adjacent projectors are striking the screen surface at extreme different angles. Therefore, it is important that the light is returned to the viewers at the same luminance making for smooth image transitions in these overlapping zones. Since StudioTek 100 and GrayMatte 70 are perfect Lambertian surfaces, they are our number one materials for these applications, On the other hand, since Studiotek 130 G4 has a half gain angle at 80 degrees, which is excellent for single projector use, it would not make as smooth of an image transition when used multiple projectors striking the screen surface from extreme different projector positions. Since I am a visual guy, I have attached photos of edge blending examples from various different applications.


----------



## Technology3456

Don Stewart said:


> The term, "Edge Blending" that you see on our material comparison charts on our website, has little to do with screen performance in "Home Cinema" applications. That said, Stewart Filmscreen is heavily involved in different markets and applications including military and civil simulation, VR centers, broadcast and specialty venues such as you would find at a museums and theme parks to name a few. Edge Blending applications is one of our specialties to create wide vista images where multiple projectors, sometimes 24 or more, are employed to create a single blended image. When doing Edge Blening, each projector image is overlapping the adjacent images by approximately 20%. In these the overlapping zones, the incident light angles from the adjacent projectors are striking the screen surface at extreme different angles. Therefore, it is important that the light is returned to the viewers at the same luminance making for smooth image transitions in these overlapping zones. Since StudioTek 100 and GrayMatte 70 are perfect Lambertian surfaces, they are our number one materials for these applications, On the other hand, since Studiotek 130 G4 has a half gain angle at 80 degrees, which is excellent for single projector use, it would not make as smooth of an image transition when used multiple projectors striking the screen surface from extreme different projector positions. Since I am a visual guy, I have attached photos of edge blending examples from various different applications.
> View attachment 3123765
> View attachment 3123766
> View attachment 3123767
> View attachment 3123768
> View attachment 3123769


Thanks for the detailed explanation and the photos. That makes sense. I'm glad it's nothing to do with the sharpness of the pixels or the detail, just the Lambertian thing that will not have as big an effect for a single projector.


----------



## brazensol

Don, thanks so much for your assistance with the ST-100 sample. I took a look at the ST-130 sample I already have over the weekend and am pretty much sold on it but will still take a look at the ST-100 sample when it arrives. Can these materials be used in a DIY frame or must one also buy a dedicated frame? I am currently using a 124" wide (135" diagonal) 2.40:1 wood frame with black/white spandex material. The reason I ask is I already have black velvet panels built to fit around my current screen frame.


----------



## howiee

brazensol said:


> Don, thanks so much for your assistance with the ST-100 sample. I took a look at the ST-130 sample I already have over the weekend and am pretty much sold on it but will still take a look at the ST-100 sample when it arrives. Can these materials be used in a DIY frame or must one also buy a dedicated frame? I am currently using a 124" wide (135" diagonal) 2.40:1 wood frame with black/white spandex material. The reason I ask is I already have black velvet panels built to fit around my current screen frame.


I'll be interested in your thoughts. I'm leaning towards the ST-100 (if going non AT) as it sounds like it gives the best picture out of any screen around. Going by the adage you marry the screen and date the projector - lumens will likely increase with future pjs which gets around the advantage on the ST-130. Having said that, if the shimmering really is negligable on the ST-130, the brightnes bump would be welcome! It's frustrating, especially gfiven the costs, there's nowhere to demo these things in the UK.


----------



## RarityAVS

Don Stewart said:


> My suggestion is to drill the existing holes with an oversize drill bit to allow for some extra wiggle room. (The aluminum bar is very easy to work with and drills like butter). Then, when fastening to the concrete wall, use some oversize washers between the screw head and the bar holes to allow for additional compression to hold bar firmly and without slipping once you get it fine tuned and level to your liking.


Thank you for the suggestion Don. Perhaps you could offer a factory slightly height adjustable EZ Mount hanging bar in the future? At least myself and possibly other customers would prefer that over modifying it.



fredworld said:


> I have another suggestion that might help. First I installed 24" long 2x4's as a push-off (so I could have the edge of the screen clear part of a door frame) on my QuietRock wall and then attached the hanging bar to the 2x4's. As it turned out it actually enabled easier leveling and an easier screen hanging due to the additional clearance from the wall.


Thank you. I've actually tought about this myself. I might do it this way.


----------



## Don Stewart

brazensol said:


> Don, thanks so much for your assistance with the ST-100 sample. I took a look at the ST-130 sample I already have over the weekend and am pretty much sold on it but will still take a look at the ST-100 sample when it arrives. Can these materials be used in a DIY frame or must one also buy a dedicated frame? I am currently using a 124" wide (135" diagonal) 2.40:1 wood frame with black/white spandex material. The reason I ask is I already have black velvet panels built to fit around my current screen frame.


Sorry, but our current policy is not to supply raw material only. Please be advised that for HT size screens, we fabricate a full finished edge binding around the screen perimeter with snap fasteners to attach the screen to the frame. Therefore, we have full factory control assuring the proper amount of tension between the frame and screen making for a flat surface. In the rare event that screen does not fit a factory frame properly, then we would cheerfully replace the screen under full factory warranty. This would be difficult for us to do when we have not control over the frame design and/or installation methods used.

Best Regards,
Don


----------



## brazensol

Don,

Thanks for the info.


----------



## BrolicBeast

RarityAVS said:


> Can the EZ Mount Hanging Bar for the WallScreen Deluxe be adjusted slightly up and down before tightening the screws to get it perfectly leveled (with a spirit tool)? Reason is I have to drill into a super hard concrete wall. It's very difficult to drill the holes perfectly in such hard material.


Hey, I’d recommend using blue Tapcon screws to mount the EZ brackets. They are the same “feel” as regular screws and allow you to be more accurate. The drill bit is narrow so the experience is “like” mounting to studs. I’ve mounted Stewart ez brackets using anchors as well, and muuuuch prefer the Tapcons. 

A laser level is recommended to mark the drill points, but not necessary if your floor is level.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## DavidHir

I'm in my seventh year with my nine-foot wide ST100 scope screen. Enjoying it as much as ever.


----------



## fredworld

DavidHir said:


> I'm in my seventh year with my nine-foot wide ST100 scope screen. Enjoying it as much as ever.


I'm still only about 5-6 months in on mine, but coming from a gray Firehawk 1.2 gain I'll never look back. Best choice I've made for my HT (with some advice from July at Stewart) in many a year.


----------



## DavidHir

fredworld said:


> I'm still only about 5-6 months in on mine, but coming from a gray Firehawk 1.2 gain I'll never look back. Best choice I've made for my HT (with some advice from July at Stewart) in many a year.


Prior to getting the ST100, I had tried out a Da-lite HD Pro 1.1 and the sparkle really bothered me. I then tried their .9 material which was better, but still not satisfactory. Once I went to the ST100, I became thrilled.


----------



## RarityAVS

BrolicBeast said:


> Hey, I’d recommend using blue Tapcon screws to mount the EZ brackets. They are the same “feel” as regular screws and allow you to be more accurate. The drill bit is narrow so the experience is “like” mounting to studs.


Thanks a lot for this great suggestion! I will definitely look into this.


----------



## bigdogg

I have an older luxus model a screen (2008) with firehawk g3. I just got a new lg laser projector (HU810P). Pretty happy with the picture so far, a lot brighter than my old one. Only complaint so far is speckle is pretty terrible. Most scenes are fine, but anything with solid red (Netflix splash screen is the worst; yellow and white show a bit as well) just look super glittery/shimmery. From what I've read, laser projectors are susceptible to this with certain screen materials. I'm also thinking perhaps using 4k content on pretty old screen material might be acerbating it?

Any experience with this issue? Are there any particular screen materials that I should be investigating to mitigate this? I hate changing bulbs, so I was really hoping I could make this work.


----------



## Don Stewart

We have been using our StudioTek 100 for laser-phosphor based projectors as it is a completely neutral studio reference surface. Be advise that any ALR screen will induce laser speckle artifacts, especially in the red color spectrum. Since you already own a 2008 Luxus retractable screen, it could be returned to the factory and outfitted with new screen fabric. That said, it may require that your room will require more light control than your current FH screen.

Best Regards,
Don


----------



## Craig Peer

bigdogg said:


> I have an older luxus model a screen (2008) with firehawk g3. I just got a new lg laser projector (HU810P). Pretty happy with the picture so far, a lot brighter than my old one. Only complaint so far is speckle is pretty terrible. Most scenes are fine, but anything with solid red (Netflix splash screen is the worst; yellow and white show a bit as well) just look super glittery/shimmery. From what I've read, laser projectors are susceptible to this with certain screen materials. I'm also thinking perhaps using 4k content on pretty old screen material might be acerbating it?
> 
> Any experience with this issue? Are there any particular screen materials that I should be investigating to mitigate this? I hate changing bulbs, so I was really hoping I could make this work.


I just read a review mentioning speckle on another laser projector. You should get some current screen samples and test them against your existing screen.


----------



## bigdogg

Don Stewart said:


> We have been using our StudioTek 100 for laser-phosphor based projectors as it is a completely neutral studio reference surface. Be advise that any ALR screen will induce laser speckle artifacts, especially in the red color spectrum. Since you already own a 2008 Luxus retractable screen, it could be returned to the factory and outfitted with new screen fabric. That said, it may require that your room will require more light control than your current FH screen.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Don


Thanks Don -- good to know I can potentially get that swapped out. I'll look into getting some samples. My setup is pretty much batcave, so I'm good there (plus this pj is like 2.5x as bright as my prior Planer PD8150, so I have a lot of room to play with).


----------



## bigdogg

Craig Peer said:


> I just read a review mentioning speckle on another laser projector. You should get some current screen samples and test them against your existing screen.


I stumbled up this page: Are Stewart Screens Compatible with Laser Projectors? - Stewart

which suggests snomatte 100 and graymatte 70, so I'll see if I can evaluate those in addition to Don's recommendation.

Thanks guys!


----------



## Craig Peer

bigdogg said:


> I stumbled up this page: Are Stewart Screens Compatible with Laser Projectors? - Stewart
> 
> which suggests snomatte 100 and graymatte 70, so I'll see if I can evaluate those in addition to Don's recommendation.
> 
> Thanks guys!


I have been watching a 4K laser projector on a StudioTek 130 G3 screen, and a Stewart Cima Neve, for 50 months, with no issue. But my projector doesn't exhibit speckle that I've ever seen.


----------



## Jason Harrison

I am looking to buy a Cima Neve and it cant find a dealer who has them in stock. Are they all made to order or is there a stock shortage right now?


----------



## SJHT

bigdogg said:


> I stumbled up this page: Are Stewart Screens Compatible with Laser Projectors? - Stewart
> 
> which suggests snomatte 100 and graymatte 70, so I'll see if I can evaluate those in addition to Don's recommendation.
> 
> Thanks guys!


When was that posted? Maybe outdated with their current screens and current laser projectors. SJ


----------



## Don Stewart

Jason Harrison said:


> I am looking to buy a Cima Neve and it cant find a dealer who has them in stock. Are they all made to order or is there a stock shortage right now?


Hi Jason,
Because of the pandemic, we and others have experienced a surge in demand for home entertainment products. As of this morning, retractable Cima screens are running 10 to 15 working days from receipt of PO from the dealer. Fixed frame Cima models are running 15 to 18 days from receipt of PO to loading finished product on the truck for shipping.

Best Regards,
Don


----------



## Craig Peer

Jason Harrison said:


> I am looking to buy a Cima Neve and it cant find a dealer who has them in stock. Are they all made to order or is there a stock shortage right now?


Stewart screens are built to order - that way you get one that is " fresh " !


----------



## RarityAVS

The WallScreen Deluxe screen fabric is snapped on at the backside of the frame, right? In other words the whole screen fabric is close to the wall? How much does the EZ Mount Hanging Bar and magnet pucks push the screen out from the wall in addition to it's 1 ½ inch frame thickness?


----------



## Craig Peer

RarityAVS said:


> The WallScreen Deluxe screen fabric is snapped on at the backside of the frame, right? In other words the whole screen fabric is close to the wall? How much does the EZ Mount Hanging Bar and magnet pucks push the screen out from the wall in addition to it's 1 ½ inch frame thickness?


About 1 1/8".


----------



## fredworld

RarityAVS said:


> The WallScreen Deluxe screen fabric is snapped on at the backside of the frame, right? In other words the whole screen fabric is close to the wall? How much does the EZ Mount Hanging Bar and magnet pucks push the screen out from the wall in addition to it's 1 ½ inch frame thickness?


Here's a suggestion for more wall clearance: *link*.


----------



## Technology3456

Don if you have time, could you please weigh in with a technical answer about whether screen surfaces can affect perception of clear smooth low-eye-strain, motion? I know screens affect every other aspect of picture quality, but haven't found any consensus whether they can affect motion.

Why I ask is, for example you mentioned the Studiotek G4 130 reflects light back at the viewer, while the G3 100 reflects it more towards the walls etc. This might mean that at a pixel level, one screen is reflecting the pixel straight ahead, while the other is sending the light of the pixels sideways in front of the edge of the other pixels, almost more bleeding of light towards the other pixels.

But because the G4 130 is higher gain, then I could see that going the other way too. Like if you took a pin sized flash light the size of one pixel, and pointed it at a 1.0 screen, the reflected pin-sized circle of light would be the same size on screen as the point of the flashlight, but if you pointed it at a 1.3 screen, maybe it would be bigger, or have like a bigger halo? I've never actually tried that so I'm not sure but it seems like it would change the way the light appears a little bit in additional ways on top of just increasing the brightness, and perhaps these ways could affect motion perception across the screen.

What I am wondering is, when the pixels are all changing and there is the illusion of movement on screen with a movie, is that motion smoother when each pixel is reflected more outwardly, on the G3 100, as well as either smaller or with less reflection, or is that motion smoother when each pixel is reflected more straight forward on the G4 130, as well as potentially reflecting the light in a bigger sphere even if it's a more straight forward refection?

I'm not sure most would notice any difference, but I am very picky about motion and comparatively not picky about everything else in the picture, so if there is even 1% smoother motion on the G3 100 or the G4 130, that would be important for me to know as I weigh the decision which to buy.


----------



## Don Stewart

Technology3456 said:


> Don if you have time, could you please weigh in with a technical answer about whether screen surfaces can affect perception of clear smooth low-eye-strain, motion? I know screens affect every other aspect of picture quality, but haven't found any consensus whether they can affect motion.
> 
> *Why I ask is, for example you mentioned the Studiotek G4 130 reflects light back at the viewer, while the G3 100 reflects it more towards the walls etc*. This might mean that at a pixel level, one screen is reflecting the pixel straight ahead, while the other is sending the light of the pixels sideways in front of the edge of the other pixels, almost more bleeding of light towards the other pixels.
> 
> But because the G4 130 is higher gain, then I could see that going the other way too. Like if you took a pin sized flash light the size of one pixel, and pointed it at a 1.0 screen, the reflected pin-sized circle of light would be the same size on screen as the point of the flashlight, but if you pointed it at a 1.3 screen, maybe it would be bigger, or have like a bigger halo? I've never actually tried that so I'm not sure but it seems like it would change the way the light appears a little bit in additional ways on top of just increasing the brightness, and perhaps these ways could affect motion perception across the screen.
> 
> What I am wondering is, when the pixels are all changing and there is the illusion of movement on screen with a movie, is that motion smoother when each pixel is reflected more outwardly, on the G3 100, as well as either smaller or with less reflection, or is that motion smoother when each pixel is reflected more straight forward on the G4 130, as well as potentially reflecting the light in a bigger sphere even if it's a more straight forward refection?
> 
> I'm not sure most would notice any difference, but I am very picky about motion and comparatively not picky about everything else in the picture, so if there is even 1% smoother motion on the G3 100 or the G4 130, that would be important for me to know as I weigh the decision which to buy.


Actually, I don't recall ever making that statement in bold text above as it is not true and correct. Perhaps your are confusing me with someone's else's comment from another thread.
Both generations of StudioTek 130, G3 and G4, have the exact same peak gain of 1.3 and the exact same half gain degree luminence angle of 80 degrees. The significant change between the two sperate generations is the optical coating now uses much smaller gain particles which in turn makes a smoother finish minimizing screen surface grain, texture and sparkle.

Regards,
Don


----------



## Technology3456

Don Stewart said:


> Actually, I don't recall ever making that statement in bold text above as it is not true and correct. Perhaps your are confusing me with someone's else's comment from another thread.
> Both generations of StudioTek 130, G3 and G4, have the exact same peak gain of 1.3 and the exact same half gain degree luminence angle of 80 degrees. The significant change between the two sperate generations is the optical coating now uses much smaller gain particles and a smoother finish minimizing screen surface grain, texture and sparkle.
> 
> Regards,
> Don


Hey Don. Apologies if I misunderstood one of your comments, or am confusing someone else's comments with one of yours. However, the bolded part of my comment and my comment in general was referring to Studiotek 130 vs G3 100, not G4 130 vs G3 130.

Maybe I am confusing the names of the screens and "G3 100" is not the correct way to put it and this is causing confusion. I am asking about the current Studiotek 130 compared to the current Studiotek 100. It was my understanding that the new Studiotek 130 is G4 because there was enough room for improvement with the gain screen, in order to perfect it, that it has graduated to G4, whereas the studiotek 100 was already perfected so it still remains G3 and has not needed to be changed enough over the years to warrant a "G4" title.

And I thought I remembered you saying that the 130 reflects light back more towards the audience, while the 100 reflects it more sideways. Based on that recollection, and the other reasons/potential reasons I mentioned, I was wondering which you would recommend for viewers extremely sensitive to motion, who want the smoothest motion possible above everything else.

Sorry if I got anything confused. The bottom line for me is I am looking for advice whether the 130 or 100 would provide slightly better motion perception than the other.


----------



## RarityAVS

Craig Peer said:


> About 1 1/8".


Where I'm from we use the metric system, but Isn't that too much? Overall depth minus frame depth should be 0.875" (2 3/8" - 1 1/2")? So that's the distance from the wall to the screen fabric, right?


----------



## Craig Peer

RarityAVS said:


> Where I'm from we use the metric system, but Isn't that too much? Overall depth minus frame depth should be 0.875" (2 3/8" - 1 1/2")? So that's the distance from the wall to the screen fabric, right?


You should probably email Stewart for that dimension. I just know what that drawing says.


----------



## Technology3456

Given the different amount of reflectivity in the Studiotek 130 than the Studiotek 100, and the different material mixes in the screen surfaces, and, unless I misunderstood, the different angles of reflectivity, which is most recommended for the smoothest, cleanest fast-motion, the 130 or the 100?

Or if there is really bad shaky cam in the source video, which screen surface will handle this with a little less smear than the other?

Based on everything I've read and heard, both the Studiotek 130 and Studiotek 100 will have the clearest, sharpest, smoothest picture, and motion, of practically (maybe _literally_) any screen on the market, but if you had to choose only one of these two "champion" screens for motion specifically, which would have a slight edge?


----------



## Don Stewart

Technology3456 said:


> Given the different amount of reflectivity in the Studiotek 130 than the Studiotek 100, and the different material mixes in the screen surfaces, and, unless I misunderstood, the different angles of reflectivity, which is most recommended for the smoothest, cleanest fast-motion, the 130 or the 100?
> 
> Or if there is really bad shaky cam in the source video, which screen surface will handle this with a little less smear than the other?
> 
> Based on everything I've read and heard, both the Studiotek 130 and Studiotek 100 will have the clearest, sharpest, smoothest picture, and motion, of practically (maybe _literally_) any screen on the market, but if you had to choose only one of these two "champion" screens for motion specifically, which would have a slight edge?


Hi Technology.
I must admit that during my long time career in the screen business, this is the very first time anyone has brought up the subject of differences in screen surface performance for fast motion artifacts. My gut instinct tells me there should be no noticeable different between ST100 and ST130 G4. That being said, we do know that there can be differences between individual's eyes and how the brain processes the information received. My suggestion is to get samples of of both screens and put them side by side, then watch some fast motion video and see if you notice any different between the two samples. I would be interested to know your test results.

Best regards,
Don


----------



## Craig Peer

Technology3456 said:


> Given the different amount of reflectivity in the Studiotek 130 than the Studiotek 100, and the different material mixes in the screen surfaces, and, unless I misunderstood, the different angles of reflectivity, which is most recommended for the smoothest, cleanest fast-motion, the 130 or the 100?
> 
> Or if there is really bad shaky cam in the source video, which screen surface will handle this with a little less smear than the other?
> 
> Based on everything I've read and heard, both the Studiotek 130 and Studiotek 100 will have the clearest, sharpest, smoothest picture, and motion, of practically (maybe _literally_) any screen on the market, but if you had to choose only one of these two "champion" screens for motion specifically, which would have a slight edge?


I have never seen a difference in motion from screen to screen, and I regularly use two different Stewart screens with two different materials.


----------



## RarityAVS

Craig Peer said:


> You should probably email Stewart for that dimension. I just know what that drawing says.


I sent Stewart an email about this today. What I'm curious about is if what I've marked in green is the actual screen inside the frame?









If so it's snapped on about 40 % in from the back of the frame itself. If the depth of the frame is 3.25 inches that means the screen itself about is 1.3 inches in from the back of the frame, right?


----------



## Craig Peer

RarityAVS said:


> I sent Stewart an email about this today. What I'm curious about is if what I've marked in green is the actual screen inside the frame?
> 
> View attachment 3128901
> 
> If so it's snapped on about 40 % in from the back of the frame itself. If the depth of the frame is 3.25 inches that means the screen itself about is 1.3 inches in from the back of the frame, right?


That's the material I believe, but 3 1/2" is not the depth of the frame - that's the width of the frame. The depth is 1 1/2" as per the drawing I posted above.


----------



## RarityAVS

Craig Peer said:


> That's the material I believe, but 3 1/2" is not the depth of the frame - that's the width of the frame. The depth is 1 1/2" as per the drawing I posted above.


Yes, of course! My bad! That should put the screen fabric approximately at 0.6 inches or 15 mm in from the back of the frame. In total the screen fabric should be about 1.48 inches or 38 mm from the wall.

These numbers actually matters to me as I'm trying to push the boundaries I'm working with to get as big a scope screen for movies as possible.

Edited: Corrected my bad saturday night math.


----------



## Technology3456

RarityAVS said:


> Yes, of course! My bad! That should put the screen fabric approximately at 0.24 inches or 6 mm in from the back of the frame. In total the screen fabric should be about 1.06 inches or 27 mm from the wall.
> 
> These numbers actually matters to me as I'm trying to push the boundaries I'm working with to get as big a scope screen for movies as possible.


Good question. I was wondering the same thing for retractable screens, but it wasn't one of my more urgent questions so I tabled it. This seems a good time to ask though. If you mount the back of the retractable screen... tube/box/case... right where the ceiling and wall come together, as far back to the wall as possible, once you retract the screen out of it and it tensions, how far will it be off the wall?


----------



## SJHT

Probably depends on what drop down model you have. I would look on the Stewart website. This info would likely be in the installation manuals… SJ


----------



## AVfile

RarityAVS said:


> These numbers actually matters to me as I'm trying to push the boundaries I'm working with to get as big a scope screen for movies as possible.


Same here. I never did calculate the exact distance but I figured it was under 1 inch. Also I remember thinking the Wallscreen 2.5 and 3.25 / Deluxe were slightly different based on the drawings. Which frame are you getting?

I was surprised how much difference that inch could make in image size, and needs to be accounted for when doing throw distance calculations if your PJ is near max zoom.


----------



## RarityAVS

I was considering the WallScreen 2.5, but the dealer in Denmark told me it wasn't available anymore. Not sure if that's just here in Europe or also across the pond? That frame also has slightly less depth which is useful when trying to go as big as possible.

I am therefore probably getting the WallScreen Deluxe. I figured the 3 ¼ inch velvet masking could be really handy when the wall isn't black (and help the image stand out/pop more). I also think it's probably the most sturdy, well built "basic" fixed frame they offer.

I was really set on 128 inches, but then I only see the velvet masking of the whole screen in the sweet spot. If I move one seat to the left or the right I don't see the bottom left and right corners of the velvet masking (because of the screen being on the wall behind the towed in left and right floor standing speakers). Since the screen itself also is about 1.6 inches or 4.1 cm from the wall I reluctantly need to reduce the size somewhat. If I reduce it to 127 inches I see a little bit of the bottom left and right corner velvet masking, but maybe I ought to go down to even 126 inches. I am going to try it by projecting on the wall to see what I feel comfortable with before making the final decision.

Problem is as you say, that even small adjustments makes a lot of difference and I want to get it right the first time.

By the way... According to the dealer in my country the screen fabric sits 0.79 inches or 2 cm inside the frame (from the back of it). He measured it.


----------



## AVfile

RarityAVS said:


> I was considering the WallScreen 2.5, but the dealer in Denmark told me it wasn't available anymore. Not sure if that's just here in Europe or also across the pond? That frame also has slightly less depth which is useful when trying to go as big as possible.
> 
> I am therefore probably getting the WallScreen Deluxe. I figured the 3 ¼ inch velvet masking could be really handy when the wall isn't black (and help the image stand out/pop more). I also think it's probably the most sturdy, well built "basic" fixed frame they offer.
> 
> I was really set on 128 inches, but then I only see the velvet masking of the whole screen in the sweet spot. If I move one seat to the left or the right I don't see the bottom left and right corners of the velvet masking (because of the screen being on the wall behind the towed in left and right floor standing speakers). Since the screen itself also is about 1.6 inches or 4.1 cm from the wall I reluctantly need to reduce the size somewhat. If I reduce it to 127 inches I see a little bit of the bottom left and right corner velvet masking, but maybe I ought to go down to even 126 inches. I am going to try it by projecting on the wall to see what I feel comfortable with before making the final decision.
> 
> Problem is as you say, that even small adjustments makes a lot of difference and I want to get it right the first time.
> 
> By the way... According to the dealer in my country the screen fabric sits 0.79 inches or 2 cm inside the frame (from the back of it). He measured it.


I went with 126” too. 

Actually when I ordered 6 months ago it was the WS Deluxe that wasn’t available due to an issue in the factory and my store wanted to sell me the WS 2.5 instead! Fortunately Stewart stepped up and offered something called WS 3.25 which is almost identical to the Deluxe so I went with that. So I would be surprised if WS 2.5 is not still available. One thing I was not impressed with was the outdated information the local dealer had so I called the Canadian distributor myself and also got some good advice from a helpful American dealer. By the way everything is special order here and nobody stocks anything.

I just measured mine and the screen is 2cm back from the front of the frame. The front of the frame is 5cm out from the wall, so that puts the screen 3cm from the wall.


----------



## RarityAVS

Technology3456 said:


> Good question. I was wondering the same thing for retractable screens, but it wasn't one of my more urgent questions so I tabled it. This seems a good time to ask though. If you mount the back of the retractable screen... tube/box/case... right where the ceiling and wall come together, as far back to the wall as possible, once you retract the screen out of it and it tensions, how far will it be off the wall?


I just came over this YouTube video at 10:10:






You can use _Auto-translate_ if you want to watch the whole thing.


----------



## Everyone

Finally assembling my 160" Balon Borderless StudioTek130Perf screen... I inspected all the major parts when it arrived 2 months ago, but didn't pay attention to the small parts. I'm missing 4 of the bolts for the frame assembly, screws for the EZ Mount, and the steel pucks. 

The bolts and screws aren't a big deal since the sizes are listed and I can just pick them up at the hardware store when they open tomorrow, but where do I find these "steel pucks"? There's no dimension listed for it, so I'm not sure what to use as a replacement.


----------



## Craig Peer

Everyone said:


> Finally assembling my 160" Balon Borderless StudioTek130Perf screen... I inspected all the major parts when it arrived 2 months ago, but didn't pay attention to the small parts. I'm missing 4 of the bolts for the frame assembly, screws for the EZ Mount, and the steel pucks.
> 
> The bolts and screws aren't a big deal since the sizes are listed and I can just pick them up at the hardware store when they open tomorrow, but where do I find these "steel pucks"? There's no dimension listed for it, so I'm not sure what to use as a replacement.


You find them by contacting your dealer and having them ask Stewart for them. In fact, you should be doing that rather than posting here !


----------



## Everyone

Craig Peer said:


> You find them by contacting your dealer and having them ask Stewart for them. In fact, you should be doing that rather than posting here !


 'cause the dealer is around late on a Sunday evening. I had a message waiting for me this morning, Stewart is shipping them to me. If I could have found them at my local hardware store, it's 15 minutes to go pick up $2 worth of hardware vs waiting days for them to be shipped.


----------



## Craig Peer

Everyone said:


> I had a message waiting for me this morning, Stewart is shipping them to me. If I could have found them at my local hardware store, it's 15 minutes to go pick up $2 worth of hardware vs waiting days for them to be shipped.


You are using the wrong dealer.


----------



## Don Stewart

Everyone said:


> Finally assembling my 160" Balon Borderless StudioTek130Perf screen... I inspected all the major parts when it arrived 2 months ago, but didn't pay attention to the small parts. I'm missing 4 of the bolts for the frame assembly, screws for the EZ Mount, and the steel pucks.
> 
> The bolts and screws aren't a big deal since the sizes are listed and I can just pick them up at the hardware store when they open tomorrow, but where do I find these "steel pucks"? There's no dimension listed for it, so I'm not sure what to use as a replacement.


Please be advised that the missing hardware is being shipped today Via Fed-X for Next Day Delivery so keep your eye out for them. I will direct message you the tracking number. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused you.

Best regards,
Don


----------



## Everyone

Finally got the screen assembled and up tonight. Room is nowhere near done, but will finally be functional now!


----------



## BrolicBeast

Looking good, @Everyone !!!

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Don Stewart

Projector Central just published a nice article on UNLV's Film School's new Huge completely seamless, 29'-6" diagonal "Director's Choice" in their auditorium.
(A technical note to avoid confusion.) The screen material SnoMatte 100 and StudioTek 100 are the same material. When used for large venues, we brand as Snomatte 100. When used for smaller venues such as residential applications, we brand it as StudioTek 100.








UNLV Upgrades Their Theater With Stewart Filmscreen's Director's Choice


When UNLV in Las Vegas decided to build a first-class film program, they naturally turned to Stewart Filmscreen's Director's Choice screen as part of their state-of-the-art projection solution.



www.projectorcentral.com


----------



## pettso

I've got a potentially stupid question, so apologies in advance. Is it possible to get screen material that fits into an existing non-Stewart frame? As a specific example, I have a 120" Silver Ticket fixed frame and I'd like rather not go through the process of dumping the frame and installing a new one to upgrade the material.


----------



## Don Stewart

pettso said:


> I've got a potentially stupid question, so apologies in advance. Is it possible to get screen material that fits into an existing non-Stewart frame? As a specific example, I have a 120" Silver Ticket fixed frame and I'd like rather not go through the process of dumping the frame and installing a new one to upgrade the material.


 Does your frame use snap fasteners to secure the screen to the back of the frame? If so, only if it can be brought to our factory in SoCal so we can test fit it and make sure it fits the frame properly. 

Regards,
Don


----------



## AndreNewman

Don Stewart said:


> Does your frame use snap fasteners to secure the screen to the back of the frame? If so, only if it can be brought to our factory in SoCal so we can test fit it and make sure it fits the frame properly.
> 
> Regards,
> Don


I was just about to ask much the same question, I saw in a post a few years ago you were discussing supplying fabric for a alternate supplier screen but that was ~12 years ago!

I have a fixed frame Beamax A-Velvet 3.34m visible wide 2.35:1 screen with a high contrast white fabric in a light controlled room but with white ceiling and looking for something better with a little gain. The fitting is sleeved rods with tensioned bands, is this fairly easy to retrofit Stewart fabric into? Or better yet a standard fit?

Is there someone in the UK I can talk to about this, maybe get some fabric samples or is it better or possible to go direct?

Thanks


----------



## Technology3456

If I bought an on ceiling tensioned retractable Stewart screen, what model is that called? Or what are the differences between the types available? 

I am trying to determine the dimensions it would take up on the ceiling, and where the screen would come out of the container.


----------



## Don Stewart

Technology3456 said:


> If I bought an on ceiling tensioned retractable Stewart screen, what model is that called? Or what are the differences between the types available?
> 
> I am trying to determine the dimensions it would take up on the ceiling, and where the screen would come out of the container.


We make many different retractable screens. Would need the serial # to determine the model.


----------



## Craig Peer

Technology3456 said:


> If I bought an on ceiling tensioned retractable Stewart screen, what model is that called? Or what are the differences between the types available?
> 
> I am trying to determine the dimensions it would take up on the ceiling, and where the screen would come out of the container.


The Luxus is the most common one I'd say, or the Cima - 
Luxus - Stewart (stewartfilmscreen.com) 

Cima BC - Stewart (stewartfilmscreen.com) 

Screens - Stewart (stewartfilmscreen.com)


----------



## Craig Peer

Technology3456 said:


> If I bought an on ceiling tensioned retractable Stewart screen, what model is that called? Or what are the differences between the types available?
> 
> I am trying to determine the dimensions it would take up on the ceiling, and where the screen would come out of the container.


Here is one example - 

Luxus Series Retractable, Below Ceiling Screen System Model Name: Luxus Model Number: LUX130SST13G4CLB-12-2-5 Image Size: 51in x 119.5in (130in diag.) 2.35:1


----------



## Technology3456

Craig Peer said:


> Here is one example -
> 
> Luxus Series Retractable, Below Ceiling Screen System Model Name: Luxus Model Number: LUX130SST13G4CLB-12-2-5 Image Size: 51in x 119.5in (130in diag.) 2.35:1
> View attachment 3135312


Thanks. That really helps a lot.


----------



## SJHT

Do any of these retractable screens offer top masking options? I added a DIY which works well for my Stewart, but would NEVER purchase a 16:9 screen retractable without this anymore. SJ


----------



## Don Stewart

SJHT said:


> Do any of these retractable screens offer top masking options? I added a DIY which works well for my Stewart, but would NEVER purchase a 16:9 screen retractable without this anymore. SJ


Hi SJHT,
Yes we do. See link.


https://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/Files/files/Support%20Material/Screen%20Data%20Sheets/Cascade.pdf



Best regards,
Don


----------



## Technology3456

Don Stewart said:


> Hi SJHT,
> Yes we do. See link.
> 
> 
> https://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/Files/files/Support%20Material/Screen%20Data%20Sheets/Cascade.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Don


Very cool. Is there an "on ceiling" version?


----------



## Don Stewart

Technology3456 said:


> Very cool. Is there an "on ceiling" version?


Here is the newly redesigned below ceiling Luxus model.. It can be attached directly to the ceiling or to a wall.





Luxus - Stewart


An appealing compact, below ceiling retractable screen ideal for images in widths up to 13 feet 3 inches. The Luxus features a quiet motor and advanced roller tube technology, minimizing horizontal lines in the image area. A well proven screen with a time-tested following.




www.stewartfilmscreen.com


----------



## Technology3456

Don Stewart said:


> Here is the newly redesigned below ceiling Luxus model.. It can be attached directly to the ceiling or to a wall.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Luxus - Stewart
> 
> 
> An appealing compact, below ceiling retractable screen ideal for images in widths up to 13 feet 3 inches. The Luxus features a quiet motor and advanced roller tube technology, minimizing horizontal lines in the image area. A well proven screen with a time-tested following.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.stewartfilmscreen.com


Is there an on-ceiling version with left and right side masking options, or top and bottom masking options, like the Cascade above ceiling model has? Any model similar to the Cascade, but "on ceiling"?


----------



## Don Stewart

Technology3456 said:


> Is there an on-ceiling version with left and right side masking options, or top and bottom masking options, like the Cascade above ceiling model has? Any model similar to the Cascade, but "on ceiling"?


Since these are high end units, most customers have them mounted above the ceiling by a professional AV installer. If the ceiling joust are going perpendicular to the screen housing, then they mount the unit just below the ceiling and have an architectural valance built around screen housing to match the room decor.


----------



## SJHT

I could have done the on ceiling (mine has a valance to hide it anyway), but would be great if you offered an on wall retractable that has masking options. Not sure that would be possible, but nice as an option. Since I’m wishing, having a top masking system that could be added would also be fantastic. Mine is a simple power retractable roller with triple black velvet fabric that drops down in front of the retractable screen and is totally automated (by aspect ratio sent from my Kaleidescape system and Lumagen Pro) but would purchase a professional model if available. Could not find one and ended up going DIY…. SJ


----------



## Technology3456

Don Stewart said:


> Since these are high end units, most customers have them mounted above the ceiling by a professional AV installer. If the ceiling joust are going perpendicular to the screen housing, then they mount the unit just below the ceiling and have an architectural valance built around screen housing to match the room decor.


Thanks for explaining. Not familiar with architectural variance, and maybe I can live with bad room decor other than I want black velvet everywhere in front/back/side of the screen. I'm most concerned with, will it work to mount it on the ceiling, or not? The studs in my ceiling are perpendicular to where the screen would be mounted. Let's see if this works. If the |'s combine to represent the screen, the -------'s are the studs. 

------ |
------ |
------ |


----------



## Craig Peer

Don Stewart said:


> Since these are high end units, most customers have them mounted above the ceiling by a professional AV installer. If the ceiling joust are going perpendicular to the screen housing, then they mount the unit just below the ceiling and have an architectural valance built around screen housing to match the room decor.


I built a soffit in front of my surface mount Luxus screens. Can’t even see the case.










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## millerquad4

Today is the estimated ship date for my ST130 G4 WallScreen Deluxe…getting excited! Hope to receive confirmation from my rep soon.


----------



## raullopez1234

Does the cima neve screen material have any polarization?. I'm trying to figure out what 3d glasses to buy for my nx7.


----------



## Don Stewart

raullopez1234 said:


> Does the cima neve screen material have any polarization?. I'm trying to figure out what 3d glasses to buy for my nx7.


The Neve material is a white diffusion screen with a little extra gain added. (1.1 to1.2 gain). To do passive polarized 3D, it requires a screen with a metalized finish, such as a silver screen, that holds the polarization and returns the polarized light back to the viewer(s). That said, you can do active 3D on the Neve material with the proper set up..

Best Regards,
Don


----------



## Don Stewart

A different design idea.
Sometimes, a customer will send us a sketch of what he is looking for. In this case, he wanted a completely stealth video system when not in use and went with an above ceiling retractable trap door screen. The customer added in-wall speakers at sitting ear level and wanted the screen to deploy all the way to the floor to give the system more of a theatrical look when in use. So we started with a single seamless piece of StudioTek 130. We then Micro-perforated the screen material starting at only just below the bottom of the image area where the in-wall speakers were located. After perforating the lower apron area, the screen went to our fly- loft where we applied the black border finish on the top, sides, and bottom of screen material. I did not get a photo of his particular screen but here is a similar one where we did receive a photo. Anyway, I thought this was a cool design for this particular customer's need.


----------



## DaveN

I am in the process of moving. Somehow on my last move I developed a crease in my Stewart fixed frame screen material. It took weeks of blow drying to get it out. I have the box from my new screen and I am wondering if there are any tips to avoid this happening again. The screen will probably be boxed for 6-7 months.


----------



## millerquad4

So this arrived yesterday! Setup was a breeze. Massive improvement in picture quality from my old screen and regarding HDR content...WOW! Still have work left on the room, but I am extremely happy and satisfied with this purchase. Highly recommend the impressive ST130 G4!


----------



## fredworld

DaveN said:


> I am in the process of moving. Somehow on my last move I developed a crease in my Stewart fixed frame screen material. It took weeks of blow drying to get it out. I have the box from my new screen and I am wondering if there are any tips to avoid this happening again. The screen will probably be boxed for 6-7 months.


I believe Stewart machine rolls them. My newish StudioTek 100 (delivered November 2020) was rolled with special paper on the viewing side. When I unrolled it, it was COMPLETELY EVENLY ROLLED with no bumps or creases. When storing keep the box flat. Don't stand it on end because gravity will have its way with it.
See* this post from Stewar*t.
I'm pretty sure that there's a mention in the manual about such, too.
When I first got my first Stewart screen new in 2004 it had about a half dozen creases horizontally across the entire width. After several weeks they were gone. The screens have a "memory" and reshape themselves after installation. Two years later after we moved to our current home the screen was stored for over 6 months before I was able to install it. Once again there were creases and this time with wrinkles. They all dissipated in their entirety after a few weeks BY DOING NOTHING. I wouldn't do anything other than wait a few weeks. Stewart says there's a "technique" to the hair dryer method, so unless you speak with them directly for instructions on that "technique" I wouldn't try it. The passive approach seems best, either via patience or exposure to sunlight as Stewart suggests. I hope this helps.


----------



## Don Stewart

DaveN said:


> I am in the process of moving. Somehow on my last move I developed a crease in my Stewart fixed frame screen material. It took weeks of blow drying to get it out. I have the box from my new screen and I am wondering if there are any tips to avoid this happening again. The screen will probably be boxed for 6-7 months.


Hi Dave,

Please see the attached PDF file instructions for repacking screen material. 

Best Regards,
Don


----------



## avsBuddy

millerquad4 said:


> So this arrived yesterday!


Congratulations! Very cozy room. How did you decide on the size of your screen? What's your seating distance?


----------



## millerquad4

avsBuddy said:


> Congratulations! Very cozy room. How did you decide on the size of your screen? What's your seating distance?


Thank you! Our seating distance is right at 11.5 ft. We were considering 124" 2.35 (right around 99" for 1.78) and 117" 1.78 screens. Before ordering we watched plenty of movies/shows/sports on the wall at those sizes/aspect rations. We eventually went with the 117" 1.78 for a few reasons.

1) Although the 124" 2.35 was amazing, we watch a lot of 1.78 content and being in Oklahoma...plenty of OU football games and college football. I just could not stomach watching on less than a 100" screen if we went the 2.35 route. We could have went a little larger for 1.78, but my wife watches with me and unfortunately she suffers from motion sickness. 117" for us worked best.

2) We are limited on the projector location because we have a door in the back left corner to our attic, which we need access to as well as a return vent that causes issues. If we moved our sectional back we could get additional viewing distance (larger screen), but it is a pain to move and we would need to every time we need access to the attic. Yes it is big and one could say too big, but it works for us. We have two girls (teenagers), so sleepovers work great and the two dogs usually take the section closest to the screen.

It was a challenge for sure choosing the size we went with, but overall I am extremely happy. I went with the ST130 G4 over the ST100 for the extra brightness (HDR content) and glad I did. With all that said, I ultimately wanted to go with a 2.35 ratio screen, but I need a minimum of 135"...maybe a little larger to justify the smaller 1.78 ratio throw in a CIH setup.


----------



## liverpool_for_life

liverpool_for_life said:


> That's some endorsement (as if the review wasn't glowing enough without it). This is my new dream screen. Someday, when I buy a JVC NX 5/7...


(Apologies for quoting my own post)

As Luigi says in Cars: "Guido, it's time!". Have a 135 in 16:9, but it's time for a new screen to pair with the NX7.

Still discussing some options wrt optimizing the non-dedicated room, but the goal is for the room to be light-controlled while watching. Walls and ceilings are a dark blue, and there's a red carpet about 8 feet long and 12 feet wide starting out from the front wall.

The ST130 G4 remains my dream screen. Hoping to do 135 in scope. Still not sure if I'm going to do fixed frame or retractable. Will have to give up a window if I do fixed, but that may well be necessary to make things work budget-wise. Either way, given that I have acoustic treatments across my front wall, I'll need an AT screen.

Anyone with experience of using the ST130 G4 perforated? Thanks in advance!


----------



## Webmonkey

Kris Deering said:


> My review of the new G4 Studiotek 130 went live online today. You can find it here:
> 
> Stewart Studiotek 130 Generation 4 Review
> 
> As I mentioned in the review, this is now what I am using full time in my room given the benefit of the gain for HDR and the decrease in perceptual artifacts from the coating compared to the G3. It is still not a ST100, but it is close enough with the gain benefit for my needs.


I see that you also did a review of the Neve material. How do they compare when it comes to sparke and sheen??


----------



## liverpool_for_life

liverpool_for_life said:


> Anyone with experience of using the ST130 G4 perforated?


Spoke with Mark Seaton yesterday and his advise was to go with the perforated. Waiting on a shipping quote for the Luxus retractable 150 in diagonal in 2.4:1. This will give me a 120 in 16:9 image, but the plan is to install the screen 2-3 feet out into the room, so the perception of smallness wrt to my prior 135 in 16:9 image can be mitigated somewhat.

My NX7 will be calibrated. Current thinking is to go with retractable blackout curtains for a third of the sidewalls and ceiling.

Calculators suggest image brightness in the mid 20's FL for this screen size/gain and minimum throw distance. Anamorphic lens is out of the equation. Will I be okay or do I need to consider either darkening the room more/going smaller on the screen size?


----------



## etherealsound

Hello, so I am about to pull the trigger on a stewart screen and have everything down except the material. I'm stuck between the st100 and the st130. I'll be using it in a completely light controlled room with matte black ceilings and walls with an epson 6050ub at 122 inch 2.4:1 any advice or opinions are much appreciated!


----------



## millerquad4

etherealsound said:


> Hello, so I am about to pull the trigger on a stewart screen and have everything down except the material. I'm stuck between the st100 and the st130. I'll be using it in a completely light controlled room with matte black ceilings and walls with an epson 6050ub at 122 inch 2.4:1 any advice or opinions are much appreciated!


I have a 6050 and complete light control with 117” 1.78 screen and went with the ST130 G4. I have no regrets and definitely enjoy the extra brightness for HDR content. What is your throw distance? Also, have you thought about getting samples of both ST100 and ST130?


----------



## fredworld

etherealsound said:


> Hello, so I am about to pull the trigger on a stewart screen and have everything down except the material. I'm stuck between the st100 and the st130. I'll be using it in a completely light controlled room with matte black ceilings and walls with an epson 6050ub at 122 inch 2.4:1 any advice or opinions are much appreciated!


July Yepez of Stewart advised me that for a light controlled set up, the StudioTek 100 is truly optimal filmscreen to use up to 132” diagonal in 2.35:1 format.
I don't regret taking his advice at all.


----------



## etherealsound

millerquad4 said:


> I have a 6050 and complete light control with 117” 1.78 screen and went with the ST130 G4. I have no regrets and definitely enjoy the extra brightness for HDR content. What is your throw distance? Also, have you thought about getting samples of both ST100 and ST130?


I've not thought about doing that but I suppose it would be a good idea. My throw distance would be about 17ft?



fredworld said:


> July Yepez of Stewart advised me that for a light controlled set up, the StudioTek 100 is truly optimal filmscreen to use up to 132” diagonal in 2.35:1 format.
> I don't regret taking his advice at all.


Another Stewart rep also advised me of the same but I also wanted to get a few extra opinions.


----------



## etherealsound

.


----------



## liverpool_for_life

Retractable, perforated Luxus 150 in diagonal 2.4:1 it is! Truly awesome 45th birthday gift from the missus. Fingers crossed it can get here in time and be installed by then.


----------



## etherealsound

millerquad4 said:


> I have a 6050 and complete light control with 117” 1.78 screen and went with the ST130 G4. I have no regrets and definitely enjoy the extra brightness for HDR content. What is your throw distance? Also, have you thought about getting samples of both ST100 and ST130?


If you don't mind me asking, are your walls/ceilings a dark matte color? Also, do you notice any hotspotting on your ST130?


----------



## fredworld

etherealsound said:


> I've not thought about doing that but I suppose it would be a good idea. My throw distance would be about 17ft?
> 
> 
> 
> Another Stewart rep also advised me of the same but I also wanted to get a few extra opinions.


It's the even light distribution that is very appealing. Usually when I have guests over I'll sit at the seat furthest to the left which is right up against a wall but I see no loss of image brightness. Guests have commented how good the picture is from any seat. Oftentimes when I'm alone watching a movie I'll change my seat just for kicks and I'm continually impressed with the image consistency. My prior screen which was 1.2 gain and had a narrower sweet spot, very noticeable at that wall seat. Having said all that, my throw distance is only 14' in a 18'x14'x7.5' light controlled room with a black screen wall and ceiling with the three other walls dark gray.


----------



## millerquad4

etherealsound said:


> If you don't mind me asking, are your walls/ceilings a dark matte color? Also, do you notice any hotspotting on your ST130?


I can confirm with fredworld that the ST100 is an amazing screen, but the ST130 is just as good. I was also advised the ST100 performs well up to those measurements. I do not regret my choice at all and I have ZERO hotspotting and light distribution is not a problem. Pic looks the same from anywhere in the room. I posted a pic on page 203 or 204 if you want to see my wall color choice. It is Tricorn Black Matte (walls and ceiling) and I added triple black velvet on the ceiling and side walls next to the screen. Honestly, you cannot go wrong with your current options. My room is 18x13x8, so very similar to fredworld as well as my throw at 14.6. Yes, it is bright but I want a bight image on a professionally calibrated projector. HDR pops and is so much better than my old silverticket screen. I actually kept that screen and plan on cutting it in half and hanging on top of the Stewart and taking a few pics to see the difference.


----------



## fredworld

Kris Deering's review is *here*. He mentions both the 100 and 130 in the review.


----------



## djroot2

Officially a Stewart Film Screen owner. My Wallscreen Deluxe 144" 2.4:1 with Studiotek 130 G4 arrived this morning. Packaging was great and everything looks flawless. Assembly and mounting were super easy. This is so much nicer than the cheap Amazon pull down I was using. I couldn't be happier with this decision.


----------



## etherealsound

fredworld said:


> Kris Deering's review is *here*. He mentions both the 100 and 130 in the review.


Thank you, I do have one other question. Do you do much HDR viewing and do you think you ever need extra brightness for it?


----------



## fredworld

etherealsound said:


> Thank you, I do have one other question. Do you do much HDR viewing and do you think you ever need extra brightness for it?


That's two questions. Yes and yes. A notch down one step of the HDR slider fixes that.


----------



## Hawks07

liverpool_for_life said:


> Retractable, perforated Luxus 150 in diagonal 2.4:1 it is! Truly awesome 45th birthday gift from the missus. Fingers crossed it can get here in time and be installed by then.


Nice, congrats. You should be fine with mid 20's FL for HDR.
It will be one nice setup you will have.


----------



## scanido

fredworld said:


> July Yepez of Stewart advised me that for a light controlled set up, the StudioTek 100 is truly optimal filmscreen to use up to 132” diagonal in 2.35:1 format.
> I don't regret taking his advice at all.


Same here. I took July’s advice for ST100 when I was really fixated on ST130, and glad I did. No regrets as well.


----------



## liverpool_for_life

Hawks07 said:


> Nice, congrats.


Thank you!



> You should be fine with mid 20's FL for HDR.


My dealer and a Stewart rep feel the same. I did want to maximize the screen size for scope, given that I expect to keep this screen for as long as we are in our current home.



> It will be one nice setup you will have.


I consider myself fortunate. The video and audio now ought to be roughly in balance once the room treatments for both are complete.


----------



## Technology3456

scanido said:


> Same here. I took July’s advice for ST100 when I was really fixated on ST130, and glad I did. No regrets as well.


Just curious, did you ever try the ST130? What makes the choice is difficult is you were probably in the same situation as most of us, that besides smallish samples, you choose one or the other, get it in, and that is all you have to reference. It would be great to find a decent number of comparisons from people who have had both, who either didn't need the extra brightness from the ST130, or only borderline needed it, who could tell us their experiences about any tradeoffs or things they noticed, pros and cons etc.


----------



## Craig Peer

Technology3456 said:


> Just curious, did you ever try the ST130? What makes the choice is difficult is you were probably in the same situation as most of us, that besides smallish samples, you choose one or the other, get it in, and that is all you have to reference. It would be great to find a decent number of comparisons from people who have had both, who either didn't need the extra brightness from the ST130, or only borderline needed it, who could tell us their experiences about any tradeoffs or things they noticed, pros and cons etc.


I tend to disagree with July on this one. But it can come down to personal choice. I've seen full sized ST100's and ST130's many times at Cedia. I always prefer the ST130.


----------



## etherealsound

Craig Peer said:


> I tend to disagree with July on this one. But it can come down to personal choice. I've seen full sized ST100's and ST130's many times at Cedia. I always prefer the ST130.


Not trying to detract from your experience and I haven't gone to Cedia but are the light conditions there optimal for screen viewing?


----------



## Craig Peer

etherealsound said:


> Not trying to detract from your experience and I haven't gone to Cedia but are the light conditions there optimal for screen viewing?


They are pretty good in the demo rooms. Better than a lot of theater photos I see around here !


----------



## magnetic

Does anyone have experience with the Silver 5D material? I'm currently running an ST130 G4 curved screen, and have an itch to try higher brightness.

Anyone have a sense of how it compares to the more common screens (e.g. ST130 or Firehawk) in terms of artifacting? Seems like it hasn't had the same iterative improvements that these screens have benefitted from over the years (though maybe reading too much into the naming here..)


----------



## Jason Harrison

I am planning to replace my cheap Amazon screen with a Stewart/Cima and would like some advice. I have a dual-laser LG AU810 projector in a light controlled basement. I was thinking of getting either a Neve or Tiburon (so i dont need to always watch in the dark). My concern with the Tiburon is that this projector shows sparkle on other ALR screens. Should this be a concern on the Tiburon?


----------



## Craig Peer

Jason Harrison said:


> I am planning to replace my cheap Amazon screen with a Stewart/Cima and would like some advice. I have a dual-laser LG AU810 projector in a light controlled basement. I was thinking of getting either a Neve or Tiburon (so i dont need to always watch in the dark). My concern with the Tiburon is that this projector shows sparkle on other ALR screens. Should this be a concern on the Tiburon?


Get samples and see if you can see artifacts in person. Since you have the projector already, you can easily test the screen samples!


----------



## asharma

Don Stewart said:


> Projector Central just published a nice article on UNLV's Film School's new Huge completely seamless, 29'-6" diagonal "Director's Choice" in their auditorium.
> (A technical note to avoid confusion.) The screen material SnoMatte 100 and StudioTek 100 are the same material. When used for large venues, we brand as Snomatte 100. When used for smaller venues such as residential applications, we brand it as StudioTek 100.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UNLV Upgrades Their Theater With Stewart Filmscreen's Director's Choice
> 
> 
> When UNLV in Las Vegas decided to build a first-class film program, they naturally turned to Stewart Filmscreen's Director's Choice screen as part of their state-of-the-art projection solution.
> 
> 
> 
> www.projectorcentral.com


Hi Don, hope all is well Sir…I’m working with July on this issue but wanted you to be aware also and perhaps chime in…

My electric ST100 seems to have developed a bow…In the attached pics you will see I can’t get the side white lines to perfectly line up vertically…They are tight at the top and bottom but bow into the masking near the middle…If I gently push the back of the screen forward, the lines line up…

July suggested i back the tension off…I did that but it doesn’t seem to make a difference…It’s like the baton does not provide enuf weight…I can also tighten the strings right up which could perhaps stretch the bow out from side to side?

I noticed this recently when I installed my JVC RS3000…A person pays dearly for one of the best lenses in the industry, but I can’t imagine it working 100 percent properly from a focus perspective if there is a bow in the screen…Any further advice would be greatly appreciated Don…Screen is approx 14 months old…thanks Don, appreciate the support…


----------



## Don Stewart

Hi Arshama. Looking at your photos, the screen appears to be perfectly flat. Just for clarity, when using the term, "Bowing", do you mean where the side masking has come in a little in the horizontal middle of the screen giving a slight hourglass shape to the image area? Please advise. Thanks.
Regards.
Don


----------



## asharma

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Arshama. Looking at your photos, the screen appears to be perfectly flat. Just for clarity, when using the term, "Bowing", do you mean where the side masking has come in a little in the horizontal middle of the screen giving a slight hourglass shape to the image area? Please advise. Thanks.
> Regards.
> Don


Hey Don, thanks for the follow up Sir…I “think” that’s what I mean…Here are a couple more photos after further adjustment…you can see the gap between white line and masking at the top and bottom of the left and right sides…If the screen was flat, would this occur…I’m really concerned about uniform focus across the screen…if there is a slight bow, does that mean I don’t have a uniform focus? If I gently push the side forward from behind, I think the white line than lines up more with the masking line…You’re the expert man, far above my pay grade…Thanks again…


----------



## noah katz

Seems like the question is if it's the image line and/or edge of the screen that isn't straight.

As far as focus, go up tp the screen and see if the pixel edge sharpness is different along the height.


----------



## asharma

noah katz said:


> Seems like the question is if it's the image line and/or edge of the screen that isn't straight.
> 
> As far as focus, go up tp the screen and see if the pixel edge sharpness is different along the height.


Thanks…I’m assuming the white image line, which is from the JVC projector Lens Control test pattern, is straight…I always understood that this white line needs to line up perfectly with the edge of the screen for perfect projector/screen alignment…

the bottom white line has a slight bow upward in the middle of the screen also…it’s tight at each end of the screen but bows in the middle…

Apologies Don, if bow is the wrong term here…


----------



## noah katz

asharma said:


> I’m assuming the white image line, which is from the JVC projector Lens Control test pattern, is straight


Right, but only if it's projected onto a flat surface.


----------



## asharma

noah katz said:


> Right, but only if it's projected onto a flat surface.


And that’s my point I guess, I don’t think I have a flat surface, which I believe is essential for a pristine image…I wonder if there is a remedy…I’m hoping I’m totally wrong on this…


----------



## Craig Peer

Try " aiming " the projector ever so slightly towards the left, then move the image back right with lens shift. What happens then?


----------



## Craig Peer

asharma said:


> And that’s my point I guess, I don’t think I have a flat surface, which I believe is essential for a pristine image…I wonder if there is a remedy…


Masking on electric screens is painted on. Perhaps the painted portion isn't absolutely 100% straight / perfect. I have way more of a bow in my image due to using a DCR lens. Doesn't bother me.


----------



## asharma

Craig Peer said:


> Try " aiming " the projector ever so slightly towards the left, then move the image back right with lens shift. What happens then?


Thanks Craig, appreciate the advice Sir…I tried what you suggested for several hours last night as I was determined to solve this…I have a mount which allows for very fine fine horizontal rotation…The photos posted are the best I could get it…


----------



## asharma

Craig Peer said:


> Masking on electric screens is painted on. Perhaps the painted portion isn't absolutely 100% straight / perfect. I have way more of a bow in my image due to using a DCR lens. Doesn't bother me.


Thanks again…All I know is “something” is not straight/perfect…As mentioned above there is also a “bow” in the middle bottom edge of the screen…I can’t remember exactly but for the bottom if I push the screen a tiny bit in (or could be out, can’t remember), the bottom line then lines up…


----------



## noah katz

asharma said:


> …All I know is “something” is not straight/perfect…


Stop guessing and get a long straight edge (buy a 1x4 at Home Depot if you have to*) to find out, and to check screen flatness.

* make sure it's straight by sighting down its length


----------



## asharma

noah katz said:


> Stop guessing and get a long straight edge (buy a 1x4 at Home Depot if you have to*) to find out, and to check screen flatness.
> 
> * make sure it's straight by sighting down its length


lets assume for a moment it isn’t the screen…What else could it be?


----------



## Craig Peer

asharma said:


> lets assume for a moment it isn’t the screen…What else could it be?


Is the screen case ( or surface it's mounted to ) perfectly level? And forget the test pattern with lines - I never use them. What does an actual 16:9 image look like? Does it look the same?


----------



## fredworld

Craig Peer said:


> Is the screen case ( or surface it's mounted to ) perfectly level? And forget the test pattern with lines - I never use them. What does an actual 16:9 image look like? Does it look the same?


Wouldn't a Geometry Test Pattern such as the one from a Spears and Munsil disc help evaluation? And definitely get that straight-edge.


----------



## asharma

Craig Peer said:


> Is the screen case ( or surface it's mounted to ) perfectly level? And forget the test pattern with lines - I never use them. What does an actual 16:9 image look like? Does it look the same?


thanks Craig…I’m not sure you can just say don’t use the test patterns…that’s what they are there for…They ensure there is perfect alignment on top/bottom left/right sides…

when you ask what does a 16:9 image look like, does it look the same, could you please clarify? Look the same as what? I know on a 2.35 image given the screen/masking unevenness, I have to over zoom and then mask off or else I get the same gaps at the top and bottom of the left and right sides…


----------



## asharma

fredworld said:


> Wouldn't a Geometry Test Pattern such as the one from a Spears and Munsil disc help evaluation? And definitely get that straight-edge.


Crap, don’t have that disc!


----------



## Technology3456

asharma said:


> thanks Craig…I’m not sure you can just say don’t use the test patterns…that’s what they are there for…They ensure there is perfect alignment on top/bottom left/right sides…
> 
> when you ask what does a 16:9 image look like, does it look the same, could you please clarify? Look the same as what? I know on a 2.35 image given the screen/masking unevenness, I have to over zoom and then mask off or else I get the same gaps at the top and bottom of the left and right sides…


I think he means do you notice any issue when watching content, or can you only see a problem with the test pattern? It's a good point that you likely you wont notice the issue in content since it's subtle enough, but, still, if it were me, paying for a screen like this, I would want it to be straight, and get it remedied at the beginning. When getting a high end screen I don't think we're looking for, "It's technically not perfect, but you won't notice it consciously," we're looking for "it's perfect, so there is no problem to notice or not notice in the first place."

When I say perfect, of course not everything can be 100% perfect, man-made perfection does not really exist, but something like the screen being straight I think is reasonable to expect. I mean, I think 99% of them are straight. So if this one isn't, there might be some slight damage to it or something.

But, it could be the projector too. Whatever it is, it would bother me too and I would want it it fixed, even if during actual content, it doesn't consciously bother me, at least not enough that I can tell, if that makes sense. I think your first step needs to be finding a way to determine if it's the screen, or the projector, or the angle it's mounted at. Im not the person to ask how to figure that out. Im also not sure if you need a different test disc, or if this test pattern should do the job. If the projector or screen are the issue, then playing a different test disc with a perfectly straight pattern will still be curved by either the projector or the screen, so Im not sure it will tell you anything different.


----------



## fredworld

asharma said:


> Crap, don’t have that disc!


Since you don't have a disc, if you can run the video below, then it might help. Measure the circles and general overall pattern for consistency.


----------



## asharma

Ok, on the right hand side of the screen I just measured from the top of the screen the width of the black masking…it’s 3 and 3/4”…I then measured the middle of the screens masking width…it’s 4”…Is this by design? Perhaps it’s not a bow which would be GREAT…I’m unsure how to interpret my own data…

edit: ok, so that means near the middle of the screen, the masking goes in towards the screen further which would then give the side of the screen that hour glass effect…So a straight line from the top corner of the screen would “bow” further out onto the masking near the center…again, not sure if this is a feature or a bug…This is why I need to over zoom the image so the height of the image fills the white screen from top to bottom and then mask off with JVC masking menu

@Don Stewart can hopefully educate me on this and end all my foolish speculation…


----------



## Craig Peer

Technology3456 said:


> *I think he means do you notice any issue when watching content, or can you only see a problem with the test pattern? It's a good point that you likely you wont notice the issue in content since it's subtle enough, *but, still, if it were me, paying for a screen like this, I would want it to be straight, and get it remedied at the beginning. When getting a high end screen I don't think we're looking for, "It's technically not perfect, but you won't notice it consciously," we're looking for "it's perfect, so there is no problem to notice or not notice in the first place."
> 
> When I say perfect, of course not everything can be 100% perfect, man-made perfection does not really exist, but something like the screen being straight I think is reasonable to expect. I mean, I think 99% of them are straight. So if this one isn't, there might be some slight damage to it or something.
> 
> But, it could be the projector too. Whatever it is, it would bother me too and I would want it it fixed, even if during actual content, it doesn't consciously bother me, at least not enough that I can tell, if that makes sense. I think your first step needs to be finding a way to determine if it's the screen, or the projector, or the angle it's mounted at. Im not the person to ask how to figure that out. Im also not sure if you need a different test disc, or if this test pattern should do the job. If the projector or screen are the issue, then playing a different test disc with a perfectly straight pattern will still be curved by either the projector or the screen, so Im not sure it will tell you anything different.


Bingo. Throw an anamorphic lens on and the sides won't be perfect anyway. That's why there is masking.


----------



## Craig Peer

asharma said:


> Ok, on the right hand side of the screen I just measured from the top of the screen the width of the black masking…it’s 3 and 3/4”…I then measured the middle of the screens masking width…it’s 4”…Is this by design? Perhaps it’s not a bow which would be GREAT…I’m unsure how to interpret my own data…
> 
> edit:* ok, so that means near the middle of the screen, the masking goes in towards the screen further which would then give the side of the screen that hour glass effect*…So a straight line from the top corner of the screen would “bow” further out onto the masking near the center…again, not sure if this is a feature or a bug…This is why I need to over zoom the image so the height of the image fills the white screen from top to bottom and then mask off with JVC masking menu
> 
> @Don Stewart can hopefully educate me on this and end all my foolish speculation…
> View attachment 3149470


That is part of the design of the tensioning system.


----------



## asharma

Craig Peer said:


> That is part of the design of the tensioning system.


Well, I guess that’s better than a bow…at least that means the screen is flat…it just creates an issue having to over zoom on to the masking to fill the non uniform sides with video and then mask off…

edit: don’t quote me on this but I posted these pics on the RS3000 site the other day trying to better understand the issue and I “thought” Mike Garrett suggested it could be a bow so I started digging deeper into this rabbit hole…if I’m off base here, my apologies Mike…


----------



## Technology3456

asharma said:


> Ok, on the right hand side of the screen *I just measured from the top of the screen the width of the black masking…it’s 3 and 3/4”…I then measured the middle of the screens masking width…it’s 4*”…
> (...)
> View attachment 3149470


Thats interesting. Must be an optical illusion then but looking at the picture above, it looks like the masking is wider at the top right, and then curves out right below the top right, like ) not like ( which is what you measured.


----------



## Technology3456

Craig Peer said:


> That is part of the design of the tensioning system.


Whats the benefit to doing that? Can you buy one that tensions without the bow? The tensioning system could be the same but cant they compensate the black border to make the border still be straight?


----------



## asharma

Technology3456 said:


> Thats interesting. Must be an optical illusion then but looking at the picture above, it looks like the masking is wider at the top right, and then curves out right below the top right, like ) not like ( which is what you measured.


Definitely narrower at the top vs middle


----------



## Technology3456

asharma said:


> Definitely narrower at the top vs middle


Its probably because of the camera angle but if you focus on the white screen, not the black border, it looks like its curving out just right at the top, the half inch on your computer screen from the right corner. Look at the white not the black maybe you can see what I mean.


----------



## asharma

Technology3456 said:


> Its probably because of the camera angle but if you focus on the white screen, not the black border, it looks like its curving out just right at the top, the half inch on your computer screen from the right corner. Look at the white not the black maybe you can see what I mean.
> View attachment 3149504


I see what u mean but I think u need to look at the whole vertical side and then see the lower middle is wider than the top.


----------



## noah katz

asharma said:


> lets assume for a moment it isn’t the screen…What else could it be?


As I said, the screen can be off more than one way.

I didn't say it before because you sound like a perfectionist, but I totally agree with the point brought up that you don't need perfection that you can't see.


----------



## asharma

noah katz said:


> As I said, the screen can be off more than one way.
> 
> I didn't say it before because you sound like a perfectionist, but I totally agree with the point brought up that you don't need perfection that you can't see.


I watched a 2.35 movie last night…I can actually see when watching a movie that the difference in masking width along each side creates an hour glass effect on the screen along each side…I had assumed this was A bow, meaning the screen was not flat, but I’m not sure now…if this hour glass effect is inherent in tab tension but still keeps the screen flat, I’ll take that over a bow…

when I say hourglass effect the edge of the screen is shaped like ( as the masking is wider in the middle of the screen…


----------



## asharma

Craig Peer said:


> That is part of the design of the tensioning system.


Craig, r u able to measure your Cima screen masking width at top middle and bottom of the side and let me know what u find?

is the edge of your screen shaped like ( 

that’s what I’m calling the hourglass effect which I think is what Don mentioned…


----------



## Craig Peer

asharma said:


> Craig, r u able to measure your Cima screen masking width at top middle and bottom of the side and let me know what u find?
> 
> is the edge of your screen shaped like (
> 
> that’s what I’m calling the hourglass effect which I think is what Don mentioned…


Sure - let me make some coffee first and I’ll measure both screens / post photos. I have two electric screens to compare with yours.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Craig Peer

asharma said:


> Craig, r u able to measure your Cima screen masking width at top middle and bottom of the side and let me know what u find?
> 
> is the edge of your screen shaped like (
> 
> that’s what I’m calling the hourglass effect which I think is what Don mentioned…


Have you put a plumb bob on a string and hung it at the black border edge to see if it's straight? That's the only way to truly see if it is. A plumb bob won't lie.


----------



## asharma

Craig Peer said:


> Have you put a plumb bob on a string and hung it at the black border edge to see if it's straight? That's the only way to truly see if it is. A plumb bob won't lie.


Thanks Craig, Given I just had to google what the hell a plumb bob was, I’d say no 😉 Were you able to measure? It would be helpful if someone from Stewart could chime in as this may all be by design…


----------



## Killroy

Craig Peer said:


> Have you put a plumb bob on a string and hung it at the black border edge to see if it's straight? That's the only way to truly see if it is. A plumb bob won't lie.


I borrowed one of these from a former neighbor and it helped me determine that my wall was NOT plum on the top right corner (all the way down to the bottom 2/3rd)...









Rack-A-Tiers Laser Plumb Bob Self Leveling Vertical Laser Level 88455 - The Home Depot


Looking for a better way to lay out complex ceiling and high bays. The Laser Plumb Bob, the self leveling vertical laser from Rack-A-Tiers, is the answer. For all commercial, industrial, or residential



www.homedepot.com





I had to add some spacers on the other three corners and a little shim on the right to get it perfectly plumb.


----------



## asharma

Killroy said:


> I borrowed one of these from a former neighbor and it helped me determine that my wall was NOT plum on the top right corner (all the way down to the bottom 2/3rd)...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rack-A-Tiers Laser Plumb Bob Self Leveling Vertical Laser Level 88455 - The Home Depot
> 
> 
> Looking for a better way to lay out complex ceiling and high bays. The Laser Plumb Bob, the self leveling vertical laser from Rack-A-Tiers, is the answer. For all commercial, industrial, or residential
> 
> 
> 
> www.homedepot.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I had to add some spacers on the other three corners and a little shim on the right to get it perfectly plumb.


Thanks man…I think all I’m trying to understand is whether the masking on an electric screen “bows” by design creating an hour glass shape like this ( on the left and right hand side of the screen…


----------



## Craig Peer

asharma said:


> Thanks man…I think all I’m trying to understand is whether the masking on an electric screen “bows” by design creating an hour glass shape like this ( on the left and right hand side of the screen…


Guess what? I put a plumb bob on my screens - the black border does have a bow inward on both of my screens. Never really realized that.


----------



## asharma

Craig Peer said:


> Guess what? I put a plumb bob on my screens - the black border does have a bow inward on both of my screens. Never really realized that.


Thanks Craig…so the shape is like this (

In a 2.35 film, I can actually see this “effect” of ( BUT my real question is “Is the screen flat or is it bowed”?


----------



## Craig Peer

asharma said:


> Thanks Craig…so the shape is like this (
> 
> In a 2.35 film, I can actually see this “effect” of ( BUT my real question is “Is the screen flat or is it bowed”?


The screen is absolutely not bowed. The black masking has a slight curve to it.


----------



## asharma

Craig Peer said:


> The screen is absolutely not bowed. The black masking has a slight curve to it.
> View attachment 3149714


Thanks Craig. So the only reason I noticed this was I was trying to line my vertical line up with the JVC lens control test pattern. It’s no wonder I couldn’t.

The “masking bow” isn’t ideal IMO. It means I need to overzoom to fill the sides and then mask back inwards not to mention my anal eye can pick the hour glass side shape up during a scope movie vs a straight line side.


----------



## noah katz

asharma said:


> It means I need to overzoom to fill the sides and then mask back inwards not to mention my anal eye can pick the hour glass side shape up during a scope movie vs a straight line side.


Are you saying that if you overfill you can still tell that the border isn't straight?


----------



## asharma

noah katz said:


> Are you saying that if you overfill you can still tell that the border isn't straight?


I think it’s one of those things, once u know it’s there or once your eyes pick it up your brain will always pick it up. If I think about it if over zoomed and then mask back to the inner part of the masking bow, the eye should not be able to pick it up as the JVC masking should produce a straight line

edit: I’ll need to test with more content as perhaps the JVC masking isn’t dark enough to mask the outline of the Stewart masking.


----------



## Craig Peer

asharma said:


> Thanks Craig. So the only reason I noticed this was I was trying to line my vertical line up with the JVC lens control test pattern. It’s no wonder I couldn’t.
> 
> The “masking bow” isn’t ideal IMO. It means I need to overzoom to fill the sides and then mask back inwards not to mention my anal eye can pick the hour glass side shape up during a scope movie vs a straight line side.


What will your " anal eye " do with 1.85 leaving black bars on a 1.78:1 screen, 2.00:1 black bars and other oddities ? Or the DCR lens bowing the sides in the opposite direction ?


----------



## asharma

Craig Peer said:


> What will your " anal eye " do with 1.85 leaving black bars on a 1.78:1 screen, 2.00:1 black bars and other oddities ? Or the DCR lens bowing the sides in the opposite direction ?


Well, honestly that’s one of the reasons I don’t have a DCR but I do have a Lumagen to fix the AR challenges 👍🏽


----------



## Don Stewart

Please note that Stewart Filmscreen invented the retractable screen tab guy tension system back in the late 1970's for large venue screens and then applied it to smaller venue screens in the early 80's. As we all know, unlike a fixed framed screen, a retractable screen has two jobs. One is to disappear when not in use and two, be a nice flat surface for projection when the screen is in use. Up to that time, retractable screens were notorious for developing surface wrinkles and waves when deployed. My father and one of my uncle's hobbies was racing sailboats. When competing in regattas, it was important that the sails did not have any wrinkles in the fabric as wrinkles would interrupt the airflow over the sail(s). So using their knowledge from controlling sails, they applied some of it to controlling the screen fabric. The key to making the screen lay flat is the very outer side edges are cut to a catenary curved arc. The weight of the screen batten bar on the bottom then pulls down on the tab guy-wires. From this weight, the guys-wires want to take the shortest route across the screen edge arc and then pulls outward on the screen edge tabs. (See drawing below) Also, this method works best if the screen material has some elasticity to it. When trying to apply the tab system to stiff fiberglass reinforced screen material, like the kind you find on manual pull down screens, it does not work well. This is because each side edge tab position only gives you a few ounces of outward pressure, which is enough force to make unsupported vinyl lay flat, but not enough force to make stiff fiberglass screen material lay flat. One tenancy of vinyl is that over time, it will continue to cure which means some shrinkage will occur. Unlike a fixed frame screen which is hard mounted on all four sides, an electric retractable screen is hard mounted only on the top roller tube and bottom screen batten bar. When we manufacture our screen materials on our large molds, we designate some of this material to be used for retractable screens. After the screen material is removed from the molds, the designated retractable screen material then goes through an additional curing process to preshrink the screen material as much as possible before it is cut and applied to a retractable screen. This process is in a very large heated curing room where the screen material may spend an additional 10 days curing and shrinking. (See photo below) That said, we go to great lengths and expense to minimize vinyl shrinkage, but still over time, the screen material sides may creep inward a small amount. Since 1980, we have produced hundreds of thousands retractable screens and only on a few occasions can I recall the small amount of side shrinkage being an issue. Generally, one reason we apply black masking on all four sides of the screen is to allow for a small amount of image over-scan onto the masking.








Curing Room.









Large venue seamless retractable screens with tab tension making for perfectly flat screen surface.


----------



## asharma

Don Stewart said:


> Please note that Stewart Filmscreen invented the retractable screen tab guy tension system back in the late 1970's for large venue screens and then applied it to smaller venue screens in the early 80's. As we all know, unlike a fixed framed screen, a retractable screen has two jobs. One is to disappear when not in use and two, be a nice flat surface for projection when the screen is in use. Up to that time, retractable screens were notorious for developing surface wrinkles and waves when deployed. My father and one of my uncle's hobbies were racing sailboats. When competing in regattas, it was important that the sails did not have any wrinkles in the fabric. So using their knowledge from controlling sails, they applied some of it to controlling the screen fabric. The key to making the screen lay flat is the very outer side edges are cut to a catenary curved arc. The weight of the screen batten bar on the bottom then pulls down on the tab guy-wires. From this weight, the guys-wires want to take the shortest route across the screen edge arc and then pulls outward on the screen edge tabs. (See drawing below) Also, this method works best if the screen material has some elasticity to it. When trying to apply the tab system to stiff fiberglass reinforced screen material, like the kind you find on manual pull down screens, it does not work well. This is because each side edge tab position only gives you a few ounces of outward pressure, which is enough force to make unsupported vinyl lay flat, but not enough force to make stiff fiberglass screen material lay flat. One tenancy of vinyl is that over time, it will continue to cure which means some shrinkage will occur. Unlike a fixed frame screen which is hard mounted on all four sides, an electric retractable screen is hard mounted only on the top roller tube and bottom screen batten bar. When we manufacture our screen materials on our large molds, we designate some of this material to be used for retractable screens. After the screen material is removed from the molds, the designated retractable screen material then goes through an additional curing process to preshrink the screen material as much as possible before it is cut and applied to a retractable screen. This process is in a very large heated curing room where the screen material may spend an additional 10 days curing and shrinking. (See photo below) That said, we go to great lengths and expense to minimize vinyl shrinkage, but still over time, the screen material sides may creep inward a small amount. Since 1980, we have produced hundreds of thousands retractable screens and only on a few occasions can I recall the small amount of side shrinkage being an issue. Generally, one reason we apply black masking on all four sides of the screen is to allow for a small amount of image over-scan onto the masking.
> View attachment 3150371
> 
> Curing Room.
> View attachment 3150372
> 
> 
> Large venue seamless retractable screens with tab tension making for perfectly flat screen surface.
> View attachment 3150374


Thanks Don, good god man!!! Thanks for the very detailed insights!! Given my screen sides where the masking hits the screen are shaped like this )( I’m unable to drop a straight line down each side (like you have in your 3rd picture) without overshooting onto the masking in the middle of the side…Is this hour glass effect where the masking hits the screen caused by the potential shrinkage you referenced? Is there a remedy? ie. My bigger concern was that the screen was ”bowed” ie. not laying flat…Does shrinkage impact the screens ability to lay flat? Thanks again Don…


----------



## noah katz

Don Stewart said:


> So using their knowledge from controlling sails, they applied some of it to controlling the screen fabric.


Very cool!

Reminds of the rotary subwoofer; Bruce Thigpen got the idea for tilting the blades of a fan from his RC helicopter.

Thanks for explaining how tab tensioning works, a simple and brilliant design.


----------



## Don Stewart

asharma said:


> Thanks Don, good god man!!! Thanks for the very detailed insights!! Given my screen sides where the masking hits the screen are shaped like this )( I’m unable to drop a straight line down each side (like you have in your 3rd picture) without overshooting onto the masking in the middle of the side…Is this hour glass effect where the masking hits the screen caused by the potential shrinkage you referenced? Is there a remedy? ie. My bigger concern was that the screen was ”bowed” ie. not laying flat…Does shrinkage impact the screens ability to lay flat? Thanks again Don…


After looking at you photos, your screen material appears to be perfectly flat with no wrinkles. Believe me, if your screen had wrinkles or waves, it would be very apparent to both the naked eye and under projection creating image artifacts that we refer to shadowing. Please see example photo below and note wrinkling and waves on left side of screen. This photo is of another screen manufacture's product who did not get the tab tension method right. As I stated in my previous post, a retractable screen has two jobs. That said, when a retractable screen is deployed to the down position, the highest design priority is to assure the screen is perfectly flat. The remedy for slight hour-glassing of image area is to over-scan image into black masking areas.


----------



## Craig Peer

asharma said:


> Thanks Don, good god man!!! Thanks for the very detailed insights!! Given my screen sides where the masking hits the screen are shaped like this )( I’m unable to drop a straight line down each side (like you have in your 3rd picture) without overshooting onto the masking in the middle of the side…Is this hour glass effect where the masking hits the screen caused by the potential shrinkage you referenced? Is there a remedy? ie. My bigger concern was that the screen was ”bowed” ie. not laying flat…Does shrinkage impact the screens ability to lay flat? Thanks again Don…


I've had nothing but electric screens for 18 years. I've never had a quality screen like a Stewart not stay flat / smooth.


----------



## asharma

Don Stewart said:


> After looking at you photos, your screen material appears to be perfectly flat with no wrinkles. Believe me, if your screen had wrinkles or waves, it would be very apparent to both the naked eye and under projection creating image artifacts that we refer to shadowing. Please see example photo below and note wrinkling and waves on left side of screen. This photo is of another screen manufacture's product who did not get the tab tension method right. As I stated in my previous post, a retractable screen has two jobs. That said, when a retractable screen is deployed to the down position, the highest design priority is to assure the screen is perfectly flat. The remedy for slight hour-glassing of image area is to over-scan image into black masking areas.
> View attachment 3150403


Thanks Don, appreciate the clarification Sir…I’ll put 2 and 2 together and assume the slight hour glassing is caused by shrinkage (based on your explanation of the curing process), which is far far far better than the screen not being flat…I have overscanned onto the masking as you suggested…

Don, it’s very impressive that you take the time to answer these posts…It is greatly appreciated!


----------



## Technology3456

Don Stewart said:


> Please note that Stewart Filmscreen invented the retractable screen tab guy tension system back in the late 1970's for large venue screens and then applied it to smaller venue screens in the early 80's. As we all know, unlike a fixed framed screen, a retractable screen has two jobs. One is to disappear when not in use and two, be a nice flat surface for projection when the screen is in use. Up to that time, retractable screens were notorious for developing surface wrinkles and waves when deployed. My father and one of my uncle's hobbies was racing sailboats. When competing in regattas, it was important that the sails did not have any wrinkles in the fabric as wrinkles would interrupt the airflow over the sail(s). So using their knowledge from controlling sails, they applied some of it to controlling the screen fabric. The key to making the screen lay flat is the very outer side edges are cut to a catenary curved arc. The weight of the screen batten bar on the bottom then pulls down on the tab guy-wires. From this weight, the guys-wires want to take the shortest route across the screen edge arc and then pulls outward on the screen edge tabs. (See drawing below) Also, this method works best if the screen material has some elasticity to it. When trying to apply the tab system to stiff fiberglass reinforced screen material, like the kind you find on manual pull down screens, it does not work well. This is because each side edge tab position only gives you a few ounces of outward pressure, which is enough force to make unsupported vinyl lay flat, but not enough force to make stiff fiberglass screen material lay flat. One tenancy of vinyl is that over time, it will continue to cure which means some shrinkage will occur. Unlike a fixed frame screen which is hard mounted on all four sides, an electric retractable screen is hard mounted only on the top roller tube and bottom screen batten bar. When we manufacture our screen materials on our large molds, we designate some of this material to be used for retractable screens. After the screen material is removed from the molds, the designated retractable screen material then goes through an additional curing process to preshrink the screen material as much as possible before it is cut and applied to a retractable screen. This process is in a very large heated curing room where the screen material may spend an additional 10 days curing and shrinking. (See photo below) That said, we go to great lengths and expense to minimize vinyl shrinkage, but still over time, the screen material sides may creep inward a small amount. Since 1980, we have produced hundreds of thousands retractable screens and only on a few occasions can I recall the small amount of side shrinkage being an issue. Generally, one reason we apply black masking on all four sides of the screen is to allow for a small amount of image over-scan onto the masking.
> View attachment 3150371
> 
> Curing Room.
> View attachment 3150372
> 
> 
> Large venue seamless retractable screens with tab tension making for perfectly flat screen surface.
> View attachment 3150374


Thanks for responding to customers (or future customers) here. I appreciate it as well. I have to say I am more confused now than before. Is it normal for the shrinkage of the screen material to shrink more on the middle-left-side and the middle-right-side of the screen than in the corners? What I understood from your explanation is that a 120 inch tensioned screen could over time shrink to a 119.5 inch tensioned screen, just for example, but the overall viewing area would still stay the same shape. I'm still confused reading the thread why Asharma has a screen with a viewing area that is ) ( shaped regardless of its size, not rectangular. I understand the part about the screen fabric having to have a little curve because of how the tensioning works, but say the screen material itself has to have a curve of 5 degrees outward, wouldn't the inside of the black border still be cut to be straight? Even if the screen material was completely circular, you should still make a perfect rectangle inside the circle using a black border.

A slight curve on the outside of the black borders would make no difference, but why isn't the inside of the black border cut to still give a straight rectangle screen viewing area? I mean, I always thought it was, until seeing asharma's picture and then seeing responses that this is normal. I'm still not clear if that screen is a bit... off spec, but if I order a Stewart motorized tensioned screen and get an on-spec sample, its viewing area will be a straight rectangle, or, if asharma's screen is normal and on-spec, and all of them will have a ) ( shaped viewing area?

Many people use motorized tensioned screens, and also use alignment patterns to align their projectors. This is the first time I've seen this issue come up where the viewing portion of the screen did not have straight borders on the insides of the border.


----------



## Don Stewart

Technology3456 said:


> Thanks for responding to customers (or future customers) here. I appreciate it as well. I have to say I am more confused now than before. Is it normal for the shrinkage of the screen material to shrink more on the middle-left-side and the middle-right-side of the screen than in the corners? What I understood from your explanation is that a 120 inch tensioned screen could over time shrink to a 119.5 inch tensioned screen, just for example, but the overall viewing area would still stay the same shape. I'm still confused reading the thread why Asharma has a screen with a viewing area that is ) ( shaped regardless of its size, not rectangular. I understand the part about the screen fabric having to have a little curve because of how the tensioning works, but say the screen material itself has to have a curve of 5 degrees outward, wouldn't the inside of the black border still be cut to be straight? Even if the screen material was completely circular, you should still make a perfect rectangle inside the circle using a black border.
> 
> A slight curve on the outside of the black borders would make no difference, but why isn't the inside of the black border cut to still give a straight rectangle screen viewing area? I mean, I always thought it was, until seeing asharma's picture and then seeing responses that this is normal. I'm still not clear if that screen is a bit... off spec, but if I order a Stewart motorized tensioned screen and get an on-spec sample, its viewing area will be a straight rectangle, or, if asharma's screen is normal and on-spec, and all of them will have a ) ( shaped viewing area?
> 
> Many people use motorized tensioned screens, and also use alignment patterns to align their projectors. This is the first time I've seen this issue come up where the viewing portion of the screen did not have straight borders on the insides of the border.


Please go back and reread postings more carefully. The sides of the screens which are not supported by the roller tube or screen batten will experience some inward shrinkage overtime. This is just the nature of any vinyl material and also with other screen manufactures.. When the screen leaves the factory, the inside black masking it is perfectly straight. As posted earlier, we go the extra mile to add additional heat and curing time for screen material designated for retractable screens to minimize after sale shrinkage. With hundred of thousands of screens out there, this slight shrinkage issue has only come up a few times in my many decades in the business. I have explained the side tension technology to the best of my abilities, so I am pretty much done here.


----------



## Craig Peer

Technology3456 said:


> Thanks for responding to customers (or future customers) here. I appreciate it as well. I have to say I am more confused now than before. Is it normal for the shrinkage of the screen material to shrink more on the middle-left-side and the middle-right-side of the screen than in the corners? What I understood from your explanation is that a 120 inch tensioned screen could over time shrink to a 119.5 inch tensioned screen, just for example, but the overall viewing area would still stay the same shape. I'm still confused reading the thread why Asharma has a screen with a viewing area that is ) ( shaped regardless of its size, not rectangular. I understand the part about the screen fabric having to have a little curve because of how the tensioning works, but say the screen material itself has to have a curve of 5 degrees outward, wouldn't the inside of the black border still be cut to be straight? Even if the screen material was completely circular, you should still make a perfect rectangle inside the circle using a black border.
> 
> A slight curve on the outside of the black borders would make no difference, but why isn't the inside of the black border cut to still give a straight rectangle screen viewing area? I mean, I always thought it was, until seeing asharma's picture and then seeing responses that this is normal. I'm still not clear if that screen is a bit... off spec, but if I order a Stewart motorized tensioned screen and get an on-spec sample, its viewing area will be a straight rectangle, or, if asharma's screen is normal and on-spec, and all of them will have a ) ( shaped viewing area?
> 
> *Many people use motorized tensioned screens, and also use alignment patterns to align their projectors. This is the first time I've seen this issue come up where the viewing portion of the screen did not have straight borders on the insides of the border.*


In 18 years of using electric screens, I've never noticed this issue. I actual movie watching even now, I really never notice it either.


----------



## Don Stewart

Just a heads up for those who are interested. "Sound and Vision" magazine is doing a test report of the new Harmony G2 AT weave reference screen which should be out in the upcoming August publication. The testing is being done and written by reviewer, Michael Hamilton.

Best Regards,
Don


----------



## Craig Peer

Don Stewart said:


> Just a heads up for those who are interested. "Sound and Vision" magazine is doing a test report of the new Harmony G2 AT weave reference screen which should be out in the upcoming August publication. The testing is being done and written by reviewer, Michael Hamilton.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Don


Any samples available yet Don ? Thanks.


----------



## Don Stewart

Craig Peer said:


> Any samples available yet Don ? Thanks.


Sent you a DM.


----------



## etherealsound

Super excited, just received my ST130 yesterday though it seems they forgot to include my masking panels in the shipment. Will be setting it up over this weekend and will report back in with impressions!


----------



## Don Stewart

etherealsound said:


> Super excited, just received my ST130 yesterday though it seems they forgot to include my masking panels in the shipment. Will be setting it up over this weekend and will report back in with impressions!


Thank you for your purchase. Generally, depending on size, the masking panels are shipped in a separate box from the screen and frame box. The two boxes might have accidentally been separated during transit by the shipping company. On Monday, please give your dealer a call and have them contact Stewart to put a trace on the shipment. In the meantime, enjoy your new StudioTek 130 G4.
(Note: I will be out of the office all next week so I will not be able to personally follow up on your shipment, but we have plenty of staff who can).

Best Regards,
Don


----------



## etherealsound

Don Stewart said:


> Thank you for your purchase. Generally, depending on size, the masking panels are shipped in a separate box from the screen and frame box. The two boxes might have accidentally been separated during transit by the shipping company. On Monday, please give your dealer a call and have them contact Stewart to put a trace on the shipment. In the meantime, enjoy your new StudioTek 130 G4.
> (Note: I will be out of the office all next week so I will not be able to personally follow up on your shipment, but we have plenty of staff who can).
> 
> Best Regards,
> Don


I figured that was the case! I have already contacted my dealer regarding this and can't wait to have everything set up.


----------



## mrvideo

I do not know if the following question has already been answered, or not, but with so many posts here it would take me a ****'s age to read them all.

About what distance would be the best to be at so that the holes in a perf screen would not be seen? Thanks.


----------



## Craig Peer

mrvideo said:


> I do not know if the following question has already been answered, or not, but with so many posts here it would take me a ****'s age to read them all.
> 
> About what distance would be the best to be at so that the holes in a perf screen would not be seen? Thanks.


12 feet for Microperf.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mrvideo

Craig Peer said:


> 12 feet for Microperf.


Thanks for the info.


----------



## kiran110377

It’s hereeee. So exited to finally install and check the firehawk g5. It’s a 2.39:1 135in screen.

anyone knows a good setting for this screen and epson 4010


----------



## etherealsound

Don Stewart said:


> Thank you for your purchase. Generally, depending on size, the masking panels are shipped in a separate box from the screen and frame box. The two boxes might have accidentally been separated during transit by the shipping company. On Monday, please give your dealer a call and have them contact Stewart to put a trace on the shipment. In the meantime, enjoy your new StudioTek 130 G4.
> (Note: I will be out of the office all next week so I will not be able to personally follow up on your shipment, but we have plenty of staff who can).
> 
> Best Regards,
> Don


Hello,

would you happen to be able to share with me how tall the back "hooking mechanisms" are for the masking panels? Right now I can't set up my screen because I don't know how much clearance I need from the ceiling in order to install the masking panels when needed. (I have low ceilings so I do need to be quite precise with how much space I can spare).


----------



## kiran110377

What are the basics on calibrating PJ to the Firehawk screen. Not looking for software and hardware calibration but just some basic ones.


----------



## Guy Kuo

Center support braces - What sequence to install relative to screen material? Instructions say that the center support must be installed before mounting screen on wall, but never addresses WHEN to put on the brace in the assembly process.

The center support brace clearly goes behind the screen fabric and cannot be attached before the fabric. However, waiting until after the entire fabric is snapped into place may already bend the top and bottom horizontal frame pieces together. Should one slide the center support under the fabric and attach once the center snaps are done. Is it better to stretch the fabric with or without the center support in position?

Also the center support mounting point is positioned directly atop the center snaps. If the support brace is already attached, how does one snap those covered up snaps. Should the mounting points be moved laterally to leave the center snaps unobstructed? 

What is the best technique for fabric and center support brace attachment?


----------



## Guy Kuo

Never mind. I snapped the fabric into place fully. Then, stood screen upright and attached center support brace at the top. As expected, snapping in the fabric bends the horizontal frame members inward making th e distance shorter than the brace. About 40 lbs force lifting of bottom end of the brace while holding down the bottom frame member with my toes got initial fitment. That got end of brace into frame, but the brace hole was not lined up with T-nut because brace screw hole was too low relative to T-nut channel. *Used Allen key through brace hole and T-nut to lever end of brace upward and bring the hole into alignment with T-Nut. Wedged a flat end screw driver between end of brace and frame to maintain that vertical alignment without the Allen key*. That made it possible to insert bottom screw.

No way one could have lifted the brace's end under tension and inserted the screw at the same time. Using the allen key as lever and flat end screwdriver as alignment wedge was the trick.

This needs to be actually addressed in the supplied instructions - beyond simply stating one must install the brace without any elaboration of before/after fabric snapped on and how to get the ends to fit on the frame.

It's great to be back on a StudioTek 130 screen. My old one went with my old house. Carada was decent. Last Covid year was with a horrible Elite CineWhite. Who knew a "1.1 gain" screen could have such intense hot spotting and sparkles!?

This is what I mean by hot spotting on the 1.1 gain CineWhite! This is a uniform field pattern with photo taken from prime viewing position.









As opposed to a 1.3 gain StudioTek 130 G4's very mild hot spot.









If I graph intensity across the center of both screenshots here is what I get.


















Also evident is ST 130's better uniformity. You can see it in both the photos and the graphs. The CineWhite had bands of localized reflectance changes. I checked with customer support at Elite and they said they know about the banding and replacing their fabric with another one would likely have the same issue. So, even if it was a much cheaper screen, it wasn't 1.1 gain light distribution, had bands of irregular reflective layer, and tons of speckling. 

Stewart can't comment about other manufacturer screens, but I don't have that restriction.
No contest!

Stewart ST 130 G4 is the wonderful a uniform, bright and "transparent screen" I remembered fondly. Was totally worth the re-entry price to Stewart ST 130 G4 quality! No question. Wife says it is a huge improvement after viewing the new screen. In her opinion it was a _reasonable and well spent cost_ for what we got.

"The difference is significant," says the boss.

I will not miss the CineWhite's sparkles and hot spot.

Just please fix up the instructions regarding the center brace for those of us using a larger screen.


----------



## jaapaap79

I finally installed my 115” Stewart Luxus G2 StudioTek 100 perf and was super-excited. What an amazing screen!

Unfortunately after trying to align the projector however I found out the screen comes out crooked with more black at the upper right than the upper left (about 1/4”).

Does anyone have an idea how I could resolve this? Making the drop stop earlier didn’t work and I’m a little scared to just pull on the screen when it comes down.


----------



## DaViD Boulet

Hi all,

I plan to pick up an NX7 (or corresopnding new model) this fall, and will finally be going with a scope 2.40 screen. Quick summary:


Projector will be mounted behind back wall about 21 feet lens-to-screen.
Front seating is 10.5 feet from the screen/front-wall.
Existing 16x9 screen is 54 inches high which fits available vertical space well. Looking to keep that approximate height so 2.40 screen will be between 130 and 140 inches diagonal.
I love 3D and want an accurate and pleasing picture for 2D SDR, 2D HDR, and 3D SDR as well.
Black painted ceiling and walls in light controlled dedicated room.

Questions:


*Screen*... Is the ST130 G4 the "go to" screen for this scenario? And would that change if JVC introduces a brighter PJ (laser?) in the fall? Or would the ST130 be a good "future proof" screen regardless of brighter PJs down the road because it would always allow you to dial back the PJ brightness to increase contrast and preserve lamp life?
*Anamorphic Lens?* I don't have plans for a Lumagen or Panamorph lens at this time... too much cost and too much logistic complexity (at least that's what I'm sarying right now). But with the brightness of the ST130 and the fill-factor of the native 4K LCOS image, am I really missing anything just using mechanical zoom? Other than even _more_ brightness with the lens?
*Veritical Masking*... in a perfect world (with limitless funds) I would buy Stewart's VistaScope continuously variable vertical masking, but the costs I saw mentioned on few sites were more than the NX7 projector. That seems excessive... are street prices typically less? Or are there other good continously variable options out there that look professional?
*Wait?* Should I just wait until the new projector arrives before making any screen decisions? Even if I wait to buy I'd like to "hit the ground running" when the new PJ arrives and then not be waiting weeks longer to figure out the screen-purchase details.

Thanks!!


----------



## Craig Peer

DaViD Boulet said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I plan to pick up an NX7 (or corresopnding new model) this fall, and will finally be going with a scope 2.40 screen. Quick summary:
> 
> 
> Projector will be mounted behind back wall about 21 feet lens-to-screen.
> Front seating is 10.5 feet from the screen/front-wall.
> Existing 16x9 screen is 54 inches high which fits available vertical space well. Looking to keep that approximate height so 2.40 screen will be between 130 and 140 inches diagonal.
> I love 3D and want an accurate and pleasing picture for 2D SDR, 2D HDR, and 3D SDR as well.
> Black painted ceiling and walls in light controlled dedicated room.
> 
> Questions:
> 
> 
> *Screen*... Is the ST130 G4 the "go to" screen for this scenario? And would that change if JVC introduces a brighter PJ (laser?) in the fall? Or would the ST130 be a good "future proof" screen regardless of brighter PJs down the road because it would always allow you to dial back the PJ brightness to increase contrast and preserve lamp life?
> *Anamorphic Lens?* I don't have plans for a Lumagen or Panamorph lens at this time... too much cost and too much logistic complexity (at least that's what I'm sarying right now). But with the brightness of the ST130 and the fill-factor of the native 4K LCOS image, am I really missing anything just using mechanical zoom? Other than even _more_ brightness with the lens?
> *Veritical Masking*... in a perfect world (with limitless funds) I would buy Stewart's VistaScope continuously variable vertical masking, but the costs I saw mentioned on few sites were more than the NX7 projector. That seems excessive... are street prices typically less? Or are there other good continously variable options out there that look professional?
> *Wait?* Should I just wait until the new projector arrives before making any screen decisions? Even if I wait to buy I'd like to "hit the ground running" when the new PJ arrives and then not be waiting weeks longer to figure out the screen-purchase details.
> 
> Thanks!!


Screen - in my opinion, born of 18 years of my own home theater with 6 different screens, the ST130 G4 is the go to screen. A brighter laser projector wouldn't change that - you can just close the iris for better contrast or run the laser in lower power to preserve it. I see no reason to ever change my ST130 !
If JVC ever comes out with a brighter RS4500 down the road, I'll use it on my exact same ST130 and leverage the extra brightness into better contrast and better HDR.

Lens - yes, a DCR lens will add considerable pixel density and up to 38% more light you lose by zooming. But, you can add it later and it will make your projector a " new " projector after the newness has worn off. Get a 2.40:1 or 2.37:1 screen.

Masking - if getting a fixed screen, get the manual masking panels.

Wait - do wait if you aren't sure about the screen size, and do a little testing on the wall.
PM me for screen samples if you need some.


----------



## DaViD Boulet

Craig Peer said:


> Screen - in my opinion, born of 18 years of my own home theater with 6 different screens, the ST130 G4 is the go to screen. A brighter laser projector wouldn't change that - you can just close the iris for better contrast or run the laser in lower power to preserve it. I see no reason to ever change my ST130 !
> If JVC ever comes out with a brighter RS4500 down the road, I'll use it on my exact same ST130 and leverage the extra brightness into better contrast and better HDR.
> 
> Lens - yes, a DCR lens will add considerable pixel density and up to 38% more light you lose by zooming. But, you can add it later and it will make your projector a " new " projector after the newness has worn off. Get a 2.40:1 or 2.37:1 screen.
> 
> Masking - if getting a fixed screen, get the manual masking panels.
> 
> Wait - do wait if you aren't sure about the screen size, and do a little testing on the wall.
> PM me for screen samples if you need some.


Exactly the type of feedback I was hoping to hear. Thanks Craig, and looking forward to the screen samples. I'm a bit surprised at how exciting it is to get my hands on "the" ST130 G4 material... glad to rediscover the passion in this hobby that I thought I might have lost along the way. Bright things ahead...


----------



## Don Stewart

etherealsound said:


> Hello,
> 
> would you happen to be able to share with me how tall the back "hooking mechanisms" are for the masking panels? Right now I can't set up my screen because I don't know how much clearance I need from the ceiling in order to install the masking panels when needed. (I have low ceilings so I do need to be quite precise with how much space I can spare).


I have been away on vacation for the past nine days and not near a computer. The minimum distance is one inch from the very top of the frame to the ceiling.
Regards,
Don


----------



## etherealsound

Don Stewart said:


> I have been away on vacation for the past nine days and not near a computer. The minimum distance is one inch from the very top of the frame to the ceiling.
> Regards,
> Don


I hope you had a relaxing vacation! Thank you, fortunately, I guessed well enough so when the masking panels arrive it should fit perfectly.


----------



## DaViD Boulet

Question about the "viewing angle" in Stewart's spec sheet for the ST 130 G4:










Is the viewing angle measured from the very center of the screen? Meaning that if you had an 8 foot wide screen, and three people sitting on an 8-foot wide sofa directly in front of it with each person's head within the width of the screen if they looked directly forward, would only the person in the center of the sofa be on-axis (zero degrees) with the person on the left and right being off-axis (whatever "angle" would exist between their location and the screen's center)? Or since all viewers are "in front" of the screen, would they all be considered on-axis/zero-degrees, and only the person in the chair off to the right or left of the screen (seated off to the side of the screen) be considered off-axis? Or is "zero degrees" what anyone would see facing directly ahead (regardless of what part of the screen they happened to be seated in front of) and then anything to that person's left or right would represent the "angle" off-axis?

My HT has two rows of four recliners (each row about 9 feet wide), and the 2.40 screen I plan to get will be slightly wider... so even those seated on the right and left will still be "in front" of the screen in 2.40 aspect (and perhaps with their head just barely to the left/right of the 16x9 area). I'd like to know what sort of brightness drop-off I can expect for viewers in the side seats, as this is the main problem in my theater today with my legacy DaLite HiPower (retroreflective) where those seated in the two center seats get a satisfying image, but those in the outer seats get a very dim picture.

If it makes a difference, the projector will be mounted behind the rear wall of the theater so in a very long-throw configuration, and mounted below the top of the screen (probably at an elevation somewhere in the top 1/3 of the screen height).

Thanks!

-Dave


----------



## Guy Kuo

When we went from Elite's CineWhite to the StudioTek 130 G4 (both 150" 16:9) it was remarkable how well the project image hold up even when viewed from periphery of the room. Whereas before the Elite's super limited viewing half angle made angled viewing quite dim, the ST130 looks amazingly good from the side. Just do it. Go to a reference level ST130 G4 screen to match your incoming projector, especially in your light controlled room.


----------



## Don Stewart

DaViD Boulet said:


> Question about the "viewing angle" in Stewart's spec sheet for the ST 130 G4:
> 
> View attachment 3156181
> 
> 
> Is the viewing angle measured from the very center of the screen? Meaning that if you had an 8 foot wide screen, and three people sitting on an 8-foot wide sofa directly in front of it with each person's head within the width of the screen if they looked directly forward, would only the person in the center of the sofa be on-axis (zero degrees) with the person on the left and right being off-axis (whatever "angle" would exist between their location and the screen's center)? Or since all viewers are "in front" of the screen, would they all be considered on-axis/zero-degrees, and only the person in the chair off to the right or left of the screen (seated off to the side of the screen) be considered off-axis? Or is "zero degrees" what anyone would see facing directly ahead (regardless of what part of the screen they happened to be seated in front of) and then anything to that person's left or right would represent the "angle" off-axis?
> 
> My HT has two rows of four recliners (each row about 9 feet wide), and the 2.40 screen I plan to get will be slightly wider... so even those seated on the right and left will still be "in front" of the screen in 2.40 aspect (and perhaps with their head just barely to the left/right of the 16x9 area). I'd like to know what sort of brightness drop-off I can expect for viewers in the side seats, as this is the main problem in my theater today with my legacy DaLite HiPower (retroreflective) where those seated in the two center seats get a satisfying image, but those in the outer seats get a very dim picture.
> 
> If it makes a difference, the projector will be mounted behind the rear wall of the theater so in a very long-throw configuration, and mounted below the top of the screen (probably at an elevation somewhere in the top 1/3 of the screen height).
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> -Dave


Hi Dave.
Please check out Guy's post above, #4172, which pretty much tells the story of image uniformity. The "peak" gain is measured at zero degrees on axis. That said, Stewart has a long time industry reputation of publishing honest engineering specifications that meets or exceeds the published specs and certainly not what are sometimes called, "Marketing Specifications" as can be seen on some other screen manufacturing websites. Please note that the screen gain graph you posted above is very conservative. I personally was very hands on with the development of ST 130 G4 and spent many hours in the optical lab during the reformulation process. The Graph shows the G4 material crossing a gain of one at about 24 degrees off axis. In most manufacturing runs of the G4 material, the material will actually cross one gain between 28 to 30 degrees off axis giving even better off axis vieing and white field uniformity than published. Also, if you use a long throw lens, it will add to the image uniformity and off axis viewing as the PJ's incident light ray angles at the far outer edges of the screen will be more collimated and perpendicular to the screen surface. Hope that helps.

Best Regards,
Don


----------



## noah katz

Guy,

The hot spot isn't that apparent in real life, is it?

What's your throw ratio?



Guy Kuo said:


> As opposed to a 1.3 gain StudioTek 130 G4's very mild hot spot.


----------



## Guy Kuo

I real life, hot spot visibility is about half that in the photos. Hot spotting is barely discernible with the ST130. You have to know to look for it. Definitely does not distract.

On the CineWhite, it's like a torch, the first thing you notice looking at the screen. Throw ratio is 1.4 in my room. That does make higher gain screens an issue if one follows the throw longer than gain rule of thumb. Makes me think the CIneWhite actually has a higher gain reflectance layer 1.5 to 2.0 gain given the severity of its hot spot.

ST130 hits the sweet spot in terms of increased brightness but without objectionable hot spot. It's just a beautiful imaging surface that vanishes rather than intruding.


----------



## noah katz

Guy Kuo said:


> I real life, hot spot visibility is about half that in the photos.


OK, then I doubt it'd be visible with program material.




Guy Kuo said:


> Throw ratio is 1.4 in my room.


Mine is 1.8, so even less of an issue.

Thanks


----------



## Guy Kuo

Don, I just got another PM from someone asking about how and when to attach the center brace on their new Neve screen. This really needs to be added to Stewart's instructions. For such an integral step to be left without instructions is a disservice. Heck, when I was trying to figure out how to do it, I ran into one reviewer who did his incorrectly and ended up attaching the center braces a few degrees diagonally to fit them into the (now bowed) frame.

Having no directions leaves the new owner wondering how. If I followed how another mfr does theirs, I would be attaching the brace first, but that is hazardous with the viewing side up for the Stewart fabric attachment process.

Attaching before snapping all the fabric into position would make stretching the fabric every harder and risk damaging the fabric sliding the brace under the fabric on the floor.

It has to be attached after the fabric is fully snapped into place. That WILL bow the frame and the user needs some instruction as to best technique to insert the brace which now seems too long. My method worked well, but I should never have been forced to figure it out myself.


----------



## Don Stewart

Guy Kuo said:


> Don, I just got another PM from someone asking about how and when to attach the center brace on their new Neve screen. This really needs to be added to Stewart's instructions. For such an integral step to be left without instructions is a disservice. Heck, when I was trying to figure out how to do it, I ran into one reviewer who did his incorrectly and ended up attaching the center braces a few degrees diagonally to fit them into the (now bowed) frame.
> 
> Having no directions leaves the new owner wondering how. If I followed how another mfr does theirs, I would be attaching the brace first, but that is hazardous with the viewing side up for the Stewart fabric attachment process.
> 
> Attaching before snapping all the fabric into position would make stretching the fabric every harder and risk damaging the fabric sliding the brace under the fabric on the floor.
> 
> It has to be attached after the fabric is fully snapped into place. That WILL bow the frame and the user needs some instruction as to best technique to insert the brace which now seems too long. My method worked well, but I should never have been forced to figure it out myself.


Thanks Guy. I will bring this up and forward your post to our technical staff who write the instruction manuals.

EDIT: Just heard back from staff. The quickest way for us to resolve this issue is to write back brace instructions on a separate supplement sheet of paper and insert instructions into manual when shipping larger fixed frames that also use a back brace. Note that the smaller sizes do not use a back brace. Again, thanks Guy for bringing this to our attention.

Best Regards,
Don


----------



## Guy Kuo

Don Stewart said:


> ....back brace instructions on a separate supplement sheet of paper and insert instructions into manual when shipping larger fixed frames...


That is great news for the larger screen customers.😀

Please have them include hints on how to push the correct length, but only apparently too long brace into position. The narrowed spacing between the bowed horizontal members caused by fabric tension makes it seem the wrong length. 

You are welcome to use my procedure in the instructions. It required the least physical strength to accomplish - especially alignment for the bottom screw.


----------



## Gates

I haven't even put my brace on yet because I couldn't figure it out. Feel dumb.


----------



## noah katz

Guy Kuo said:


> Please have them include hints on how to push the correct length, but only apparently too long brace into position.


It would be a piece of cake if the center brace was hinged in the middle with a stop slightly over center when pushed straight; kind of like some card tables, and Visegrips.


----------



## Guy Kuo

noah katz said:


> It would be a piece of cake if the center brace was hinged in the middle with a stop slightly over center when pushed straight; kind of like some card tables, and Visegrips.


Nice! I love that idea.


----------



## Don Stewart

Thanks gentlemen for your suggestions. They have been copied and pasted and forwarded to our engineering department.
That said, the way I have always attached the back brace was by first snapping the screen to the top frame member only when still on the floor. Then, with the help of a second person, we would stand the frame up perpendicular to the floor with the bottom frame member resting on the floor. While the second person is holding and balancing the frame upright, I would then attach the back brace to the frame. Once the back brace is attached to the top and bottom of the frame, I would then proceed to snap the sides and bottom of the screen fabric to the frame. I can't even say how many times I used this method while setting up screens at trade shows. Evidently, when the instruction manuals were updated and rewritten, they did not include this method in the instructions. Again, thanks for all the suggestions.

Best Regards,
Don


----------



## Guy Kuo

So, you've been snapping the fabric to full tension AFTER both ends of the brace are attached. That would avoid the length mismatch if done post fabric. Yes, please add that to the instructions! It is obvious if you've don't it a bunch of times, but not at all obvious to the first time assembler.

What do you do regarding the snap that may be centered UNDER the brace? Can you still snap reaching under the brace or should one offset the brace T-nut to one side?


----------



## Don Stewart

Guy Kuo said:


> So, you've been snapping the fabric to full tension AFTER both ends of the brace are attached. That would avoid the length mismatch if done post fabric. Yes, please add that to the instructions! It is obvious if you've don't it a bunch of times, but not at all obvious to the first time assembler.
> 
> What do you do regarding the snap that may be centered UNDER the brace? Can you still snap reaching under the brace or should one offset the brace T-nut to one side?


When snapping the the bottom of the screen to the bottom frame member, I start from the outerside edges from both sides of the screen and then work towards the center. By the time I get to the center snap, the screen is already snapped just 4" away on both sides of the center snap making it easier and with less tension to push down on the center snap. Depending on which fixed frame model, it is easier to slightly offset the brace so the center snap is exposed. On some models, I have used a Flathead screwdriver sideways to push down on the center snap. Also, just a note. If the screen material is AT, there will never be a center brace as it would interfere with the center channel speaker position. In those particular cases we use two back braces that are offset from the screens centerline.


----------



## jaapaap79

Any ideas?


jaapaap79 said:


> I finally installed my 115” Stewart Luxus G2 StudioTek 100 perf and was super-excited. What an amazing screen!
> 
> Unfortunately after trying to align the projector however I found out the screen comes out crooked with more black at the upper right than the upper left (about 1/4”).
> 
> Does anyone have an idea how I could resolve this? Making the drop stop earlier didn’t work and I’m a little scared to just pull on the screen when it comes down.


----------



## noah katz

jaapaap79 said:


> Any ideas?


Have you determined that it's the screen and not pj alignment?


----------



## fredworld

jaapaap79 said:


> Any ideas?





noah katz said:


> Have you determined that it's the screen and not pj alignment?


 A photo might help, too, in providing advice.


----------



## jaapaap79

Sure thing. Please see below for the left, middle and right side of the screen. As you can see it’s tilted as it should have been 5” across.


----------



## fredworld

jaapaap79 said:


> Sure thing. Please see below for the left, middle and right side of the screen. As you can see it’s tilted as it should have been 5” across.
> 
> View attachment 3157406
> View attachment 3157408
> View attachment 3157410


So it looks to me like it's sloping to 5/16".
I guess my first question is what does Stewart say about manufacturing tolerances? I presume they are spot-on precise, so is it an installation issue?
Next, have you measured the left and right verticals along the height of the screen? Are they even? Or do they show the same 5/16" difference? If the same difference, I'd take it up with Stewart for their input.


----------



## CSB282000

I'm hoping for some advice on the best Stewart screen material for my room and situation. As you can see from the pictures my room is the opposite from light controlled. I've had a lot of ideas including a Sony 100" X92 mounted on the wall and a Stewart Cascade VMT3 with ST 100 ceiling mounted scope 155" masked to 124". I also have an estimate on a Gemini system with a scope ST 170" paired with a Phantom HALR 140". I plan on getting the Sony GTZ 380 for either situation. I have shade control on all windows but I love the views and would ideally like to watch lights on whenever I want.

My concern is even with 10,000 lumens on the 380 and the Phantom HALR that the image will be washed out lights open. I'm also concerned that the X92 might have glare issues. Any feedback on those points would be appreciated. My main question is what Stewart material is the best fit for nighttime lights off viewing, ST 130 G4? ST 100? Something else? 

Also, what are the pro's/con's of having say a fixed wall mounted Phantom HALR 16*9 140" paired with a different Stewart reference material ceiling mounted that drops down in front of it for dark night viewing versus the Gemini system with two different screens that drop down? Is it just looks preference of having an always mounted screen or are there other factors?

Thanks
Cameron


----------



## DaViD Boulet

CSB282000 said:


> I'm hoping for some advice on the best Stewart screen material for my room and situation. As you can see from the pictures my room is the opposite from light controlled. I've had a lot of ideas including a Sony 100" X92 mounted on the wall and a Stewart Cascade VMT3 with ST 100 ceiling mounted scope 155" masked to 124". I also have an estimate on a Gemini system with a scope ST 170" paired with a Phantom HALR 140". I plan on getting the Sony GTZ 380 for either situation. I have shade control on all windows but I love the views and would ideally like to watch lights on whenever I want.
> 
> My concern is even with 10,000 lumens on the 380 and the Phantom HALR that the image will be washed out lights open. I'm also concerned that the X92 might have glare issues. Any feedback on those points would be appreciated. My main question is what Stewart material is the best fit for nighttime lights off viewing, ST 130 G4? ST 100? Something else?
> 
> Also, what are the pro's/con's of having say a fixed wall mounted Phantom HALR 16*9 140" paired with a different Stewart reference material ceiling mounted that drops down in front of it for dark night viewing versus the Gemini system with two different screens that drop down? Is it just looks preference of having an always mounted screen or are there other factors?
> 
> Thanks
> Cameron
> 
> View attachment 3157827
> View attachment 3157828
> View attachment 3157829


I can't speak with authority to the particular question you ask about "what Stewart material is the best fit for nighttime lights off viewing"... (though with an ultra-bright projector I would assume that the ST100 might be a great option all things considered). However when you talk about also wanting to sometimes watch with the light on, have you considered merely darkening the end of the room where the screen is located? Meaning, having that one window-shade come down that's next to the screen, and (totally serious) simply unscrew the light bulbs in the recessed can lights that are close to the screen? I did something similar in my theater for a while... I unscrewed the light bulbs in the recessed lights up front near the screen as I only had once circuit that all the ceiling lights shared... and this way if someone wanted to turn the lights on to read something seated on the sofa they could do so without washing out the picture on the screen. "down firing" recessed lights are great in theater rooms for this sort of localized-light-control since they emit a controlled cone of light and can typically be configured to avoid any direct light washing onto the screen.


----------



## Stan-Lee

Here is my ST100, 120 diagonal, fixed Luxus Deluxe Frame. I'd buy it again. I've had various screens: FireHawk, GrayHawk, UltraMatte...THIS ST100 is the best screen for my living room. Even with the non-theater white wall, carpeting etc. It just works brilliantly at night and even in the daytime/afternoon with the drapes shut. I first bought those other SFC screens because I thought I shouldn't use an ST100. Sooo, now I have 2 older spare screens rolled up behind my couch just in case something ever happens to the ST100.

Right now, we are into xbox auto racing...hence the RSeat simulation setup. Although, I do not use that shifter anymore..sold it. just didn't like it at all. This is our living room and we both love it.

So yes, you can use an ST100 in a non-light controlled room for night movies. @Don Stewart ...you should cruise by sometime and check it out. Door is open. Masks required! LOL!

And why only 120" diagonal....throw distance!

And photo was taken with my Google Pixel 3XL.

Most of our theater equipment was purchased locally from: The Source - Audio Video Design Group
The Racing simulator is a whole different avenue of equipment. RSeat, Fanatec, Buttkicker...

Equipment List:
APC S15 Battery Backup
Aurender N100H high-resolution music server/player
DirecTV cable box
Focal Scala V2 Utopia Left, Right Speakers
Focal Sopra Center speaker
JL Audio E110 subwoofers (2)
McIntosh Laboratory Inc. MX122 AV processor
McIntosh Laboratory Inc. MC207 7-channel power amplifier
McIntosh Laboratory Inc. MC1.2KW monoblock amps (2)
Sony UBP-X1000ES Blu-ray player
Sony VPLXW6000 Laser projector
Stewart Filmscreen 120 inch diagonal Studiotek 100 projection screen
Torus Power AVR 15 Plus Toroidal Isolation power transformer
Peerless-AV AVL component rack

changes:
Sony Playstation 4 - Sold - no longer have it.
Xbox One (shown)... Currently is an Xbox Series X (not shown)


----------



## etherealsound

Stan-Lee said:


> Here is my ST100, 120 diagonal, fixed Luxus Deluxe Frame. I'd buy it again. I've had various screens: FireHawk, GrayHawk, UltraMatte...THIS ST100 is the best screen for my living room. Even with the non-theater white wall, carpeting etc. It just works brilliantly at night and even in the daytime/afternoon with the drapes shut. I first bought those other SFC screens because I thought I shouldn't use an ST100. Sooo, now I have 2 older spare screens rolled up behind my couch just in case something ever happens to the ST100.
> 
> Right now, we are into xbox auto racing...hence the RSeat simulation setup. Although, I do not use that shifter anymore..sold it. just didn't like it at all. This is our living room and we both love it.
> 
> So yes, you can use an ST100 in a non-light controlled room for night movies. @Don Stewart ...you should cruise by sometime and check it out. Door is open. Masks required! LOL!
> View attachment 3161999


Good lord that's quite the setup


----------



## Stan-Lee

UPDATE: Added a Google Drive link with a video of the ST100 and the racing simulation game.
This video is from March 2020, 3pm on my cell phone metadata.




__





Stewart ST100 - Google Drive







drive.google.com





This photo below is not from the video in the link above. 
This is in the mid-day, afternoon time. Drapes closed. And photo was taken with my Google Pixel 3XL.


----------



## Stan-Lee

etherealsound said:


> Good lord that's quite the setup



Yes!! Thank you! We have solved the 2-channel audio and the Theater... all-in-one setup. It performs for both worlds brilliantly!!


----------



## Don Stewart

Stan-Lee said:


> Here is my ST100, 120 diagonal, fixed Luxus Deluxe Frame. I'd buy it again. I've had various screens: FireHawk, GrayHawk, UltraMatte...THIS ST100 is the best screen for my living room. Even with the non-theater white wall, carpeting etc. It just works brilliantly at night and even in the daytime/afternoon with the drapes shut. I first bought those other SFC screens because I thought I shouldn't use an ST100. Sooo, now I have 2 older spare screens rolled up behind my couch just in case something ever happens to the ST100.
> 
> Right now, we are into xbox auto racing...hence the RSeat simulation setup. Although, I do not use that shifter anymore..sold it. just didn't like it at all. This is our living room and we both love it.
> 
> So yes, you can use an ST100 in a non-light controlled room for night movies. @Don Stewart ...you should cruise by sometime and check it out. Door is open. Masks required! LOL!
> 
> And why only 120" diagonal....throw distance!
> 
> And photo was taken with my Google Pixel 3XL.
> View attachment 3161999


What city do you live in?


----------



## Stan-Lee

Don Stewart said:


> What city do you live in?


I'm only a throw's distance away Don. It's me Lee....


----------



## avsBuddy

Lee, have you had a chance to compare ST100 to ST130G4? 

On a side-note: absolutely smashing setup for music/HT! I was looking at the Scala V2 when Upscale was clearing them out. I imagine they are sounding sublime with McIntosh. Warmth of their amps, combined with Scala details should create for a very balanced sound signature.


----------



## Stan-Lee

avsBuddy said:


> Lee, have you had a chance to compare ST100 to ST130G4?
> 
> On a side-note: absolutely smashing setup for music/HT! I was looking at the Scala V2 when Upscale was clearing them out. I imagine they are sounding sublime with McIntosh. Warmth of their amps, combined with Scala details should create for a very balanced sound signature.



No, I have not ever compared ST100 and ST130G4. I have heard from others that the 1.3 gain just adds that extra little "pop" to the overall viewing experience.

Thank you! Yes, the detail of the sound is exquisite. At least to our ears, it sure makes us happy.


----------



## maglito

I am still planning to be at the CEDIA show in Indianapolis next month. It doesn't look like they are planning to cancel it even though some of the larger manufacturers have canceled. I definitely want to check out the new JVC laser projectors. Is Stewart still planning to go? If so, any chance you guys can bring a full size 120-in diagonal 16x9 LuminEsse screen with ST100 material and the LED light kit?






LuminEsse - Stewart


LuminEsse is an architectural statement — beautifully built and striking when in use. A thin bezel frame surrounds the screen, and an optional LED light kit can be added to give just a little more vivacity to the room.




www.stewartfilmscreen.com




Do you know who is planning to be there / work the booth?


----------



## jaapaap79

fredworld said:


> So it looks to me like it's sloping to 5/16".
> I guess my first question is what does Stewart say about manufacturing tolerances? I presume they are spot-on precise, so is it an installation issue?
> Next, have you measured the left and right verticals along the height of the screen? Are they even? Or do they show the same 5/16" difference? If the same difference, I'd take it up with Stewart for their input.


Thanks. What could I do to fix the installation if that’s the issue? Is there a way for one side of the screen to come out less?


----------



## Don Stewart

Hi All,
As of just a few minutes ago, the decision was made to pull out of CEDIA this year. Out of our 16 factory rep firms, only one is attending. Also, after polling many of our most active dealers, most are staying home this year. So when making a business decision, one much always evaluate risk verses reward and in this case we are disappointed that the wind is not blowing in a favorable direction to erect a booth and send our people this year.
Best Regards,
Don


----------



## avsBuddy

Thanks for the update. It is a pretty challenging time for large gatherings such as CEDIA.


----------



## Wookey Jack

I am in the process of building out my theater and ordering the equipment. As far as the screen goes, I am between the Studiotek 130 G4 and the Harmony G2. My designer originally designed the space around the Studiotek 130 G4, but the person specking the equipment changed it out to the Harmony G2 given my seating distance of 10'-3 3/4." In talking to him further he said he normally wouldn't recommend a weave with lamp-based projectors because you are giving up almost half your light from the start, but he is also adamant that he can see the perforations under 12 feet and that it is a distraction. So, I know that the general consensus/recommendation has been that one should not go with the microperf if the viewing distance is less than 12 feet, but I am wondering if anyone has gone with it at less and is happy with it. I have samples of both and have done lots of testing and in the end, at my seating distance I really have to strain to start seeing what looks like a faint texture on the screen. I have to go to about 7-8 feet before I can really start to see the holes. I have pasted my write-up of my findings that I sent my dealer below. I just looking for some insight that might help me make a decision. Hanging up a small sample is one thing, but how does that translate to how much it will bother me on a 130" screen?



Spoiler



I have gotten new glasses/prescription and have done more testing in my friends theater and at home hanging up the samples. The two samples that I have been testing are the Studiotek 130 G4 Microperf (1.3 Gain) and the Harmony G2 Weave (0.7 Gain). Since I have gotten the new glasses, I have been over to my friend’s theater twice to test the samples. He has a JVC RS45. The first time I tested I noticed that his picture was pretty dim. As it turns out, his bulb was on it’s last legs. In this situation none of us could notice the perforations in the microperf, we got out a tape measure and all tried to see them from my seating distance, which is maybe 4-6 inches closer than his. Since the image was dim, the 1.3 gain of the microperf had a distinct brightness advantage compared to his weave and the Harmony G2 which seemed about equivalent to his Elite Screens Sable AT screen in this situation. We also noted that the blacks on the perf seemed darker than the weave as well. After this testing, the three of us were convinced that the Studiotek 130 G4 was superior do to the increased brightness compared to his dim screen as well as the G2 which looked pretty similar to his.

A week or so later, he told me that he had changed the bulb in his projector and that I should come back and retest the samples. This time, his picture was noticeably brighter and more vibrant. The G4 Microperf was definitely brighter, but it also seemed the blacks were much lighter in comparison to his and the G2 Weave. We looked at a bunch of test images with his Spears and Munsil calibration disc. We noticed that with bright white on the perf sample, you could begin to see the perforations. It was almost looked like being able to see a pattern or texture on the screen rather than the individual holes if that makes sense. I also noticed that when text was on the sample that it seemed a bit jagged compared to the weave. We also noted that with bright white, we would notice some sparkle on the perf sample as well.

I will also say that I have hung the perf sample up in my basement and tried to see the perforations at my viewing distance as well, both under dim and brighter white overhead lighting. In these situations, if I strain to try to see it I can maybe start seeing the pattern/texture but it is one of those things where I think I can see it but I am not really sure.

I don’t know if the lighter blacks and the sparkle could be taken care of by adjusting the brightness or not. Is it harder to get deep blacks on a higher gain screen? After the last test we were all leaning toward the Harmony G2 weave as being better, but I am not sure if this is due to some sort of bias or fault in our testing. At this point I thought I would just tell you our observations and see if this changes your recommendation at all.


----------



## Wookey Jack

I have also been told that if I go with the Harmony G2 I would need to go with the 2.5 inch Wall Screen frame as opposed to the Studiotek 130 G4 which would be the 1.5 inch Wall Screen. Can anyone confirm this?


----------



## n.yoshi

Can anyone point me to a good dealer who gives good pricing? 😁


----------



## Don Stewart

Wookey Jack said:


> I have also been told that if I go with the Harmony G2 I would need to go with the 2.5 inch Wall Screen frame as opposed to the Studiotek 130 G4 which would be the 1.5 inch Wall Screen. Can anyone confirm this?


Hi Wookey. The 1.5 frame extrusion has a thinner aluminum wall thickness and not recommended for the additional tension required for the Harmony G2 screen snap fasteners.. Under some conditions, the frame could bow in when under tension from the screen. The 2.5 frame is designed to take a higher tension load. Hope that helps.

Regards,
Don


----------



## jaapaap79

jaapaap79 said:


> Thanks. What could I do to fix the installation if that’s the issue? Is there a way for one side of the screen to come out less?


Nobody knows?


----------



## noah katz

n.yoshi said:


> Can anyone point me to a good dealer who gives good pricing? 😁


Try Craig Peer or Mike Garrett at AVS.


----------



## n.yoshi

noah katz said:


> Try Craig Peer or Mike Garrett at AVS.


Thank you.


----------



## n.yoshi

Can someone explain the benefits of Directors Choice without a bunch of marketing hyperbole.


----------



## SteveS78

I got a new Firehawk Perforated AT screen back earlier this year. Overall I am very happy with it and it displays the best image I have ever experienced here at home with a projector screen. However, when watching a movie, show or even playing video games in some scenes where there is a light blue or white sky I typically get what most refer to as a Moire effect where it looks like there are subtle lines mostly running diagonally down the area only with that color. Most other areas of the screen that contain other colors typically tend to be perfectly fine and look brilliant.

Is there possibly an issue with alignment of the projector or a setting that might help? Is it possible the projector is too close to the screen? I know it was mounted a little closer than the specs for this screen indicated for the size. I have it about 12 ft from the screen. I have no issue with the image fitting the screen perfectly in terms of size. So perhaps the specification on recommended distance is for this reason?

Any help would be appreciated. Thanks

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Wookey Jack

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Wookey. The 1.5 frame extrusion has a thinner aluminum wall thickness and not recommended for the additional tension required for the Harmony G2 screen snap fasteners.. Under some conditions, the frame could bow in when under tension from the screen. The 2.5 frame is designed to take a higher tension load. Hope that helps.


Thanks Don. So If I go with the 2.5 inch frame, I am assuming that I will still be able to swap out the material to something else down the road if I so desire, like the studiotek 130? It will just give me more options?

Anxiously awaiting the Harmony G2 review on Sound and Vision 😁


----------



## noah katz

SteveS78 said:


> I got a new Firehawk Perforated AT screen back earlier this year. Overall I am very happy with it and it displays the best image I have ever experienced here at home with a projector screen. However, when watching a movie, show or even playing video games in some scenes where there is a light blue or white sky I typically get what most refer to as a Moire effect where it looks like there are subtle lines mostly running diagonally down the area only with that color. Most other areas of the screen that contain other colors typically tend to be perfectly fine and look brilliant.
> 
> Is there possibly an issue with alignment of the projector or a setting that might help? Is it possible the projector is too close to the screen? I know it was mounted a little closer than the specs for this screen indicated for the size. I have it about 12 ft from the screen. I have no issue with the image fitting the screen perfectly in terms of size. So perhaps the specification on recommended distance is for this reason?
> 
> Any help would be appreciated. Thanks
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


It could be that the pixel pitch, or a multiple thereof, is close to the same as the perforation pitch, creating the interference patterns.


----------



## BrolicBeast

Wookey Jack said:


> I am in the process of building out my theater and ordering the equipment. As far as the screen goes, I am between the Studiotek 130 G4 and the Harmony G2. My designer originally designed the space around the Studiotek 130 G4, but the person specking the equipment changed it out to the Harmony G2 given my seating distance of 10'-3 3/4." In talking to him further he said he normally wouldn't recommend a weave with lamp-based projectors because you are giving up almost half your light from the start, but he is also adamant that he can see the perforations under 12 feet and that it is a distraction. So, I know that the general consensus/recommendation has been that one should not go with the microperf if the viewing distance is less than 12 feet, but I am wondering if anyone has gone with it at less and is happy with it. I have samples of both and have done lots of testing and in the end, at my seating distance I really have to strain to start seeing what looks like a faint texture on the screen. I have to go to about 7-8 feet before I can really start to see the holes. I have pasted my write-up of my findings that I sent my dealer below. I just looking for some insight that might help me make a decision. Hanging up a small sample is one thing, but how does that translate to how much it will bother me on a 130" screen?
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I have gotten new glasses/prescription and have done more testing in my friends theater and at home hanging up the samples. The two samples that I have been testing are the Studiotek 130 G4 Microperf (1.3 Gain) and the Harmony G2 Weave (0.7 Gain). Since I have gotten the new glasses, I have been over to my friend’s theater twice to test the samples. He has a JVC RS45. The first time I tested I noticed that his picture was pretty dim. As it turns out, his bulb was on it’s last legs. In this situation none of us could notice the perforations in the microperf, we got out a tape measure and all tried to see them from my seating distance, which is maybe 4-6 inches closer than his. Since the image was dim, the 1.3 gain of the microperf had a distinct brightness advantage compared to his weave and the Harmony G2 which seemed about equivalent to his Elite Screens Sable AT screen in this situation. We also noted that the blacks on the perf seemed darker than the weave as well. After this testing, the three of us were convinced that the Studiotek 130 G4 was superior do to the increased brightness compared to his dim screen as well as the G2 which looked pretty similar to his.
> 
> A week or so later, he told me that he had changed the bulb in his projector and that I should come back and retest the samples. This time, his picture was noticeably brighter and more vibrant. The G4 Microperf was definitely brighter, but it also seemed the blacks were much lighter in comparison to his and the G2 Weave. We looked at a bunch of test images with his Spears and Munsil calibration disc. We noticed that with bright white on the perf sample, you could begin to see the perforations. It was almost looked like being able to see a pattern or texture on the screen rather than the individual holes if that makes sense. I also noticed that when text was on the sample that it seemed a bit jagged compared to the weave. We also noted that with bright white, we would notice some sparkle on the perf sample as well.
> 
> I will also say that I have hung the perf sample up in my basement and tried to see the perforations at my viewing distance as well, both under dim and brighter white overhead lighting. In these situations, if I strain to try to see it I can maybe start seeing the pattern/texture but it is one of those things where I think I can see it but I am not really sure.
> 
> I don’t know if the lighter blacks and the sparkle could be taken care of by adjusting the brightness or not. Is it harder to get deep blacks on a higher gain screen? After the last test we were all leaning toward the Harmony G2 weave as being better, but I am not sure if this is due to some sort of bias or fault in our testing. At this point I thought I would just tell you our observations and see if this changes your recommendation at all.


I see the perforations at 11ft, but some folks have come to the showroom and only see perfs at 8ft for real world content, and 10 ft for the Kaleidescape cover menu. I would definitely recommend the Harmony over the ST 130 G4 at your seating distance.


----------



## SteveS78

noah katz said:


> It could be that the pixel pitch, or a multiple thereof, is close to the same as the perforation pitch, creating the interference patterns.


How does that happen happen and how could it be correct if this indeed IS the issue? Or IS it even correctable?

I did give Stewart my projector model number (the Epson 5050UB) upon placing the order. They should have manufactured the material to work with that PJ specifically. 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## noah katz

moire effect - Google Search



For a given resolution, any pj will have the same pixel spacing on the screen.

If the issue is the dark spaces between pixels, defocusing would help.

I forget what it was called, but years ago there was an add-on lens to reduce SDE (screen door effect) that created shifted pixels.


----------



## SteveS78

noah katz said:


> moire effect - Google Search
> 
> 
> 
> For a given resolution, any pj will have the same pixel spacing on the screen.
> 
> If the issue is the dark spaces between pixels, defocusing would help.
> 
> I forget what it was called, but years ago there was an add-on lens to reduce SDE (screen door effect) that created shifted pixels.


I could try to defocus the lense to see if that helps or corrects it. The issue is I would hate to lose sharpness to get rid of the effect. It would become a trade off of sorts. Shouldn't Stewart have produced the screen in such a way that doing that should not be needed? 

Also, it does seem like the issue is more pronounced and apparent in some of my daughter's video games and also 1080p and lower resolution video. When watching 4K programming, shows and movies the image looks razor sharp all the way around. There might be a few places where it will pop up very subtly in 4K, but lower resolution is where it seems it is at moreso...

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


----------



## noah katz

SteveS78 said:


> I could try to defocus the lense to see if that helps or corrects it. The issue is I would hate to lose sharpness to get rid of the effect. It would become a trade off of sorts.


Try it and see.

Note that though it may not look as sharp, that may be an illusion as far as the video material is concerned.

SDE can make the image look sharper because the grid is sharply focused, while the actual sharpness of the content may be subpar.

Just thought of something else you could try - zooming in or out a bit to change the pixel spacing.



SteveS78 said:


> Shouldn't Stewart have produced the screen in such a way that doing thar should not be needed?


Perhaps, if you consulted with them before purchase and they recommended a screen knowing your screen size.

The latter is important because that combined with the perforation pitch determines whether there will be an issue (assuming I'm even correct about my initial speculation as to the cause).


----------



## fredworld

SteveS78 said:


> I could try to defocus the lense to see if that helps or corrects it. The issue is I would hate to lose sharpness to get rid of the effect. It would become a trade off of sorts. Shouldn't Stewart have produced the screen in such a way that doing that should not be needed?
> 
> Also, it does seem like the issue is more pronounced and apparent in some of my daughter's video games and also 1080p and lower resolution video. When watching 4K programming, shows and movies the image looks razor sharp all the way around. There might be a few places where it will pop up very subtly in 4K, but lower resolution is where it seems it is at moreso...
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk


There's a fair amount of information on moire in this thread. *Here are search results on moire. *
I hope this helps.


----------



## m Robinson

SteveS78 said:


> I got a new Firehawk Perforated AT screen back earlier this year. Overall I am very happy with it and it displays the best image I have ever experienced here at home with a projector screen. However, when watching a movie, show or even playing video games in some scenes where there is a light blue or white sky I typically get what most refer to as a Moire effect where it looks like there are subtle lines mostly running diagonally down the area only with that color. Most other areas of the screen that contain other colors typically tend to be perfectly fine and look brilliant.
> 
> Is there possibly an issue with alignment of the projector or a setting that might help? Is it possible the projector is too close to the screen? I know it was mounted a little closer than the specs for this screen indicated for the size. I have it about 12 ft from the screen. I have no issue with the image fitting the screen perfectly in terms of size. So perhaps the specification on recommended distance is for this reason?
> 
> Any help would be appreciated. Thanks
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk



Steve,
Mark Robinson here from Stewart Filmscreen. I lurk here and post once in a great while. This site is quite interesting and I can go down the rabbit hole and lose a lot of hours, so I don't visit super often. Don made me aware of your situation, so here I am. 

We query incoming customers for which projector will be used, and we know the size. We have heuristic data we have collected on the various engines in use with digital two piece projection. Not all projectors have identical pixel fill ratio, or crispness of the pixel grid in use. Many have no visible interaction. In order of severity or likeliness of moire interaction, older LCD and single chip DLP units require more attention. Most DILA and SXRD require none. If given your serial number, I can see what we did and the likeliness of a possible improvement. When a customer specifies a DILA or SXRD we still rotate the material to conform to single chip DLP and LCD, cause we know lots of screens are used with multiple projectors over the useful life of the screen. We rotate the perf pattern up to about 17 degrees as is possible to minimize the amount of de-focus which might be required to completely eliminate moire. Seating distances which are very close, unfortunately may require a bit more defocus. Oftentimes however, our adjustment is sufficient to eliminate the perception of moire. 

Focal length does not matter, what matters is pixel count on screen. Use of anti keystone in the projector can add moire, which is sort of surprising, but we have seen this repeatedly. Email me your serial number to [email protected] and I will work on this. I may choose to send you a test panel and inclinometer. Let's see what we are working with here, and if there is a remedy. 

Mark Robinson


----------



## lcrenshaw7

My new Stewart Wallscreen Deluxe 2.35:1 StudioTek G4 120" screen just arrived. I am coming from a 106" Da-lite Cinema Contour HD Progressive 0.9 gain 16:9 screen. Looking forward to getting it put up this week. Hoping I notice a difference in picture quality. Always wanted a Stewart Screen.


----------



## Technology3456

m Robinson said:


> Steve,
> Mark Robinson here from Stewart Filmscreen. I lurk here and post once in a great while. This site is quite interesting and I can go down the rabbit hole and lose a lot of hours, so I don't visit super often. Don made me aware of your situation, so here I am.
> 
> We query incoming customers for which projector will be used, and we know the size. We have heuristic data we have collected on the various engines in use with digital two piece projection. Not all projectors have identical pixel fill ratio, or crispness of the pixel grid in use. Many have no visible interaction. In order of severity or likeliness of moire interaction, older LCD and single chip DLP units require more attention. Most DILA and SXRD require none. If given your serial number, I can see what we did and the likeliness of a possible improvement. When a customer specifies a DILA or SXRD we still rotate the material to conform to single chip DLP and LCD, cause we know lots of screens are used with multiple projectors over the useful life of the screen. We rotate the perf pattern up to about 17 degrees as is possible to minimize the amount of de-focus which might be required to completely eliminate moire. Seating distances which are very close, unfortunately may require a bit more defocus. Oftentimes however, our adjustment is sufficient to eliminate the perception of moire.
> 
> Focal length does not matter, what matters is pixel count on screen. Use of anti keystone in the projector can add moire, which is sort of surprising, but we have seen this repeatedly. Email me your serial number to [email protected] and I will work on this. I may choose to send you a test panel and inclinometer. Let's see what we are working with here, and if there is a remedy.
> 
> Mark Robinson


I don't want to distract from the customer's issue, but if I could inquire for just the "short version" answer without distracting from anything, why does single chip DLP have more of the problem than DLA or SXRD? And what about 3 chip DLP?


----------



## noah katz

Technology3456 said:


> why does single chip DLP have more of the problem than DLA or SXRD?


Because the spaces between the pixels aren't as blurred out.


----------



## Technology3456

noah katz said:


> Because the spaces between the pixels aren't as blurred out.


That makes sense. What had me confused is I figured 1 chip DLP would have the cleanest pixel structure, while LCD might be the opposite (at least/especially e-shift). So if LCD presents a unique problem for perf screens for that reason, you'd think 1 chip DLP would present the least problem. Or if 1 chip DLP presents a problem, then you'd think LCD would have the least problem. They are sort of opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to pixel grids, at least as far as I understand, so it's confusing why they would both have a problem here, but not lcos in the middle (so to speak). If you can clarify that, great, and I will leave it at that. If not, no problem, and I will leave it at that. Thanks for your answer either way.


----------



## Ellebob

The space between pixels with LCD is the greatest because that is where the wires are to control the pixels so to speak. E-shift can blur that somewhat but the gap still exists.
DLP has closer spacing than LCD but still has a bigger gap than LCOS as the mirrors need space to tilt to reflect light out of the lens or reflect the light to another area instead of going out of the lens.
LCOS has the least amount of space between the pixels because it is a reflective technology and not a pass through technology like LCD. Since the "wires" to control the pixels are behind the pixels, the pixels can be very close together. This is the reason LCOS has the fewest (not non-existent) problems with moire and AT screens.

PS. My description is for simplification and technically not 100% accurate but don't want to get too geeky Somebody can give a more detailed description of the technology differences if they wish.


----------



## noah katz

Technology3456 said:


> I figured 1 chip DLP would have the cleanest pixel structure, while LCD might be the opposite





Technology3456 said:


> it's confusing why they would both have a problem here, but not lcos in the middle


LCD has the the biggest gap between pixels.

DLP has smaller gap but sharp edges.

LCOS/SXRD have smallest gap and not the sharpest edges.


----------



## Technology3456

Ellebob said:


> The space between pixels with LCD is the greatest because that is where the wires are to control the pixels so to speak. E-shift can blur that somewhat but the gap still exists.
> DLP has closer spacing than LCD but still has a bigger gap than LCOS as the mirrors need space to tilt to reflect light out of the lens or reflect the light to another area instead of going out of the lens.
> LCOS has the least amount of space between the pixels because it is a reflective technology and not a pass through technology like LCD. Since the "wires" to control the pixels are behind the pixels, the pixels can be very close together. This is the reason LCOS has the fewest (not non-existent) problems with moire and AT screens.
> 
> PS. My description is for simplification and technically not 100% accurate but don't want to get too geeky Somebody can give a more detailed description of the technology differences if they wish.


No that was great. Between your and @noah katz answer right after your post, I get it completely now. Thanks guys! I am done asking about it.


----------



## matt-sf

I just mounted my Stewart Balon screen (120" wide scope with Studiotek 130). I'm loving the picture quality right out of the box - now I'm doing some optimizations?

I have the telescoping mount, but am considering going to a direct wall mount in order to get a bit more throw distance for am panamorph DCR lens.

My screen has a the 1/2" black border. I'm considering remove the border, and instead having a felt border. on the wall surrounding the screen. I think the screen would look a bitt more modern with this edgeless configuration (when the lights are up, not when viewing a movie).

I assume the border can be removed? Are there any tradeoffs of have the border on the wall like this?


----------



## Wookey Jack

I didn't see it posted yet, but the Harmony G2 review on Sound and Vision came out last month:

Stewart Filmscreen Harmony G2 Acoustically Transparent Screen Review


----------



## avsBuddy

Look what showed up at my house! Thanks to @Mike Garrett and @Don Stewart for your help designing and building my screen system. Now all I need is to read up on how to properly mount this baby and align my projector. 









p.s. Hey look, I have learned how to reference people in post.


----------



## avsBuddy

For the EZ Mount, what's the distance between top of the image and bottom of the wall bracket? I want to mount screen at a precise height from the floor and can't find that info in the manual.

Also debating ideal mounting height or a single row seating. Some sources recommend for the bottom of frame to be 30" from the floor. Even with reclining seats, image at 30" from floor seems too high for me, much less if I have to lift it another 3" to account for frame width.


----------



## HTTR17

As for screen from floor - We originally did 30" to bottom of screen and it felt way too high to me. Granted our reclining couch did sit fairly low, eyes around 36". But we lowered it to 22" from the floor and bought new HT seating that sits up higher. Feels way better, except I swear I see more sparkle from the ST130 G4 screen now.


----------



## Shaz71

Hi all, first post here. Does anyone have an opinion on the Stewart Wallscreen 2.5 vs Wallscreen Deluxe? It seems the only difference is the wider border. Any reason NOT to get the 2.5? Their website says that the deluxe is the most popular so I started to question why...


----------



## Don Stewart

avsBuddy said:


> For the EZ Mount, what's the distance between top of the image and bottom of the wall bracket? I want to mount screen at a precise height from the floor and can't find that info in the manual.


Hi Avs Buddy. When I first read your post over the weekend, I did not know the answer off the top of my head. After checking a CAD drawing in the office today, the very bottom of the mounting rail which attaches to the wall is at the same elevation as where the top of the viewing side begins on the front of frame. (See drawing) Hope that helps.
Regards,
Don


----------



## avsBuddy

Thank you! Above picture definitely makes mounting job a much easier task. Might be something to consider for inclusion in the future manuals.


----------



## Zhiming

Hi @Don Stewart. I want to buy a 165" Fixed Screen StudioTek 130 G4. I live in Viet Nam. Is there anyway I can buy it?


----------



## Don Stewart

Zhiming said:


> Hi @Don Stewart. I want to buy a 165" Fixed Screen StudioTek 130 G4. I live in Viet Nam. Is there anyway I can buy it?


Hi Zhiming.

You can email Thomas Cheong at our factory satellite office in Singapore which represents sales in the Asian Pacific Rim. Thomas is extremely knowledgeable about screen technology and can answer any question you might have. His email is, [email protected]
+65 6747 0555
Or if you prefer, you can contact our distributor in Vietnam as listed below.

Hope that helps.
Best Regards,
Don

*Vistron Vietnam HCMC*
142 Doi Can Str.,Ba Dinh Dist.,Hainoi, 4th Floor, Vietnam Paper Corp. Building
Hanoi, Vietnam
84 3722 8938 [email protected]


----------



## edub90

Could anyone tell me how come the bar on the back of my 138 inch 2.35 Cima Neve screen is causing these bubbles? It only happens occasionally and then it’ll just randomly disappear. I thought I had the bar too tight on the back of the screen so I loosened it but it’s still happening at random times.


----------



## Don Stewart

edub90 said:


> Could anyone tell me how come the bar on the back of my 138 inch 2.35 Cima Neve screen is causing these bubbles? *It only happens occasionally and then it’ll just randomly disappear.* I thought I had the bar too tight on the back of the screen so I loosened it but it’s still happening at random times.
> View attachment 3177328


Since this is only happening occasionally, the first question is there an HVAC vent in the room that is occasionally blowing air against the front of the screen or a return air vent behind the screen that is sucking the screen back when HVAC is on?


----------



## edub90

Don Stewart said:


> Since this is only happening occasionally, the first question is there an HVAC vent in the room that is occasionally blowing air against the front of the screen or a return air vent behind the screen that is sucking the screen back when HVAC is on?


Hmm there is a HVAC vent in the room blowing close to the screen. Not on it but does blow by it. What’s strange though is when I’m not in the room I don’t have the AC on and it still happens.

That’s why originally I was thinking the material was stretching a little in the heat but even when the AC is on it just does it at random times. In order to get it to go away I have to lift the bottom of the screen off the wall for a couple of minutes and then it disappears until the next random time.

I’ll have to change the way the vent sits and see if that helps at all. Thanks Don!


----------



## edub90

Don Stewart said:


> Since this is only happening occasionally, the first question is there an HVAC vent in the room that is occasionally blowing air against the front of the screen or a return air vent behind the screen that is sucking the screen back when HVAC is on?


Hey Don,
I tried changed the direction of the HVAC vent but that definitely wasn’t the problem. I had the AC in the room off today and just as I went down to watch a movie those bubbles from the bar are back so I don’t think it’s the HVAC. Any other ideas?


----------



## Don Stewart

edub90 said:


> . *In order to get it to go away, I have to lift the bottom of the screen off the wall for a couple of minutes and then it disappears until the next random time.*
> Thanks Don!


Actually, they are not bubbles in the screen material. There are some type of protrusions pushing against the back of the screen material making bumps on the front side of the material. Please make sure the back brace is installed as shown in the illustration below so back brace interference touching the material can be taken out of the equation. That said, if the back brace was the problem, the bumps should get worse when tilting the the bottom of screen away from the wall as gravity would pull the material back towards the back brace. After studying your photo again as shown below, it appears that the bumps are something sharper than the back brace as the back brace is a very smooth rail. Anyway, I am really baffled by this. Any possibility that there is some type of foreign object that was accidentally still attached to your wall behind the screen making the protrusions? Also, I have sent you a DM.

Best regards,
Don


----------



## RarityAVS

Christmas came early last week:










😃👌


----------



## mrvideo

Good grief! How big is that screen?


----------



## speedy7461

Hi, I got a question. I think Don can answer that best? When ordering a Stewart Microperf X² you will be asked if you would like to specify your projector model in order to optimally match the microperformation to it.
1.) What is being optimized there?
2.) A screen will usually be kept much longer than the projector. Especially if it's one of Stewart's. How big is the factor if, for example, I swap from Sony to JVC or from lamp to laser? Do I then need a new cloth?
Thank you and best regards
Michael


----------



## Jan.2000

speedy7461 said:


> Hi, I got a question. I think Don can answer that best? When ordering a Stewart Microperf X² you will be asked if you would like to specify your projector model in order to optimally match the microperformation to it.
> 1.) What is being optimized there?
> 2.) A screen will usually be kept much longer than the projector. Especially if it's one of Stewart's. How big is the factor if, for example, I swap from Sony to JVC or from lamp to laser? Do I then need a new cloth?
> Thank you and best regards
> Michael


Good question, I like to know that too. Also in addition to the second question, in case I swap from one laser to another laser...like from JVC to Panasonic


----------



## RarityAVS

mrvideo said:


> Good grief! How big is that screen?


Perhaps it looks bigger than it is since the frame is without a center joint, but I'm very happy with it. Total length is 122 7/8 inches or 312 centimeters! 👊


----------



## Ellebob

Don can answer this better but I doubt lamp to laser will make a difference. Pixel density seems to be the bigger problem with moiré effect. LCD, DLP, and LCOS have different spaces between their pixels and that is more of the problem to make sure they don't align with the holes in the micro-perf to cause a problem.


----------



## Don Stewart

Ellebob said:


> Don can answer this better but I doubt lamp to laser will make a difference. Pixel density seems to be the bigger problem with moiré effect. *LCD, DLP, and LCOS have different spaces between their pixels* and that is more of the problem to make sure they don't align with the holes in the micro-perf to cause a problem.


Been off the grid the past week on vacation. Yep, we skew the MP at a diferent angle if it is an LCD projector. If it is a DLP or LCOS/DILA projector, they are skewed at the same angle.


----------



## ReciprocalSpace

Looking to purchase a Stewart screen and cannot tell from the spec sheet / manual for the Wall screen 1.5", 2.5" and Deluxe, how far from the ceiling they need to be installed. Each look to have a lightly different mounting hardware. From the Deluxe drawing it looks like you need to lift the frame about 1" above the EZ-mount. With 8' ceilings and a center channel speaker on a stand, trying to maximize my screen size without going the AT route. Thanks


----------



## ReciprocalSpace

Have more been into the audio side of home theater and only recently have tried educating myself on projectors and screens over the last two weeks after finding this forum. Have an aging JVC RS49 currently projecting on a 155" 16:9 projection onto a bare wall, looking to upgrade to a NZ8 and get a screen at the same time. My light controlled room is only 14' wide with 8' ceilings, so considering the subwoofers in each corner and the LCR speakers, and being at the min throw distance ~193", 155" was pushing it. Though from what I gather JVC recommends 50+ fL for "good choice" HDR from some available training material, though 35fL (16 SMPTE - 50fL) is often referenced. Not sure where JVC gets that from and they seem to use the quoted high output lumens for each of their models, which isn't realistic after calibration/P3 filter. Local dealer is really interested in pushing gray ALR material like the GrayHawk or FireHawk or Screen Innovation offerings, though my light sources are from the ceiling and when off the room is dark (haven't measured yet but made my own floor to ceiling blackout curtains along 3 walls; also room is not multi-purpose).

FireHawk I don't think would even work given the 1.6x screen width throw requirement, and GrayHawk has a 0.9 gain. The NZ8 puts out ~2500 lumens and after calibration and engaging the P3 filter may be at around 1800 lumens, so a 150" projection on a 1.3 gain screen like the Studiotek 130 G4 would put me right at 35fL. Thinking to stick to my guns as I on the Studiotek 130 G4 as I don't see what ALR buys me but have requested samples of each. Is it a large risk to buy the screen after testing on the old RS49 (likely less than 10 fL at this point) when planning to upgrade to the NZ8. Worry about hot spotting but seems not as big a deal with laser projectors. Also worth going to 140" to get me to ~40fL and buy myself some margin as the NZ8 slowly ages? Concern over HDR quality but would like as large an image as possible; I sit 9' back, so it gives me around 60deg field of view, which should give all detail of a 4k image. Thanks again


----------



## etherealsound

I have a manual mask that hooks on to my screen that I received after the screen itself. As a result, my screen is currently mounted just a bit too close to the ceiling for the mounting system to hook over it and I have to slide it over. I originally thought that that the "hook" part of the mask was 1'' but it is apparently 2''. Anyone have any thoughts on the best way to perhaps cut off about 1'' of it? Seems like it's made of solid aluminum but I'm not sure.


----------



## Ellebob

Hot spotting is not related to laser or lamp based projectors. OK if the light source is not hitting the entire chip with the same amount of light it could be but that really shouldn't be an issue with lamp or laser. There are two main factors. One is lens uniformity. When displaying a solid picture let's say a solid white picture, every part of the picture should measure the same light output. They don't because of the lens and the outer part of the image might measure slightly lower. On good projectors this is not that noticeable to the human eye, especially if not looking for it.

The screen is the bigger problem with hot spotting and the more "gain" a screen has the more hot spotting is likely to be visible. I quoted gain because it is not the overall gain but how much gain is used in the screen. A good indicator of this is the half gain angle value. For instance a studiotek 130 has 30% gain and an 80 degree half gain angle. So that probably means Stewart took a basic white screen and incorporate a .3 gain compound to it. Compare that to the Firehawk which is only a 1.1 gain but only has a 35 degree half gain angle. Now we don't know the exact formula for the Firehawk but it might have a .55 gain gray screen with a 2.0 times gain coating, to give it a 1.1 overall gain. Overall gain does not tell the whole story.

So how does this affect hot spotting. Since these screens use angular reflection think of it this way. Stand in front of a large mirror with a laser pointer or flashlight aiming it from the middle of the mirror say one foot from the mirror. Point it at the middle of the mirror and the light will be refleacted directly back at you. Now point it to the corner of the mirror and the light will point to the wall or ceiling of the room. lambertian screen ie basic white screen with no gain like the Studiotek 100 and reflects light equally in all directions. If you take that light and aim it at, you will see the same picture for anywhere in the room. It does not act like the mirror per se. When we add a gain to it, it is like a combo of the screen and the mirror. The more true "gain" a screen has the less light will be reflected back to the viewer. 

This is also the reason screens with more "gain" have a further throw distance for the projector to reduce the hot spotting and the difference in angles between the center area of the screen and the outside area of the screen. Typically, the further back you can place the projector the better your screen uniformity will be and the less likely you will notice hot spotting. It is all about angles and mirrors (joking on the mirrors).


----------



## noah katz

Also very important is throw ratio, which determines ray angles and is why gain screens usually come with a recommendation for minimum throw ratio.


----------



## Geof

I've got a ST100 screen on order and I'm very anxious to see the differences between that and my existing Carada Classic Cinema White screen. I'm expecting a 'dramatic' - especially after I discovered the Carada gain is closer to .65 than 1 (which is how they advertised it). I haven't noticed any uniformity issues with the Carada but I know the ST100 will be excellent in that regard and it's obviously a much better screen for my velvet room. My preordered RS3100 deserves better than the crap I now have...


----------



## Todd G.

Geof said:


> I've got a ST100 screen on order and I'm very anxious to see the differences between that and my existing Carada Classic Cinema White screen. I'm expecting a 'dramatic' - especially after I discovered the Carada gain is closer to .65 than 1 (which is how they advertised it). I haven't noticed any uniformity issues with the Carada but I know the ST100 will be excellent in that regard and it's obviously a much better screen for my velvet room. My preordered RS3100 deserves better than the crap I now have...


I’ve been using the ST130 G3 for nearly three years now, first with a Sony 385ES then a JVC RS2000. I had a couple people recommend the very screen you have, but I would have needed to get a used one since Carada was no longer in business. That proved to be difficult. Since the Stewart ST130 was the screen I originally intended to buy I moved forward with ordering one. I’ve been super happy with it.

Enjoy your new RS3100 and screen!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Geof

Todd G. said:


> I’ve been using the ST130 G3 for nearly three years now, first with a Sony 385ES then a JVC RS2000. I had a couple people recommend the very screen you have, but I would have needed to get a used one since Carada was no longer in business. That proved to be difficult. Since the Stewart ST130 was the screen I originally intended to buy I moved forward with ordering one. I’ve been super happy with it.
> 
> Enjoy your new RS3100 and screen!
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Interesting...I don't think I've heard from an unhappy Stewart Screen owner and that says a lot.
We're supposed to "marry our screen and date our projectors" - you 'married wisely'...me...I'm gettin a divorce...  
And I can't wait to meet the replacement...


----------



## Guy Kuo

Several months now with my StudioTek 130 G4 screen and I have _nothing_ to say..... and that is a GOOD thing. The projected images are so free of screen induced defects that I basically have not thought about the screen at all. What a huge difference from the prior Elite CineWhite which routinely dragged me out of the the projected illusion. 

So good you don't notice it! Not very catchy, but oh so _wonderful_ in my theater. Absolutely no regrets and worth every penny.


----------



## howiee

ReciprocalSpace said:


> Have more been into the audio side of home theater and only recently have tried educating myself on projectors and screens over the last two weeks after finding this forum. Have an aging JVC RS49 currently projecting on a 155" 16:9 projection onto a bare wall, looking to upgrade to a NZ8 and get a screen at the same time. My light controlled room is only 14' wide with 8' ceilings, so considering the subwoofers in each corner and the LCR speakers, and being at the min throw distance ~193", 155" was pushing it. Though from what I gather JVC recommends 50+ fL for "good choice" HDR from some available training material, though 35fL (16 SMPTE - 50fL) is often referenced. Not sure where JVC gets that from and they seem to use the quoted high output lumens for each of their models, which isn't realistic after calibration/P3 filter. Local dealer is really interested in pushing gray ALR material like the GrayHawk or FireHawk or Screen Innovation offerings, though my light sources are from the ceiling and when off the room is dark (haven't measured yet but made my own floor to ceiling blackout curtains along 3 walls; also room is not multi-purpose).
> 
> FireHawk I don't think would even work given the 1.6x screen width throw requirement, and GrayHawk has a 0.9 gain. The NZ8 puts out ~2500 lumens and after calibration and engaging the P3 filter may be at around 1800 lumens, so a 150" projection on a 1.3 gain screen like the Studiotek 130 G4 would put me right at 35fL. Thinking to stick to my guns as I on the Studiotek 130 G4 as I don't see what ALR buys me but have requested samples of each. Is it a large risk to buy the screen after testing on the old RS49 (likely less than 10 fL at this point) when planning to upgrade to the NZ8. Worry about hot spotting but seems not as big a deal with laser projectors. Also worth going to 140" to get me to ~40fL and buy myself some margin as the NZ8 slowly ages? Concern over HDR quality but would like as large an image as possible; I sit 9' back, so it gives me around 60deg field of view, which should give all detail of a 4k image. Thanks again


Sounds good. I wouldn't be considering the Firehawk in your situation. I would treat the ceiling with velvet/flock tho. I'm aiming for around 25ftl for HDR btw, with a plan to start in the low/mid 30s to allow for dimming. This is with a similar screen width to yours - altho likely scope and zooming.


----------



## Don Stewart

Guy Kuo said:


> Several months now with my StudioTek 130 G4 screen and I have _nothing_ to say..... and that is a GOOD thing. The projected images are so free of screen induced defects that I basically have not thought about the screen at all. What a huge difference from the prior Elite CineWhite which routinely dragged me out of the the projected illusion.
> So good you don't notice it! Not very catchy, but oh so _wonderful_ in my theater. Absolutely no regrets and worth every penny.


Thank you Guy for the brief, but well articulated review. Yep, a perfect viewing surface is one that becomes totally invisible when in use. That was our mission and goal when developing ST 130 G4.
Best Regards,
Don


----------



## ReciprocalSpace

howiee said:


> Sounds good. I wouldn't be considering the Firehawk in your situation. I would treat the ceiling with velvet/flock tho. I'm aiming for around 25ftl for HDR btw, with a plan to start in the low/mid 30s to allow for dimming. This is with a similar screen width to yours - altho likely scope and zooming.


Placed my order for the 130 G4 and crossing my fingers. Didn't want to wait another two weeks to get more samples to compare center/edge at the same time, and too enamored with the idea requiring the 130 G4 to hit 40fL post calibration w/ P3 filter so I med laser to 30fL-27fL, then high laser until back down to 30fL before upgrading PJ or saying bye to the P3 filter. Good luck with your setup.

Flock has come onto my radar from the forums, definitely tempted to order some for the ceiling as the side/back walls are floor to ceiling thicker curtains. Though I'm a little afraid to commit to making the dedicated home theater darker for how it might not look as good with the lights on to the wife, but kind of seems irrational now that I wrote that out considering the room is only used as a HT...


----------



## howiee

ReciprocalSpace said:


> Placed my order for the 130 G4 and crossing my fingers. Didn't want to wait another two weeks to get more samples to compare center/edge at the same time, and too enamored with the idea requiring the 130 G4 to hit 40fL post calibration w/ P3 filter so I med laser to 30fL-27fL, then high laser until back down to 30fL before upgrading PJ or saying bye to the P3 filter. Good luck with your setup.
> 
> Flock has come onto my radar from the forums, definitely tempted to order some for the ceiling as the side/back walls are floor to ceiling thicker curtains. Though I'm a little afraid to commit to making the dedicated home theater darker for how it might not look as good with the lights on to the wife, but kind of seems irrational now that I wrote that out considering the room is only used as a HT...


Good stuff! I'm looking forward to impressions. Agreed about the dedicated room. We spend 1000s on high end kit, so why not make them shine? I think rooms look better when fully treated too - altho that's quite subjective. Either way - the screen's going to be baddass


----------



## void.pointer

What would be a good choice for 133", 16:9 acoustically transparent screen? My room is 17' by 17' and 10' height. I used projectorcentral.com to set my throw distance with the JVC NX5 to 15' and I get about a 133" diagonal sized screen. I'm told an AT screen requires some more distance from the wall (for the center speaker to sound good) so I'm not sure if that affects my screen size much. The 133" at 15' had me at around 1.92x zoom (not quite the 2x max). So I have a little wiggle room.

The Stewart website shows that Studiotek 130 G4 is acoustically transparent, and recent posts here say it's a good material choice. I also see several screen choices: Balon Series, Cima FF, WallScreen, and a handful of others but I'm not sure what is best. Cima FF is a good choice?

I'm sure there's more to the choice than this. But I'm a newbie at this. Not looking to spend hours learning about projectors and screens, more hoping I can get help from the smarter people here to pick a good one and I just buy it 

Thanks!


----------



## Imatk

I just moved to a new house and brought my Stewart screen with me. I put everything in the original box and tube, but the material is rippled now at the top of the screen frame.

Will this go away by itself or is it damaged now?


----------



## fredworld

Imatk said:


> I just moved to a new house and brought my Stewart screen with me. I put everything in the original box and tube, but the material is rippled now at the top of the screen frame.
> 
> Will this go away by itself or is it damaged now?


The screens have a "memory" and reshape themselves in time after installation. Usually a few weeks.


----------



## Imatk

fredworld said:


> The screens have a "memory" and reshape themselves in time after installation. Usually a few weeks.


Awesome thank you


----------



## RapalloAV

I have the ST 130 G4 microperf. The gain is 1.3 but Im told for microperf its 1.1, is that correct has anyone tested?


----------



## Ellebob

That is about correct. I think it is closer to 1.15 but Don probably knows the exact amount.


----------



## RapalloAV

Ellebob said:


> That is about correct. I think it is closer to 1.15 but Don probably knows the exact amount.


Thanks for that. It would be nice to know exactly the truth on the gain of a microperf ST 130 G4 as its difficult doing readings off a meter if one doesnt know.


----------



## Ellebob

It is not that the gain that is any different than the non-perforated versions but because of the perforations, some light does go through the screen. It is the reason you need a black backing or black area behind the screen so it doesn't reflect back towards the viewer and destroy contrast-picture quality. I just found an old article on Stewart's website. It is 10.2% light loss making overall gain would be 1.1674 for a ST 130. I don't know if that is the same micro-perf technique used today, but I think 10-10.5% light loss is probably in the ballpark.





Defining the Difference in Perforated Screens - Stewart


It seems that we thrive on the “who is best” arguments in all walks of life. There is the PC versus MAC conflict and the Ford versus Chevy versus Dodge battles that fuel the NASCAR phenomenon. In our realm of replicating the cinema experience we can look to a more profound group of metrics with w




www.stewartfilmscreen.com





Also, when measuring with a gain screen with a meter make sure your angles are correct for the meter relative to the light source to get truly accurate measurements.


----------



## Don Stewart

RapalloAV said:


> I have the ST 130 G4 microperf. The gain is 1.3 but Im told for microperf its 1.1, is that correct has anyone tested?


The gain is 1.3 prior to our in-house microperfing process. The open area from the perforations is 10.2% leaving 89.8% of solid surface and a net light transmission comparable to a gain of 1.167.


----------



## RapalloAV

Don Stewart said:


> The gain is 1.3 prior to our in-house microperfing process. The open area from the perforations is 10.2% leaving 89.8% of solid surface and a net light transmission comparable to a gain of 1.167.
> View attachment 3188578


Ok all good thats what I want to hear thank you Don!


----------



## RapalloAV

Ellebob said:


> It is not that the gain that is any different than the non-perforated versions but because of the perforations, some light does go through the screen. It is the reason you need a black backing or black area behind the screen so it doesn't reflect back towards the viewer and destroy contrast-picture quality. I just found an old article on Stewart's website. It is 10.2% light loss making overall gain would be 1.1674 for a ST 130. I don't know if that is the same micro-perf technique used today, but I think 10-10.5% light loss is probably in the ballpark.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Defining the Difference in Perforated Screens - Stewart
> 
> 
> It seems that we thrive on the “who is best” arguments in all walks of life. There is the PC versus MAC conflict and the Ford versus Chevy versus Dodge battles that fuel the NASCAR phenomenon. In our realm of replicating the cinema experience we can look to a more profound group of metrics with w
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.stewartfilmscreen.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, when measuring with a gain screen with a meter make sure your angles are correct for the meter relative to the light source to get truly accurate measurements.


Ive heard from Don and I do have a whole wall of black speaker cloth behind the screen.


----------



## Brian Hampton

I may want a new screen soon and Stewart is always the first thing that comes to mind.

My current screen is from Draper and is Fixed frame, 127", 2.40, not curved, not perfed, and has a gain of 1.3.

I could prefer all the same without the gain. I know StudioTec 1.3 is popular but I have read that 1.0 gain is an option.

Any ideas on where to souce such a screen ? If I could buy direct from AVS that's even better.

This seem to be one option ....

One option

option 2

-Brian


----------



## Todd G.

Brian Hampton said:


> I may want a new screen soon and Stewart is always the first thing that comes to mind.
> 
> My current screen is from Draper and is Fixed frame, 127", 2.40, not curved, not perfed, and has a gain of 1.3.
> 
> I could prefer all the same without the gain. I know StudioTec 1.3 is popular but I have read that 1.0 gain is an option.
> 
> Any ideas on where to souce such a screen ? If I could buy direct from AVS that's even better.
> 
> This seem to be one option ....
> 
> One option
> 
> option 2
> 
> -Brian


It’s my understanding these screens are built to order. Mine was shipped directly to me from Stewart even though I bought through a “local” dealer (two hours away). I love my ST130!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## noah katz

RapalloAV said:


> It would be nice to know exactly the truth on the gain of a microperf ST 130 G4 as its difficult doing readings off a meter if one doesnt know.


? The point of a meter is to find out for yourself.




Brian Hampton said:


> One option
> 
> option 2


I suggest you check with Craig Peer or Mike Garrett as well.


----------



## RapalloAV

noah katz said:


> ? The point of a meter is to find out for yourself.


I think having the answer from Don Stewart is more than good enough.


----------



## Technology3456

Brian Hampton said:


> I may want a new screen soon and Stewart is always the first thing that comes to mind.
> 
> My current screen is from Draper and is Fixed frame, 127", 2.40, not curved, not perfed, and has a gain of 1.3.
> 
> I could prefer all the same without the gain. I know StudioTec 1.3 is popular but I have read that 1.0 gain is an option.
> 
> Any ideas on where to souce such a screen ? If I could buy direct from AVS that's even better.
> 
> This seem to be one option ....
> 
> One option
> 
> option 2
> 
> -Brian


They can make any exact size you want, just FYI.


----------



## Don Stewart

A Jumbo size "Director's Choice" four way masking system under construction at our factory for a well known Hollywood studio head's new home. The system will include a seamless StudioTek 130 G4 MP during job site final installation.


----------



## Killroy

Don Stewart said:


> A Jumbo size "Director's Choice" four way masking system under construction at our factory for a well known Hollywood studio head's new home. The system will include a seamless StudioTek 130 G4 MP during job site final installation.
> View attachment 3189475


WOW!!! How big can you build these now?!?!


----------



## Don Stewart

Killroy said:


> WOW!!! How big can you build these now?!?!


Not sure as we have not hit the limit yet. That said, the largest to date is a 14' x 26' made for the University of Las Vegas School of Cinema.
Here is a link for the job's case study. https://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/Files/files/Support Material/SFC_UNLV Case Study.pdf


----------



## Snowmanick

Don Stewart said:


> A Jumbo size "Director's Choice" four way masking system under construction at our factory for a well known Hollywood studio head's new home. The system will include a seamless StudioTek 130 G4 MP during job site final installation.
> View attachment 3189475


My 125” feels inadequate now. Thanks for giving it a complex.


----------



## Don Stewart

Don Stewart said:


> A Jumbo size "Director's Choice" four way masking system under construction at our factory for a well known Hollywood studio head's new home. The system will include a seamless StudioTek 130 G4 MP during job site final installation.
> View attachment 3189475


Correction. It is a StudioTek 100 MP, not 130 as I first indicated. My bad.


----------



## Killroy

My ultimate dream "Director's Choice" screen will be a 25-foot (127" tall) wide 2.35:1 screen with side maskings for all my non scope ARs....now all I have to do is figure out how to build the room big enough to hold it.


----------



## ReciprocalSpace

Todd G. said:


> It’s my understanding these screens are built to order. Mine was shipped directly to me from Stewart even though I bought through a “local” dealer (two hours away). I love my ST130!
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


My dealer used to work as a rep for Stewart, told me there is a serial number on the back of the screen and they keep exact dimensions so if you ever want to change out the screen the buttons will line up perfectly. Also if my memory serves me they own the entire process and made their screens from petroleum and spray them, so they can make very large screens 40' x 90' and as oil goes up so to do the cost of their screens. Can't wait for my 130 G4 to arrive.


----------



## Todd G.

ReciprocalSpace said:


> My dealer used to work as a rep for Stewart, told me there is a serial number on the back of the screen and they keep exact dimensions so if you ever want to change out the screen the buttons will line up perfectly.


True. And, for reference, the serial number is on the screen shipping tube as well. I got pricing to buy the ST130 G4 material for my frame and my dealer insisted I get it from the back of the frame. Turns out that number matched the shipping tube info.

Enjoy your new G4 when you get it!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Stan-Lee

Don Stewart said:


> The gain is 1.3 prior to our in-house microperfing process. The open area from the perforations is 10.2% leaving 89.8% of solid surface and a net light transmission comparable to a gain of 1.167.
> View attachment 3188578


Nice photo!


----------



## Craig Peer

Todd G. said:


> True. And, for reference, the serial number is on the screen shipping tube as well. I got pricing to buy the ST130 G4 material for my frame and my dealer insisted I get it from the back of the frame. *Turns out that number matched the shipping tube info.*
> 
> Enjoy your new G4 when you get it!
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Most people throw the shipping tube away. Good on you for saving it for future use ( or at least recording the serial number on it ). Owners should write the serial number on their owner's manual right away and file it in a safe place!


----------



## Todd G.

Craig Peer said:


> Most people throw the shipping tube away. Good on you for saving it for future use ( or at least recording the serial number on it ). Owners should write the serial number on their owner's manual right away and file it in a safe place!


Well, the shipping box the frame and tube were in is long gone. The tube and thin foam that were rolled with the screen were much easier to store and made more sense to keep. I have original boxes for all of my basement A/V equipment, but I have a ton of storage space in the garage and basement.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## speedy7461

Hello folks,

thumbs up from me for the ST130. I installed my 133 "this week and I'm very happy. Coming from fabric cloth and 43 nits. Now the JVC has measured 59 nits, which feels like 100 nits. Not to mention the sharpness gained.
THANK YOU Stewart


----------



## sackohammers

Can someone link to me, or tell me, the difference between Cima Fixed Frame, Wall Screen, and Balon?
I'm looking for a screen about 120"-130". Fixed to the wall for a light-controlled, dedicated cinema room.
Then I need to decide between Cima Neve, StudioTek 100, StudioTek 130 G4. I've been leaning towards the StudioTek 100.
I emailed Stewart, the email went unanswered for a week, and when they finally got back, they didn't answer my question. The reply simply said I'd need to contact my local sales rep. Well they're 2.5 hours away.
So hopefully someone here can tell me the differences between the frames so I can pick the one that's right for me.


----------



## fredworld

sackohammers said:


> Can someone link to me, or tell me, the difference between Cima Fixed Frame, Wall Screen, and Balon?
> I'm looking for a screen about 120"-130". Fixed to the wall for a light-controlled, dedicated cinema room.
> Then I need to decide between Cima Neve, StudioTek 100, StudioTek 130 G4. I've been leaning towards the StudioTek 100.
> I emailed Stewart, the email went unanswered for a week, and when they finally got back, they didn't answer my question. The reply simply said I'd need to contact my local sales rep. Well they're 2.5 hours away.
> So hopefully someone here can tell me the differences between the frames so I can pick the one that's right for me.


I have the *Balon* borderless with Studiotek 100. I chose borderless so as to maximize screen size on limited wall space.
Links for *Wall Screen* series and *Cime Fixed Frame* (FF). I hope this helps. I'm happy to explain my choice further.


----------



## sackohammers

I wish it was easier to directly compare the price of a similarly sized frame in each, and understand the differences. Wall Screen seem to be, at least in part, marketed as quick takedown and quick setup for presentations. But I realize that doesn't eliminate it as a good choice for permanent residential. They also offer the Wall Screen in 4 different variations.
I guess maybe I could narrow it down and compare the 1.5" Balon vs the 1.5" Wall Screen.


----------



## fredworld

sackohammers said:


> I wish it was easier to directly compare the price of a similarly sized frame in each, and understand the differences. Wall Screen seem to be, at least in part, marketed as quick takedown and quick setup for presentations. But I realize that doesn't eliminate it as a good choice for permanent residential. They also offer the Wall Screen in 4 different variations.
> I guess maybe I could narrow it down and compare the 1.5" Balon vs the 1.5" Wall Screen.


I forgot to mention that I have the EZ Mount wall mount with my borderless screen permanently installed via Mounting instructions that are on the Stewart site in pdf. When I was deciding on mine, July Lopez at Stewart was very helpful. You should consider calling Stewart to discuss your questions.
Meantime, here's a *Sound and Vision review *of the Studiotek 130 with mention of the 100.


----------



## kevinlg

I have a Stewart 2:35:1 StudioTek 130” that I need to unload, do you guys have any tips where I can go about doing that? I'm in FL so it will be pick up only...


----------



## Todd G.

kevinlg said:


> I have a Stewart 2:35:1 StudioTek 130” that I need to unload, do you guys have any tips where I can go about doing that? I'm in FL so it will be pick up only...


You could try the AVS classifieds under DISPLAY DEVICES/FRONT PROJECTION. Best of luck. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fredworld

kevinlg said:


> I have a Stewart 2:35:1 StudioTek 130” that I need to unload, do you guys have any tips where I can go about doing that? I'm in FL so it will be pick up only...


I sold my old Stewart Firehawk in the Home Theater> Display Devices section of *www.usaudiomart.com*


----------



## kevinlg

Todd G. said:


> You could try the AVS classifieds under DISPLAY DEVICES/FRONT PROJECTION. Best of luck.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk





fredworld said:


> I sold my old Stewart Firehawk in the Home Theater> Display Devices section of *www.usaudiomart.com*



Thank you both very much, will do!


----------



## Todd G.

kevinlg said:


> Thank you both very much, will do!


I like Fred’s suggestion. I had forgotten about that one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Craig Peer

sackohammers said:


> Can someone link to me, or tell me, the difference between Cima Fixed Frame, Wall Screen, and Balon?
> I'm looking for a screen about 120"-130". Fixed to the wall for a light-controlled, dedicated cinema room.
> *Then I need to decide between Cima Neve, StudioTek 100, StudioTek 130 G4. I've been leaning towards the StudioTek 100.*
> I emailed Stewart, the email went unanswered for a week, and when they finally got back, they didn't answer my question. The reply simply said I'd need to contact my local sales rep. Well they're 2.5 hours away.
> So hopefully someone here can tell me the differences between the frames so I can pick the one that's right for me.


I'd suggest getting samples of those first. Cima Neve has it's own frame and fixed sizes. PM me if you need a source for samples.


----------



## Craig Peer

sackohammers said:


> Can someone link to me, or tell me, the difference between Cima Fixed Frame, Wall Screen, and Balon?
> I'm looking for a screen about 120"-130". Fixed to the wall for a light-controlled, dedicated cinema room.
> Then I need to decide between Cima Neve, StudioTek 100, StudioTek 130 G4. I've been leaning towards the StudioTek 100.
> I emailed Stewart, the email went unanswered for a week, and when they finally got back, they didn't answer my question. The reply simply said I'd need to contact my local sales rep. Well they're 2.5 hours away.
> *So hopefully someone here can tell me the differences between the frames so I can pick the one that's right for me.*


Frame width is one difference - Wallscreen.pdf (stewartfilmscreen.com)


----------



## Geof

I've completed my installation of ST100 and I'm happy with the results. But I do have a question for some smart folk because this dummy is confused...
First the setup
Using ColourSpace and an i1D3 Pro I measured 55.3 nits off of my Carada screen. I also measured Lux and computed 53 nits.
The next day with the ST100 now installed I measured 54.6 nits using the same probe from the same position (lux reading was slightly lower this day as well)
I attributed the slight nit decrease to a couple hours of viewing and a lamp strike between measurements.
Okay, that all seems about right - right?
But here's where I'm confused...I shined a flashlight at the front of the ST100 and nothing came thru - you could not see light from the backside.
When I shine a flashlight at the front of the Carada there is enough light bleeding thru the backside to read a book.
So, if the Carada is bleeding light thru and the ST100 doesn't bleed any thru why are the nit readings similar ???
(I'll also say I could discern no difference in brightness altho I immediately thought the picture looked better)


----------



## Don Stewart

Geof said:


> I've completed my installation of ST100 and I'm happy with the results. But I do have a question for some smart folk because this dummy is confused...
> First the setup
> Using ColourSpace and an i1D3 Pro I measured 55.3 nits off of my Carada screen. I also measured Lux and computed 53 nits.
> The next day with the ST100 now installed I measured 54.6 nits using the same probe from the same position (lux reading was slightly lower this day as well)
> I attributed the slight nit decrease to a couple hours of viewing and a lamp strike between measurements.
> Okay, that all seems about right - right?
> But here's where I'm confused...I shined a flashlight at the front of the ST100 and nothing came thru - you could not see light from the backside.
> When I shine a flashlight at the front of the Carada there is enough light bleeding thru the backside to read a book.
> So, if the Carada is bleeding light thru and the ST100 doesn't bleed any thru why are the nit readings similar ???
> (I'll also say I could discern no difference in brightness altho I immediately thought the picture looked better)


Hi Geof. Thank you for your purchase.
What you are witnessing with your old screen is what we refer to as " False Screen Gain". Being that your old screen was manufactured utilizing a calendar machine method that extrudes the hot vinyl between multiple rollers, it leaves a low but still somewhat glossy finish. The gloss level or False Gain, then reflects more light back as un-diffused light. When measuring with a meter, the meter will pick up this false gain and give you a higher reading. Your new Studiotek 100 is manufactured utilizing a casting process on hugh seamless 40 ft x 90 ft molds. During the finishing process of ST100, the gloss level is monitored and measured with an instrument to insure the almost non existent gloss level meets our Studio Reference screen specifications making for a near perfect lambertian diffusion surface. To give you an extreme visual example of false gain, if you have tried to project on a dry marker whiteboard which has a high gloss shiny finish, you can witness false gain at its worse. The shiny surface will reflect un-difussed light back to the the viewers at certain viewing angles. (See attached high gloss whiteboard example photo below)
Secondary, since your old screen somewhat translucent and not opaque like the ST 100, there is a possibility that the light leakage from the back of the screen is reflecting off a back wall and transmitting a very small amount of light back to the viewing side adding to the reading of your light meter.
Anyway, I hope I explained this well.

Best regards,
Don

False Gain on high gloss surface example


----------



## Geof

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Geof. Thank you for your purchase.
> What you are witnessing with your old screen is what we refer to as " False Screen Gain". Being that your old screen was manufactured utilizing a calendar machine method that extrudes the hot vinyl between multiple rollers, it leaves a somewhat glossy finish. The gloss level or False Gain, then reflects more light back as un-diffused light. When measuring with a meter, the meter will pick up this false gain and give you a higher reading. Your new Studiotek 100 is manufactured utilizing a casting process on hugh seamless 40 ft x 90 ft molds. During the finishing process of ST100, the gloss level is monitored and measured with an instrument to insure the almost non existent gloss level meets our Studio Reference screen specifications making for a near perfect lambertian diffusion surface. To give you an extreme visual example of false gain, if you have tried to project on a dry marker whiteboard which has a high gloss shiny finish, you can witness false gain at its worse. The shiny surface will reflect un-difussed light back to the the viewers at certain viewing angles. (See attached high gloss whiteboard example photo below)
> Secondary, since your old screen somewhat translucent and not opaque like the ST 100, there is a possibility that the light leakage from the back of the screen is reflecting off a back wall and transmitting a very small amount of light back to the viewing side adding to the reading of your light meter.
> Anyway, I hope I explained this well.
> 
> Best regards,
> Don
> 
> False Gain on high gloss surface example
> View attachment 3199797


Awesome explanation Don. I thank you for that clear explanation. I think that also explains what struck me immediately and that is clarity...the image had more clarity, color depth, seems more 3D like. Absolutely better, so happy I made the switch.


----------



## Todd G.

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Geof. Thank you for your purchase.
> What you are witnessing with your old screen is what we refer to as " False Screen Gain". Being that your old screen was manufactured utilizing a calendar machine method that extrudes the hot vinyl between multiple rollers, it leaves a low but still somewhat glossy finish. The gloss level or False Gain, then reflects more light back as un-diffused light. When measuring with a meter, the meter will pick up this false gain and give you a higher reading. Your new Studiotek 100 is manufactured utilizing a casting process on hugh seamless 40 ft x 90 ft molds. During the finishing process of ST100, the gloss level is monitored and measured with an instrument to insure the almost non existent gloss level meets our Studio Reference screen specifications making for a near perfect lambertian diffusion surface. To give you an extreme visual example of false gain, if you have tried to project on a dry marker whiteboard which has a high gloss shiny finish, you can witness false gain at its worse. The shiny surface will reflect un-difussed light back to the the viewers at certain viewing angles. (See attached high gloss whiteboard example photo below)
> Secondary, since your old screen somewhat translucent and not opaque like the ST 100, there is a possibility that the light leakage from the back of the screen is reflecting off a back wall and transmitting a very small amount of light back to the viewing side adding to the reading of your light meter.
> Anyway, I hope I explained this well.
> 
> Best regards,
> Don
> 
> False Gain on high gloss surface example
> View attachment 3199797


Considering this explanation, especially with regard to some screens being at least somewhat translucent, it makes sense that placing black velvet directly behind a screen has been recommended in another AVS thread. 

@Geof glad you’re liking your ST100. I love my ST130.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Geof

Todd G. said:


> Considering this explanation, especially with regard to some screens being at least somewhat translucent, it makes sense that placing black velvet directly behind a screen has been recommended in another AVS thread.
> 
> @Geof glad you’re liking your ST100. I love my ST130.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


FWIW,
I didn't mention it before but there was black velvet behind the screen (it's still there). I didn't recall doing that but there it was....

I spent more time in the theater tonight and the difference between screens is quite apparent. Kinda hard for me to describe but clarity seems to fit best - Whatever it is it's readily apparent. Yep, the RS3100 deserves this screen...


----------



## Erod

I heard that Stewart makes physical masking panels now for screens. Is this true?


----------



## liverpool_for_life

Erod said:


> I heard that Stewart makes physical masking panels now for screens. Is this true?








Manual Masking Panels - Stewart


Manual masking panels, specifically tailored to the screen, will easily convert a screen from Scope to a 16:9 aspect ratio. The masking panels are custom made to align perfectly, creating sharp, crisp borders, improving perceived contrast and delivering a gray bar-free image.




www.stewartfilmscreen.com


----------



## edub90

Erod said:


> I heard that Stewart makes physical masking panels now for screens. Is this true?


Unfortunately not for Cima Neve screens


----------



## Tulipo

I have a 120 inch 1:78 wallscreen series. Does Stewart sell making panels for this (for scope movies; ie top and bottom masking) or are the masking panels only for scope screens for 16:9 viewing?


----------



## Craig Peer

Tulipo said:


> I have a 120 inch 1:78 wallscreen series. Does Stewart sell making panels for this (for scope movies; ie top and bottom masking) or are the masking panels only for scope screens for 16:9 viewing?


Scope screens only.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Don Stewart

Just posted my "Outdoor Movie Night" in the outdoor theater section on AVS forum. Fun times had by all.








Our Annual Movie Night Party At The Stewart Residence.


For the past 25 years, my wife and I have been hosting a movie night for about 125 friends and guest. Takes us over a day and half just to do the set up and party preparation. 6:00, drinks and dinner, 7:00, live band playing classic R&R. 8:00 the footage starts to roll. Most of the video centers...




www.avsforum.com


----------



## JSHT

I am considering a new Stewart studiotek 130 microperf and waiting on sample to arrive. For those that have used this screen (or other Stewart MPs), what distance do you have your speakers behind the screen? Stewart recommends 12” however I can only accommodate about 6” of space. I only plan to put the Center behind the screen and FL and FR will be outside of screen. Trying to understand if this distance will be a problem and whether I should be considering alternatives? I have looked at weave screens but don’t want to compromise on image and lower gain. A non-AT screen will require that I put the Center below the screen which is very close to the ground. What do others think is the better option? 

HT is currently under construction so I am unable to test. This is my first HT so I have no previous experience with AT or non-AT screens

Thanks


----------



## jsil

I'm looking at Cima Tiburon g4 or ST130 g4 for family room set up. I do have some ambient light in the room. My walls and ceiling are painted dark colors. Which one would be a good match for the room or look at something else.


----------



## vampat

Hi,

I have a Cima Neve and would like to know if it is possible to change/upgrade the material only?
I would be interested by the Studiotek 130 G4
but don’t want to necessary change the frame, My actual screen is 2.35 in 125 inch,

Thanks in advance for your comments!


----------



## Craig Peer

vampat said:


> Hi,
> 
> I have a Cima Neve and would like to know if it is possible to change/upgrade the material only?
> I would be interested by the Studiotek 130 G4
> but don’t want to necessary change the frame, My actual screen is 2.35 in 125 inch,
> 
> Thanks in advance for your comments!


No. Stewart won't sell material from the custom line to fit Cima frames. You will need to replace the screen. Just sell the Cima.


----------



## fredworld

vampat said:


> Hi,
> 
> I have a Cima Neve and would like to know if it is possible to change/upgrade the material only?
> I would be interested by the Studiotek 130 G4
> but don’t want to necessary change the frame, My actual screen is 2.35 in 125 inch,
> 
> Thanks in advance for your comments!





Craig Peer said:


> No. Stewart won't sell material from the custom line to fit Cima frames. You will need to replace the screen. Just sell the Cima.


Are you sure about that? I would've put up good money that there was an earlier post from @Don Stewart indicating that all they need is the serial number off the frame to match it up for new material.
PS: I just now found *this post* on that issue.


----------



## Todd G.

fredworld said:


> Are you sure about that? I would've put up good money that there was an earlier post from @Don Stewart indicating that all they need is the serial number off the frame to match it up for new material.











Do I need to update my screen?


I moved into an existing home in 2015 that already had a dedicated home theater and am looking at possibly upgrading some components. The current projector is a 2012 JVC DLA-X30BU and the screen is a framed Stewart Grayhawk sn123h with a diagonal screen size of 120". I am looking at buying a...




www.avsforum.com





Is this the thread you mean?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## edub90

vampat said:


> Hi,
> 
> I have a Cima Neve and would like to know if it is possible to change/upgrade the material only?
> I would be interested by the Studiotek 130 G4
> but don’t want to necessary change the frame, My actual screen is 2.35 in 125 inch,
> 
> Thanks in advance for your comments!


Is there even a big enough difference in the material to notice a difference?


----------



## fredworld

Todd G. said:


> Do I need to update my screen?
> 
> 
> I moved into an existing home in 2015 that already had a dedicated home theater and am looking at possibly upgrading some components. The current projector is a 2012 JVC DLA-X30BU and the screen is a framed Stewart Grayhawk sn123h with a diagonal screen size of 120". I am looking at buying a...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.avsforum.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is this the thread you mean?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Lol. You're not Don Stewart!😕
I found the post and edited my previous message. Don's suggestion about the SN is at the end of his reply.


----------



## Todd G.

fredworld said:


> Lol. You're not Don Stewart!
> I found the post and edited my previous message. Don's suggestion about the SN is at the end of his reply.


Ha! We must been posting simultaneously there, different threads though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fredworld

edub90 said:


> Is there even a big enough difference in the material to notice a difference?


You can *contact Stewart* to request a sample to see for yourself.


----------



## Craig Peer

fredworld said:


> Are you sure about that? I would've put up good money that there was an earlier post from @Don Stewart indicating that all they need is the serial number off the frame to match it up for new material.
> PS: I just now found *this post* on that issue.


I'm sure. I've asked my Stewart rep before. Cima frames - Cima materials only. The rest of the line on the Stewart side is a different story.


----------



## Craig Peer

Todd G. said:


> Do I need to update my screen?
> 
> 
> I moved into an existing home in 2015 that already had a dedicated home theater and am looking at possibly upgrading some components. The current projector is a 2012 JVC DLA-X30BU and the screen is a framed Stewart Grayhawk sn123h with a diagonal screen size of 120". I am looking at buying a...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.avsforum.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is this the thread you mean?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yes - you can get ST130 or other non Cima material made for the Wallscreen series frames etc. But you can't get Cima material in a Wallscreen deluxe frame, and you can't get ST130 G4 material in a Cima frame. 

I do have Cima Neve material in my Luxus 122" diagonal 16:9 electric screen, but it was a one off, and they said " don't ask us to do that again ".


----------



## Todd G.

Craig Peer said:


> Yes - you can get ST130 or other non Cima material made for the Wallscreen series frames etc. But you can't get Cima material in a Wallscreen deluxe frame, and you can't get ST130 G4 material in a Cima frame.


Understood. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Craig Peer

Todd G. said:


> Understood.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Stewart treats the Cima line as " another brand " in a sense. They won't " cross brand " materials.


----------



## vampat

Craig Peer said:


> No. Stewart won't sell material from the custom line to fit Cima frames. You will need to replace the screen. Just sell the Cima.


Ok thanks!

Maybe it would not be an interesting expense, an audio shop confirmed to me that the difference between the two material was not huge, from there perspective… that i could compare on samples if i want…but not worth the money.


----------



## Craig Peer

vampat said:


> Ok thanks!
> 
> Maybe it would not be an interesting expense, an audio shop confirmed to me that the difference between the two material was not huge, from there perspective… that i could compare on samples if i want…but not worth the money.


Get samples to compare to your existing screen. Then you'll know one way or the other.


----------



## FenceMan

I just purchased a used StudioTek 130 G4 screen and it still has some wrinkles from shipping (only been hung a couple of days). How long can I expect until these work themselves out (assuming they will)? Anything I should do to move the process along?


----------



## fredworld

FenceMan said:


> I just purchased a used StudioTek 130 G4 screen and it still has some wrinkles from shipping (only been hung a couple of days). How long can I expect until these work themselves out (assuming they will)? Anything I should do to move the process along?


Do nothing other than exercise patience. Give them a couple weeks to a month or so. You should be fine by 6 weeks and gone completely as long as your installation was done properly and the screen is taut.


----------



## FenceMan

fredworld said:


> Do nothing other than exercise patience. Give them a couple weeks to a month or so. You should be fine by 6 weeks and gone completely as long as your installation was done properly and the screen is taut.


Thank you.

By properly you mean all of the snaps are engaged and screen is tight?


----------



## fredworld

FenceMan said:


> Thank you.
> 
> By properly you mean all of the snaps are engaged and screen is tight?


Mostly, but I believe the frame assembly installation must have no twists nor otherwise be out of alignment so the screen material is universally flat.


----------



## Don Stewart

FenceMan said:


> I just purchased a used StudioTek 130 G4 screen and it still has some wrinkles from shipping (only been hung a couple of days). How long can I expect until these work themselves out (assuming they will)? Anything I should do to move the process along?


It appears that the screen material shifted on the roller core during transit leaving small wrinkles near the screen edge binding. They should come out on there own over time. If you would like to speed it up, then take a 1500 watt or so hairdryer and run heat along the the wrinkle area. IMPORTANT: When heating material, have hairdryer about three inches away and move hairdryer in the same type of strokes as if you were painting with a spray paint can. Do not hold heat in one place. The material will tighten up only during the cool down period after heat is removed. Repeat if necessary.
Best regards,
Don


----------



## FenceMan

fredworld said:


> Mostly, but I believe the frame assembly installation must have no twists nor otherwise be out of alignment so the screen material is universally flat.


Gotcha, the frame is pretty simple, four bolts and she's together. I'll give it a few weeks and hopefully it's perfect. Appreciate the help.


----------



## Marc D Carra

I have a dealer offerring me a Studiotek 130 G3 Luxus Deluxe110" 2.35:1 fixed frame screen in perfect condition for about $1100USD. I'm in Canada so new G4 model will cost me a little over 2x that amount. Is the G3 material still a good match for a JVC NX5? Viewing in a completely dark room, about 16ft throw, 10 ft viewing distance. Thanks for any advice you can give me!


----------



## Todd G.

Marc D Carra said:


> I have a dealer offerring me a Studiotek 130 G3 Luxus Deluxe110" 2.35:1 fixed frame screen in perfect condition for about $1100USD. I'm in Canada so new G4 model will cost me a little over 2x that amount. Is the G3 material still a good match for a JVC NX5? Viewing in a completely dark room, about 16ft throw, 10 ft viewing distance. Thanks for any advice you can give me!


I’m using a 100” 16:9 ST130 G3 with my RS2000 (NX7) at a 15’ throw and 9.5’ viewing distance in a light controlled room. At 1200 hours on the bulb we’re still getting 38 ft/L (with my settings) for HDR in high lamp. 

A few people notice sparkles with this screen. I don’t as I’m not sensitive to this. I think it’s a great screen for our needs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## liverpool_for_life

It took a while (nowt to do with Stewart who had the screen ready for shipping within a couple of weeks of receiving the advance payment), but The Luxus Has (Finally) Landed!

Very, very excited to have this installed and get my NX7 calibrated.


----------



## clausdk

Vistascope Evo.

How tight is the fit between the mask and screen?


----------



## Erod

Marc D Carra said:


> I have a dealer offerring me a Studiotek 130 G3 Luxus Deluxe110" 2.35:1 fixed frame screen in perfect condition for about $1100USD. I'm in Canada so new G4 model will cost me a little over 2x that amount. Is the G3 material still a good match for a JVC NX5? Viewing in a completely dark room, about 16ft throw, 10 ft viewing distance. Thanks for any advice you can give me!


Fantastic screen, no doubt, but the G4 is better. I've had both, and there is less sparkle (almost none) and better color with HDR on the G4. Of course, this is a small improvement, but it's there.

Perhaps you can buy this one, then switch the material down the road if you decide later. They'll just need your frame serial number on the back.


----------



## pakoon

I have a dedicated theater room, not perfect but quite good, very little ambient light.
I have a JVC DLA-N7 projector, viewing distance about 4.2 meters (like 13-14 feet).
Atm I have a 10 years old 91 inch Screenline Fashion screen, it is gray, I think that the gain is 0.8.

Now I would like to have a little bigger screen like 100 - 106 inch and I could also change to a better one.
What would be best choice for my room and projector from the Stewart fixed frame 16:9 screens (white, gray, gain ….)
Any recommendations ?


----------



## howiee

pakoon said:


> I have a dedicated theater room, not perfect but quite good, very little ambient light.
> I have a JVC DLA-N7 projector, viewing distance about 4.2 meters (like 13-14 feet).
> Atm I have a 10 years old 91 inch Screenline Fashion screen, it is gray, I think that the gain is 0.8.
> 
> Now I would like to have a little bigger screen like 100 - 106 inch and I could also change to a better one.
> What would be best choice for my room and projector from the Stewart fixed frame 16:9 screens (white, gray, gain ….)
> Any recommendations ?


At 100-106" with a JVC N7 i'd likely go for a Stewart StudioTek 100.


----------



## Don Stewart

StudioTek100, aka Snomatte100. "A Touch of Hollywood in Sweden", Case Study.


https://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/Files/files/Support%20Material/CAN_Film_CaseStudy.pdf


----------



## pakoon

Hi

Thanks for the comments.
With the new screen Studiotek/Snomatte what would I get ?
More brightness, contrast, blackier black … ?


----------



## Todd G.

pakoon said:


> Hi
> 
> Thanks for the comments.
> With the new screen Studiotek/Snomatte what would I get ?
> More brightness, contrast, blackier black … ?


Get a few different material samples. That will help you make the best decision and answer your questions best. I wouldn’t rush into this decision without seeing samples first.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## avsBuddy

Seconded. Try materials in your setting before you pull the trigger. If possible, get several samples of the same material to get a bigger total test area for each. The bigger the size of a sample, the easier it is to note the differences between materials. Between Studiotek 130/Snomatte - light absorption in your room/projector light output combo will be the major factor in your decision. ST 130G4 is so good at minimizing sparkles, that in my opinion, you really have to have a bat cave in order for Snomatte material to outshine it (no pun intended  ).


----------



## soundnew

I also struggle with my decision. I have two samples here (both are roughly letter size). Studiotek 100 and 130. For me, it is very hard to see a difference between these two given the size of the samples. I am not sure if it´s worth the trade-off between gain and viewing angles. My main seating position is 3.88 meters away from a 3.84 meters screen. The viewing angle is between 0 and 26, on the two other seats it is up to 64 degrees. What is your opinon?


----------



## fredworld

soundnew said:


> I also struggle with my decision. I have two samples here (both are roughly letter size). Studiotek 100 and 130. For me, it is very hard to see a difference between these two given the size of the samples. I am not sure if it´s worth the trade-off between gain and viewing angles. My main seating position is 3.88 meters away from a 3.84 meters screen. The viewing angle is between 0 and 26, on the two other seats it is up to 64 degrees. What is your opinon?


I'm prejudiced. I love my 1.0 Studiotek BECAUSE of the severe viewing angles. Gain is not an issue with my setup.


----------



## Don Stewart

Is this big enough?
A Hugh electric retractable "seamless" GrayMatte 70 screen in our fly loft at our Torrance, CA factory. Every retractable screen is first tested for screen flatness prior to shipping to customer.









Just building a shipping crate for these big screens can be a project by itself.


----------



## pakoon

soundnew said:


> I also struggle with my decision. I have two samples here (both are roughly letter size). Studiotek 100 and 130. For me, it is very hard to see a difference between these two given the size of the samples. I am not sure if it´s worth the trade-off between gain and viewing angles. My main seating position is 3.88 meters away from a 3.84 meters screen. The viewing angle is between 0 and 26, on the two other seats it is up to 64 degrees. What is your opinon?


This is is very good and educating discussion, thx everybody.
I had the same projector / screen combo for 10 years and was happy with it, paying no attention to the screen, did not actually understand that there can be such differences between materials.

What I have understood now is that it is a trade off with the gain / quality. In daylight a high gain is needed, but something is lost in the picture quality.
In a dark room smaller gain is OK and it gives better picture quality. Please correct me here, if I have misunderstood something. 

About the recommendations to my darkened room: Studiotek 100 / 130,

The viewing angle in my case is small, due to screen size and the fact that I have only two adjacent seats. 
So would the screen with a little better gain be better ?
Atm I am running the projector in the low lamp mode due to noise.


----------



## Todd G.

pakoon said:


> This is is very good and educating discussion, thx everybody.
> I had the same projector / screen combo for 10 years and was happy with it, paying no attention to the screen, did not actually understand that there can be such differences between materials.
> 
> What I have understood now is that it is a trade off with the gain / quality. In daylight a high gain is needed, but something is lost in the picture quality.
> In a dark room smaller gain is OK and it gives better picture quality. Please correct me here, if I have misunderstood something.
> 
> About the recommendations to my darkened room: Studiotek 100 / 130,
> 
> The viewing angle in my case is small, due to screen size and the fact that I have only two adjacent seats.
> So would the screen with a little better gain be better ?
> Atm I am running the projector in the low lamp mode due to noise.


I can’t speak for you and your tastes. But I can say I’m using my ST130 with a JVC RS2000 in low lamp for SDR content and high lamp for HDR content, all of this in a dark, fully light controlled room. My screen is 87” wide (in a 12’-9” wide room) and the center of the outboard seats in our four seat theater is just inside the edges of the screen. With 9.5 to 10 foot viewing distance, and viewer’s eye height at 1/3 of the way up the screen, I don’t have severe viewing angles. But I can walk along either side wall and test view at the most severe angles and lose very little (if any) color saturation, light, or detail…and I’m talking 9” out from the front corner of the room, very nearly at 179 degrees.

I really do like my projector a lot. But I love this screen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Kadath

Looks like I’m headed this way, will be talking to local vendors in next few weeks. My basement flooded last month so I put in darker carpet and mid/dark grey walls and have the nz8 on order as soon as jvc can make a few more.


----------



## DAlba

Looking at upgrading screen to Directors Choice with acoustic transparent screen. What are reasons one would choose 2.00:1 ratio vs 16:9?
My room is 15.5'd x 15'w. I have JVC NX7. Throw distance is currently 14' and sitting 11.5' from 133" 2.35 screen. I feel like screen could be a little smaller sitting that close but 16:9 content is very underwhelming.

What intrigues me about Directors Choice is essentially being able to display image at any size I want. So I can run it a little smaller now but if/when I move to new house and have a larger theater room I won't have to buy another screen. Problem though is the above garage bonus room has slopped ceilings so going with a 140" 16:9 Directors Choice which is 16.5" deep for example I would have to bring screen forward from wall about 20" which means my room just got 3' smaller and I would have to run screen size even smaller bc my seating distance will now be closer to 10'.

Also having hard time deciding between StudioTek 100 and StudioTek 130 G4. Walls will be painted black with no windows. Zero light most of the time but occasionally some rear down lights on dim for ambient light. Content is mostly blu-ray and 4k movies and maybe 20% TV/Netflix. Any advice?


----------



## Kadath

I thought I wanted a DC too until I got my quote. Hoomama! =)

Anyway I think I'm settled. 130" wallscreen 1.5" border with Studiotek 130 G4. 

From this:









To this if my numbers are right:


----------



## Technology3456

Kadath said:


> I thought I wanted a DC too until I got my quote. Hoomama! =)
> 
> Anyway I think I'm settled. 130" wallscreen 1.5" border with Studiotek 130 G4.
> 
> From this:
> View attachment 3218226
> 
> 
> To this if my numbers are right:
> View attachment 3218227


If you went 2.35:1 you could have it go under the beams on the right of the ceiling and use more width and still get a decent sized 16:9 image. It would also be more even to both walls. But if it's a matter of seating distance being too close then there would be no need. Just an idea.


----------



## avsBuddy

Having projection screen so visibly offset on the screen wall would bother me, to be honest. If you gong to stick with that arrangement, I would consider covering that wall with black velvet, plus couple of feet on the sides, to minimize any distractions from the offset. I've seen it done in the movie theaters where an entry on one side forced screen to be offset.


----------



## Kadath

avsBuddy said:


> Having projection screen so visibly offset on the screen wall would bother me, to be honest. If you gong to stick with that arrangement, I would consider covering that wall with black velvet, plus couple of feet on the sides, to minimize any distractions from the offset. I've seen it done in the movie theaters where an entry on one side forced screen to be offset.


It’s no big deal. This is what it looked like pre-flood. 

__
https://flic.kr/p/UUnNKB


----------



## Kadath

Technology3456 said:


> If you went 2.35:1 you could have it go under the beams on the right of the ceiling and use more width and still get a decent sized 16:9 image. It would also be more even to both walls. But if it's a matter of seating distance being too close then there would be no need. Just an idea.


yeah not for me thanks. I watch way more 16x9 content than I do UWS
Every tv show is 16x9
Every sporting event is 16x9
Every video game is 16x9
All projectors are native 16x9

A couple thousand movies are 2.35 and to get the most out of them you have to waste a good percentage of your projector’s native resolution to zoom in or buy a multi-thousand dollar anamorphic contraption. 

it’s not worth it.


----------



## Kabillyhop

I'm going to order a new screen for our theatre. Probably a 114" wide Stewart ST130G4. Projector will be JVC RS3100.
From my limited research, I've come to the following conclusions:

2.40:1 is preferable to 2.35:1
3 1/2" frame is better than 2 1/2" frame
ST130 is not a significant compromise to picture quality compared to ST100
I'm looking for some confirmation from folks more knowledgeable than me that these conclusions make sense (or don't).

Thanks in advance for your help.


----------



## avsBuddy

I’m a recent very satisfied owner of the ST130 screen and agree with all 3 points. 
1) Preferable, to me means you avoid any black bars with most CinemaScope material.
2) For dedicated home theater, thinner screen border is not very important while ease of assembly and sturdiness of 3.5” frame is a big plus. 
3) ST130 is a fine choice for anything that is not a bat cave theater and helps with HDR.


----------



## fredworld

Kabillyhop said:


> I'm going to order a new screen for our theatre. Probably a 114" wide Stewart ST130G4. Projector will be JVC RS3100.
> From my limited research, I've come to the following conclusions:
> 
> 2.40:1 is preferable to 2.35:1
> 3 1/2" frame is better than 2 1/2" frame
> ST130 is not a significant compromise to picture quality compared to ST100
> I'm looking for some confirmation from folks more knowledgeable than me that these conclusions make sense (or don't).
> 
> Thanks in advance for your help.


My prior screen was a 1.2 gain 16x9 Firehawk with Luxus Ve-Lux frame. I upgraded to a white 2.35:1 StudioTek 100 borderless frame. The borderless frame maximized my screen size for my smallish room (18x14x7.5). With my PJ I can tailor the lens menory so that there's only a very thin black bar at the bottom (or top) of the screen for wider-than 2.35 movies. The 2.35 black bars fall off screen and blend into my black screen wall. I prefer that to cropping a 2.35 image on a 2.41 screen. I elected the Lambertian 1.0 gain StudioTek 100 after consulting with Stewart's rep, July Lopez, who was eminently helpful with my decision which was based on a completely light controlled room with black screen wall/ceiling and dark gray side walls and my preference to avoid a "hot spot" and light fall-off when sitting far off axis. I'll add that the white screen is not an issue with most 16:9 images. If I wish I just move horizontal black curtains into place which are adjustable for <2.35 aspect ratios. I have no regrets. I hope this helps.


----------



## Don Stewart

Kadath said:


> I thought I wanted a DC too until I got my quote. Hoomama! =)
> 
> Anyway I think I'm settled. 130" wallscreen 1.5" border with Studiotek 130 G4.
> 
> From this:
> View attachment 3218226
> 
> 
> To this if my numbers are right:
> View attachment 3218227












I think you are fine the 1.5" shadowbox frame if the screen is placed on the wall as drawn above. Just to be sure, with this frame, the top frame member must be NO lower in elevation off the floor than the top of the PJ lens position so frame will not interfere with the very top light rays and cast a shadow on top of viewing area.
Best Regards,
Don


----------



## Kadath

avsBuddy said:


> 3) ST130 is a fine choice for anything that is not a bat cave theater and helps with HDR.


This sentence is a bit confusing. Are you saying there is a better choice for HDR in a batcave?


----------



## Kadath

Don Stewart said:


> I think you are fine the 1.5" shadowbox frame if the screen is placed on the wall as drawn above. Just to be sure, with this frame, the top frame member must be NO lower in elevation off the floor than the top of the PJ lens position so frame will not interfere with the very top light rays and cast a shadow on top of viewing area.


Don thanks for saying that! I hadn't considered that as both of my previous frames had been relatively flat and didn't have depth like the wallscreen 1.5 does. Is there a better choice for me that lies more flat giving more flexibility in placement???


----------



## Don Stewart

Kadath said:


> Don thanks for saying that! I hadn't considered that as both of my previous frames had been relatively flat and didn't have depth like the wallscreen 1.5 does. Is there a better choice for me that lies more flat giving more flexibility in placement???


The Wall Screen 2.5" frame has a beveled face slanted towards the viewing surface allowing for more flexibility with placement.


https://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/Files/files/Support%20Material/OwnersManuals/WallScreen2_5.pdf


----------



## Don Stewart

Kadath said:


> This sentence is a bit confusing. Are you saying there is a better choice for HDR in a batcave?


Here is a review from Sound and Vision. The writer has used both ST100 and ST130 G4.








Stewart Filmscreen StudioTek 130 G4 Projection Screen Review


Performance Setup Value PRICE $1,484 (material only, as tested) AT A GLANCE Plus




www.soundandvision.com




Also this.


----------



## SJHT

Kadath said:


> yeah not for me thanks. I watch way more 16x9 content than I do UWS
> Every tv show is 16x9
> Every sporting event is 16x9
> Every video game is 16x9
> All projectors are native 16x9
> 
> A couple thousand movies are 2.35 and to get the most out of them you have to waste a good percentage of your projector’s native resolution to zoom in or buy a multi-thousand dollar anamorphic contraption.
> 
> it’s not worth it.


You could also add top masking to handle non-16:9 content if your budget allows.... SJ


----------



## Todd G.

Kadath said:


> This sentence is a bit confusing. Are you saying there is a better choice for HDR in a batcave?


I’ve got a bat cave and love my JVC RS2000/ ST130 combo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Kabillyhop

avsBuddy said:


> I’m a recent very satisfied owner of the ST130 screen and agree with all 3 points.
> 1) Preferable, to me means you avoid any black bars with most CinemaScope material.
> 2) For dedicated home theater, thinner screen border is not very important while ease of assembly and sturdiness of 3.5” frame is a big plus.
> 3) ST130 is a fine choice for anything that is not a bat cave theater and helps with HDR.


Thank you, this is what I was looking for.


----------



## noah katz

Don Stewart said:


> What you are witnessing with your old screen is what we refer to as " False Screen Gain".


Don, what's false about it?

Why isn't it just the higher gain that would be expected with a glossy surface, along with the expected hotspotting?




DAlba said:


> What are reasons one would choose 2.00:1 ratio vs 16:9?


It's a sensible compromise between 16:9 and 2.35:1, which respectively would give an excessively short 2.35 image or excessively narrow 2.35:1 image.

My screen is 2.05:1 and much prefer it; when I switch to 16:9 I appreciate the increased height, and when I switch to 2.35:1 I appreciate the increased width.

That said, the choice was easy because I'm maxed out in both width and height that my installation can accommodate.


----------



## avsBuddy

Kadath said:


> This sentence is a bit confusing. Are you saying there is a better choice for HDR in a batcave?


With the fourth generation of ST130, Stewart greatly minimized most of the drawbacks you get with positive gain screens - sparkles and narrow viewing cone. That means that home theater enthusiasts, with less than ideal theater rooms, now get even more benefits out of ST130. If your room is a reference quality, ST100 will still have a theoretical edge over ST130 due to its unity gain.

As far as HDR goes - the brighter you can get the image, the better the HDR effect. With positive gain, ST130 would certainly not hurt the HDR material. And it looks like a poster above went with ST130 for HDR, even in a "bat cave" environment.


----------



## Craig Peer

I’m a fan of the StudioTek 130 too. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Technology3456

noah katz said:


> Don, what's false about it?
> 
> Why isn't it just the higher gain that would be expected with a glossy surface, along with the expected hotspotting?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's a sensible compromise between 16:9 and 2.35:1, which respectively would give an excessively short 2.35 image or excessively narrow 2.35:1 image.
> 
> My screen is 2.05:1 and much prefer it; when I switch to 16:9 I appreciate the increased height, and when I switch to 2.35:1 I appreciate the increased width.
> 
> That said, the choice was easy because I'm maxed out in both width and height that my installation can accommodate.


How do you do 4-way masking for 2.35:1 and 16:9, or do you just leave it? How does the full setup work as far as lens memory, anamorphic lenses, etc?


----------



## Kadath

Don Stewart said:


> The Wall Screen 2.5" frame has a beveled face slanted towards the viewing surface allowing for more flexibility with placement.
> 
> 
> https://www.stewartfilmscreen.com/Files/files/Support%20Material/OwnersManuals/WallScreen2_5.pdf


thanks. Think I will stick with the 1.5” and just ensure it’s above the pj since all the JVCs should be able to handle that


----------



## BrolicBeast

DAlba said:


> Looking at upgrading screen to Directors Choice with acoustic transparent screen. What are reasons one would choose 2.00:1 ratio vs 16:9?
> My room is 15.5'd x 15'w. I have JVC NX7. Throw distance is currently 14' and sitting 11.5' from 133" 2.35 screen. I feel like screen could be a little smaller sitting that close but 16:9 content is very underwhelming.
> 
> What intrigues me about Directors Choice is essentially being able to display image at any size I want. So I can run it a little smaller now but if/when I move to new house and have a larger theater room I won't have to buy another screen. Problem though is the above garage bonus room has slopped ceilings so going with a 140" 16:9 Directors Choice which is 16.5" deep for example I would have to bring screen forward from wall about 20" which means my room just got 3' smaller and I would have to run screen size even smaller bc my seating distance will now be closer to 10'.
> 
> Also having hard time deciding between StudioTek 100 and StudioTek 130 G4. Walls will be painted black with no windows. Zero light most of the time but occasionally some rear down lights on dim for ambient light. Content is mostly blu-ray and 4k movies and maybe 20% TV/Netflix. Any advice?
> View attachment 3217928


Exciting times! the 2.00 AR is just the required AR to ensure that your viewable surface area is the same whether watching in 2.40 or 16:9. I have a Directors Choice in (or approaching) production. One of the buggest benefits is its use in conjunction with lens memory. We like large, but if my wife and I are sitting down to watch the Golden Girls, the 160" wide image isn't flattering. Even if I use my Lumagen to shrink the image the onscreen pixels are still that of a 160" screen. But if I close the masking to be, say, 85" wide 4:3, then from our seating distance, it will still have an awe-inspiring size while having more pixel density due to the projector zooming in to match the screen size and aspect ratio. I've also added more seating to our back row, since now--the main obstructions to the new seating (soffits clipping corners of image) will be overcome by a simple decrease in screen size by a foot. The versatility was totally worth the price. I'll be shooting a YouTube review of the screen assembly, configuration, Control4 programming, and at least ten different Use Cases once our Directors Choice arrives. 

We opted for the ST130 G4 material versus the ST100 material due to size and the desire to maximize HDR. It's what we have right now with our Wallscreen Deluxe screen (Don posted a link to my YouTube review of that screen on the last page) and it's a game changer for HDR. Anything short of a Sony GTZ380 or a Sim2 Nero4S Gold for your specified projector needs the ST130 material on a large screen (12ft wide or above) in my opinion.

Because I'm so excited (and you soon will be as well), here's my diagram:


----------



## Don Stewart

noah katz said:


> Don, what's false about it?
> 
> Why isn't it just the higher gain that would be expected with a glossy surface, along with the expected hotspotting?


"False Gain" is a term used in the optical lab to define high gain readings on the meter when an un-diffused image is present. A high gloss surface will reflect PJ's incident light back as incident light only. Think of it this way. A matte finish, good, and gloss finish, bad, are direct opposites. When formulating a high quality positive gain coating, one must use proper optical and chemical engineering to maximize image diffusion and at the same time, mimimize the gloss level to the engineered screen surface.
Example of incident UN-diffuesed light reflecting back to viewers below. This example is way more than just a Hot Spot, it is false gain due to the glossy surface.


----------



## Technology3456

Don Stewart said:


> "False Gain" is a term used in the optical lab to define high gain readings on the meter when an un-diffused image is present. A high gloss surface will reflect PJ's incident light back as incident light only. Think of it this way. A matte finish, good, and gloss finish, bad, are direct opposites. When formulating a high quality positive gain coating, one must use proper optical and chemical engineering to maximize image diffusion and at the same time, mimimize the gloss level to the engineered screen surface.
> Example of incident UN-diffuesed light reflecting back to viewers below. This example is way more than just a Hot Spot, it is false gain due to the glossy surface.
> 
> View attachment 3218888


What material is that?


----------



## noah katz

Technology3456 said:


> How do you do 4-way masking for 2.35:1 and 16:9, or do you just leave it? How does the full setup work as far as lens memory, anamorphic lenses, etc?


No masking, I just leave it.

No anamorphic lens.

I just select one of the JVC's lens memories on the remote.

Black bars don't bother me anymore; these days, what with not-infrequent HDMI issues and processor glitches, I'm happy if I can start watching without having to dick around with things for 10 min.


----------



## Technology3456

noah katz said:


> Black bars don't bother me anymore; these days, what with not-infrequent HDMI issues and processor glitches, I'm happy if I can start watching without having to dick around with things for 10 min.


Wow that's too bad. Unless that's normal for that model I would try to get it fixed in warranty. But thanks for explaining about your setup. If you have any more to add you can PM me so it doesn't become an extended OT conversation about JVC HDMI or anything.


----------



## DAlba

BrolicBeast said:


> Exciting times! the 2.00 AR is just the required AR to ensure that your viewable surface area is the same whether watching in 2.40 or 16:9. I have a Directors Choice in (or approaching) production. One of the buggest benefits is its use in conjunction with lens memory. We like large, but if my wife and I are sitting down to watch the Golden Girls, the 160" wide image isn't flattering. Even if I use my Lumagen to shrink the image the onscreen pixels are still that of a 160" screen. But if I close the masking to be, say, 85" wide 4:3, then from our seating distance, it will still have an awe-inspiring size while having more pixel density due to the projector zooming in to match the screen size and aspect ratio. I've also added more seating to our back row, since now--the main obstructions to the new seating (soffits clipping corners of image) will be overcome by a simple decrease in screen size by a foot. The versatility was totally worth the price. I'll be shooting a YouTube review of the screen assembly, configuration, Control4 programming, and at least ten different Use Cases once our Directors Choice arrives.
> 
> We opted for the ST130 G4 material versus the ST100 material due to size and the desire to maximize HDR. It's what we have right now with our Wallscreen Deluxe screen (Don posted a link to my YouTube review of that screen on the last page) and it's a game changer for HDR. Anything short of a Sony GTZ380 or a Sim2 Nero4S Gold for your specified projector needs the ST130 material on a large screen (12ft wide or above) in my opinion.
> 
> Because I'm so excited (and you soon will be as well), here's my diagram:
> 
> View attachment 3218850


Thanks for sharing your thoughts and congrats on your Directors Choice order. I look forward to seeing your videos. I wish I could go that big! Damn sloped ceiling! The cost of entry into Directors Choice is high but going from a 130" to 160" is minimal so really wish I could just order the biggest so if I move to a new house with bigger space I won't be wishing I had larger screen.


----------



## SJHT

I’ve asked this in the past, but can‘t Stewart add a WALL mounted drop down screen with top masking? Not sure why this is difficult. Especially with the new wall mounting system which is really nice and very sturdy vs. the 2 screws holding up older wall mounted Stewart screens. Seems like there is not much additional weight and size. They offer a ceiling/flush mounted option. We have built in valence to hide the entire unit. Just curious why this has not been an option.


----------



## Snowmanick

I have a Luxus Model A Electriscreen with a 125” diagonal Firehawk G4 microperf screen material. I’m redoing my room and am wondering if I can change the screen material to Studiotec ST130 G4 since it’s a retractable screen?

This is a basement theatre/multimedia room and lounge. I have blackout blinds on the windows, and have done some work towards ambient light/retro reflective surfaces. The ceiling in front of the screen has an 8’x8’ charcoal gray acoustic cloud, I have a dark charcoal 9’x12’ rug, and dark furniture. The front wall is covered in dark gray stretched fabric over black screen paint, the sidewalls are a matte finish medium blue-gray, and the ceiling not covered by the acoustic panels is painted with a “ambient light rejecting”
Paint from projectorscreen.com (Projector Screen Paint - Wall/Ceiling Ambient Light Rejecting Acoustic Dampening - Light Grey-Gallon - Paint on Screen POS-G00WCLG). This is as far as the wife’s willing to go in darkening they room. Is it enough for the ST130?

Current PJ is a JVC RS500, replacing with a JVC RS3100.


----------



## Guy Kuo

Still loving the G4 ST130 here. 150 inches of image goodness. Enjoyable even when I run an old RS45 instead of my RS3000. Despite the picture measuring too low to be pedantically good, it is still beautiful presentation. Image looks bright and even - no noticeable hot spotting during movie watching. Off angle picture is great. No bad seats in this house.

Don, when do you ship our e-ST130's with e-ink localized dimming? 😎


----------



## ShoutingMan

FYI, Stewart Filmscreen‘s Adrian Silva was on the most recent HTU podcast. 
Episode 32 - Adrian Silva of Stewart Filmscreen


----------



## Kadath

ShoutingMan said:


> FYI, Stewart Filmscreen‘s Adrian Silva was on the most recent HTU podcast.
> Episode 32 - Adrian Silva of Stewart Filmscreen


hey thanks for the shout out. I’d have posted that myself but I know that AVS has been down on folks pimping their own external links in the past. I really enjoyed chatting with Adrian! I have a quote in now for a 130” Stewart Wall Mount and screen. Just gonna come down to how fast the NZ8s ship and what the tax return looks like.


----------



## iccup7

Hi all,

I am new to the forum and I feel like I am learning a ton. I am currently in process of trying to get a good screen for the home I just moved into and I am very interested in a Stewart due to its quality. But I have a questions about Stewart screen for all of you experienced folks.

I already have a good UST so I will keep using it. The room is very light colored all around with no chance of repainting to darker color without getting killed by the wife. There are also LCR speakers in-wall (wife really likes the fact that there are no big towers). We will sit about 13 ft from the screen so looking at 130 inch. Based on my equipment and some research on Stewart website, I figured I can get a Graymatte 70 with micro perf to be both AT and mitigate as much as possible the reflected light (gray, less than 0.7 gain after perf) from walls and ceiling. It also should work with my existing UST. 

However, I heard from the local Stewart dealer that this is not the case. In fact I was told that as soon as a Stewart GrayMatte 70 gets micro perforated to become acoustically transparent, they can no longer be used with an UST. The reason is that while perforation will not affect the image quality of a long throw projector, it will significantly degrade the image quality from a UST. Something about the angle of light from UST interacting with the micro perforations. 

I am having a real hard time understanding why this would be but maybe the dealer knows something I don't. Can anyone provide some input/insight? There is so much info related to every part of a home theatre so your help is much appreciated!


----------



## Ellebob

I would double check with Stewart. I don't see why a Lambertian surface would change properties if perforated. A grayhawk 70 and studiotek 100 should both be fine with an ultra short throw projector. Other screens which have gain in them this wouldn't be the case and I doubt perforated would make a difference in the properties of the screen material except that you lose about 10% light through the perforations. I could be wrong so double check with Stewart.


----------



## mrvideo

I'm going to make a WAG. With a perforated screen, one is normally projecting straight on, such that the holes won't cause an issue. But, when you come at the screen from off axis, the light now can hit the edge of the perforation. Hitting the edge might cause some strange reflection anomalies. Just a thought.


----------



## Ellebob

Don, usually chimes in. Hopefully, he will and give us an answer.


----------



## fredworld

iccup7 said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I am new to the forum and I feel like I am learning a ton. I am currently in process of trying to get a good screen for the home I just moved into and I am very interested in a Stewart due to its quality. But I have a questions about Stewart screen for all of you experienced folks.
> 
> I already have a good UST so I will keep using it. The room is very light colored all around with no chance of repainting to darker color without getting killed by the wife. There are also LCR speakers in-wall (wife really likes the fact that there are no big towers). We will sit about 13 ft from the screen so looking at 130 inch. Based on my equipment and some research on Stewart website, I figured I can get a Graymatte 70 with micro perf to be both AT and mitigate as much as possible the reflected light (gray, less than 0.7 gain after perf) from walls and ceiling. It also should work with my existing UST.
> 
> However, I heard from the local Stewart dealer that this is not the case. In fact I was told that as soon as a Stewart GrayMatte 70 gets micro perforated to become acoustically transparent, they can no longer be used with an UST. The reason is that while perforation will not affect the image quality of a long throw projector, it will significantly degrade the image quality from a UST. Something about the angle of light from UST interacting with the micro perforations.
> 
> I am having a real hard time understanding why this would be but maybe the dealer knows something I don't. Can anyone provide some input/insight? There is so much info related to every part of a home theatre so your help is much appreciated!


Have you seen this* information on UST screens*? An *this site* addressing UST screens?


----------



## Don Stewart

iccup7 said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I am new to the forum and I feel like I am learning a ton. I am currently in process of trying to get a good screen for the home I just moved into and I am very interested in a Stewart due to its quality. But I have a questions about Stewart screen for all of you experienced folks.
> 
> I already have a good UST so I will keep using it. The room is very light colored all around with no chance of repainting to darker color without getting killed by the wife. There are also LCR speakers in-wall (wife really likes the fact that there are no big towers). We will sit about 13 ft from the screen so looking at 130 inch. Based on my equipment and some research on Stewart website, I figured I can get a Graymatte 70 with micro perf to be both AT and mitigate as much as possible the reflected light (gray, less than 0.7 gain after perf) from walls and ceiling. It also should work with my existing UST.
> 
> However, I heard from the local Stewart dealer that this is not the case. In fact I was told that as soon as a Stewart GrayMatte 70 gets micro perforated to become acoustically transparent, they can no longer be used with an UST. The reason is that while perforation will not affect the image quality of a long throw projector, it will significantly degrade the image quality from a UST. Something about the angle of light from UST interacting with the micro perforations.
> 
> I am having a real hard time understanding why this would be but maybe the dealer knows something I don't. Can anyone provide some input/insight? There is so much info related to every part of a home theatre so your help is much appreciated!


We currently have plenty of both StudioTek 100 and Graymatte 70 MP screens in use by customers with UST PJ's. To date, we have received no negative reports from either our dealers or end users. We also have at our factory, Epson, LG and Samsung UST PG's on hand and we have done testing with said PJ's with MP matte screen surfaces with no negative image artifacts. That being said, I will personally DM the OP and and ask which dealer and contact person at that dealer to see what their comments were based on, providing that OP responds to my DM. 

Best Regards,
Don Stewart


----------



## iccup7

Hi all,

Thank you all, especially Don, for your input! I suspect it is an issue of miscommunication and should be resolved in short order .


----------



## ReciprocalSpace

Got my StudioTek 130 G4 16:9 140" delivered last week after three months and several delays. Was worried about a wall mounted screen after hearing friends stories with their non-Stewart screens how hard it was to stretch and secure, but the buttons were easy. Couldn't be happier with how easy it was to put together and get up on the wall, only took a few hours and only needed help on the last part to lift onto the wall with the screen material installed. 

Note when I originally got the samples of the different materials from my dealer, Stewart sent them mounted on rigid plastic ~18"x18", so was not the 12x12" screen material I was expecting. Made getting up on the wall a bit more difficult and in hindsight I would have requested two of each samples in order to view at center and edge at the same time. Contacted a few other screen vendors, and customer support was worse in all cases, either they didn't have any material so couldn't send samples, or they didn't provide samples.


----------



## Don Stewart

Sound & Vision Magazine. JVC's 8K Demo with Stewart StudioTek 130 G4 Studio Reference Screen at CES, 2022. Obviously, I like the part where the writer states. "Color rendition was also off the charts".









JVC’s 8K Video Demo Impresses at CES 2022


Ever since Sound & Vision posted Kris Deering’s in-depth review of JVC’s DLA-NZ9 D-ILA projector, a Top Pick of the Year winner for 2021, I’ve been wondering what true 8K video looks like displayed on a big screen by an 8K-capable projector.




www.soundandvision.com


----------



## Craig Peer

Don Stewart said:


> Sound & Vision Magazine. JVC's 8K Demo with Stewart StudioTek 130 G4 Studio Reference Screen at CES, 2022. Obviously, I like the part where the writer states. "Color rendition was also off the charts".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JVC’s 8K Video Demo Impresses at CES 2022
> 
> 
> Ever since Sound & Vision posted Kris Deering’s in-depth review of JVC’s DLA-NZ9 D-ILA projector, a Top Pick of the Year winner for 2021, I’ve been wondering what true 8K video looks like displayed on a big screen by an 8K-capable projector.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.soundandvision.com


I was there - the screen / 8K video combo looked outstanding!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FenceMan

Don Stewart said:


> It appears that the screen material shifted on the roller core during transit leaving small wrinkles near the screen edge binding. They should come out on there own over time. If you would like to speed it up, then take a 1500 watt or so hairdryer and run heat along the the wrinkle area. IMPORTANT: When heating material, have hairdryer about three inches away and move hairdryer in the same type of strokes as if you were painting with a spray paint can. Do not hold heat in one place. The material will tighten up only during the cool down period after heat is removed. Repeat if necessary.
> Best regards,
> Don


Its been about 6 weeks and wrinkles haven't completely disappeared (better but not perfect) so I want to try the hair dryer. How long should I heat it up before letting it cool? Are we talking a minute of hairdryer moving around the area or 5 minutes? Can this be done to the front of the screen with it hanging or do I have to do it from the backside? Last thing I want to do is ruin my screen, thanks in advance. Also would it be better / safer to lock it in a small room with vent open and heat full blast for a couple of hours instead?


----------



## fredworld

FenceMan said:


> Its been about 6 weeks and wrinkles haven't completely disappeared (better but not perfect) so I want to try the hair dryer. How long should I heat it up before letting it cool? Are we talking a minute of hairdryer moving around the area or 5 minutes? Can this be done to the front of the screen with it hanging or do I have to do it from the backside? Last thing I want to do is ruin my screen, thanks in advance. Also would it be better / safer to lock it in a small room with vent open and heat full blast for a couple of hours instead?


Sounds like you're loosing patience. STOP THERE and reread* my prior post*, especially since it seems you don't know what you're about to do. 🤨
The fact that the wrinkles have lessened tells you something about the process.


----------



## FenceMan

fredworld said:


> Sounds like you're loosing patience. STOP THERE and reread* my prior post*, especially since it seems you don't know what you're about to do. 🤨
> The fact that the wrinkles have lessened tells you something about the process.


Well that's why I'm asking. You say leave it be?


----------



## fredworld

FenceMan said:


> Well that's why I'm asking. You say leave it be?


Yup, unless you're 100% confident with the hair dryer process. Patience is a virtue...that is often rewarding.


----------



## fredworld

FenceMan said:


> Well that's why I'm asking. You say leave it be?





fredworld said:


> Yup, unless you're 100% confident with the hair dryer process. Patience is a virtue...that is often rewarding.


When I got my first Stewart screen new in 2004 it had about a half dozen creases horizontally across the entire width. After several weeks they were gone. Two years later after we moved to our current home the screen was stored for over 6 months before I was able to install it. Once again there were creases and this time with wrinkles throughout the surface. They all dissipated in their entirety after a few weeks, maybe a month or two, I don't recall specifics. Be patient. I wouldn't do anything other than wait. Stewart says there's a "technique" to the hair dryer method, so unless you speak with them directly for instructions on that "technique" and are abundantly confident, I wouldn't try it. The passive approach seems best, either via patience or exposure to sunlight or a* very warm room *(I think Stewart said 92F). *Stewart advised about the procedure in another post.*


----------



## soundnew

Do you all have either 16:9 oder 2.4:1 screens? I wonder because in my room, the max width my projector can do is the limiting factor. I can do max 150 inches. In 2.4 the height then would be 62 inches, which would b fine by me for movies in this format. For 16:9 content, I would not mind having a slightly larger image but not as large as it would be with 150 width. So my idea is if it would by a good idea to go to 2:1 ratio as there is already quite a lot of content shot in this ratio and probably there is more to come. What would you think about that?


----------



## fredworld

soundnew said:


> Do you all have either 16:9 oder 2.4:1 screens? I wonder because in my room, the max width my projector can do is the limiting factor. I can do max 150 inches. In 2.4 the height then would be 62 inches, which would b fine by me for movies in this format. For 16:9 content, I would not mind having a slightly larger image but not as large as it would be with 150 width. So my idea is if it would by a good idea to go to 2:1 ratio as there is already quite a lot of content shot in this ratio and probably there is more to come. What would you think about that?


I like the Constant Image Height (CIH) screen so that scope movies have the feel of spectacle. It sacrifices the IMAX effect on variable aspect ratio films so a 2:1 screen is a good compromise, but then I would consider installing a matte system to mask the top/bottom black bars on scope films.


----------



## soundnew

Agree, masking would be beneficial. If Stewart masing was not that expensive....


----------



## Craig Peer

soundnew said:


> Agree, masking would be beneficial. If Stewart masing was not that expensive....


Their manual masking panels for the Wallscreen Deluxe are not that expensive. That only works for a scope screen though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## soundnew

Did not know them. But I found only masking to 16:9, not vertical


----------



## Craig Peer

soundnew said:


> Did not know them. But I found only masking to 16:9, not vertical


A 2.00:1 screen would have black bars for just about everything. Just do what I did.


----------



## fredworld

soundnew said:


> Agree, masking would be beneficial. If Stewart masing was not that expensive....


I had considered a manual system of a Roman Shade from the top down and dual side masking. Home Depot had everything I needed. Pricing was relatively inexpensive. I figured it could work with a programmed lens shift so that only the top shows a black bar for scope films but ultimately I decided on the CIH screen and use manual side masking as needed.


----------



## pettso

I'm looking to upgrade from a basic SilverTicket screen to a nicer AT screen, ideally last upgrade for quite some time so I'm considering spending a bit more and going with a Stewart screen this time around. 

I'm a bit overwhelmed with all of the different screen materials on the site though, not sure what to order a sample of. What is generally recommended for a basic fixed frame AT screen? Screen will be between 135-142" diagonal, light controlled room, with a JVC NX5 projector around 16' away. Seating will be around 12' away, and I'm planning on putting matching LRC in-wall speakers behind it (not sure if that last bit is relevant). 

Also, any other brands/materials I should consider? I realize this is the Stewart thread, but curious to see what would I should be comparing to.  I've only ordered some SilverTticket WVS samples as the cheap option.


----------



## FenceMan

fredworld said:


> When I got my first Stewart screen new in 2004 it had about a half dozen creases horizontally across the entire width. After several weeks they were gone. Two years later after we moved to our current home the screen was stored for over 6 months before I was able to install it. Once again there were creases and this time with wrinkles throughout the surface. They all dissipated in their entirety after a few weeks, maybe a month or two, I don't recall specifics. Be patient. I wouldn't do anything other than wait. Stewart says there's a "technique" to the hair dryer method, so unless you speak with them directly for instructions on that "technique" and are abundantly confident, I wouldn't try it. The passive approach seems best, either via patience or exposure to sunlight or a* very warm room *(I think Stewart said 92F). *Stewart advised about the procedure in another post.*


I've been running a 1500w space heater couple feet in front of the screen (and 3' below screen where it's hung) to just heat up the general area which seems to be working slowly but surely.


----------



## cportnoy69

Hey Don! 

Glad to see you're still around. How the heck are you? Haven't been on here in a while. I was a Grayhawk Beta tester in fall of 2000 and we met on the first HT Cruise!

In 2007 I purchased the FireHawk G3 snapper screen in 2.40:1 (137.5" diag) and loved the light rejection to the sides which made masking unnecessary for 16:9 material.
However, the sparkly screen texture really bothered me, though nobody at the time seemed to believe me. I ended up 3 months later purchasing a StudioTek 130 G3 to fit the same frame. This was back when I had money to burn. It's a beautiful screen with virtually no texture seen in the image. I've been using it ever since, and just live with the light spillage.

So, I just tried going back to the FireHawk again to see how bad it could be and maybe get some better contrast with my older HD projector. The sparkly texture is still there plus now I have some creases from storage to contend with. There's also that occasional bright sparkle that reflects right back in my eye which bothered me initially. My projector is long throw, 22ft back mounted just at top edge of screen.

I wonder if you can tell me if the newer G5 formula for the FireHawk looks at all as smooth as the StudioTek or will the texture still be there in bright scenes. If not, is there a G6 I could Beta test?  Otherwise, I guess I can go back to the StudioTek G3 for now, unless the G4 is worth getting, though not crazy about buying a third screen.

I assume you still keep records from 2007 with the snap locations so I don't have to buy the Frame itself. I read posts from 2020 saying your prices went way down, but it doesn't look like that anymore. Not sure what to do. Maybe I should wait until 4K projectors are worthy enough for a screen upgrade. For just HD I might be OK for now. Thanks for listening (if you made it this far😊).
-Carey Portnoy


----------



## Carey P

cportnoy69 said:


> Hey Don!
> 
> Glad to see you're still around. How the heck are you? Haven't been on here in a while. I was a Grayhawk Beta tester in fall of 2000 and we met on the first HT Cruise!
> 
> In 2007 I purchased the FireHawk G3 snapper screen in 2.40:1 (137.5" diag) and loved the light rejection to the sides which made masking unnecessary for 16:9 material.
> However, the sparkly screen texture really bothered me, though nobody at the time seemed to believe me. I ended up 3 months later purchasing a StudioTek 130 G3 to fit the same frame. This was back when I had money to burn. It's a beautiful screen with virtually no texture seen in the image. I've been using it ever since, and just live with the light spillage.
> 
> So, I just tried going back to the FireHawk again to see how bad it could be and maybe get some better contrast with my older HD projector. The sparkly texture is still there plus now I have some creases from storage to contend with. There's also that occasional bright sparkle that reflects right back in my eye which bothered me initially. My projector is long throw, 22ft back mounted just at top edge of screen.
> 
> I wonder if you can tell me if the newer G5 formula for the FireHawk looks at all as smooth as the StudioTek or will the texture still be there in bright scenes. If not, is there a G6 I could Beta test?  Otherwise, I guess I can go back to the StudioTek G3 for now, unless the G4 is worth getting, though not crazy about buying a third screen.
> 
> I assume you still keep records from 2007 with the snap locations so I don't have to buy the Frame itself. I read posts from 2020 saying your prices went way down, but it doesn't look like that anymore. Not sure what to do. Maybe I should wait until 4K projectors are worthy enough for a screen upgrade. For just HD I might be OK for now. Thanks for listening (if you made it this far😊).
> -Carey Portnoy


I just signed in properly this time.


----------



## cricket9998

What are the actual differences between the Studiotek 130 G4 and the Ultramatte 130? They have similar specs but obviously wouldn't have different names if there wasn't something different. I have full light control of the room but would like a bit more gain as long as the half angle is good for basically free brightness.


----------



## Craig Peer

Carey P said:


> I just signed in properly this time.


Get a sample of the current Firehawk to compare yourself!


----------



## Kabillyhop

@Don Stewart Can I ask you a quick question. I have a quote for a ST130 2.4:1 screen, but have been reading about 2.0:1 screens which might work better given the way I constructed the screen area years ago.

Can you make a ST130 in 2.0:1 aspect ratio?


----------



## Craig Peer

Kabillyhop said:


> @Don Stewart Can I ask you a quick question. I have a quote for a ST130 2.4:1 screen, but have been reading about 2.0:1 screens which might work better given the way I constructed the screen area years ago.
> 
> Can you make a ST130 in 2.0:1 aspect ratio?


Stewart is a custom screen company. They can make just about anything you want.


----------



## Copeland

I'm desperately trying to find someone to come work on my Stewart screen here in Los Angeles.

I have a 4 year old Stewart CIMA 135" Above Ceiling screen and the motor died on me two days ago. Unfortunately, the screen is in the down position in the middle of my living room and I'm worried the screen itself will get damaged unless I get get it rolled up soon (people and dog traffic!) Also unfortunately, I called Stewart directly here in Los Angeles, and it seems like they're slammed.

So any suggestions for a tech/electrician in this area would be super appreciated! Thanks!


----------



## pettso

pettso said:


> I'm looking to upgrade from a basic SilverTicket screen to a nicer AT screen, ideally last upgrade for quite some time so I'm considering spending a bit more and going with a Stewart screen this time around.
> 
> I'm a bit overwhelmed with all of the different screen materials on the site though, not sure what to order a sample of. What is generally recommended for a basic fixed frame AT screen? Screen will be between 135-142" diagonal, light controlled room, with a JVC NX5 projector around 16' away. Seating will be around 12' away, and I'm planning on putting matching LRC in-wall speakers behind it (not sure if that last bit is relevant).
> 
> Also, any other brands/materials I should consider? I realize this is the Stewart thread, but curious to see what would I should be comparing to.  I've only ordered some SilverTticket WVS samples as the cheap option.


So I read through a half dozen pages of this thread and it seems like the StudioTek 130 G4 is likely my best option given the projector, distance and room. Any concerns with viewing angles from the side seats? I recognize the sound will be far from perfect for those seats for multiple reasons, but I want to make sure the picture isn't completely degraded.


----------



## cricket9998

pettso said:


> So I read through a half dozen pages of this thread and it seems like the StudioTek 130 G4 is likely my best option given the projector, distance and room. Any concerns with viewing angles from the side seats? I recognize the sound will be far from perfect for those seats for multiple reasons, but I want to make sure the picture isn't completely degraded.
> 
> View attachment 3230045


They are sitting around 45 degrees relative to the screen which will look like 0.8 gain. Looking at the g4 brightness chart the opposite side of the screen may be a bit darker but overall should be smooth. It has a somewhat linear drop off after 40 degrees so you won’t be able to tell especially with a movie.


----------



## pettso

cricket9998 said:


> They are sitting around 45 degrees relative to the screen which will look like 0.8 gain. Looking at the g4 brightness chart the opposite side of the screen may be a bit darker but overall should be smooth. It has a somewhat linear drop off after 40 degrees so you won’t be able to tell especially with a movie.


Based on the brightness chart, wouldn't the gain span between ~1.2 (near side of the screen) down to ~0.8 (far side of the screen? That seems like a pretty substantial brightness difference.


----------



## fredworld

pettso said:


> So I read through a half dozen pages of this thread and it seems like the StudioTek 130 G4 is likely my best option given the projector, distance and room. Any concerns with viewing angles from the side seats? I recognize the sound will be far from perfect for those seats for multiple reasons, but I want to make sure the picture isn't completely degraded.
> 
> View attachment 3230045





cricket9998 said:


> They are sitting around 45 degrees relative to the screen which will look like 0.8 gain. Looking at the g4 brightness chart the opposite side of the screen may be a bit darker but overall should be smooth. It has a somewhat linear drop off after 40 degrees so you won’t be able to tell especially with a movie.





pettso said:


> Based on the brightness chart, wouldn't the gain span between ~1.2 (near side of the screen) down to ~0.8 (far side of the screen? That seems like a pretty substantial brightness difference.


Perhaps for casual guests you'll be fine. I usually sit at the extreme side when we have guests and I can see the difference after I replaced my Firehawk 1.2 gain with a Studiotek 100 in November '20. The viewing from the side seats is as uniform as the center seating now. I'm not sure why you were inclined to the 130 but you might consider obtaining samples from Stewart of both the 130 and 100 to judge for yourself.

Edit: In case you haven't seen it, *here's an informative review.*


----------



## pettso

fredworld said:


> Perhaps for casual guests you'll be fine. I usually sit at the extreme side when we have guests and I can see the difference after I replaced my Firehawk 1.2 gain with a Studiotek 100 in November '20. The viewing from the side seats is as uniform as the center seating now. I'm not sure why you were inclined to the 130 but you might consider obtaining samples from Stewart of both the 130 and 100 to judge for yourself.
> 
> Edit: In case you haven't seen it, *here's an informative review.*


Yep, I plan on getting some samples to see if the ST100 is bright enough. It will be hard to evaluate the drop-off in gain from near side to far side of the screen with samples though. 

I've got a pretty standard setup with a NX5 that will be projecting onto a ~140" 16:9 screen from 16' away. The projectorcentral estimate for that setup with a 0.9 gain screen (AT ST100) is 20fL vs. 27fL with a 1.2 gain screen (AT ST130). The extra gain from the ST130 helps keep the brightness at parity with my current 120" 16:9 screen (SilverTicket white).


----------



## fredworld

pettso said:


> Yep, I plan on getting some samples to see if the ST100 is bright enough. It will be hard to evaluate the drop-off in gain from near side to far side of the screen with samples though.
> 
> I've got a pretty standard setup with a NX5 that will be projecting onto a ~140" 16:9 screen from 16' away. The projectorcentral estimate for that setup with a 0.9 gain screen (AT ST100) is 20fL vs. 27fL with a 1.2 gain screen (AT ST130). The extra gain from the ST130 helps keep the brightness at parity with my current 120" 16:9 screen (SilverTicket white).


Ah! I forgot you were doing AT. The 130 makes sense now BUT if your room is fully treated and has full light control then you might want to consider speaking directly with a Stewart rep. July Lopez at Stewart was VERY helpful when I was in the decision process.


----------



## Don Stewart

Copeland said:


> I'm desperately trying to find someone to come work on my Stewart screen here in Los Angeles.
> 
> I have a 4 year old Stewart CIMA 135" Above Ceiling screen and the motor died on me two days ago. Unfortunately, the screen is in the down position in the middle of my living room and I'm worried the screen itself will get damaged unless I get get it rolled up soon (people and dog traffic!) Also unfortunately, I called Stewart directly here in Los Angeles, and it seems like they're slammed.
> 
> So any suggestions for a tech/electrician in this area would be super appreciated! Thanks!


Hi Copeland.
Your Cima screen motor failure was brought to my attention when in the office today. I was informed that a new motor was going out to a dealer/installer near your residence.
Also, I understand we offered to send a technician from our factory here in Torrance, but not until next week. Please be advised that we did have a wave of Omicron hit our facility so many of our people are out with the required quarantine period. I guess you could say a sign of the times. That said, we are sorry for any inconvenience this may have caused you.
Best Regards,
Don Stewart


----------



## Don Stewart

cportnoy69 said:


> Hey Don!
> 
> Glad to see you're still around. How the heck are you? Haven't been on here in a while. I was a Grayhawk Beta tester in fall of 2000 and we met on the first HT Cruise!
> 
> In 2007 I purchased the FireHawk G3 snapper screen in 2.40:1 (137.5" diag) and loved the light rejection to the sides which made masking unnecessary for 16:9 material.
> However, the sparkly screen texture really bothered me, though nobody at the time seemed to believe me. I ended up 3 months later purchasing a StudioTek 130 G3 to fit the same frame. This was back when I had money to burn. It's a beautiful screen with virtually no texture seen in the image. I've been using it ever since, and just live with the light spillage.
> 
> So, I just tried going back to the FireHawk again to see how bad it could be and maybe get some better contrast with my older HD projector. The sparkly texture is still there plus now I have some creases from storage to contend with. There's also that occasional bright sparkle that reflects right back in my eye which bothered me initially. My projector is long throw, 22ft back mounted just at top edge of screen.
> 
> I wonder if you can tell me if the newer G5 formula for the FireHawk looks at all as smooth as the StudioTek or will the texture still be there in bright scenes. If not, is there a G6 I could Beta test?  Otherwise, I guess I can go back to the StudioTek G3 for now, unless the G4 is worth getting, though not crazy about buying a third screen.
> 
> I assume you still keep records from 2007 with the snap locations so I don't have to buy the Frame itself. I read posts from 2020 saying your prices went way down, but it doesn't look like that anymore. Not sure what to do. Maybe I should wait until 4K projectors are worthy enough for a screen upgrade. For just HD I might be OK for now. Thanks for listening (if you made it this far😊).
> -Carey Portnoy


Hi Carey. Hope all is well with you. The FH G5 has less sparkles than the 2007 versions as much smaller gain particles on final optical coating are currently used that were not even available back then.
If that interest you, you can masking tape a G5 sample to your existing FH to compare.Yes, we keep detail records of every screen we manufacture via serial number. There is no G6 in the works at this time.

Best regards,
Don


----------



## Snowmanick

I’m about to order a new screen, a StudioTek ST130 G4 microperf. I have JBL SCL in-wall speakers. How far off the wall/away from the speakers do I need to mount the screen? My installer and I aren’t sure, but my dealer thinks it’s only an inch or so.


----------



## Ellebob

Usually, 8 inches to a foot is better. You can put it closer but if possible a little space is better.


----------



## Copeland

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Copeland.
> Your Cima screen motor failure was brought to my attention when in the office today. I was informed that a new motor was going out to a dealer/installer near your residence.
> Also, I understand we offered to send a technician from our factory here in Torrance, but not until next week. Please be advised that we did have a wave of Omicron hit our facility so many of our people are out with the required quarantine period. I guess you could say a sign of the times. That said, we are sorry for any inconvenience this may have caused you.
> Best Regards,
> Don Stewart


Thanks for this! 

I hope it didn't seem like I was running down Stewart Filmscreen. I've had nothing but stellar customer service from your company. And I think you guys make the best screens on the market... I am constantly recommending them to friends, and friends of friends, who are in the processes of putting together home cinemas.

I was just commenting that, as with most everything right now, Covid has thrown a wrench into the works... And as a result, I was searching for a quick, viable alternative locally.

I did in fact find someone's after posting that message, and he is working with you guys to help solve my issue. 

Thanks again!


----------



## squared80

Snowmanick said:


> I’m about to order a new screen, a StudioTek ST130 G4 microperf. I have JBL SCL in-wall speakers. How far off the wall/away from the speakers do I need to mount the screen? My installer and I aren’t sure, but my dealer thinks it’s only an inch or so.


Where would I order an acoustically transparent StudioTek ST130 G4 screen? Or from whom on here?


----------



## Snowmanick

squared80 said:


> Where would I order an acoustically transparent StudioTek ST130 G4 screen? Or from whom on here?


I ordered mine through my local dealer. Stewart can probably direct you to one. 






Home-en - Stewart


Home EN US projection screen manufacture




www.stewartfilmscreen.com


----------



## cricket9998

squared80 said:


> Where would I order an acoustically transparent StudioTek ST130 G4 screen? Or from whom on here?


@Mike Garrett hooked me up. Easy and simple purchase


----------



## kwenar

I am looking to see if anyone has the combo of a UST projector (Samsung 7 or 9)or a similar projo and the GreyMatte 70 material ? I need a larger bezel screen as the screen I currently have has a small .4 bezel and the light bleed or haloing is driving me crazy. I know the Blackhawk ALR material would be better but for some reason they don't make it with a bigger bezel only the super thin bezel. I want to know if I use this material in a lower light area like my basement would it be okay or should I not consider this if I want to have a bit of light on while watching TV (sports). 

They won't let me return it if it looks bad in my application so I am hoping to get some insight from people on this forum before spending around $4k Canadian


----------



## Ricdeau

Has anyone received a Stewart screen recently and if so when was your order date? I placed an order for an ST130 G4 at AV Science about 8 weeks ago, and I'm just trying to get bead on how long the lead has been for others that have gotten screens recently.


----------



## fredworld

Ricdeau said:


> Has anyone received a Stewart screen recently and if so when was your order date? I placed an order for an ST130 G4 at AV Science about 8 weeks ago, and I'm just trying to get bead on how long the lead has been for others that have gotten screens recently.


I ordered a StudioTek 100 through Overture Audio/Video in Wilmington, DE October 15, 2020. It arrived just around the middle of November '20. I think you should follow up with AV Science. There could be any number of reasons for a delay in these times.


----------



## Snowmanick

Ricdeau said:


> Has anyone received a Stewart screen recently and if so when was your order date? I placed an order for an ST130 G4 at AV Science about 8 weeks ago, and I'm just trying to get bead on how long the lead has been for others that have gotten screens recently.


I just ordered on Jan 31st. I was given a 5-6 week estimate by my dealer. Wall screen Deluxe ST130G4 if that matters.


----------



## Ricdeau

Snowmanick said:


> I just ordered on Jan 31st. I was given a 5-6 week estimate by my dealer. Wall screen Deluxe ST130G4 if that matters.


I ordered the same and was quoted 4-6 weeks, but I’m at about 8 weeks now. I’m assuming holidays and COVID have impacted production. Hopefully mine will ship out soon.


----------



## aoaaron

hi ppl who have gone to g130, what do u think of elavated black floor ? from low gain screen? do u just clamp down iris for more contras tto brightness match?


----------



## Craig Peer

aoaaron said:


> hi ppl who have gone to g130, what do u think of elavated black floor ? from low gain screen? do u just clamp down iris for more contras tto brightness match?


I never had elevated blacks going from a Firehawk to a ST130 screen - the blacks were more or less identical - but I needed to treat reflections in my room and make it darker.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## aoaaron

more or les


Craig Peer said:


> I never had elevated blacks going from a Firehawk to a ST130 screen - the blacks were more or less identical - but I needed to treat reflections in my room and make it darker.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


More or less identical is very vague.
Need documented measurements and user perception is sadly very unreliable.

high gain should increase gain of entire spectrum. It cannot just ignore black unless you mean dynamic iris fully closed


----------



## Craig Peer

aoaaron said:


> more or les
> 
> More or less identical is very vague.
> Need documented measurements and user perception is sadly very unreliable.
> 
> high gain should increase gain of entire spectrum. It cannot just ignore black unless you mean dynamic iris fully closed


Going to the ST130 did elevate blacks ( ST130 sample overlaying a Firehawk screen ) until I did this -


----------



## Craig Peer

It took a serious darkening / revamp of the theater. In fact, I didn't switch to the ST130 G3 screen until my improvements made black scenes on the screen looks as good on the ST130 as they did on the Firehawk gray screen. 

Low gain screens look way too dull to me - if I had a .8 screen I'd need a 10,000 lumen projector.


----------



## Don Stewart

Ricdeau said:


> Has anyone received a Stewart screen recently and if so when was your order date? I placed an order for an ST130 G4 at AV Science about 8 weeks ago, and I'm just trying to get bead on how long the lead has been for others that have gotten screens recently.


We had a wave of Omicron come through our facility. Any employee who worked in close proximity to a person who actually tested positive for Covid was then required to quarantine for ten days which reduced our production output significantly. Most of our people are now back, but we are now operating in a catch up mode to get product out the door. We apologize if this has caused you any inconvenience.

Best Regards,
Don


----------



## BKEW

Don Stewart said:


> We had a wave of Omicron come through our facility. Any employee who worked in close proximity to a person who actually tested positive for Covid was then required to quarantine for ten days which reduced our production output significantly. Most of our people are now back, but we are now operating in a catch up mode to get product out the door. We apologize if this has caused you any inconvenience.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Don


Had the same thing happen to my firm last year, pretty much cost us the entire month.

I ordered a 130 G4 right before Christmas and it is being delievered tomorrow (scheduled to be) so given holidays and what Don noted I would say 6-8 weeks is on par.


----------



## Ricdeau

BKEW said:


> Had the same thing happen to my firm last year, pretty much cost us the entire month.
> 
> I ordered a 130 G4 right before Christmas and it is being delievered tomorrow (scheduled to be) so given holidays and what Don noted I would say 6-8 weeks is on par.


This is good to hear. I ordered my screen on December 23rd, but the actual order might have not processed until the 27th. Hopefully this means mine is coming up very soon.



Don Stewart said:


> We had a wave of Omicron come through our facility. Any employee who worked in close proximity to a person who actually tested positive for Covid was then required to quarantine for ten days which reduced our production output significantly. Most of our people are now back, but we are now operating in a catch up mode to get product out the door. We apologize if this has caused you any inconvenience.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Don


Completely understandable. My company had a round of Omicron that really impacted our service delivery as well. I'm mainly just crossing my fingers I get the screen before late March when my calibrator is scheduled to be coming through my area. Outside of that I have a screen that is currently up so I've not been impacted other than not having my fancy new screen.


----------



## Jagercola

Anyone try the Studiotek 130 G4 microperf and sit 10.5-11' away? I know the recommendation is 12', but I got a sample of the material and shining a bright flashlight on it, it's hard to to see the dots at 10.5-11". Just wondering if anyone has gone less than 12' and been happy. Deciding between rolling the dice with this screen and an ~11' viewing distance or go woven with the Dreamscreen v7. Thanks!


----------



## henkeli

Hello, please help recommend me a screen material. 

Interested in a fixed wall-mounted unit.
Leaning towards Balon for LED bias lighting and a modern clean look. 

Installation will be in a loft/media room pictured below (with some of my best crayon work included).
Room will not be treated, no velvet, it will have maybe some non-bright gray/beige paint but will otherwise be kept tasteful to be cohesive with the rest of the residence. Think of what an interior designer would do for a media room. It won't be white, but it won't be anywhere near a bat cave. 

Projector is probably new Epson LS12000 unless something similar is released end of year or early next year. Main seating positions on west side of couch would put the viewer heads at around 12ft from the screen. Screen is in yellow below at 16:9 135" diagonal.

Area of concern is the north-east corner wall and ceiling above where light bouncing off a reference white screen would ruin the experience. So, one though I had was to use GrayMatte 70. Other thought is HALR. 

Content will be self-limited to SDR Bluray and some 4K UHD that will be tone-mapped to the level of FL/nits coming off the screen. So basically I will only be viewing SDR content. I will not be expecting to view HDR at all. Roku will be set to 4K SDR.

Ok, thanks.


----------



## dormie1360

Jagercola said:


> Anyone try the Studiotek 130 G4 microperf and sit 10.5-11' away? I know the recommendation is 12', but I got a sample of the material and shining a bright flashlight on it, it's hard to to see the dots at 10.5-11". Just wondering if anyone has gone less than 12' and been happy. Deciding between rolling the dice with this screen and an ~11' viewing distance or go woven with the Dreamscreen v7. Thanks!


I'm currently sitting 10-10.5 feet. When I had the 130/G3 material, if I was looking for them, I would occasionally notice the perfs on a very bright spot/scene directly in front of me (closest point on the screen from where I was sitting). Also, there was a slight "sheen or sparkle" associated with this same bright area. (not visable sitting farther back.) I've since switched to 130/G4 material. I can't say I've noticed any perforations or the associated sheen watching movies since switching. I've also upgraded to a brighter projector which, if anything, would would have made any perforations and sheen more noticeable. Unfortunately my projector is in repair right now so I can't check out a static bright white image for you or do some movie watching taking a closer look. Obviously, eye sight and projector brightness would be variables.

Not sure if this helps in your decision or not. Personally, I'm happy with the screen.


----------



## mrvideo

henkeli said:


> I will not be expecting to view HDR at all. Roku will be set to 4K SDR.


Why don't you want to view HDR material?


----------



## henkeli

mrvideo said:


> Why don't you want to view HDR material?


I don't want to get into too much detail about it, but I've done tone-mapping on a projector for the last 2 years and many hours sunk into testing curves/settings with mixed (but mostly positive) results. However, an obvious conclusion reached was that _high dynamic range_ from say 0.0001 to 1000+ nits of brightness does not successfully (i.e. consistently) fit into a much smaller envelope that today's residential consumer projectors can provide, peaking around 100 nits but often much less than that depending on screen size, color gamut accuracy, desired audible fan noise, etc. 

It is a problem that also involves the HDR content itself, as different titles will be mastered differently and beg the viewer to fiddle with gamma on a per movie basis. But the bottom line is that a given display doesn't really start being HDR capable until around 300 nits with competent dynamic mapping. And that's just the luminance part. 

Here's some other reasons: my favorite movies (old and newly released) tend to be only released on 1080p Bluray. The better the actual movie, the less I care about technical specs (beyond a pleasing picture that doesn't interfere). There's a pattern if you pay attention, to modern blockbuster titles, where an overly dramatic (e.g. Hans Zimmer) soundtrack will be piped into a CG-assisted supranatural unreality sequence filled with lightshows and color, pretty faces and bodies, slow motion, et al that washes over the masses to the point that they cease to even care that the plot, acting, message, statement, culture, whatever, is utterly lacking. "Let's fly to the moon, and play amongst the stars" literally and ridiculously. I don't use Atmos/DTS encoding and feel that 5.x channels are sufficient for a residential use case. When a movie is transferred or scanned into 4K UHD, if 35mm was used for the film, there is an over abundance of digital noise that appears which wrecks the experience. But it turns out OK with SDR Bluray. 

Anyway, I'm not going to argue any of this. Will move my post to it's own thread about screens.


----------



## mrvideo

henkeli said:


> Anyway, I'm not going to argue any of this. Will move my post to it's own thread about screens.


Wasn't going to argue. I was curious as to why.


----------



## Ricdeau

Just as an update, I took delivery of my ST130 G4 this morning. Looking forward to getting it installed.


----------



## Mike Garrett

Public service announcement. Stewart price increase announced today. Will start May 1st.


----------



## avsBuddy

Was a matter of time. What is the approximate increase percentage?


----------



## Mike Garrett

avsBuddy said:


> Was a matter of time. What is the approximate increase percentage?


Do not have it yet, but told 5% to 7%.


----------



## Jeff60

Just installed a 121" Firehawk G5 screen with a Wallscreen deluxe frame to replace a 120" Elunevision Aurora fixed frame screen and wanted to share my thoughts on the upgrade. 

The Stewart frame is about twice the weight of the Elunevision. 
The tolerancing on the Stewart frame is very tight and it fits together square and flat, when you lift one corner there is very little twisting of the frame. The Elunevision frame is not quite square and has a slight twist to it that I could never eliminate. This did affect the image slightly as it does not sit flat on the wall. 
The Elunevision mounts with 2 small Z clips screwed into studs allowing the screen to be moved side to side about 2 feet. The EZ mount for the Stewart screen only allows for about 4 inches of movement making the location of the mount more critical. The mount only has 3 mounting hole and since it can only move a couple of inches I could not line it up with the studs and had to use drywall anchors. Putting holes in the bracket every 2" or 4" would have allowed me to mount to the studs. 
The instruction manuals for both are not great. The Stewart frame is clearly marked and very intuitive to assemble, it would be hard to assemble wrong. 
My thumbs still hurt from mounting the screen with the snaps, by the time I figured out how to do it efficiently I was done. 
The magnets on the bottom of the frame work great and hold the screen tightly to the wall. 
The Elunevision Aurora screen has visible texturing on the surface, the Firehawk has none. 
I have lighter coloured walls in my room, hence the need for an ALR screen. After running autocal on the NX7 projector with the Firehawk screen the black levels and contrast are significantly better than the Aurora resulting in a much better viewing experience. There is also less light spilling onto the walls. 

Overall I am very happy with the upgrade as I was not sure it would have this much impact on the picture quality when I ordered the screen. I have to thank Ed at EQAudio up here in the Great White North for recommending the Firehawk to me. 

Looks like my timing was good based on Mike's post about the price increase.


----------



## 2 Stangs

Can we lock in a price if we order a screen before the increase? I'm thinking about ordering a custom sized wallscreen.


----------



## Don Stewart

2 Stangs said:


> Can we lock in a price if we order a screen before the increase? I'm thinking about ordering a custom sized wallscreen.


Yes, pricing is based on when PO from dealer is received.

Don


----------



## Craig Peer

Jeff60 said:


> Just installed a 121" Firehawk G5 screen with a Wallscreen deluxe frame to replace a 120" Elunevision Aurora fixed frame screen and wanted to share my thoughts on the upgrade.
> 
> The Stewart frame is about twice the weight of the Elunevision.
> The tolerancing on the Stewart frame is very tight and it fits together square and flat, when you lift one corner there is very little twisting of the frame. The Elunevision frame is not quite square and has a slight twist to it that I could never eliminate. This did affect the image slightly as it does not sit flat on the wall.
> The Elunevision mounts with 2 small Z clips screwed into studs allowing the screen to be moved side to side about 2 feet. The EZ mount for the Stewart screen only allows for about 4 inches of movement making the location of the mount more critical. The mount only has 3 mounting hole and since it can only move a couple of inches I could not line it up with the studs and had to use drywall anchors. *Putting holes in the bracket every 2" or 4" would have allowed me to mount to the studs. *
> The instruction manuals for both are not great. The Stewart frame is clearly marked and very intuitive to assemble, it would be hard to assemble wrong.
> My thumbs still hurt from mounting the screen with the snaps, by the time I figured out how to do it efficiently I was done.
> The magnets on the bottom of the frame work great and hold the screen tightly to the wall.
> The Elunevision Aurora screen has visible texturing on the surface, the Firehawk has none.
> I have lighter coloured walls in my room, hence the need for an ALR screen. After running autocal on the NX7 projector with the Firehawk screen the black levels and contrast are significantly better than the Aurora resulting in a much better viewing experience. There is also less light spilling onto the walls.
> 
> Overall I am very happy with the upgrade as I was not sure it would have this much impact on the picture quality when I ordered the screen. I have to thank Ed at EQAudio up here in the Great White North for recommending the Firehawk to me.
> 
> Looks like my timing was good based on Mike's post about the price increase.


Just drill some additional holes if needed.


----------



## Jeff60

Craig Peer said:


> Just drill some additional holes if needed.


Could do, but Stewart could make it easier for all customers by adding more holes in the bracket. Just the engineer in me coming out.


----------



## deckert99

Is it possible to get a sample of the Neve and Tiburon G4 screen materials in Canada? The screen is for a LG AU810PB which suffers from laser speckle on screens with gain of greater than 0.9. I am thinking the Tiburon G4 will work best but would like to test the Neve as well. I'm currently using a Vutec Silverstar and that thing has crazy speckle.


----------



## Don Stewart

deckert99 said:


> Is it possible to get a sample of the Neve and Tiburon G4 screen materials in Canada? The screen is for a LG AU810PB which suffers from laser speckle on screens with gain of greater than 0.9. I am thinking the Tiburon G4 will work best but would like to test the Neve as well. I'm currently using a Vutec Silverstar and that thing has crazy speckle.


Yes, please contact our Canadian distributor as listed below. If they are low on sample stock, then DM me and I will pass it on to our sample department and we will send to you direct from our factory.
Regards,
Don

The Watershed Group
402A-10 Abbott Court
Brantford, ON N3S0E7 Canada
888-253-1207
[email protected]


----------



## deckert99

Don Stewart said:


> Yes, please contact our Canadian distributor as listed below. If they are low on sample stock, then DM me and I will pass it on to our sample department and we will send to you direct from our factory.
> Regards,
> Don
> 
> The Watershed Group
> 402A-10 Abbott Court
> Brantford, ON N3S0E7 Canada
> 888-253-1207
> [email protected]


Thanks Don!


----------



## Don Stewart

Got to say there is never a dull day at Stewart Filmscreen, so I always have loved my job.. This client has a super yacht and wants the screen to rise out of the deck to watch movies. After NRE drawings from our engineering department, the project goes to our machine shop to fabricate custom parts for screen housing assembly including a 1/4" thick aluminum plate motorized trap door. Many of the metal internal parts were substituted with anti-rust stainless steel for the harsh marine environment. After screen housing is completed, it goes to screen fabric department for material cutting and fitting. Finally, the screen goes to our paint line masking department where screen borders are painted to customer's specifications. Screen now complete and ready to ship.


----------



## SteveS78

Have a situation where I need to clean a few spots on my screen due to what appears to be greasy finger prints or something similar from the kids. Per the instructions it mentions using Simple Green with warm water. Does that seem like the correct way to handle it for this situation? Any other bits of advice before I do it? If I do the Simple Green method, do I need to make sure I don't rub the screen? It mentions "soak and lift" as the cleaning motion, but worried that it may not clean that way without a little bit of rubbing to make sure it is all out...

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk


----------



## Don Stewart

SteveS78 said:


> Have a situation where I need to clean a few spots on my screen due to what appears to be greasy finger prints or something similar from the kids. Per the instructions it mentions using Simple Green with warm water. Does that seem like the correct way to handle it for this situation? Any other bits of advice before I do it? If I do the Simple Green method, do I need to make sure I don't rub the screen? It mentions "soak and lift" as the cleaning motion, but worried that it may not clean that way without a little bit of rubbing to make sure it is all out...
> 
> Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk


Hi Steve. Which Stewart screen material do you have?


----------



## SteveS78

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Steve. Which Stewart screen material do you have?


I have a Firehawk 1.1 gain screen. It's has the microperfs for being acoustically transparent. I believe it is G5, if that makes a difference...

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk


----------



## Don Stewart

SteveS78 said:


> I have a Firehawk 1.1 gain screen. It's has the microperfs for being acoustically transparent. I believe it is G5, if that makes a difference...
> 
> Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk


More recently, we have been using Simple Green "Crystal" at our factory with great success. No reason to rub hard. Spray on grease stain then BLOT with a cotton terry cloth towel. Repeat if necessary.
Hope that helps.
Regards,
Don
ttps://www.amazon.com/19024-Crystal-Industrial-Cleaner-Degreaser/dp/B000ULR4EO/ref=asc_df_B000ULR4EO/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=167129842963&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=8376601165447067825&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9031024&hvtargid=pla-328038423007&psc=1


----------



## SteveS78

Don Stewart said:


> More recently, we have been using Simple Green "Crystal" at our factory with great success. No reason to rub hard. Spray on grease stain then BLOT with a cotton terry cloth towel. Repeat if necessary.
> Hope that helps.
> Regards,
> Don
> ttps://www.amazon.com/19024-Crystal-Industrial-Cleaner-Degreaser/dp/B000ULR4EO/ref=asc_df_B000ULR4EO/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=167129842963&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=8376601165447067825&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9031024&hvtargid=pla-328038423007&psc=1


Thanks for the info. That is interesting you said that. I was told that the standard Simple Green All Purpose Cleaner is what you use. The Crystal Simple Green which appears to be different was not mentioned anywhere to me. Also, I was told not to apply it or spray it directly on the screen. But to dilute the simple green with warm water (1:10 dilution ratio) using either a clean sponge or a microfiber cloth, etc and then dip the cloth or sponge in the bowl of water and then apply to the screen that way very lightly. Can you clarify?

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk


----------



## Don Stewart

SteveS78 said:


> Thanks for the info. That is interesting you said that. I was told that the standard Simple Green All Purpose Cleaner is what you use. The Crystal Simple Green which appears to be different was not mentioned anywhere to me. Also, I was told not to apply it or spray it directly on the screen. But to dilute the simple green with warm water (1:10 dilution ratio) using either a clean sponge or a microfiber cloth, etc and then dip the cloth or sponge in the bowl of water and then apply to the screen that way very lightly. Can you clarify?
> 
> Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk


As I mentioned before, I only found out last week and only by accident that we just recently changed from the green tinted Simple Green to the clear Crystal Simple Green as it is more effective and less of a hassle to work with. By accident, when we were evaluating some experimental screen material in our lab, we had accidentally got some fingernail size machine grease on the viewing side. After asking for it to be removed, the guys came in using the Crystal Simple Green instead of the tinted green solution and I was impressed how easily the grease was removed. So before responding to the above, I just checked with some of our guys on the factory floor who actually do the work to get additional clarification for you. We receive the clear Crystal Simple green in large 55 gallon drums. When removing the solution to smaller containers we do not dilute. If you are removing a small stain, spray on a microfiber and then gently apply to stain. Then blot solution with a clean cotton towel. Note that cotton towels adsorb excess moisture better than a Microfiber cloth. If cleaning a larger area, spray directly on to surface then immediately blot with clean cotton towel. One thing they added that I did not put on my original post is the last step is to then apply a small amount of water where the Crystal Simple Green was applied and then remove water with clean dry cotton towel so not to leave any of the cleaner residue on the viewing surface. BTW, the instructions that you were given above will work but our guys say the clear Crystal Simple Green is more effective and is much easier to do.

Regards,
Don


----------



## SteveS78

Don Stewart said:


> As I mentioned before, I only found out last week and only by accident that we just recently changed from the green tinted Simple Green to the clear Crystal Simple Green as it is more effective and less of a hassle to work with. By accident, when we were evaluating some experimental screen material in our lab, we had accidentally got some fingernail size machine grease on the viewing side. After asking for it to be removed, the guys came in using the Crystal Simple Green instead of the tinted green solution and I was impressed how easily the grease was removed. So before responding to the above, I just checked with some of our guys on the factory floor who actually do the work to get additional clarification for you. We receive the clear Crystal Simple green in large 55 gallon drums. When removing the solution to smaller containers we do not dilute. If you are removing a small stain, spray on a microfiber and then gently apply to stain. Then blot solution with a clean cotton towel. Note that cotton towels adsorb excess moisture better than a Microfiber cloth. If cleaning a larger area, spray directly on to surface then immediately blot with clean cotton towel. One thing they added that I did not put on my original post is the last step is to then apply a small amount of water where the Crystal Simple Green was applied and then remove water with clean dry cotton towel so not to leave any of the cleaner residue on the viewing surface. BTW, the instructions that you were given above will work but our guys say the clear Crystal Simple Green is more effective and is much easier to do.
> 
> Regards,
> Don


So for smaller spota, is it okay to spray the crystal solution on the screen directly as long as it's just a little bit? Or for smaller areas should I be only applying to the cloth first? And can I rub it a little bit if gentle when applying the solution and trying to clean it? Or should it only be blotted when drying it?

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk


----------



## Don Stewart

SteveS78 said:


> So for smaller spota, is it okay to spray the crystal solution on the screen directly as long as it's just a little bit? Or for smaller areas should I be only applying to the cloth first? And can I rub it a little bit if gentle when applying the solution and trying to clean it? Or should it only be blotted when drying it?
> 
> Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk


The FireHawk, StudioTek 130 and GrayHawk screens have a fairly robust optical gain finish so you can rub gently. Just don't get carried away doing so. And by a smaller spot, lets define that size of about a nickel or so. Yes, you can apply the solution direct to a Microfiber cloth in that case.


----------



## SteveS78

Don Stewart said:


> The FireHawk, StudioTek 130 and GrayHawk screens have a fairly robust optical gain finish so you can rub gently. Just don't get carried away doing so. And by a smaller spot, lets define that size of about a nickel or so. Yes, you can apply the solution direct to a Microfiber cloth in that case.


No actually the spot is a little larger than that. I would say about 3 or 4 inches long.

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk


----------



## 2 Stangs

Has anyone directly compared a 1.1 gain white Cima screen vs Studiotek 130 G4 and can give comparisons? 

I've narrowed it down to those choices. My room is completely blacked out with a JVC rs520. Probably looking at a 135' 16:9 screen. 

thanks


----------



## Minge

Don:

I have a 15 year old Firehawk screen that still performs like the day it was installed. While I am not unhappy at all I am wondering if I could breath new life into my JVC RS500 with a fresh new ST 130 G4 in my light controlled room with a 100 inch screen that I sit about 10 feet from?


----------



## scottyb

Not Don,

But I think it would give that projector some pop!!

The only thing I miss your black levels will be brighter also.

100 inches isn’t huge so I would think that it would still be a great picture


----------



## Don Stewart

Minge said:


> Don:
> 
> I have a 15 year old Firehawk screen that still performs like the day it was installed. While I am not unhappy at all I am wondering if I could breath new life into my JVC RS500 with a fresh new ST 130 G4 in my light controlled room with a 100 inch screen that I sit about 10 feet from?


I would recommend to secure a sample of the ST130 G4 and tape it to your FH material with masking tape and then evaluate. (Note, the masking tape will not hurt the FH screen surface if only left on for a few hours). Also, if you have a fixed frame, a new screen can be built to attach to the same frame. We just need the serial number.


----------



## Minge

I have a motorized retractable, so I would need a whole new screen?


----------



## Don Stewart

Minge said:


> I have a motorized retractable, so I would need a whole new screen?


With a retractable, it gets a little more complicated. We can send a new screen attached to a new roller tube and new bottom batten bar. It would take a skillful tech to change out at the job-site. The other option would be sending the whole unit back to our factory and have the work done there.


----------



## Minge

I would pick option two of course. Thanks, I will order a sample and see if it is a worthy project. Thanks for your timely responses. Stewart is the gold standard for projector screens your should be proud of your products.


----------



## Craig Peer

2 Stangs said:


> Has anyone directly compared a 1.1 gain white Cima screen vs Studiotek 130 G4 and can give comparisons?
> 
> I've narrowed it down to those choices. My room is completely blacked out with a JVC rs520. Probably looking at a 135' 16:9 screen.
> 
> thanks


Get a sample of each. PM me and I can get you samples.

I have a Cima Neve and a ST130 G3 screen and they do look pretty close at times from normal seating distances.


----------



## gregblurayhd

I just had a Sony 4K 715ES Projector installed. I currently have a Silver Ticket 110in Screen with 1.1 Peak Gain. I'm upgrading to a 110 in Stewart StudioTek 130 G4. I leave the projector setting at Bright Cinema. The projector is 17.5 feet from the seating area. It is in a light controlled DARK room. No light. My sales rep indicated a 1.3 Gain would be perfect for my setup. I'd like the brighter screen....I just wonder if it's overkill. Does anyone have any suggestions? Thanks,


----------



## scottyb

I think you will love the new screen!!


----------



## Craig Peer

Minge said:


> Don:
> 
> I have a 15 year old Firehawk screen that still performs like the day it was installed. While I am not unhappy at all I am wondering if I could breath new life into my JVC RS500 with a fresh new ST 130 G4 in my light controlled room with a 100 inch screen that I sit about 10 feet from?


I switched from Firehawk to a ST130 ( at the time I did, it was the G3 ). Definite improvement picture wise all the way around.


----------



## Craig Peer

Minge said:


> I have a motorized retractable, so I would need a whole new screen?


I sold my old Firehawk electric screen on Ebay and got a new electric screen when I bout my ST130 screen.


----------



## Gates

Don Stewart said:


> I would recommend to secure a sample of the ST130 G4 and tape it to your FH material with masking tape and then evaluate. (Note, the masking tape will not hurt the FH screen surface if only left on for a few hours). Also, if you have a fixed frame, a new screen can be built to attach to the same frame. We just need the serial number.


I admire how you're telling him to test instead of just trying to sell him. Well done sir.


----------



## Don Stewart

Gates said:


> I admire how you're telling him to test instead of just trying to sell him. Well done sir.


Thanks. Personally, I really hate it when someone tries to "sell" me something so I certainly not going to do that to others. I have more of an engineering type aptitude and believe the best approach is give the customer the tools and proper information to make to make an informative decision. That being said, we do have sales people at Stewart and on occasions they have reminded me that, "Nothing happens in the economy until something is sold" which has some truth behind it. I guess you can say the world needs all types of individuals.


----------



## Ellebob

A good salesman is worth his weight in gold for a company. One measure I find of a good salesman is not only honesty but willing to recommend the best solution for a customer even if not from his/her organization. For example in your industry if someone was looking for an inexpensive pull down screen a good salesman would tell them companies that sells those products.


----------



## Don Stewart

Ellebob said:


> A good salesman is worth his weight in gold for a company. One measure I find of a good salesman is not only honesty but willing to recommend the best solution for a customer even if not from his/her organization. For example in your industry if someone was looking for an inexpensive pull down screen a good salesman would tell them companies that sells those products.


I fully agree with the above. Like I said in my post above, nothing happens until something gets sold. When hiring, we look for that type of individual that truly has both the customer's and company interest at heart. After hiring, and when we know we have a keeper, we also spend a lot of time to train them technically to understand the technology. As many here on the forum already know, most of the general public out there know very little about how screens work so we spend a lot of time educating our people. A good example of one of our sales persons is July Lopez. I have seen his name praised for his help and knowledge by many customers here on this forum.


----------



## cricket9998

I have a 2.4:1 balon borderless installed and it is amazing with the 130 G4 material. Really simple install and amazes everyone who sees it. 

I was wondering if there are any options for manual masking panels. Either something I can buy or any tips on making my own? I would only need ones for 17:9 and 16:9 on the sides.


----------



## scottyb

Hi Cricket 






Manual Masking Panels - Stewart


Manual masking panels, specifically tailored to the screen, will easily convert a screen from Scope to a 16:9 aspect ratio. The masking panels are custom made to align perfectly, creating sharp, crisp borders, improving perceived contrast and delivering a gray bar-free image.




www.stewartfilmscreen.com





Not sure if you can get them for the Balon


----------



## Craig Peer

scottyb said:


> Hi Cricket
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Manual Masking Panels - Stewart
> 
> 
> Manual masking panels, specifically tailored to the screen, will easily convert a screen from Scope to a 16:9 aspect ratio. The masking panels are custom made to align perfectly, creating sharp, crisp borders, improving perceived contrast and delivering a gray bar-free image.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.stewartfilmscreen.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure if you can get them for the Balon


Just available on WallScreen Deluxe screens.


----------



## scottyb

Hey Craig

maybe there would be a way to modify the clips??


----------



## lcoleman

Alan Gouger said:


> Post all your questions and answers related to Stewart to this thread.
> 
> Please, no sales or marketing. It will be removed.


I am registered on AVSForum but I see no way to post a question on the Official Stewart Film Screen Thread. What am I missing?


----------



## scottyb

lcoleman, 

You just posted in the thread with the above. Just ask your question here.


----------



## Craig Peer

scottyb said:


> Hey Craig
> 
> maybe there would be a way to modify the clips??


Maybe, except Stewart won't make you masking panels if you have a Balon to begin with. People that buy Balon / " Zero Edge " type screens want a giant TV look. TV's don't have masking panels. I suppose one could make their own custom masking panels though.


----------



## gregblurayhd

lcoleman said:


> I am registered on AVSForum but I see no way to post a question on the Official Stewart Film Screen Thread. What am I missing?


On the bottom of the thread, just enter your topic in the write your reply area.


----------



## lcoleman

I am replacing my current screen with a 110" Stewart screen. I will continue with my Epson 5030UB projector but want the screen to be compatible with 4K in the not-too-distant future. The room is 19'x27' with the projector throw across the 19' dimension. Black-out shades in 10 large windows run in grooves so there is no light leak on sunniest days. The walls consist of dark bookshelves along one 27' dimension and medium taupe walls about the reflectivity of a photographer's gray card elsewhere, but a good fraction of two walls is the black black-out shades. The weak element is the white ceiling, which is going to stay that way according to management. Helpfully, the cathedral ceiling slopes up and away from the screen, which should reduce reflected light onto the screen somewhat.

I plan to get either the Cima or Luxus retractable mechanism but need suggestions for the screen material.


----------



## cricket9998

Craig Peer said:


> Maybe, except Stewart won't make you masking panels if you have a Balon to begin with. People that buy Balon / " Zero Edge " type screens want a giant TV look. TV's don't have masking panels. I suppose one could make their own custom masking panels though.


I am going to eventually just build my own motorized panels. They will slide on rails side to side and be covered in triple black velvet. There doesn’t seem to be a residential product for this


----------



## scottyb

Seymour AV has something like this!



cricket9998 said:


> I am going to eventually just build my own motorized panels. They will slide on rails side to side and be covered in triple black velvet. There doesn’t seem to be a residential product for this


----------



## gregblurayhd

Quick question for the group. I'm in the process of buying a Stewart WallScreen 110" 16:9, 1.3 gain (StudioTek 130 G4 material). Can I watch 3D movies with this material. There website states Passive 3D - no.


----------



## gregblurayhd

gregblurayhd said:


> Quick question for the group. I'm in the process of buying a Stewart WallScreen 110" 16:9, 1.3 gain (StudioTek 130 G4 material). Can I watch 3D movies with this material. There website states Passive 3D - no.


I should have stated that I have Active 3D...if it works with Active, I'm good to go,


----------



## fredworld

gregblurayhd said:


> Quick question for the group. I'm in the process of buying a Stewart WallScreen 110" 16:9, 1.3 gain (StudioTek 130 G4 material). Can I watch 3D movies with this material. There website states Passive 3D - no.


My Epson utilizes an active 3D system and the 3D images on my StudioTek 100 94" wide screen is excellent.


----------



## gregblurayhd

fredworld said:


> My Epson utilizes an active 3D system and the 3D images on my StudioTek 100 94" wide screen is excellent.


Thanks for the reply....I'm wondering if their new G4 material makes a difference....I would think it wouldn't matter.


----------



## fredworld

gregblurayhd said:


> Thanks for the reply....I'm wondering if their new G4 material makes a difference....I would think it wouldn't matter.


I highly doubt it matters. I got my StudioTek in November '20.


----------



## Don Stewart

cricket9998 said:


> I have a 2.4:1 balon borderless installed and it is amazing with the 130 G4 material. Really simple install and amazes everyone who sees it.
> 
> I was wondering if there are any options for manual masking panels. Either something I can buy or any tips on making my own? I would only need ones for 17:9 and 16:9 on the sides.


Hi Cricket. First of all, thank you for your purchase.

To the best of my knowledge, yours is the first request for manual masking panels for the Balon screen series. I ran it by engineering today and their response is that they could be custom built with special hangers to attach to your existing frame. That said, I have no idea on costing yet but if you would like to pursue then please DM me.
Best regards,
Don


----------



## [email protected]

I ordered an NZ8 and a 140" 2.40 Studio Tek 100 (recommended by Stewart) before I understood the impact that HDR has on brightness. The question is did I make a mistake on the screen material?


----------



## cricket9998

[email protected] said:


> I ordered an NZ8 and a 140" 2.40 Studio Tek 100 (recommended by Stewart) before I understood the impact that HDR has on brightness. The question is did I make a mistake on the screen material?


You will have plenty of overhead for hdr. I would recommend the ST130 for free gain though but either way it will look great.


----------



## [email protected]

cricket9998 said:


> You will have plenty of overhead for hdr. I would recommend the ST130 for free gain though but either way it will look great.


Thanks, It does look good. I have a totally light controlled room with everything dark dark navy blue. The only exception are the white lamp shades on the wall sconces. I have been wondering if I should do something about the lamp shades.


----------



## DavidHir

On my ST100 screen, with a uniform color and strong brightness, I can see a clear few shiny clear specs on the material. No idea how they got there, but the screen is eight years old. I am trying to recall the recommend procedure to remove such debris? 

Edit: just saw this. 






Troubleshooting Tips - Stewart


With reasonable care, you may expect many years of dependable use of your Stewart projection screen.




www.stewartfilmscreen.com




.


----------



## coffeeguy57

Can anyone point me to resource for some fabric samples and ultimately a good dealer. Looking at ST130 G4 and ST 100 samples for a new 2.35:1 screen approx 116" wide +/-

I dont know that it matters but Im on the west coast.


----------



## Craig Peer

coffeeguy57 said:


> Can anyone point me to resource for some fabric samples and ultimately a good dealer. Looking at ST130 G4 and ST 100 samples for a new 2.35:1 screen approx 116" wide +/-
> 
> I dont know that it matters but Im on the west coast.


I sent you a PM.


----------



## KCAV23

coffeeguy57 said:


> Can anyone point me to resource for some fabric samples and ultimately a good dealer. Looking at ST130 G4 and ST 100 samples for a new 2.35:1 screen approx 116" wide +/-
> 
> I dont know that it matters but Im on the west coast.


Cool! I just got something very similar! I sent you a PM


----------



## cricket9998

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Cricket. First of all, thank you for your purchase.
> 
> To the best of my knowledge, yours is the first request for manual masking panels for the Balon screen series. I ran it by engineering today and their response is that they could be custom built with special hangers to attach to your existing frame. That said, I have no idea on costing yet but if you would like to pursue then please DM me.
> Best regards,
> Don


Thanks I sent you a DM about this.


----------



## Don Stewart

Since we are getting request for the BlackHawk UST ALR screen to be made available with wider basil frames for easier PJ set up to over-scan on, we were testing this past week for screen lay flat characteristics on a 122" diagonal viewing size 2.5" wide frame. Most of our other screens use snap fasteners to attach to frame. That said, the BlackHawk material is way too stiff for snaps and requires screen edge grommets, "S" hooks and tension bungee chord to maintain perfect screen flatness. The PJ for this test was a LG 2700 lumen Laser with a UST lens set up.


----------



## kwenar

Don Stewart said:


> Since we are getting request for the BlackHawk UST ALR screen to be made available with wider basil frames for easier PJ set up to over-scan on, we were testing this past week for screen lay flat characteristics on a 122" diagonal viewing size 2.5" wide frame. Most of our other screens use snap fasteners to attach to frame. That said, the BlackHawk material is way too stiff for snaps and requires screen edge grommets, "S" hooks and tension bungee chord to maintain perfect screen flatness. The PJ for this test was a LG 2700 lumen Laser with a UST lens set up.
> View attachment 3274231


Hi Don

That looks good to me, do you think that will be available soon as I would like to order something like that? For me I would need a 110" version


----------



## Don Stewart

kwenar said:


> Hi Don
> 
> That looks good to me, do you think that will be available soon as I would like to order something like that? For me I would need a 110" version


Hopefully, in the next 90-120 days. The one in the photo is a prototype for testing.
Regards,
Don


----------



## kwenar

Don Stewart said:


> Hopefully, in the next 90-120 days. The one in the photo is a prototype for testing.
> Regards,
> Don


HI Don

One last question about your prototype is does it use the same UST profile with steep inset like the 3 3/4 inch bezel or is it another style. I like the idea of the deeper inset as it would trap the light off the edges better in my mind versus a flatter profile bezel which is what i have now with a .4 inch bezel.

Here is a picture from your website incase my question doesn't make sense.

I am deciding if I want to just order your regular non ALR combo with the GreyMatte 70 UST in 110" or wait for this type of screen with a bit smaller bezel in the ALR Blackhawk material that you are trying out. 

Thanks in advance


----------



## Don Stewart

kwenar said:


> HI Don
> 
> One last question about your prototype is does it use the same UST profile with steep inset like the 3 3/4 inch bezel or is it another style. I like the idea of the deeper inset as it would trap the light off the edges better in my mind versus a flatter profile bezel which is what i have now with a .4 inch bezel.
> 
> Here is a picture from your website incase my question doesn't make sense.
> 
> I am deciding if I want to just order your regular non ALR combo with the GreyMatte 70 UST in 110" or wait for this type of screen with a bit smaller bezel in the ALR Blackhawk material that you are trying out.
> 
> Thanks in advance
> 
> View attachment 3275323


The new 2.5" UST prototype has a sharper knife like edge where the inside of the frame basil meets the screen material. It will be avaiable with both the GrayMatte 70 and BlackHawk screen surfaces. If you can wait, this frame will be the next generation of the WallScreen UST.


----------



## kwenar

Don Stewart said:


> The new 2.5" UST prototype has a sharper knife like edge where the inside of the frame basil meets the screen material. It will be avaiable with both the GrayMatte 70 and BlackHawk screen surfaces. If you can wait, this frame will be the next generation of the WallScreen UST.


Wow that’s awesome Don that you guys are taking a issue that is light bleed and coming up with a new solution to resolve this.

I have spent so much time researching and trying new things to solve this for my scenario so it’s exciting to see a company step up and make a new solution.

I take it you were not happy with the bottom shadow the larger bezel was creating so this will fix that ?

if so I can wait as I was about to order the 110 UST with greymatte70 but if this will be better overall I can wait a few more months.

thanks for all your responses.


----------



## Don Stewart

kwenar said:


> Wow that’s awesome Don that you guys are taking a issue that is light bleed and coming up with a new solution to resolve this.
> 
> I have spent so much time researching and trying new things to solve this for my scenario so it’s exciting to see a company step up and make a new solution.
> 
> *I take it you were not happy with the bottom shadow the larger bezel was creating so this will fix that ?*
> 
> if so I can wait as I was about to order the 110 UST with greymatte70 but if this will be better overall I can wait a few more months.
> 
> thanks for all your responses.


That is correct as that was the mission and goal of the undated frame profile..


----------



## kwenar

Don Stewart said:


> That is correct as that was the mission and goal of the undated frame profile..


Looks like I will be waiting for one of those when they are available. If you could post when they become available in this new design I will put in my order through my install company as they are a dealer in my area of your company.

Thanks again for making this new option as I am sure you will have many happy customers once they get their hands on them.


----------



## Don Stewart

Thank you for your patience on this, BTW, nice vintage Chevelle SS on your avatar.


----------



## kwenar

Don Stewart said:


> Thank you for your patience on this, BTW, nice vintage Chevelle SS on your avatar.


No worries, I know this is a newer area of the projector market and more and more people are purchasing these types of units over TVs so there will be growing pains and patience is needed to getting things improved upon.

I work for a large electronics company that manufactures high end products and we are also constantly looking to improve our customers devices. Its constantly evolving as customer expectations are also becoming higher each year that passes. I can't wait to see what these UST's can do in the next few years.


----------



## flyers10

What Stewart model would be recommended for this scenario?
AT screen, 7' 4" view distance. Speakers will be only 1" to 2" behind screen. Light controlled dedicated room. 
Thinking a 96" wide 2.4 screen and using probably a JVC NP5 projector.


----------



## Snowmanick

flyers10 said:


> What Stewart model would be recommended for this scenario?
> AT screen, 7' 4" view distance. Speakers will be only 1" to 2" behind screen. Light controlled dedicated room.
> Thinking a 96" wide 2.4 screen and using probably a JVC NP5 projector.


Maybe a woven screen? I can see the microperf from that distance on my ST130G4.


----------



## RickS

I just installed a new 120" 16x9 Luxus ST130G4 screen in our HT room and am very pleased with picture quality vs the out going screen of another brand. The system is connected with the included IR sensor that works fine. Is there away to connect to Alexa for home automation voice control if the smart port is using the IR sensor? I'd like to have both. Also, I find the light is reflecting off of the bottom part of the black Luxus case. Less shiny paint would have worked better I think. What do you do cut down light reflection from the case? I'm using a JVC DLA-RS3100.


----------



## Craig Peer

RickS said:


> I just installed a new 120" 16x9 Luxus ST130G4 screen in our HT room and am very pleased with picture quality vs the out going screen of another brand. The system is connected with the included IR sensor that works fine. Is there away to connect to Alexa for home automation voice control if the smart port is using the IR sensor? I'd like to have both. Also, I find the light is reflecting off of the bottom part of the black Luxus case. *Less shiny paint would have worked better I think. What do you do cut down light reflection from the case?* I'm using a JVC DLA-RS3100.


I put some self adhesive Protostar black material on mine.


----------



## Snowmanick

Craig Peer said:


> I put some self adhesive Protostar black material on mine.


I did the same on my last screen. Easy to do.


----------



## Erod

Don, good morning. Still loving my ST130/G4 screen.

Quick question that arose....how visible is the microperf on these screens from 11 feet.

I'm not a fan of the PQ loss from going to woven screens, although I know they are generally better from an acoustic transparency standpoint. However, I'd only be putting the center channel behind the screen, so I sometimes think about going with the ST130 microperf. I know the light loss would take it to about a 1.17 gain, but I'm not sure how visible the perf would be.


----------



## Craig Peer

Erod said:


> Don, good morning. Still loving my ST130/G4 screen.
> 
> Quick question that arose....how visible is the microperf on these screens from 11 feet.
> 
> I'm not a fan of the PQ loss from going to woven screens, although I know they are generally better from an acoustic transparency standpoint. However, I'd only be putting the center channel behind the screen, so I sometimes think about going with the ST130 microperf. I know the light loss would take it to about a 1.17 gain, but I'm not sure how visible the perf would be.


Not Don, but thought I'd chime in. Most people say they can see the perf's from 12' or so. I was in a theater in South Lake Tahoe installing a new JVC projector, and it took me quite some time to realize their screen was Microperf. Get a sample. PM me if you want and I can get you one.


----------



## Don Stewart

Erod said:


> Don, good morning. Still loving my ST130/G4 screen.
> 
> Quick question that arose....how visible is the microperf on these screens from 11 feet.
> 
> I'm not a fan of the PQ loss from going to woven screens, although I know they are generally better from an acoustic transparency standpoint. However, I'd only be putting the center channel behind the screen, so I sometimes think about going with the ST130 microperf. I know the light loss would take it to about a 1.17 gain, but I'm not sure how visible the perf would be.


Hi Erod,
With today's brighter projectors, the consensus is a minimum of 11-12 feet when viewing very bright scenes.The best way to determine is to evaluate a sample from your viewing distance and in your particular room set up,
Best Regards,
Don


----------



## Erod

Craig Peer said:


> Not Don, but thought I'd chime in. Most people say they can see the perf's from 12' or so. I was in a theater in South Lake Tahoe installing a new JVC projector, and it took me quite some time to realize their screen was Microperf. Get a sample. PM me if you want and I can get you one.


Thanks. Sent the PM.


----------



## Erod

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Erod,
> With today's brighter projectors, the consensus is a minimum of 11-12 feet when viewing very bright scenes.The best way to determine is to evaluate a sample from your viewing distance and in your particular room set up,
> Best Regards,
> Don


Don, I have about 7-8 inches of room behind my screen if I put an in-wall version of my current center channel behind it. Is that enough room behind your microperfs to avoid audible comb filtering? I have two rows of three seats, that don't start until 11 feet away, so I don't think I'd have off-axis issues with microperf, but I'm not sure about behind the screen. I prefer my left and right channels outside the screen frame.


----------



## flyers10

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Erod,
> With today's brighter projectors, the consensus is a minimum of 11-12 feet when viewing very bright scenes.The best way to determine is to evaluate a sample from your viewing distance and in your particular room set up,
> Best Regards,
> Don


Don, does Stewart offer any AT screens designed for seating distances of 7.25 feet? And only about 2" from screen to speakers.


----------



## BrolicBeast

flyers10 said:


> Don, does Stewart offer any AT screens designed for seating distances of 7.25 feet? And only about 2" from screen to speakers.


The Stewart Harmony G2 will fit this use case--it's actually an amazing woven material!


----------



## BrolicBeast

Erod said:


> Don, I have about 7-8 inches of room behind my screen if I put an in-wall version of my current center channel behind it. Is that enough room behind your microperfs to avoid audible comb filtering? I have two rows of three seats, that don't start until 11 feet away, so I don't think I'd have off-axis issues with microperf, but I'm not sure about behind the screen. I prefer my left and right channels outside the screen frame.


I'm not Don, but.I have installed a bunch of these and conduct audio calibrations after screen installation. I find that the range of 8"-12" behind the screen is the sweet spot...what type of equalization are you using (Dirac, Trinnov Optimizer, ARC, Audyssey, etc.)? Do you have access to an outboard DSP like QSC Qsys or Xilica? These screens will sound like they simply aren't there after proper setup and calibration!


----------



## Erod

BrolicBeast said:


> I'm not Don, but.I have installed a bunch of these and conduct audio calibrations after screen installation. I find that the range of 8"-12" behind the screen is the sweet spot...what type of equalization are you using (Dirac, Trinnov Optimizer, ARC, Audyssey, etc.)? Do you have access to an outboard DSP like QSC Qsys or Xilica? These screens will sound like they simply aren't there after proper setup and calibration!


Thanks. I use Dirac (with my HTP-1), but I generally only correct to 300 Hz. Sounds like I'd need to use full-range correction with one of these screens? 

My hope would be that because I'm only putting the center channel behind it, it wouldn't be as critical what the speaker can do above 12 kHz, but perhaps I'm wrong. Of course, if I can see the perforations, it becomes somewhat moot because I couldn't tolerate that. I need Don to get busy on a G4 weave that can do 1.3 gain and the same resolution! LOL


----------



## Hawks07

BrolicBeast said:


> I'm not Don, but.I have installed a bunch of these and conduct audio calibrations after screen installation. I find that the range of 8"-12" behind the screen is the sweet spot...what type of equalization are you using (Dirac, Trinnov Optimizer, ARC, Audyssey, etc.)? Do you have access to an outboard DSP like QSC Qsys or Xilica? These screens will sound like they simply aren't there after proper setup and calibration!


I am also considering moving to a Microperf and just putting my center behind the screen. 
I use Audyssey right now and also correct to just 300Hz. What exactly needs to be done during calibration for these screens? 
Thanks.


----------



## Don Stewart

Erod said:


> Thanks. I use Dirac (with my HTP-1), but I generally only correct to 300 Hz. Sounds like I'd need to use full-range correction with one of these screens?
> 
> My hope would be that because I'm only putting the center channel behind it, it wouldn't be as critical what the speaker can do above 12 kHz, but perhaps I'm wrong. Of course, if I can see the perforations, it becomes somewhat moot because I couldn't tolerate that. I need Don to get busy on a G4 weave that can do 1.3 gain and the same resolution! LOL


Hi Erod,
Some years back, I was involved with some additional MicroPerf testing by comparing various speaker designs. We compared speakers with high frequency horn designs vs speakers with a typical 1" dome tweeter design. We found that the HF horn designs transmitted smoother and more efficiently than the tweeter designs. The reason being is that the horn design distributed the upper mids and highs over a much larger area of back of the screen's surface and therefore allowed the audio to transmit through many dozens of more perforation holes than what a dome tweeter does. I did google looking for an In-Wall speaker with a HF horn. I did find the one below with kind of a simi-horn which positions the high frequency furrter back from the back of the screen surface allowing more sound disbursement through many more perforation holes.


----------



## flyers10

BrolicBeast said:


> The Stewart Harmony G2 will fit this use case--it's actually an amazing woven material!


thanks The site says not ideal for HDR. Know anything about that and how it compares to Seymour UF or SSE Neo?


----------



## Erod

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Erod,
> Some years back, I was involved with some additional MicroPerf testing by comparing various speaker designs. We compared speakers with high frequency horn designs vs speakers with a typical 1" dome tweeter design. We found that the HF horn designs transmitted smoother and more efficiently than the tweeter designs. The reason being is that the horn design distributed the upper mids and highs over a much larger area of back of the screen's surface and therefore allowed the audio to transmit through many dozens of more perforation holes than what a dome tweeter does. I did google looking for an In-Wall speaker with a HF horn. I did find the one below with kind of a simi-horn which positions the high frequency furrter back from the back of the screen surface allowing more sound disbursement through many more perforation holes.
> View attachment 3279426


Hmmm, I have matching AMT tweeters all the way around my bed layer. I'm not sure mixing tweeter types in the LCR would produce a good timbre for panning.

With dialogue being the primary function is that channel, which is the only one that would be behind the screen, I suspect it will be just fine. 

The perforation visibility seems to be the most pressing question.


----------



## Erod

Anybody here with own with the WallMask HM screen, and what has been your experience with it?


----------



## jsmith967

Help me interpret my new (used) Stewart Screen. 

The screen material is Firehawk, I'm just trying to see which version it is, the screen model says, "LX92HFHW-12-2-5" . What does this mean? 

It is a 92" Firehawk tab tensioned. I appreciate whatever insight you can provide.


----------



## cricket9998

From sound and vision

“ Meanwhile, Stewart Filmscreen, the California-based company that has been crafting high-performance projection screens since the golden age of Hollywood, has announced its acquisition by the private-equity group Shackleton Equity Partners. The company will maintain its manufacturing facilities and continue to be managed by its current senior management team in Torrance, according to press reports, but owner and manager Mary Stewart will relinquish her role.”

😬 PE acquisitions are scary as a consumer. Many of them mismanage or pilfer the cash value of the companies


----------



## Don Stewart

cricket9998 said:


> From sound and vision
> 
> “ Meanwhile, Stewart Filmscreen, the California-based company that has been crafting high-performance projection screens since the golden age of Hollywood, has announced its acquisition by the private-equity group Shackleton Equity Partners. The company will maintain its manufacturing facilities and continue to be managed by its current senior management team in Torrance, according to press reports, but owner and manager Mary Stewart will relinquish her role.”
> 😬* PE acquisitions are scary as a consumer. Many of them mismanage or pilfer the cash value of the companies*


Not in this case. I think this is a very positive move for Stewart. Shackleton Equity Partners is not some hugh equity company, but just the opposite. 
Mark Shackleton resides fairly close to our Torrance facility which allows him to commute to our facility and take a hands on approach in the management of the company. Also, I am staying on as an Executive Vice President. That said, I have a lot of respect for Mark's professional management skills. Mark has taken a special personal interest in Stewart because of its legacy history in the movie film industry and our very recognizable customer base in over five vertical markets that Stewart serves. This transaction will also allow additional capitalization in the company so we can make improvements with product production flow, additional modernization in equipment and give us more purchasing power leverage with some post pandemic supply chain issues with raw materials.
For more information, please see the link to the press release below.








Stewart Filmscreen Acquired By Private Equity


Stewart Filmscreen to maintain manufacturing facilities after buyout by Shackleton Equity Partners. Owner/manager Mary Stewart to step down.




www.cepro.com


----------



## cricket9998

Don Stewart said:


> Not in this case. I think this is a very positive move for Stewart. Shackleton Equity Partners is not some hugh equity company, but just the opposite.
> Mark Shackleton resides fairly close to our Torrance facility which allows him to commute to our facility and take a hands on approach in the management of the company. Also, I am staying on as an Executive Vice President. That said, I have a lot of respect for Mark's professional management skills. Mark has taken a special personal interest in Stewart because of its legacy history in the movie film industry and our very recognizable customer base in over five vertical markets that Stewart serves. This transaction will also allow additional capitalization in the company so we can make improvements with product production flow, additional modernization in equipment and give us more purchasing power leverage with some post pandemic supply chain issues with raw materials.
> For more information, please see the link to the press release below.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Stewart Filmscreen Acquired By Private Equity
> 
> 
> Stewart Filmscreen to maintain manufacturing facilities after buyout by Shackleton Equity Partners. Owner/manager Mary Stewart to step down.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.cepro.com


Cool well that’s great to hear then


----------



## Erod

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Erod,
> With today's brighter projectors, the consensus is a minimum of 11-12 feet when viewing very bright scenes.The best way to determine is to evaluate a sample from your viewing distance and in your particular room set up,
> Best Regards,
> Don


Don, question regarding speaker placement.

I would be placing only the center channel behind the screen, and I would have 6-7 inches of clearance. I have a narrow viewing angle in my room - 19 degrees total from the two furthest seating positions left and right - so would that distance behind the screen be sufficient to properly EQ with Dirac afterward given proper sound treatment behind the screen?

I would keep my left and right channels outside the screen frame because most of the information from those speakers is off-screen sound.


----------



## Don Stewart

Erod said:


> Don, question regarding speaker placement.
> 
> I would be placing only the center channel behind the screen, and I would have 6-7 inches of clearance. I have a narrow viewing angle in my room - 19 degrees total from the two furthest seating positions left and right - so would that distance behind the screen be sufficient to properly EQ with Dirac afterward given proper sound treatment behind the screen?
> 
> I would keep my left and right channels outside the screen frame because most of the information from those speakers is off-screen sound.


Actually, most of our dealer/installers place speaker(s) 2-3" behind screen and adjust EQ as needed. That said, if you have 6-7 inches, then place front of speaker in that position which will require less EQ adjustment.


----------



## Erod

Don Stewart said:


> Actually, most of our dealer/installers place speaker(s) 2-3" behind screen and adjust EQ as needed. That said, if you have 6-7 inches, then place front of speaker in that position which will require less EQ adjustment.
> 
> View attachment 3284513


OK, thanks, Don. 

I have one more question that you can answer in private message if you prefer. What is the lead time for the WallMask HM/microper ST130 production currently? I'll need to know that if I move forward and need to prepare the space behind the screen and arrange installation. Not sure I want to tackle installation on this screen myself this time.


----------



## Don Stewart

I will ask scheduling what the current lead time is and then DM you? That said, we do have lots on order right now including our commercial business. Please confirm what size screen?
Regards,
Don


----------



## Erod

Don Stewart said:


> I will ask scheduling what the current lead time is and then DM you? That said, we do have lots on order right now including our commercial business. Please confirm what size screen?
> Regards,
> Don


Between 130 and 135. Still doing some calculations based on a few room factors. I hope that is specific enough.


----------



## photogeek1

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Erod,
> With today's brighter projectors, the consensus is a minimum of 11-12 feet when viewing very bright scenes.The best way to determine is to evaluate a sample from your viewing distance and in your particular room set up,
> Best Regards,
> Don


I have a Visionary 120 inch 2.4:1 ST130 G4 micro perf screen in our theater. The space is still under final construction, but we have been using the screen and PJ even without walls. I did have to cover the metal studs behind the screen since they will definitely reflect light back through the perforation. Hoping our final dark gray wall will not have that same issue. Our screen is 8 inches away from the rear wall, where we'll have in-wall B&W 7.3S2 speakers as LCR. Reading the comments here, that seems ideal. Fine audio calibration will be performed with ARC Genesis. 

The bigger issue is now that we received our two rows of theater seats, the front row is about a foot closer to the screen than planned. If we push them back to their planned position, the rear seat occupants' feet would kick the top of the front row occupants' heads when both are fully reclined. And the back row needs a little space off the rear wall to recline as well. This puts the non-reclined viewing position only 9 feet from the screen and the reclined position around 10 feet. Projetor is a JVC NX5 with Panamorph DCR lens. Any thoughts? Or are we just going to have to deal with seeing the micro-perf from the front row?


----------



## nakenergy

what are the shipping times for Stewart screens?; seems to be more than 10-12 weeks? Anyone got their screens earlier than 10 weeks?


----------



## gregblurayhd

nakenergy said:


> what are the shipping times for Stewart screens?; seems to be more than 10-12 weeks? Anyone got their screens earlier than 10 weeks?


I ordered one on March 28th. I was told it would arrive in 4 weeks. It still hasn't come. My store indicated it should arrive in mid-June. They told me it was supply issues....so, hopefully only a couple of more weeks to go.


----------



## nakenergy

gregblurayhd said:


> I ordered one on March 28th. I was told it would arrive in 4 weeks. It still hasn't come. My store indicated it should arrive in mid-June. They told me it was supply issues....so, hopefully only a couple of more weeks to go.


I ordered exactly a month after you (2-3 weeks shipping time) and now I was told July; hope to get it before July 4th.


----------



## fredworld

nakenergy said:


> I ordered exactly a month after you (2-3 weeks shipping time) and now I was told July; hope to get it before July 4th.


Mine took about 4 weeks but that was back in November '19. I'm not surprised that it's taking more than twice as long now. Many things put end-product delivery times out of control of the manufacturer.


----------



## flyers10

Anyone used the Harmony G2 and compared it to other woven like Seymour UF, SSE Neo, Dreamscreen V6/V7 ? Have a short 7.25 view distance.


----------



## samsung84

nakenergy said:


> what are the shipping times for Stewart screens?; seems to be more than 10-12 weeks? Anyone got their screens earlier than 10 weeks?


I ordered my 133" wallscreen deluxe studiotek 100 screen on March 11th and received it May 24th


----------



## ScudDawg

Hello everyone, I am looking for some advice, here's where I am at. I am looking at getting a studiotek 130G4 screen and I am height limited more than width. I can fit with a wall screen 2.5 around 123" or a balon edge around 127". I am coming from a 120" screen but looking to max out my room. Other than the price difference which I'm expecting to be around $800, is there any trade-off I should be aware of with the balon edge? My projector is dead center in my room and shouldn't have any over scan issues which I think is what the main issue could be for some rooms. Thanks for any insight/advice ahead of time.


----------



## fredworld

ScudDawg said:


> Hello everyone, I am looking for some advice, here's where I am at. I am looking at getting a studiotek 130G4 screen and I am height limited more than width. I can fit with a wall screen 2.5 around 123" or a balon edge around 127". I am coming from a 120" screen but looking to max out my room. Other than the price difference which I'm expecting to be around $800, is there any trade-off I should be aware of with the balon edge? My projector is dead center in my room and shouldn't have any over scan issues which I think is what the main issue could be for some rooms. Thanks for any insight/advice ahead of time.


I see you have the Epson 5050UB as I do. My 2.35:1 Balon Borderless pairs beautifully with the Epson. Overscan is a non-issue. My screen wall is black so letterbox bars are invisible. I chose borderless so as to maximize my screen width in my room. Installing the Balon was easy even with my rudimentary skills. A 4' long straight bubble level was my best friend during installation, but my screen is only 94" wide. With a 120"-127" wide screen I'd measure and check leveling THREE times before drilling. 😉


----------



## ScudDawg

fredworld said:


> I see you have the Epson 5050UB as I do. My 2.35:1 Balon Borderless pairs beautifully with the Epson. Overscan is a non-issue. My screen wall is black so letterbox bars are invisible. I chose borderless so as to maximize my screen width in my room. Installing the Balon was easy even with my rudimentary skills. A 4' long straight bubble level was my best friend during installation, but my screen is only 94" wide. With a 120"-127" wide screen I'd measure and check leveling THREE times before drilling. 😉


Excellent, that is what I was looking to hear, I may go borderless as well, another 2" of picture would also work. The room is all velvet for the first 13 feet. Thank you so much!


----------



## cricket9998

ScudDawg said:


> Excellent, that is what I was looking to hear, I may go borderless as well, another 2" of picture would also work. The room is all velvet for the first 13 feet. Thank you so much!


I also have the balon borderless and I put about a foot of triple black velvet all around it. It gives a floating look to the screen and helps catch any overscan that exists or if I am zoomed and the aspect ratio changes. It also looks super premium.


----------



## KCAV23

cricket9998 said:


> I also have the balon borderless and I put about a foot of triple black velvet all around it. It gives a floating look to the screen and helps catch any overscan that exists or if I am zoomed and the aspect ratio changes. It also looks super premium.


Is that velvet acoustically transparent? Thanks


----------



## cricket9998

KCAV23 said:


> Is that velvet acoustically transparent? Thanks


It definitely isn’t but I’m sure you can find some.


----------



## KCAV23

cricket9998 said:


> It definitely isn’t but I’m sure you can find some.


Awesome! The 145" 2.40:1 Stewart StudioTek 130 G4 perf screen I ordered about 3 months ago finally arrived yesterday!! I've seen the velvet look that you did around your HT screen and it looks SO COOL! My screen is about 2 inches shy of the width of my room so all the speakers are in an infinite baffle wall behind the screen along with subs. 

Now I need to find material that has the same pitch black light absorbing property but acoustically transparent LOL, I think compromises will be made 😀

Take care!!


----------



## Charlie_L

KCAV23 said:


> Awesome! The 145" 2.40:1 Stewart StudioTek 130 G4 perf screen I ordered about 3 months ago finally arrived yesterday!! I've seen the velvet look that you did around your HT screen and it looks SO COOL! My screen is about 2 inches shy of the width of my room so all the speakers are in an infinite baffle wall behind the screen along with subs.
> 
> Now I need to find material that has the same pitch black light absorbing property but acoustically transparent LOL, I think compromises will be made 😀
> 
> Take care!!


I used Guilford of Maine FR701 black on panels bordering my perfed Stewart G4 screen, and you can’t see a difference between where the screen border ends and the fabric begins. ( The panels border all four sides.)


----------



## KCAV23

Charlie_L said:


> I used Guilford of Maine FR701 black on panels bordering my perfed Stewart G4 screen, and you can’t see a difference between where the screen border ends and the fabric begins. ( The panels border all four sides.)


Guilford of Maine FR701, got it! Thanks so much!! I think this look makes a huge difference!!


----------



## AndreNewman

KCAV23 said:


> Awesome! The 145" 2.40:1 Stewart StudioTek 130 G4 perf screen I ordered about 3 months ago finally arrived yesterday!! I've seen the velvet look that you did around your HT screen and it looks SO COOL! My screen is about 2 inches shy of the width of my room so all the speakers are in an infinite baffle wall behind the screen along with subs.
> 
> Now I need to find material that has the same pitch black light absorbing property but acoustically transparent LOL, I think compromises will be made
> 
> Take care!!


Whaleys devore black velvet is effectively acoustically transparent.

You have to order it from UK and it’s not cheap but it is the blackest anything on the planet. 









Silk/Viscose Velvet Black (Devore)


A light weight Velvet suitable for scarves, with a short pile.Fabric is prepared for dyeing and/or printing.Approx 195gsm.




www.whaleys-bradford.ltd.uk


----------



## flyers10

Anyone know how best to get a sample of Stewart screens? I contacted through their site a couple times and only get their automated email response back.


----------



## Hawks07

flyers10 said:


> Anyone know how best to get a sample of Stewart screens? I contacted through their site a couple times and only get their automated email response back.


Craig or Mike at AV Science can help.


----------



## Ellebob

Or any dealer


----------



## BdoUK

I've seen that Stewart now offers some manual masking panels for certain frame types. What's the likelihood that frame type support (e.g. Cima) is expanded in the future? I've made my own for now but would love to have an official option for my Cima screen.


----------



## Hoi

The ETA shipping date for my order went from 10 weeks to now 5 weeks. I'm very excited as these are my 1st ones from Stewart. I'm getting the ST130G4 material for the Luxus (2.40 AR) and Wallscreen 1.5 (16:9 AR) to replace my 0.8 gain motorized and 1.0 gain fixed frame from other brands.


----------



## avsinkhole

Lucky you! I'm at 10 weeks and counting for a ST130G4 and awaiting an updated ETA.


----------



## gregblurayhd

I ordered mine on 3/28/22. I just received a call from my Retailer today...The Screen has arrived!!!! It took about 11 weeks...


----------



## nakenergy

which retailer is that? I haven't received any ETA nor any update since I put in the order.


----------



## gregblurayhd

ABT Electronics in Glenview IL


----------



## avsinkhole

Ordered 4/3/22 through AVScience. Just got a ship date of 6/17, with 5 business day estimate for delivery.


----------



## gregblurayhd

Ugh! After waiting almost 12 weeks for my Stewart Screen to arrive, it finally came....that's the good news...the bad news, the metal bar to hang the screen was missing from the box. My retailer will contact Stewart on Monday. Let's hope it doesn't take 12 weeks for a missing part. It was also missing the cloth glove kit for handling the screen during install. I realize things happen...but after 12 weeks you'd think they'd take extra care to make sure everything was in the box! I hope Stewart's service is top notch...I'll know soon enough.


----------



## Don Stewart

gregblurayhd said:


> Ugh! After waiting almost 12 weeks for my Stewart Screen to arrive, it finally came....that's the good news...the bad news, the metal bar to hang the screen was missing from the box. My retailer will contact Stewart on Monday. Let's hope it doesn't take 12 weeks for a missing part. It was also missing the cloth glove kit for handling the screen during install. I realize things happen...but after 12 weeks you'd think they'd take extra care to make sure everything was in the box! I hope Stewart's service is top notch...I'll know soon enough.


Hi Greg,
We apologize for excluding your screen hanging bracket(s). I sent you a DM to get the screen info details so we can remedy this issue quickly.
Regards, 
Don


----------



## Don Stewart

gregblurayhd said:


> Ugh! After waiting almost 12 weeks for my Stewart Screen to arrive, it finally came....that's the good news...the bad news, the metal bar to hang the screen was missing from the box. My retailer will contact Stewart on Monday. Let's hope it doesn't take 12 weeks for a missing part. It was also missing the cloth glove kit for handling the screen during install. I realize things happen...but after 12 weeks you'd think they'd take extra care to make sure everything was in the box! I hope Stewart's service is top notch...I'll know soon enough.


Your dealer will be receiving via overnight Fed-X the missing hanging wall brackets today. Again, we apologize for the exclusion of the brackets.
Best Regards,
Don


----------



## gregblurayhd

Don Stewart said:


> Your dealer will be receiving via overnight Fed-X the missing hanging wall brackets today. Again, we apologize for the exclusion of the brackets.
> Best Regards,
> Don


Thanks Don. They have contacted me and the brackets are on their way. I appreciate the quick reply and assist.


----------



## Cg078

Hi all, I ordered a 133” cinescope screen with electronic masking on April 25th. I was told 6 weeks…Here we are 9 weeks later and now being told mid August? So that is 17 weeks….if I was told 17 weeks when I ordered it I would have chosen a different screen as I have all of my theatre components in now. I told my distributor to cancel the order, does anyone on here have or know anyone that has one for sale? Even without the masking is fine thanks for your help!


----------



## nakenergy

Cg078 said:


> Hi all, I ordered a 133” cinescope screen with electronic masking on April 25th. I was told 6 weeks…Here we are 9 weeks later and now being told mid August? So that is 17 weeks….if I was told 17 weeks when I ordered it I would have chosen a different screen as I have all of my theatre components in now. I told my distributor to cancel the order, does anyone on here have or know anyone that has one for sale? Even without the masking is fine thanks for your help!


I ordered the same size without masking on April 29 and now I am wondering how much more I have to wait as my HT is all set up other than the screen. Is it because of the masking you requested or even for screens without masking?


----------



## Cg078

nakenergy said:


> I ordered the same size without masking on April 29 and now I am wondering how much more I have to wait as my HT is all set up other than the screen. Is it because of the masking you requested or even for screens without masking?


My home theatre is all setup as well, my screen is the only thing left. All of the speakers, Amps and components came within 6 weeks. I don’t think it is because of the electric masking as my dealer was told 6 weeks. I feel as though my time was wasted as I could have ordered a Seymour with electric masking and had it by now, but I felt Stewart was the better choice and trusted there timeline.


----------



## avsinkhole

Ordered my 120" scope 130 g4 on April 3. Delivery scheduled for 6/23. 11&1/2 weeks.


----------



## Cg078

Congrats, not sure what happened with mine. I just got quoted 4 weeks from Seymour if I order today, a few people have reached out to me with used ones as well.


----------



## etherealsound

From what I've seen and demoed, Stewart is the best for sheer picture quality. They also have wonderful customer service.


----------



## Cg078

I definitely agree with you, they are the best which is why I ordered one.


----------



## avsinkhole

etherealsound said:


> From what I've seen and demoed, Stewart is the best for sheer picture quality. They also have wonderful customer service.


Well, I will know soon for myself. Installing mine today. My screen progression with various projectors has been: diy blackout cloth, painted Sintra board, silver ticket, and now Stewart ST130G4. Each one has been a big improvement. Hoping for the same with the Stewart. Btw, I have the same projector as you.


----------



## gregblurayhd

My brand new Stewart Screen 110 Studiotek 130G4 was installed yesterday. I have to say, it is a VAST improvement over my previous Silver Ticket Screen. Colors pop and detail is outstanding. I was talking with the installer about the great picture quality, and he stated, "Most people don't realize it, but your picture is only as good as your screen. Some people buy expensive projectors but buy an inexpensive screen. If I had to, I'd pay more for the screen than the projector to get the best experience". He installs screens very often. That was quite a comment from an installer, that does NOT work for Stewart.

I'm not knocking the Silver Ticket Screen. It served me well for 4 years. It has an acceptable picture, but the Stewart is a noticeable upgrade. I've been playing various 4K blu rays that I've seen before and I can't believe the detail and color I was missing...especially regarding HDR, which was difficult to notice on the Silver Ticket. Admittedly, the Stewart cost much more than the Silver Ticket. I'd recommend the Silver Ticket if funds are short as a temporary screen, until you have the funds to upgrade to Stewart. 

Was it a long wait to receive the Stewart? Yes...but it was worth the wait.


----------



## etherealsound

avsinkhole said:


> Well, I will know soon for myself. Installing mine today. My screen progression with various projectors has been: diy blackout cloth, painted Sintra board, silver ticket, and now Stewart ST130G4. Each one has been a big improvement. Hoping for the same with the Stewart. Btw, I have the same projector as you.


Yup, we've got a very similar set up. I have blackout velvet on ceilings, walls, and with the RS2000, the picture quality is truly like a window into another world. I've no doubt you will be very very happy with it.


----------



## Ellebob

I agree with your installer on how much a screen makes a difference. Working in this industry and being a calibrator I see the difference. It is tough for some to justify spending that much on a screen even if they have the money, but it is worth it.
There's a saying, " You marry the screen and date the projector" as you will upgrade many projectors before upgrading a screen if you ever upgrade.
For limited budgets I would say subjectively if you are spending less than $5,000 on a projector then go to the next better model projector before upgrading the screen. If you're spending more than $5,000 on a projector, don't bother going to the next model of projector and get a better screen.


----------



## avsinkhole

Initial impression of my newly installed Stewart ST130G4 with my JVC RS2000: Colors just pop and are rich and true. Haven't done much critical viewing yet, but watched the Spears and Munsil 4k demo loop and it was fantastic. I'm very familiar with this material so I can really tell the degree of the upgrade. Right from d-ILA logo on projector startup, I knew this was going to be a treat. Then I watched a bit of the UHD LOTR Fellowship of the Ring disc, which was stunning. 

One thing I can't say yet is whether it is that much brighter than my Silver Ticket which is marketed as 1.4 gain. But I also am going from 110 inch ST to 120 inch Stewart. For sure I need a calibration and I'm on Chad B's waiting list. 

Lastly, the screen construction and assembly is a thing of beauty and just exudes quality. Happy to be a new owner.


----------



## howiee

avsinkhole said:


> Initial impression of my newly installed Stewart ST130G4 with my JVC RS2000: Colors just pop and are rich and true. Haven't done much critical viewing yet, but watched the Spears and Munsil 4k demo loop and it was fantastic. I'm very familiar with this material so I can really tell the degree of the upgrade. Right from d-ILA logo on projector startup, I knew this was going to be a treat. Then I watched a bit of the UHD LOTR Fellowship of the Ring disc, which was stunning.
> 
> One thing I can't say yet is whether it is that much brighter than my Silver Ticket which is marketed as 1.4 gain. But I also am going from 110 inch ST to 120 inch Stewart. For sure I need a calibration and I'm on Chad B's waiting list.
> 
> Lastly, the screen construction and assembly is a thing of beauty and just exudes quality. Happy to be a new owner.


Good stuff! More impressions pls when you have had more time. I'm mostly interested in noticeable/visible texture/sheen/sparling/hotspotting etc if there is any.


----------



## fredworld

howiee said:


> Good stuff! More impressions pls when you have had more time. I'm mostly interested in noticeable/visible texture/sheen/sparling/hotspotting etc if there is any.


Can't attest to the 130 but my ST100 has absolutely 0 "texture/sheen/sparling/hotspotting" and has no noticeable light loss from any angle in my HT room. It has the most movie-like image of the three screens I've owned in 28 years. It was recommended by Stewart's July Lopez for my completely light controlled, black screen wall/ceiling and dark grey walled 18'x14'x7.5' room.


----------



## howiee

fredworld said:


> Can't attest to the 130 but my ST100 has absolutely 0 "texture/sheen/sparling/hotspotting" and has no noticeable light loss from any angle in my HT room. It has the most movie-like image of the three screens I've owned in 28 years. It was recommended by Stewart's July Lopez for my completely light controlled, black screen wall/ceiling and dark grey walled 18'x14'x7.5' room.


Sounds great and the ST100 is on the list for sure! I'm quite prone to noticing artifiacts added by gain but have heard great thigns about the ST130 G4 in this regard. i.e. very far and few between and only in the most problematic scenes. It's a shame there's nowhere to get a demo in the UK as this is quite a lot of money to drop on a blind buy!


----------



## fredworld

howiee said:


> Sounds great and the ST100 is on the list for sure! I'm quite prone to noticing artifiacts added by gain but have heard great thigns about the ST130 G4 in this regard. i.e. very far and few between and only in the most problematic scenes. It's a shame there's nowhere to get a demo in the UK as this is quite a lot of money to drop on a blind buy!


You should be able to get some samples sent to you from a distributor or from Stewart.


----------



## avsinkhole

howiee said:


> Good stuff! More impressions pls when you have had more time. I'm mostly interested in noticeable/visible texture/sheen/sparling/hotspotting etc if there is any.


Here's what I can say with certainty so far: I have seen no visible texture, sheen, sparkle, or hotspotting from my 14' viewing distance. My room width is fairly narrow, so no issues with viewing angle. I also am in a completely light controlled environment with a generous black velvet proscenium, with a black tile ceiling, and dark walls and floor.

I can also say that the ST130 G4 is everything I was hoping for, and more. I'm experiencing the same feeling I had when I first got my JVC-RS2000. I find myself watching the screen and forgetting to watch the movie. Like a lot of people, buying this screen was a stretch for me, as was the projector. But now, after 20 years of seeking affordable incremental gains, I am so happy to have finally achieved the glorious viewing experience I am privileged to own. 

As I said, I still need a professional calibration to maximize my setup, especially with some HDR material. But all, and I mean ALL, SDR material I have viewed so far is just stunning. This screen was a total blind buy for me as I don't have any opportunities to view other competing screen material. Yes, I could have gotten samples and all that, but I decided to just jump in the deep end and go for the consensus best and be done with it.


----------



## Hoi

avsinkhole said:


> Here's what I can say with certainty so far: I have seen no visible texture, sheen, sparkle, or hotspotting from my 14' viewing distance. My room width is fairly narrow, so no issues with viewing angle. I also am in a completely light controlled environment with a generous black velvet proscenium, with a black tile ceiling, and dark walls and floor.
> 
> I can also say that the ST130 G4 is everything I was hoping for, and more. I'm experiencing the same feeling I had when I first got my JVC-RS2000. I find myself watching the screen and forgetting to watch the movie. Like a lot of people, buying this screen was a stretch for me, as was the projector. But now, after 20 years of seeking affordable incremental gains, I am so happy to have finally achieved the glorious viewing experience I am privileged to own.
> 
> As I said, I still need a professional calibration to maximize my setup, especially with some HDR material. But all, and I mean ALL, SDR material I have viewed so far is just stunning. This screen was a total blind buy for me as I don't have any opportunities to view other competing screen material. Yes, I could have gotten samples and all that, but I decided to just jump in the deep end and go for the consensus best and be done with it.


I'm in a similar situation as you. My order is shipping in a couple of weeks. I blind bought a Luxus motorized 2.40 screen and WallScreen 1.78 screen, both with the ST130G4 material. I have RS2000 and RS500 projectors running in a full triple black velvet room. Your initial impressions, along with other reviews, are making me think that I made the right choice at the cost of my credit card!


----------



## howiee

avsinkhole said:


> Here's what I can say with certainty so far: I have seen no visible texture, sheen, sparkle, or hotspotting from my 14' viewing distance. My room width is fairly narrow, so no issues with viewing angle. I also am in a completely light controlled environment with a generous black velvet proscenium, with a black tile ceiling, and dark walls and floor.
> 
> I can also say that the ST130 G4 is everything I was hoping for, and more. I'm experiencing the same feeling I had when I first got my JVC-RS2000. I find myself watching the screen and forgetting to watch the movie. Like a lot of people, buying this screen was a stretch for me, as was the projector. But now, after 20 years of seeking affordable incremental gains, I am so happy to have finally achieved the glorious viewing experience I am privileged to own.
> 
> As I said, I still need a professional calibration to maximize my setup, especially with some HDR material. But all, and I mean ALL, SDR material I have viewed so far is just stunning. This screen was a total blind buy for me as I don't have any opportunities to view other competing screen material. Yes, I could have gotten samples and all that, but I decided to just jump in the deep end and go for the consensus best and be done with it.


That sounds brilliant! I'm glad it all worked out and you're happy with the results. I've been yo-yoing between AT at around 0.7 gain and 1.3 on the ST130 for a few years now and it's hard to ignore a 60% brighter image. Especially when you consider the premium we pay for brighter projectors these days.


----------



## Craig Peer

Hoi said:


> I'm in a similar situation as you. My order is shipping in a couple of weeks. I blind bought a Luxus motorized 2.40 screen and WallScreen 1.78 screen, both with the ST130G4 material. I have RS2000 and RS500 projectors running in a full triple black velvet room. Your initial impressions, along with other reviews, are making me think that I made the right choice at the cost of my credit card!


You will have a great setup with the two screens!


----------



## kwenar

Don Stewart said:


> Since we are getting request for the BlackHawk UST ALR screen to be made available with wider basil frames for easier PJ set up to over-scan on, we were testing this past week for screen lay flat characteristics on a 122" diagonal viewing size 2.5" wide frame. Most of our other screens use snap fasteners to attach to frame. That said, the BlackHawk material is way too stiff for snaps and requires screen edge grommets, "S" hooks and tension bungee chord to maintain perfect screen flatness. The PJ for this test was a LG 2700 lumen Laser with a UST lens set up.
> View attachment 3274231


Hey Don any updates on this screen? Hoping it will be able to be ordered soon

Thanks in advance


----------



## Don Stewart

kwenar said:


> Hey Don any updates on this screen? Hoping it will be able to be ordered soon
> 
> Thanks in advance


Hi Kwenar.
The aluminum mill who extrudes our raw frame sections has given us a date of the end of July for us to receive the updated frame design extrusions. That said, I am keeping my fingers crossed that it ships as promised.
Have a nice 4th of July!
Don


----------



## kwenar

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Kwenar.
> The aluminum mill who extrudes our raw frame sections has given us a date of the end of July for us to receive the updated frame design extrusions. That said, I am keeping my fingers crossed that it ships as promised.
> Have a nice 4th of July!
> Don


That's awesome, can't wait to order one!

Thanks for the update Don


----------



## Stan-Lee

Did someone mention Studiotek 100? These are photos from my Google Pixel 6 Pro today. 1:30pm in light-uncontrolled livingroom w/ white walls and carpeting. I love my ST100! This is a Luxus Deluxe 120" dia Wallscreen. Sony VPL-VW675ESB projector. 
Xbox F1 gaming going on...








Xbox-F1.mp4







drive.google.com


----------



## Don Stewart

Today, we finally conducted our very first dealer training and factory tour in almost 2-1/2 years or since pre-covid. It was great to meet customers face to face and give the factory tour showing and explaining all our processes including where we cast our 40' by 90' seamless one piece screen materials on hugh molds. It also felt so good to get back in the saddle again and doing some actual training which I thoroughly enjoy doing so.


----------



## photogeek1

We have really enjoyed out ST130G4 120" Visionary Motorized screen since getting it last year. Earlier today, an electrical contractor was working on some circuits in the theater room, and tonight the screen won't come down. We verified the control box is getting AC power (it even makes a relay click sound when plugging in). But the 5V input LED is not coming on. No burnt electrical smell. Opened the control box and no loose, broken, or melted wires. Everything looks fine. But the screen will not take the 5V trigger and activate the motor. Any ideas?


----------



## photogeek1

photogeek1 said:


> We have really enjoyed out ST130G4 120" Visionary Motorized screen since getting it last year. Earlier today, an electrical contractor was working on some circuits in the theater room, and tonight the screen won't come down. We verified the control box is getting AC power (it even makes a relay click sound when plugging in). But the 5V input LED is not coming on. No burnt electrical smell. Opened the control box and no loose, broken, or melted wires. Everything looks fine. But the screen will not take the 5V trigger and activate the motor. Any ideas?


And.... I'm an idiot. Andrew at Stewart tech support was super helpful. Turns out the 12V trigger source was bad. Swapped out a new cable and hooked up to AVR, and we're back in business.


----------



## Don Stewart

photogeek1 said:


> And.... I'm an idiot. Andrew at Stewart tech support was super helpful. Turns out the 12V trigger source was bad. Swapped out a new cable and hooked up to AVR, and we're back in business.


Been on vacation this past week so this is my first opportunity to log back on the forum.
That is good news Photogeek1 that you guys got the problem resolved. FYI, Scott Kimber, who had been with the Stewart for well over three decades previously, headed up Tech Support but retired recently at 67 years of age. Andrew Cox has now taken over Tech support. Andrew has 20 plus years plus at Stewart and previously headed up our IT department. That said, Andrew is great at trouble shooting, very polite and extremely patient. If he does not know an answer, he is very familiar with all the departments at Stewart, so he knows his way around and where to go to ask a question. Again, glad it worked out for you.


----------



## SED <--- Rules

Hi everyone, I have a question and looking for an honest answer. About 10 years ago I bought a used Carada Brilliant White screen (110' 16:9) for about 800 bucks. So far I've been pretty happy with it and I'm still using it with an older JVC projector. I have a bat cave velvet room. I want to know how much of an improvement will I see with a Stewart ST130 G4? (Assuming I have one of the newer JVCs). And yes, I am a video enthusiast seeking the best picture quality I can afford.


----------



## Craig Peer

SED <--- Rules said:


> Hi everyone, I have a question and looking for an honest answer. About 10 years ago I bought a used Carada Brilliant White screen (110' 16:9) for about 800 bucks. So far I've been pretty happy with it and I'm still using it with an older JVC projector. I have a bat cave velvet room. I want to know how much of an improvement will I see with a Stewart ST130 G4? (Assuming I have one of the newer JVCs). And yes, I am a video enthusiast seeking the best picture quality I can afford.


Get a sample and compare them. PM me if you need one.


----------



## Technology3456

Does Stewart make floor rising models?


----------



## Stan-Lee

Technology3456 said:


> Does Stewart make floor rising models?


Not sure they are still making custom in the floor models. But there is the "AllRise" model with a small case for smaller applications and for larger applications, a much taller/larger case. AllRise - Stewart


----------



## DaViD Boulet

Hi all,

My new Stewart ST130 G4 arrives today... It's 2.40:1 and 138" diagonal and I'm thrilled to finally join the scope-screen-club. 

The projector is a JVC RS3100/NZ8 mounted in relatively "long throw" behind my back wall (about 21 feet away from the screen) and I won't be using an anamorphic lens (at least right now). As my current screen is a HiPower (2.8 gain) which is retro-reflective, the projector's shelf elevation is as low as it can be and still clear the heads of the 2nd row of guests... which means that the lens elevation is within the top 1/3 of the screen area (not lined up with the top of the screen and not above the screen). When seated in the front row (my preferred place to view with the better immersion) my eyes are just above the bottom of the screen. Now that I'm shifting to an angular-reflective screen (today!) I'm wondering if this elevation is optimal, or if I should consider raising the height of the projector to be closer to the top of the screen. Is there a rule-of-thumb? Like "hold a mirror in the middle of your screen and you want to be able to see the projector lens" or something like that?

Also... rather than fixed side panels that I have to take on/off for masking I'm thinking of motorized black velvet curtains for a continuously-variable horizontal masking solution. Any thoughts/tips?

Thanks all!

-Dave


----------



## Luis Gabriel Gerena

DaViD Boulet said:


> Hi all,
> 
> My new Stewart ST130 G4 arrives today... It's 2.40:1 and 138" diagonal and I'm thrilled to finally join the scope-screen-club.
> 
> The projector is a JVC RS3100/NZ8 mounted in relatively "long throw" behind my back wall (about 21 feet away from the screen) and I won't be using an anamorphic lens (at least right now). As my current screen is a HiPower (2.8 gain) which is retro-reflective, the projector's shelf elevation is as low as it can be and still clear the heads of the 2nd row of guests... which means that the lens elevation is within the top 1/3 of the screen area (not lined up with the top of the screen and not above the screen). When seated in the front row (my preferred place to view with the better immersion) my eyes are just above the bottom of the screen. Now that I'm shifting to an angular-reflective screen (today!) I'm wondering if this elevation is optimal, or if I should consider raising the height of the projector to be closer to the top of the screen. Is there a rule-of-thumb? Like "hold a mirror in the middle of your screen and you want to be able to see the projector lens" or something like that?
> 
> Also... rather than fixed side panels that I have to take on/off for masking I'm thinking of motorized black velvet curtains for a continuously-variable horizontal masking solution. Any thoughts/tips?
> 
> Thanks all!
> 
> -Dave


I always liked having my screen bottom third aligned with my eyes height from the floor.


----------



## DaViD Boulet

Luis Gabriel Gerena said:


> I always liked having my screen bottom third aligned with my eyes height from the floor.


Yeah agreed... and I'm not too far away from that right now. But regardless the screen mounting height can't be lowered any further because of the 2nd row of seating needing visibility. So what I'm really asking is what is the optimal height of the _projector_ in relationship to the screen (and given that my eyes are aligned to the bottom give or take a few inches)? I do have the flexibility to raise the projector another 18 inches or so if it would bring any benefits with brightness. I should note that I don't have the ability to freely experiment since this would involve cutting out new holes in the back wall etc. (which is why I'm hoping some folks in this thread may already know from experience if there might be an advantage).


----------



## Don Stewart

DaViD Boulet said:


> Hi all,
> 
> My new Stewart ST130 G4 arrives today... It's 2.40:1 and 138" diagonal and I'm thrilled to finally join the scope-screen-club.
> 
> The projector is a JVC RS3100/NZ8 mounted in relatively "long throw" behind my back wall (about 21 feet away from the screen) and I won't be using an anamorphic lens (at least right now). As my current screen is a HiPower (2.8 gain) which is retro-reflective, the projector's shelf elevation is as low as it can be and still clear the heads of the 2nd row of guests... which means that the lens elevation is within the top 1/3 of the screen area (not lined up with the top of the screen and not above the screen). When seated in the front row (my preferred place to view with the better immersion) my eyes are just above the bottom of the screen. Now that I'm shifting to an angular-reflective screen (today!) I'm wondering if this elevation is optimal, or if I should consider raising the height of the projector to be closer to the top of the screen. Is there a rule-of-thumb? Like "hold a mirror in the middle of your screen and you want to be able to see the projector lens" or something like that?
> 
> Also... rather than fixed side panels that I have to take on/off for masking I'm thinking of motorized black velvet curtains for a continuously-variable horizontal masking solution. Any thoughts/tips?
> 
> Thanks all!
> 
> -Dave


Since you have a long throw distance which is good in this case, nearly 2X screen width, the incident light rays exiting the lens will be more collimated than with most set ups. That said, before going to the trouble of relocating your PJ, I would first try viewing the screen image from your existing seats and then sitting on the floor to mimic the PJ position if it was located up at a higher elevation. Since ST130 has excellent image uniformity, the different will most likely be nominal to the "naked" eye. Anyway, give it a try and thank you for your purchase.

Best regards,
Don


----------



## DaViD Boulet

Don Stewart said:


> Since you have a long throw distance which is good in this case, nearly 2X screen width, the light rays exiting the lens will be more collimated than with most set ups. That said, before going to the trouble of relocating your PJ, I would first try viewing the screen image position from your existing seats and then sitting on the floor to mimic the PJ position if it was located up in a higher elevation. Since ST130 has excellent image uniformity, the different will most likely be nominal to the "naked" eye. Anyway, give it a try and thank you for your purchase.
> 
> Best regards,
> Don


Brilliant suggestion (changing my seating position ad-hoc to replicate the same angle of incidence as would result from raising the projector in order to easily test). Such a simple suggestion yet one that had completely eluded me. Much appreciated Don... and I can't wait to report back my overall impressions once the screen is installed (hopefully tonight). I've heard much praise for the G4 ST130... I'm expecting that soon my voice will be added to the chorus... 

Thanks!


----------



## Hoi

8 weeks after being ordered, I finally received my Luxus motorized 2.40 screen with the ST130G4 material. It was quite the chore to mount on the wall.

After inspection of the screen, I noticed that there is a small dimple present. Is it safe to assume that it will flatten out after some time if I leave it in the down position?


----------



## Don Stewart

Hoi said:


> 8 weeks after being ordered, I finally received my Luxus motorized 2.40 screen with the ST130G4 material. It was quite the core to mount on the wall.
> 
> After inspection of the screen, I noticed that there is a small dimple present. Is it safe to assume that it will flatten out after some time if I leave it in the down position?


More than likely, the small dimple is an impression from the packing paper that comes with the screen. The screen material has memory so the dimple should flatten out after hanging a few days at room temperature. If not, then please DM me.
Best Regards,
Don


----------



## Hoi

Don Stewart said:


> More than likely, the small dimple is an impression from the packing paper that comes with the screen. The screen material has memory so the dimple should flatten out after hanging a few days at room temperature. If not, then please DM me.
> Best Regards,
> Don


Thanks Don! I'm coming from a 0.8 gain AT screen to the ST130G4. The increase in brightness and clarity is tremendous, I love it! I have a 16:9 WallScreen 1.5 with the same material coming in 2 weeks to replace an old Carada and now know what to expect.


----------



## nakenergy

Finally received my Stewart 130G4 after 12 weeks. Patience pays! Wonderful screen - right from packing to materials and easy assembly! Once mounted, the colors, picture came to life. What a picture! Thanks Stewart for a great experience!


----------



## Don Stewart

Hoi said:


> Thanks Don! I'm coming from a 0.8 gain AT screen to the ST130G4. The increase in brightness and clarity is tremendous, I love it! I have a 16:9 WallScreen 1.5 with the same material coming in 2 weeks to replace an old Carada and now know what to expect.


Wow!... a double purchase! Are these screens going in the same room utilizing two different aspect ratios or in completely different theater rooms? Also, thank you for your purchase.

Best regards,
Don


----------



## Don Stewart

nakenergy said:


> Finally received my Stewart 130G4 after 12 weeks. Patience pays! Wonderful screen - right from packing to materials and easy assembly! Once mounted, the colors, picture came to life. What a picture! Thanks Stewart for a great experience!


I am very happy you are impressed with your new ST130 G4 screen, especially from a 20 year forum member such as yourself. That said, I take a lot of personal pride with the G4 reformulation as I quietly worked on the reformulation for many months without even the knowledge of most of my coworkers. Sometimes, I have found it is best not to present your work to the team until you really have something to show them. Anyway, thanks for choosing Studiotek 130 G4 as your new screen.

Best regards,
Don


----------



## Hoi

Don Stewart said:


> Wow!... a double purchase! Are these screens going in the same room utilizing two different aspect ratios or in completely different theater rooms? Also, thank you for your purchase.
> 
> Best regards,
> Don


It's a dual screen setup for my movie room. Maybe one day I'll get a 3rd screen for those pesky films/shows with 2.00 AR.


----------



## Craig Peer

Don Stewart said:


> Wow!... a double purchase! Are these screens going in the same room utilizing two different aspect ratios or in completely different theater rooms? Also, thank you for your purchase.
> 
> Best regards,
> Don


Dual screens is the bomb - especially if they are Stewart screens!


----------



## Hoi

Craig Peer said:


> Dual screens is the bomb - especially if they are Stewart screens!


I actual went with dual screens a couple of years ago after seeing your pictures, but with a different setup. I have a 16:9 fixed frame mounted on the wall, put up a 2x4 above that, and hung a 2.40 motorized screen over that. 

I have watched 3 UHD blu ray films on the 2.40 ST130G4 so far on my NX7 and RS500 projectors. Now that I have my new screens, if I was forced to sell my NX7/DCR lens combo and was only left with my RS500/no lens, I wouldn't be too upset.


----------



## Shinji Mikami

@Don Stewart where to buy a Stewart Screen in Europe (Spain)? Thank you,


----------



## Don Stewart

Shinji Mikami said:


> @Don Stewart where to buy a Stewart Screen in Europe (Spain)? Thank you,


Please contact Rune in our European office as listed below.
Best Regards,
Don

Rune S. Nielsen
P: +45 40 95 65 31
F: +1 310.326.6870
Email: [email protected]


----------



## kwenar

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Kwenar.
> The aluminum mill who extrudes our raw frame sections has given us a date of the end of July for us to receive the updated frame design extrusions. That said, I am keeping my fingers crossed that it ships as promised.
> Have a nice 4th of July!
> Don


Hi Don

Any updates on the progress of these new screens?

NFL starts soon and hoping to get one ordered soon, I have been harassing my local install company on ordering one but they say there is no info on model numbers to pre order one in advance

Thanks for your time


----------



## Don Stewart

kwenar said:


> Hi Don
> 
> Any updates on the progress of these new screens?
> 
> NFL starts soon and hoping to get one ordered soon, I have been harassing my local install company on ordering one but they say there is no info on model numbers to pre order one in advance
> 
> Thanks for your time


Hi Kwenar,
I just checked on it and the new frame extrusion should be at our facility this Friday or Monday. Please have your dealer contact Diana Ha at Stewart, ext 108, and ask for the new *2.5 UST frame* as she has been close to the project.

Best Regards,
Don


----------



## kwenar

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Kwenar,
> I just checked on it and the new frame extrusion should be at our facility this Friday or Monday. Please have your dealer contact Diana Ha at Stewart, ext 108, and ask for the new *2.5 UST frame* as she has been close to the project.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Don


Awesome thanks so much!! I will pass this along today so I can get one preordered ASAP. Cant wait to get one of these in my theatre.


----------



## soundnew

Is it possible to split the long side of the wallscreen 2.5 into two pieces to be able to fit it through a relatively narrow hallway?


----------



## Wendell R. Breland

For Don Stewart or anyone that knows about the 33.5 inch EZ Mount Bracket: What is the distance from the center of the screw hole to the top of the bracket? Overall height of the bracket? Could not find this info on the Stewart site.


----------



## fredworld

Wendell R. Breland said:


> For Don Stewart or anyone that knows about the 33.5 inch EZ Mount Bracket: What is the distance from the center of the screw hole to the top of the bracket? Overall height of the bracket? Could not find this info on the Stewart site.


I don't know if this will help but here's a photo of the EZ Mount on my screen wall before hanging the screen. I had to mount them on 2x4's so that the screen would clear the doorway frame (that leads to a storage room) so I could maximize the width of the screen. Unfortunately for you, I didn't measure the screw hole centers to the bracket's top but I'm sure it's a matter of an inch or so.


----------



## Don Stewart

Wendell R. Breland said:


> For Don Stewart or anyone that knows about the 33.5 inch EZ Mount Bracket: What is the distance from the center of the screw hole to the top of the bracket? Overall height of the bracket? Could not find this info on the Stewart site.


Off the top of my head I do not recall. I will check when I am back in Monday.


----------



## jdsutt1

Hi Friends,

I have a few questions about light reflections behind acoustically transparent screens that I’m hoping you can help answer as this forum has been incredibly helpful with our other purchases. We recently purchased a Stewart 130 G4 acoustically transparent screen from a local dealer that’s turned out to be more focused on commercial installations than residential and they haven’t been very knowledgeable when it comes to questions about this specific screen or maker. We also tried contacting Stewart through their web inquiry on the 29th of July with questions but never received a response there either and I’m trying to sort a few things out before a new calibrator comes out in a few weeks. We have a fair amount of light reflecting off the speakers behind the screen (pic attached showing the apple photos logo on the Apple TV with the reflection…and I have videos I can share that might paint a better picture as this continues in a horizontal line as you pan and also shows up in other areas as you change seats in the home theater) and we’re trying to figure out if this is to be expected or if this is a flaw with the specific screen or the install. This is our first time using an acoustically transparent screen (our last screen was the Silver Ticket standard screen recommended by wire cutter) and so far we’re pretty frustrated with the comparative performance (which is a shock considering the price difference) but we’re trying to be realistic with our expectations. From most viewing areas you’re able to see the reflections from the speakers behind the screen and a big part of the selling point behind this screen and material was that we were told that Stewart customizes the screen to match your specific projector model to create the perfect image. 








Check out the bottom left of the apple photos app for reference in the photo. A few questions: 1. Are these types of reflections just part of what’s to be expected when using acoustically transparent screens? 2. Could something be off with the installation or something we could fix when the calibrator comes out next month? 3. Are there any best practices for reducing reflections? We have painted everything behind the screen black but the revel speakers have black glossy cabinets so I’m betting that’s what’s catching the light. We’re just concerned that this much is making its way back through.

Thanks I’m advance for any help,
Jason


----------



## fredworld

jdsutt1 said:


> Hi Friends,
> 
> I have a few questions about light reflections behind acoustically transparent screens that I’m hoping you can help answer as this forum has been incredibly helpful with our other purchases. We recently purchased a Stewart 130 G4 acoustically transparent screen from a local dealer that’s turned out to be more focused on commercial installations than residential and they haven’t been very knowledgeable when it comes to questions about this specific screen or maker. We also tried contacting Stewart through their web inquiry on the 29th of July with questions but never received a response there either and I’m trying to sort a few things out before a new calibrator comes out in a few weeks. We have a fair amount of light reflecting off the speakers behind the screen (pic attached showing the apple photos logo on the Apple TV with the reflection…and I have videos I can share that might paint a better picture as this continues in a horizontal line as you pan and also shows up in other areas as you change seats in the home theater) and we’re trying to figure out if this is to be expected or if this is a flaw with the specific screen or the install. This is our first time using an acoustically transparent screen (our last screen was the Silver Ticket standard screen recommended by wire cutter) and so far we’re pretty frustrated with the comparative performance (which is a shock considering the price difference) but we’re trying to be realistic with our expectations. From most viewing areas you’re able to see the reflections from the speakers behind the screen and a big part of the selling point behind this screen and material was that we were told that Stewart customizes the screen to match your specific projector model to create the perfect image.
> View attachment 3318221
> 
> Check out the bottom left of the apple photos app for reference in the photo. A few questions: 1. Are these types of reflections just part of what’s to be expected when using acoustically transparent screens? 2. Could something be off with the installation or something we could fix when the calibrator comes out next month? 3. Are there any best practices for reducing reflections? We have painted everything behind the screen black but the revel speakers have black glossy cabinets so I’m betting that’s what’s catching the light. We’re just concerned that this much is making its way back through.
> 
> Thanks I’m advance for any help,
> Jason


I suggest that you call Stewart. I've had excellent advice by phone from July Lopez. He knows the Stewart screens very well.
Also, you should drape your speaker cabinets with black material.


----------



## djn2004

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Kwenar,
> I just checked on it and the new frame extrusion should be at our facility this Friday or Monday. Please have your dealer contact Diana Ha at Stewart, ext 108, and ask for the new *2.5 UST frame* as she has been close to the project.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Don


Are there any pictures of the new screen frame? Would love to see it in action with a UST with the halo effect.


----------



## Don Stewart

jdsutt1 said:


> Hi Friends,
> 
> I have a few questions about light reflections behind acoustically transparent screens that I’m hoping you can help answer as this forum has been incredibly helpful with our other purchases. We recently purchased a Stewart 130 G4 acoustically transparent screen from a local dealer that’s turned out to be more focused on commercial installations than residential and they haven’t been very knowledgeable when it comes to questions about this specific screen or maker. We also tried contacting Stewart through their web inquiry on the 29th of July with questions but never received a response there either and I’m trying to sort a few things out before a new calibrator comes out in a few weeks. We have a fair amount of light reflecting off the speakers behind the screen (pic attached showing the apple photos logo on the Apple TV with the reflection…and I have videos I can share that might paint a better picture as this continues in a horizontal line as you pan and also shows up in other areas as you change seats in the home theater) and we’re trying to figure out if this is to be expected or if this is a flaw with the specific screen or the install. This is our first time using an acoustically transparent screen (our last screen was the Silver Ticket standard screen recommended by wire cutter) and so far we’re pretty frustrated with the comparative performance (which is a shock considering the price difference) but we’re trying to be realistic with our expectations. From most viewing areas you’re able to see the reflections from the speakers behind the screen and a big part of the selling point behind this screen and material was that we were told that Stewart customizes the screen to match your specific projector model to create the perfect image.
> View attachment 3318221
> 
> Check out the bottom left of the apple photos app for reference in the photo. A few questions: 1. Are these types of reflections just part of what’s to be expected when using acoustically transparent screens? 2. Could something be off with the installation or something we could fix when the calibrator comes out next month? 3. Are there any best practices for reducing reflections? We have painted everything behind the screen black but the revel speakers have black glossy cabinets so I’m betting that’s what’s catching the light. We’re just concerned that this much is making its way back through.
> 
> Thanks I’m advance for any help,
> Jason


Thank you for your purchase. I am having a difucult time interpreting your photos above but I do see some white light areas that look like a refection. Not knowing what type of speaker you have, here are a few suggestions. If you have chrome type dome tweeters, they can reflect light back similar to a mirror and are the usual first suspects. The method to remedy is to take a black "Marks-A-Lot" felt pen and gently black out the tweeter so it will not reflect. Since it sounds like your speaker(s) cabinets are finished in a high gloss piano type finish, you can add a black felt to front of the cabinet without covering the speakers, Other options would be take a piece of cardboard, just a little larger than your speaker, cut out holes for speakers, paint cardboard flat Matte Black and then place in front of the speaker cabinet to mask out high glass cabinet face. The last option is to purchase some clear photo Flat Matte finishing spray and front of cabinet which will dull the high gloss finish. I have seen this technique used on movie sets when a prop is reflecting light directly back to the camera.


https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/34937-REG/Sureguard_SU_931_UV_Matte_Special_Spray.html


----------



## Hawks07

jdsutt1 said:


> Hi Friends,
> 
> I have a few questions about light reflections behind acoustically transparent screens that I’m hoping you can help answer as this forum has been incredibly helpful with our other purchases. We recently purchased a Stewart 130 G4 acoustically transparent screen from a local dealer that’s turned out to be more focused on commercial installations than residential and they haven’t been very knowledgeable when it comes to questions about this specific screen or maker. We also tried contacting Stewart through their web inquiry on the 29th of July with questions but never received a response there either and I’m trying to sort a few things out before a new calibrator comes out in a few weeks. We have a fair amount of light reflecting off the speakers behind the screen (pic attached showing the apple photos logo on the Apple TV with the reflection…and I have videos I can share that might paint a better picture as this continues in a horizontal line as you pan and also shows up in other areas as you change seats in the home theater) and we’re trying to figure out if this is to be expected or if this is a flaw with the specific screen or the install. This is our first time using an acoustically transparent screen (our last screen was the Silver Ticket standard screen recommended by wire cutter) and so far we’re pretty frustrated with the comparative performance (which is a shock considering the price difference) but we’re trying to be realistic with our expectations. From most viewing areas you’re able to see the reflections from the speakers behind the screen and a big part of the selling point behind this screen and material was that we were told that Stewart customizes the screen to match your specific projector model to create the perfect image.
> View attachment 3318221
> 
> Check out the bottom left of the apple photos app for reference in the photo. A few questions: 1. Are these types of reflections just part of what’s to be expected when using acoustically transparent screens? 2. Could something be off with the installation or something we could fix when the calibrator comes out next month? 3. Are there any best practices for reducing reflections? We have painted everything behind the screen black but the revel speakers have black glossy cabinets so I’m betting that’s what’s catching the light. We’re just concerned that this much is making its way back through.
> 
> Thanks I’m advance for any help,
> Jason


If it is the glossy cabinet reflecting you could just get some velvet and wrap the cabinets with it.

Edit: Sorry, saw that fredworld beat me to it.


----------



## Don Stewart

Don Stewart said:


> Off the top of my head I do not recall. I will check when I am back in Monday.


Hi Wendell,
The wall mounted part of the rail is 2" high. The mounting hole is 1.5" from the top of rail to the center-line of the hole. Hope this helps.
Best Regards
Don


----------



## Wendell R. Breland

Don Stewart said:


> Hi Wendell,
> The wall mounted part of the rail is 2" high. The mounting hole is 1.5" from the top of rail to the center-line of the hole. Hope this helps.
> Best Regards
> Don


Thanks Don. I plan to mount the screen 8" out from the wall using steel brackets (rated for 130 lbs each) and two pieces of 1 x 4 x 9 foot lumber (one top, one bottom). I do this because my center channel is behind the screen. Planed purchase is StudioTek 130 G4 Microperf X² with a view size 54" H x 127" W. Need the 9 foot because the U-Channel Bracket is only 16" from the end.

I like to have my drawings and materials available before screen purchase is made.


----------



## jdsutt1

fredworld said:


> I suggest that you call Stewart. I've had excellent advice by phone from July Lopez. He knows the Stewart screens very well.
> Also, you should drape your speaker cabinets with black material.


Thank you! I'll give the black material a shot!


----------



## jdsutt1

Don Stewart said:


> Thank you for your purchase. I am having a difucult time interpreting your photos above but I do see some white light areas that look like a refection. Not knowing what type of speaker you have, here are a few suggestions. If you have chrome type dome tweeters, they can reflect light back similar to a mirror and are the usual first suspects. The method to remedy is to take a black "Marks-A-Lot" felt pen and gently black out the tweeter so it will not reflect. Since it sounds like your speaker(s) cabinets are finished in a high gloss piano type finish, you can add a black felt to front of the cabinet without covering the speakers, Other options would be take a piece of cardboard, just a little larger than your speaker, cut out holes for speakers, paint cardboard flat Matte Black and then place in front of the speaker cabinet to mask out high glass cabinet face. The last option is to purchase some clear photo Flat Matte finishing spray and front of cabinet which will dull the high gloss finish. I have seen this technique used on movie sets when a prop is reflecting light directly back to the camera.
> 
> 
> https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/34937-REG/Sureguard_SU_931_UV_Matte_Special_Spray.html
> 
> 
> View attachment 3318496


Thank you, Don. I'll start by giving the fabric a shot to see if that takes care of it. It sounds like the cabinets are the culprit


----------



## Don Stewart

djn2004 said:


> Are there any pictures of the new screen frame? Would love to see it in action with a UST with the halo effect.


Our newly designed UST extrusion was suppose to be delivered not later than yesterday. The trucking company advised that the load was stuck in their depot in San Bernardino, CA and they have a labor shortage of short haul delivery drivers. They cave us a new ETA of end of this week. (Yep, this is the kind of stuff, plus other issues, that manufacturing firms been having to deal with almost daily in this post pandemic economy.)


----------



## Don Stewart

Wendell R. Breland said:


> Thanks Don. I plan to mount the screen 8" out from the wall using steel brackets (rated for 130 lbs each) and two pieces of 1 x 4 x 9 foot lumber (one top, one bottom). I do this because my center channel is behind the screen. Planed purchase is StudioTek 130 G4 Microperf X² with a view size 54" H x 127" W. Need the 9 foot because the U-Channel Bracket is only 16" from the end.
> 
> I like to have my drawings and materials available before screen purchase is made.


Thanks Wendell. Please take some photos of your extension brackets and horizontal wood rails once installed on your wall. This would be helpful to other members here in the future. Thank you.
Regards,
Don


----------



## kwenar

Don Stewart said:


> Our newly designed UST extrusion was suppose to be delivered not later than yesterday. The trucking company advised that the load was stuck in their depot in San Bernardino, CA and they have a labor shortage of short haul delivery drivers. They cave us a new ETA of end of this week. (Yep, this is the kind of stuff, plus other issues, that manufacturing firms been having to deal with almost daily in this post pandemic economy.)


Looks like I won’t be able to try out this new screen because I can’t find anyone in Canada that sells Stewart screens anymore. My install companies supplier that did went under recently. So unless Stewart is willing to sell me one direct I am out of luck.
I think I am going to have to sell my projector and start over with a ceiling mount one.


----------



## asharma

kwenar said:


> Looks like I won’t be able to try out this new screen because I can’t find anyone in Canada that sells Stewart screens anymore. My install companies supplier that did went under recently. So unless Stewart is willing to sell me one direct I am out of luck.
> I think I am going to have to sell my projector and start over with a ceiling mount one.


The Watershed Group in Canada is the Canadian distributor…


----------



## Don Stewart

kwenar said:


> Looks like I won’t be able to try out this new screen because I can’t find anyone in Canada that sells Stewart screens anymore. My install companies supplier that did went under recently. So unless Stewart is willing to sell me one direct I am out of luck.
> I think I am going to have to sell my projector and start over with a ceiling mount one.


As mentioned above by Asharma, please contact the Watershed Group.
*The Watershed Group*
402A-10 Abbott Court
Brantford, ON N3S0E7 Canada
888-253-1207
[email protected]


----------



## kwenar

Don Stewart said:


> As mentioned above by Asharma, please contact the Watershed Group.
> *The Watershed Group*
> 402A-10 Abbott Court
> Brantford, ON N3S0E7 Canada
> 888-253-1207
> [email protected]


Thanks Don

I did end up contacting them this morning but left the conversation more confused than ever. The gentleman I spoke with says that UST screens are not supposed to be ALR. This confuses me because every single website I go to when you select UST screens has ALR properties. Either than entire marketing of these screens by every company manufacturing is incorrect or your Canadian distribution company is incorrect and to be completely honest this makes me apprehensive in wanting to deal with them further.
The gentleman was super nice and took the time to speak with me even though I am not a dealer but I found this very odd.
I have literally done hundreds of hours reading forums and online reviews about these UST pjs and screens so I am at a loss right now of what to believe.
I get that maybe you don’t 100% need ALR but wouldn’t it make for a better experience than a non ALR version. Especially when I don’t want to watch in complete darkness at all times.

As an example projectorscreen.com sells pretty much only ALR screens when you go to the UST section to purchase. The only non ALR you can even purchase is the Stewart that uses the greymatte70 material

Don or anyone else on here can you maybe clear up why a distributor would tell me this?

this seems to contradict every thing I have read and researched

This article goes over the properties of UST screens in great detail and lists ALR as a main feature of UST screens 



https://www.projectorscreen.com/projector-screens/special-features/www.projectorscreen.com


----------



## [email protected]

kwenar said:


> Thanks Don
> 
> I did end up contacting them this morning but left the conversation more confused than ever. The gentleman I spoke with says that UST screens are not supposed to be ALR. This confuses me because every single website I go to when you select UST screens has ALR properties. Either than entire marketing of these screens by every company manufacturing is incorrect or your Canadian distribution company is incorrect and to be completely honest this makes me apprehensive in wanting to deal with them further.
> The gentleman was super nice and took the time to speak with me even though I am not a dealer but I found this very odd.
> I have literally done hundreds of hours reading forums and online reviews about these UST pjs and screens so I am at a loss right now of what to believe.
> I get that maybe you don’t 100% need ALR but wouldn’t it make for a better experience than a non ALR version. Especially when I don’t want to watch in complete darkness at all times.
> 
> As an example projectorscreen.com sells pretty much only ALR screens when you go to the UST section to purchase. The only non ALR you can even purchase is the Stewart that uses the greymatte70 material
> 
> Don or anyone else on here can you maybe clear up why a distributor would tell me this?
> 
> this seems to contradict every thing I have read and researched
> 
> This article goes over the properties of UST screens in great detail and lists ALR as a main feature of UST screens
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.projectorscreen.com/projector-screens/special-features/www.projectorscreen.com





kwenar said:


> Thanks Don
> 
> I did end up contacting them this morning but left the conversation more confused than ever. The gentleman I spoke with says that UST screens are not supposed to be ALR. This confuses me because every single website I go to when you select UST screens has ALR properties. Either than entire marketing of these screens by every company manufacturing is incorrect or your Canadian distribution company is incorrect and to be completely honest this makes me apprehensive in wanting to deal with them further.
> The gentleman was super nice and took the time to speak with me even though I am not a dealer but I found this very odd.
> I have literally done hundreds of hours reading forums and online reviews about these UST pjs and screens so I am at a loss right now of what to believe.
> I get that maybe you don’t 100% need ALR but wouldn’t it make for a better experience than a non ALR version. Especially when I don’t want to watch in complete darkness at all times.
> 
> As an example projectorscreen.com sells pretty much only ALR screens when you go to the UST section to purchase. The only non ALR you can even purchase is the Stewart that uses the greymatte70 material
> 
> Don or anyone else on here can you maybe clear up why a distributor would tell me this?
> 
> this seems to contradict every thing I have read and researched
> 
> This article goes over the properties of UST screens in great detail and lists ALR as a main feature of UST screens
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.projectorscreen.com/projector-screens/special-features/www.projectorscreen.com


Hi Kwenar,

My name is Adrian Silva and I am the Vice President of Sales at Stewart Filmscreen. I want to apologize for the confusion here and will clear the air. We do offer several materials for UST projectors. The reason is each application is different (obviously). In your case, we do have an ALR UST available. Please e-mail me ([email protected]) so I can send you full details. Thank you and I look forward to your e-mail.


----------



## cricket9998

kwenar said:


> Thanks Don
> 
> I did end up contacting them this morning but left the conversation more confused than ever. The gentleman I spoke with says that UST screens are not supposed to be ALR. This confuses me because every single website I go to when you select UST screens has ALR properties. Either than entire marketing of these screens by every company manufacturing is incorrect or your Canadian distribution company is incorrect and to be completely honest this makes me apprehensive in wanting to deal with them further.
> The gentleman was super nice and took the time to speak with me even though I am not a dealer but I found this very odd.
> I have literally done hundreds of hours reading forums and online reviews about these UST pjs and screens so I am at a loss right now of what to believe.
> I get that maybe you don’t 100% need ALR but wouldn’t it make for a better experience than a non ALR version. Especially when I don’t want to watch in complete darkness at all times.
> 
> As an example projectorscreen.com sells pretty much only ALR screens when you go to the UST section to purchase. The only non ALR you can even purchase is the Stewart that uses the greymatte70 material
> 
> Don or anyone else on here can you maybe clear up why a distributor would tell me this?
> 
> this seems to contradict every thing I have read and researched
> 
> This article goes over the properties of UST screens in great detail and lists ALR as a main feature of UST screens
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.projectorscreen.com/projector-screens/special-features/www.projectorscreen.com


you just need special UST compatible material and coating for ALR screens. Off the shelf alr will not work. I know Stewart makes a material specific for UST for sure. You also don’t need alr screen if you don’t need alr. Any flat white 1.0 gain screens will work fine if you have a light controlled room. Although most people who use UST projectors don’t typically have that, otherwise they would just have a standard throw projector.


----------



## kwenar

[email protected] said:


> Hi Kwenar,
> 
> My name is Adrian Silva and I am the Vice President of Sales at Stewart Filmscreen. I want to apologize for the confusion here and will clear the air. We do offer several materials for UST projectors. The reason is each application is different (obviously). In your case, we do have an ALR UST available. Please e-mail me ([email protected]) so I can send you full details. Thank you and I look forward to your e-mail.


Thanks so much for taking the time to respond.

I emailed you this afternoon and look forward to figuring this out and getting a screen soon


----------



## kwenar

cricket9998 said:


> you just need special UST compatible material and coating for ALR screens. Off the shelf alr will not work. I know Stewart makes a material specific for UST for sure. You also don’t need alr screen if you don’t need alr. Any flat white 1.0 gain screens will work fine if you have a light controlled room. Although most people who use UST projectors don’t typically have that, otherwise they would just have a standard throw projector.


Yeah I have overhead lights and don't want to watch in the dark all the time.

I have people over to watch NFL during the season and it would be weird to be in dark room when having a bunch of people over for a get together.

Stewart has a few options for UST but for a thicker bezel with ALR they currently don't until they release this new 2.5 bezel unless you count the Greymatte70's 38% ALR as true ALR. I want one of their higher % ALR versions like the Blackhawk which is over 80% so I can still enjoy it with lights on.

When you go to pretty much any site to purchase a UST screen of any brand such as projectorscreen.com they don't even list non ALR as an option at all so that must be for a reason is my point of why I posted this earlier. If non ALR materials were so common then why is it they are all listed as ALR except the odd model?

Seemed odd to me to have someone tell me that today.


----------



## BrolicBeast

OUR ENDGAME SCREEN ON THE WAY!!! DIRECTOR'S CHOICE!!!


----------



## Wendell R. Breland

Don Stewart said:


> Thanks Wendell. Please take some photos of your extension brackets and horizontal wood rails once installed on your wall. This would be helpful to other members here in the future.


Will do pictures when finished. Attached is a PDF of my plans. May have to adjust the bottom bracket some because I do not have dimension info for the puck and magnet but my drawing should be close.


----------



## Don Stewart

This week, we have had the privilege of hosting the three day ISF calibration training for AV industry professionals at our facilities and factory here in Torrance CA. We also gave the attendees a full factory tour so they could witness how are our screen materials are made, plus observe our vast capabilities of metal work we can do for both highly custom and standard framing, plus retractable screens and masking systems. It is great that the pandemic restrictions have been lifted and we can now have group gatherings again at Stewart Filmscreen. The ISF instructor is Jason Dustal, accompanied by Dustin Stuntebeck who is a VP at Murideo.

ISF Attendees in Stewart's training classroom.









The ISF trainers were elated that they could take advantage our fully blackened " BATCAVE" in our Optical Screen Lab for student hands on calibrating training.. They have never had the luxury working in a pitch black room before in prior trainings.









Students working in the lab.


----------



## SJHT

I’ve asked before, but time to ask again…. I really need a retractable WALL mounted screen WITH top masking! A ceiling mounted version is not ideal. Have a DIY masking system that works pretty well, but would like to replace at some point. Will wait another year before asking again.  Thanks! My current Stewart 16:9 ST100 system with masking down….


----------



## Jive821

For Don… I am interested in moving up to your Studiotek 130 g4. My left and right speakers are in wall and would be located behind the screen. My current screen, Seymour xd currently lies over the speakers. Is it correct that you are recommending 12 inches of space between the screen and the speakers for the microperf x2? I’m not sure how to accomplish that?


----------



## etherealsound

BrolicBeast said:


> OUR ENDGAME SCREEN ON THE WAY!!! DIRECTOR'S CHOICE!!!


That is awesome, how big is the screen?


----------



## HTRaleigh

I’ve been a Stewart ST 130 owner for 25 years since I first got into home theater in 1997. I was active in AVS under a different screen name for years but decided to change my screen name with the change in residence location. I used that first ST130 screen with Sony D50, G70 and G90 CRTs as I moved up to higher PQ. About 4 years ago I relocated and moved into an existing home with a once incredible award winning theater that needed updates. Two years ago I started the process and went with scope screen ST130 Gen4. I love it. With a Kris Deering calibration on my JVC RS3000, Panamorph DCR lens and a Lumagen Radiance Pro I’ve been ecstatic about the PQ. I did install Revel c763L Atmos speakers and upgraded the audio processor and added more outboard amplification but left the speakers in the 7 main channels as they were in phase 1.

However, I’ve recently decided it is time for Phase 2. I need to update my system audio and want to convert to an AT screen with high end in-wall speakers. This past weekend I attended the outstanding Audio Advice Live show in Raleigh, NC. I got to talk to experts including Adrian Silva from Stewart and JVC and Harman technical gurus and several installers and calibrators.
My key learnings were:

1) Since I’m used to the amazing performance of a Stewart ST130 G4 that any move to any brand of woven screen would be visually disappointing due to light drop. I’m not yet ready to buy the RS4100/NZ9 so my amazing RS3000 will have to do for a while.

2) The age old rule of thumb about keeping a microperf screen 8-12” from the speakers is not a hard and fast rule. With todays room correction software most people that are spending at this level will have the capability to seamlessly EQ the upper frequencies via Dirac, ARC or Trinnov Optimizer to eliminate any concern with high frequency attenuation.

3)The next “aha” was that horn based compression drivers actually perform better when very close to the screen material can at the “rule of thumb” distance.. The JBL Synthesis calibration gurus that certify full Synthesis systems always put their speakers close to the fabric to get the best result This goes for microperf and woven materials. Traditional dome drivers do not work as well when being that close to a microperf but compression drivers with a full horn work very well. In fact I was told that SCL-2s work great as close as you can get them to the screen.

These revelations are huge in my use case. I wanted a path to keep the quality of a ST130 screen but go Microperfs but was afraid that might not be feasible given the old rule of thumb. Now I’ll just get replacement fabric for my existing Stewart frame. I was also considering JBL SCL in wall speakers among a couple of other brands and now I know those will perform very well without moving my screen position. Finally, since I can keep the screen where it is I will not have to remount my projector 8-12” back. The only remaining possible issue will be whether I can see the perfs in real movie content from my 10.5’ primary viewing location. The other two rows will be fine and they will all get much better sound with audio projecting on a higher plane from behind the screen. If I can see the perfs in movie content I can move that front row back 12-18.”

I’ve seen many people over the years struggle with these issues but now it seems that most of the trade-offs can be mitigated or in practice no longer exist. These findings compare favorably to Don Stewart’s posts on this topic within this thread so I wanted to reinforce those. He has shown a frequency chart that shows 1.5-3 db attenuation that is relatively flat and very easy to EQ. He has mentioned that he had been told that horn style tweeter/midrange drivers do better than traditional dome style in a microperf screen and most recently he said that most installers are putting screens only 2-3 “ away for all speaker types. If you hear that you must go woven or have speakers 8-12” behind the screen there is hope. I think for several reasons that no longer applies. You can have or keep outstanding PQ and have awesome Audio.


----------



## sandyj

I am looking towards some similar just wondering what stewart offer for a Micro perf variable side masking scope screen 135" diag approx that's sort of affordable. I currently have a ST130 G4 screen 16x9 solid screen and its amazing but started looking for AT now would like to move the speakers behind the screen possibly using SLC-2 or 4's.


----------



## HTRaleigh

Stewart makes a great masking system but it is very expensive. When I install the SCL2 speakers I will use the 16/9 footprint within my 2.4:1 screen just like John Schuermann did in the Official JBL Synthesis/Revel thread. This opens up options for manual masking too. He claims that the soundstage is so wide he isn’t missing anything by not pushing the Left and Right channels to the full scope screen dimensions.


----------



## Don Stewart

HTRaleigh said:


> I’ve been a Stewart ST 130 owner for 25 years since I first got into home theater in 1997. I was active in AVS under a different screen name for years but decided to change my screen name with the change in residence location. I used that first ST130 screen with Sony D50, G70 and G90 CRTs as I moved up to higher PQ. About 4 years ago I relocated and moved into an existing home with a once incredible award winning theater that needed updates. Two years ago I started the process and went with scope screen ST130 Gen4. I love it. With a Kris Deering calibration on my JVC RS3000, Panamorph DCR lens and a Lumagen Radiance Pro I’ve been ecstatic about the PQ. I did install Revel c763L Atmos speakers and upgraded the audio processor and added more outboard amplification but left the speakers in the 7 main channels as they were in phase 1.
> 
> However, I’ve recently decided it is time for Phase 2. I need to update my system audio and want to convert to an AT screen with high end in-wall speakers. This past weekend I attended the outstanding Audio Advice Live show in Raleigh, NC. I got to talk to experts including Adrian Silva from Stewart and JVC and Harman technical gurus and several installers and calibrators.
> My key learnings were:
> 
> 1) Since I’m used to the amazing performance of a Stewart ST130 G4 that any move to any brand of woven screen would be visually disappointing due to light drop. I’m not yet ready to buy the RS4100/NZ9 so my amazing RS3000 will have to do for a while.
> 
> 2) The age old rule of thumb about keeping a microperf screen 8-12” from the speakers is not a hard and fast rule. With todays room correction software most people that are spending at this level will have the capability to seamlessly EQ the upper frequencies via Dirac, ARC or Trinnov Optimizer to eliminate any concern with high frequency attenuation.
> 
> 3)The next “aha” was that horn based compression drivers actually perform better when very close to the screen material can at the “rule of thumb” distance.. The JBL Synthesis calibration gurus that certify full Synthesis systems always put their speakers close to the fabric to get the best result This goes for microperf and woven materials. Traditional dome drivers do not work as well when being that close to a microperf but compression drivers with a full horn work very well. In fact I was told that SCL-2s work great as close as you can get them to the screen.
> 
> These revelations are huge in my use case. I wanted a path to keep the quality of a ST130 screen but go Microperfs but was afraid that might not be feasible given the old rule of thumb. Now I’ll just get replacement fabric for my existing Stewart frame. I was also considering JBL SCL in wall speakers among a couple of other brands and now I know those will perform very well without moving my screen position. Finally, since I can keep the screen where it is I will not have to remount my projector 8-12” back. The only remaining possible issue will be whether I can see the perfs in real movie content from my 10.5’ primary viewing location. The other two rows will be fine and they will all get much better sound with audio projecting on a higher plane from behind the screen. If I can see the perfs in movie content I can move that front row back 12-18.”
> 
> I’ve seen many people over the years struggle with these issues but now it seems that most of the trade-offs can be mitigated or in practice no longer exist. These findings compare favorably to Don Stewart’s posts on this topic within this thread so I wanted to reinforce those. He has shown a frequency chart that shows 1.5-3 db attenuation that is relatively flat and very easy to EQ. He has mentioned that he had been told that horn style tweeter/midrange drivers do better than traditional dome style in a microperf screen and most recently he said that most installers are putting screens only 2-3 “ away for all speaker types. If you hear that you must go woven or have speakers 8-12” behind the screen there is hope. I think for several reasons that no longer applies. You can have or keep outstanding PQ and have awesome Audio.


Thanks for taking the time of your well written post above IMO. The key to getting the best sound through AT screen materials is to spread the upper mids and HF over a larger section of the back of the screen material such as horn designs do.
To add to the story, a few years back I was frustrated by this and started sketching different speaker design concepts for mid priced dedicated behind the screen speakers that would allow for better HF distribution over a larger area of the back of the screen. I think I have over a half dozen different design concepts. Being an optical guy, not an audio engineer, I was just getting ready to bring in audio engineer consultants to run my ideas past them. But at that same time, I mentioned to my wife that I was thinking about a start up a stand alone speaker company. She then went ballistic, saying I was going to make her a widow as I already spend enough time and energy doing what I do. So that project is now off the table. Happy wife, happy life as the saying goes.
One of my many concept sketches below.


----------



## scottyb

Hello Don,

In reading HTRaliegh's post, it seems as though you can put speakers closer than before to a Microperf? 

As in, could we put these IN-Walls behind the Microperf and do a regular wall mount?






MartinLogan | Tribute 5XW







www.martinlogan.com





Thanks Don!!

Scott


----------



## HTRaleigh

I’m not Don, but I plan to mount JBL SCL2 behind my EZ Mount screen. As it was explained to me, the depth of the horn driver provides needed distance from the screen and the large horn itself funnels that sound through a large section of perforations. This is one reason that standard flush mounted dome drivers need more space to the screen. So I think the speaker type makes a difference in how close you can go.


----------



## FenceMan

FenceMan said:


> Its been about 6 weeks and wrinkles haven't completely disappeared (better but not perfect) so I want to try the hair dryer. How long should I heat it up before letting it cool? Are we talking a minute of hairdryer moving around the area or 5 minutes? Can this be done to the front of the screen with it hanging or do I have to do it from the backside? Last thing I want to do is ruin my screen, thanks in advance. Also would it be better / safer to lock it in a small room with vent open and heat full blast for a couple of hours instead?


Ok I am over 6 months in with screen installed and my wrinkles are still not 100% gone (recap I bought used and was packed no so well). Is it possible these will continue to work themselves out or am I basically stuck with where they are? *Not* complaining just asking.


----------



## fredworld

FenceMan said:


> Ok I am over 6 months in with screen installed and my wrinkles are still not 100% gone (recap I bought used and was packed no so well). Is it possible these will continue to work themselves out or am I basically stuck with where they are? *Not* complaining just asking.


I suspect that they'll work themselves out if left alone. *See this post*.
Or *go here* to skip my comment.


----------



## scottyb

FenceMan said:


> Ok I am over 6 months in with screen installed and my wrinkles are still not 100% gone (recap I bought used and was packed no so well). Is it possible these will continue to work themselves out or am I basically stuck with where they are? *Not* complaining just asking.


Have you tried a hairdryer? And I'm not joking. Maybe start on a low temp and keep an eye on it as you move up in temperature.


----------



## VikingBoy

Any recommendations for acoustic treatment to Put behind a 135" Stewart 130 G4 screen and JBL SCL speakers when mounting as closely as possible? What's the tipping point between absorbency and screen distance? 0.25", 1", 2" 4"?


----------



## Don Stewart

scottyb said:


> Hello Don,
> 
> In reading HTRaliegh's post, it seems as though you can put speakers closer than before to a Microperf?
> 
> As in, could we put these IN-Walls behind the Microperf and do a regular wall mount?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MartinLogan | Tribute 5XW
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.martinlogan.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks Don!!
> 
> Scott


Hi Scott,
I am not personlly familiar will all the in-wall speaker lines that are available today but I would suggest doing a little research to find a model with a HF horn for reasons mentioned in previous postings. Also, If you are planning to have a sonic processor as HTRaliegh mentioned in previous post, you can pretty much flaten out the EQ curve and be happy with the end results.
Best regards,
Don


----------



## Cg078

Hi guys,

i just installed my awesome 133”Stewart screen with electronic vertical mask. I have a quick question, when playing movies on Kaleidescape is there a way to setup an auto trigger for the masks to come down when it detects a 16:9 ratio? I have a cinescope screen and I run that natively. I hope I worded the question correctly.
I guess what I’m asking is do I need to manually turn on the masking when switching aspect ratios? I could have sworn I saw some systems do it automatically.
Any insight would be much appreciated thank you


----------



## Ellebob

You can do it with various control systems (IP/RS-232), I don't think there is a way to interface the Stewart controller with kaleidoscope directly.


----------



## Ricoflashback

Hi Don - 

Maybe covered before but the UST market is a fast growing segment for projector sales and for those who do not have the space for a dedicated theater - - it still enables them to have that "big screen" experience. 

How does Stewart Filmscreen view the UST market and potential products (screens) & support for this audience? Thanks.


----------



## Don Stewart

Ricoflashback said:


> Hi Don -
> Maybe covered before but the UST market is a fast growing segment for projector sales and for those who do not have the space for a dedicated theater - - it still enables them to have that "big screen" experience.
> How does Stewart Filmscreen view the UST market and potential products (screens) & support for this audience? Thanks.


Yes, we recognize that UST PJ's are rapidly growing for reasons you state above. That said, we have just introduced this month our 2.5 wall screen frame with a new redesigned profile to better accommodate UST extreme incident light angles. The new profile is desgined so the front of the frame does not interfere with the light path of the projector and cast a shadow on the very bottom of the image. The 2.5 frame has been renamed as the 2.5 G2 wall screen. We offer choice three types of screen materials, Studiotek 100, GrayMatte 70, and the BlackHawk horizontal lenticular screen. As far as tech support goes, we offer our tech support person, Andrew Cox, who had been with Stewart for over two decades and is very technically skilled to answer any questions.

Best regards,
Don


----------



## gilmet

Hello,

I'm looking for some advice on screen and screen material for my living room UST projector. Here's the room as it stands:









We'll be installing blinds or some kind of shading on the window on the far wall, but I expect we will have occasions where we leave them open while watching. The projector is a Samsung LSP9T. The faint image you can currently see is about 90" and I think that's about the size I'd like to shoot for (possibly considering up to 100"). I'm currently looking at the GreyMatte 70 and BlackHawk UST as potential screen materials. Should I be considering any others? What should I do to come to a decision?

Thanks!


----------



## Ricoflashback

Don Stewart said:


> Yes, we recognize that UST PJ's are rapidly growing for reasons you state above. That said, we have just introduced this month our 2.5 wall screen frame with a new redesigned profile to better accommodate UST extreme incident light angles. The new profile is desgined so the front of the frame does not interfere with the light path of the projector and cast a shadow on the very bottom of the image. The 2.5 frame has been renamed as the 2.5 G2 wall screen. We offer choice three types of screen materials, Studiotek 100, GrayMatte 70, and the BlackHawk horizontal lenticular screen. As far as tech support goes, we offer our tech support person, Andrew Cox, who had been with Stewart for over two decades and is very technically skilled to answer any questions.
> 
> Best regards,
> Don


Much thanks, Don. It is very much appreciated. Maybe a question for Andrew Cox but one of the issues with UST projectors is light bouncing off the thin frame and a frame of thin light around the frame itself - - left, top and right. I would think a black velvet, wrapped frame that is a little larger would help with that refraction. 

Again - thanks Don for responding. Looking forward to finding out as much as I can on your new UST screen - - and the proper name for it! Also - - I don't think your website (which is very well laid out) has a separate section or "tab" for UST screens. That would be helpful.


----------



## kwenar

Ricoflashback said:


> Much thanks, Don. It is very much appreciated. Maybe a question for Andrew Cox but one of the issues with UST projectors is light bouncing off the thin frame and a frame of thin light around the frame itself - - left, top and right. I would think a black velvet, wrapped frame that is a little larger would help with that refraction.
> 
> Again - thanks Don for responding. Looking forward to finding out as much as I can on your new UST screen - - and the proper name for it! Also - - I don't think your website (which is very well laid out) has a separate section or "tab" for UST screens. That would be helpful.


It’s not on the website yet and it will be awhile till you can order one and a actually receive one. I have been speaking with Adrian from Stewart and he let my install company know that they are not done testing them for a few weeks then they can look at starting production. They don’t have pricing yet either and it will most likely be November or December till you would be able to have one in your home .
I am patiently waiting till I can find out pricing then decide on ordering one of these or getting rid of my UST and going long throw. 

I should have just went long throw from the start. For me this been a very frustrating last year trying to figure out how to get this to setup to look decent and I still will be another 4 months aprox. if I wait this out for the screens to be available. The haloing it gives off is brutal so I don’t even bother watching anything on it at all.
This new screen should help all the people that are considering a UST setup in the future though.


----------



## Ricoflashback

kwenar said:


> It’s not on the website yet and it will be awhile till you can order one and a actually receive one. I have been speaking with Adrian from Stewart and he let my install company know that they are not done testing them for a few weeks then they can look at starting production. They don’t have pricing yet either and it will most likely be November or December till you would be able to have one in your home .
> I am patiently waiting till I can find out pricing then decide on ordering one of these or getting rid of my UST and going long throw.
> 
> I should have just went long throw from the start. For me this been a very frustrating last year trying to figure out how to get this to setup to look decent and I still will be another 4 months aprox. if I wait this out for the screens to be available. The haloing it gives off is brutal so I don’t even bother watching anything on it at all.
> This new screen should help all the people that are considering a UST setup in the future though.


Well, a long throw projector is always optimal, IMHO, if you have the space for it. If it's in a living room, though, it kind of sticks out like a sore thumb, aesthetics wise. Hang in there. Lastly - when I think of a "halo" - I think of a reflection up top, on the ceiling. Like the ones from a fresnel screen. I do not get that with my "El Cheapo," WEMAX ALR screen but I do get the light image refraction on the left, center and right of my screen. I try to not focus on it too much. A thicker bezel that is wrapped in black velvet would help with any light refractions. Of course, the main issue with that is losing any of the picture on the bottom due to the steep angle of a UST PJ.


----------



## Ricoflashback

gilmet said:


> Hello,
> 
> I'm looking for some advice on screen and screen material for my living room UST projector. Here's the room as it stands:
> View attachment 3325928
> 
> 
> We'll be installing blinds or some kind of shading on the window on the far wall, but I expect we will have occasions where we leave them open while watching. The projector is a Samsung LSP9T. The faint image you can currently see is about 90" and I think that's about the size I'd like to shoot for (possibly considering up to 100"). I'm currently looking at the GreyMatte 70 and BlackHawk UST as potential screen materials. Should I be considering any others? What should I do to come to a decision?
> 
> Thanks!


Beautiful room! And yes, invest in the best window treatments you can. That, above all, will help with the picture quality of your UST projector. Go 100" if you can. That's a lot more immersive than 90". You could buy a 85" TV and that would work better in that room during the daytime. But the difference between 85" and a 100" image is vast. Not so much the difference between 85" and 90". 

A XY Pet Crystal screen, Spectra, Elite CLR or SilverTicket UST screen are also good options.


----------



## silver700

Hey guys, I was going to start a new thread with this question but thought I try to ask this here first. Does anyone have any first hand experience with the Stewart Halr Plus Screen? I used to own a Black Diamond 1.3 screen but it has too many "sparkles" and it's off axis view was not the best, so unless I was sitting directly in the center of the screen, the image was not as clear or bright. I was also wondering if using the Stewart screen helped with black levels as well. I sold the BD because at the time I had a projector that was at round 1200 lumens and wanted to get a white screen to pair with it. Now that I have a 3100lumens projector, I am thinking of going back to a light rejecting screen. If I need to ask this in a separate thread, I can move this question to the main "Screens" thread. Thanks!


----------



## sandyj

silver700 said:


> Hey guys, I was going to start a new thread with this question but thought I try to ask this here first. Does anyone have any first hand experience with the Stewart Halr Plus Screen? I used to own a Black Diamond 1.3 screen but it has too many "sparkles" and it's off axis view was not the best, so unless I was sitting directly in the center of the screen, the image was not as clear or bright. I was also wondering if using the Stewart screen helped with black levels as well. I sold the BD because at the time I had a projector that was at round 1200 lumens and wanted to get a white screen to pair with it. Now that I have a 3100lumens projector, I am thinking of going back to a light rejecting screen. If I need to ask this in a separate thread, I can move this question to the main "Screens" thread. Thanks!


That's a good question all the ALR positive gain screen samples of various brands I have seen have had this issue I think the elements required to get that type of gain requires a lot more than a white screen and therefore pushes them harder. If you can handle a .8 gain then the options start to open up although I have not seen the Stewart I don't think you can fight the laws of physics. I also hate that oil slick look you can get with some of the ALR's I did not like the BD 1.3 for that reason. I also found its best to test with larger screen samples sky scenes, bright backgrounds, and snow fields seem to show it up best.


----------



## silver700

sandyj said:


> That's a good question all the ALR positive gain screen samples of various brands I have seen have had this issue I think the elements required to get that type of gain requires a lot more than a white screen and therefore pushes them harder. If you can handle a .8 gain then the options start to open up although I have not seen the Stewart I don't think you can fight the laws of physics. I also hate that oil slick look you can get with some of the ALR's I did not like the BD 1.3 for that reason. *I also found its best to test with larger screen samples sky scenes, bright backgrounds, and snow fields seem to show it up best.*


That is great advice. I will request (hopefully granted) a larger sample to test. I know its like fighting a non-win-able battle but my room is actually a media room with dark walls, The only thing is I watch sports in that room and don't like watching sports or tv shows in the dark like I do movies. I know there are trade offs but I did hear that the new Stewart Halr Screen was a break through in ALR screens. I also wondered if the darker screen might help with contrast in dark scenes. I will look at getting a sample and get back with what my thoughts are. I currently have a StudioTek 130 G4, which I hate to give up, but it is really made for room that are treated as a "home theater room", and not a media room.


----------



## jimmyfan

Where is the search option on this thread?


----------



## ThoBkk

silver700 said:


> That is great advice. I will request (hopefully granted) a larger sample to test. I know its like fighting a non-win-able battle but my room is actually a media room with dark walls, The only thing is I watch sports in that room and don't like watching sports or tv shows in the dark like I do movies. I know there are trade offs but I did hear that the new Stewart Halr Screen was a break through in ALR screens. I also wondered if the darker screen might help with contrast in dark scenes. I will look at getting a sample and get back with what my thoughts are. I currently have a StudioTek 130 G4, which I hate to give up, but it is really made for room that are treated as a "home theater room", and not a media room.


I use the Firehawk G5 in a similar setup, i think phantom has a max width of 90 inches so it wasn't an option for me. My ceiling is white and the room is also my office so i don't want to sit in the total dark all the time, especially when i just watch some background concert bluray and listen to the music mostly.
I figured the G5 might be a good compromise between Studiotek and Phantom...

It's not installed yet, so can't give u more than my reasons for initially buying it, hower Ekki made a good german review about the G4/Phantom compared to other ALR screens, maybe u can get some good info out of it using google translate: Test Kontrast Leinwände / Beamer / Wohnzimmer | Cine4home.de

Overall the Firehawk and Phantom where by far the best, keep in mind he tested the older G4 version so its not even the new Firehawk, i translated the comparsion table for you: 











Also did u think about just getting 2 different screens? Keep the studiotek and get like a smaller Phantom/Firehawk for sports, additionally, as long as your projector has lens memory shouldnt be an issue.


----------



## Don Stewart

From time to time, I like to post photos from our dealers of solutions in what some might consider problematic installations with a UST projector and a fireplace to deal with.
Photo Caption:
Beyond Home Theater of Santa Monica, CA, smoothly integrated a stylish 110” diagonal Stewart Luxus electriscreen into a circular room with a cathedral hardwood ceiling and fireplace. The Luxus features StudioTek 100 screen material and an Intelligent Motor (IMC) control system, which is compatible with most 3rd party control systems.


----------



## Erod

Don Stewart said:


> From time to time, I like to post photos from our dealers of solutions in what some might consider problematic installations with a UST projector and a fireplace to deal with.
> Photo Caption:
> Beyond Home Theater of Santa Monica, CA, smoothly integrated a stylish 110” diagonal Stewart Luxus electriscreen into a circular room with a cathedral hardwood ceiling and fireplace. The Luxus features StudioTek 100 screen material and an Intelligent Motor (IMC) control system, which is compatible with most 3rd party control systems.
> View attachment 3327153


Too bad the center channel burned up. 

LOL, just kidding. That is really cool.


----------



## Erod

HTRaleigh said:


> I’ve been a Stewart ST 130 owner for 25 years since I first got into home theater in 1997. I was active in AVS under a different screen name for years but decided to change my screen name with the change in residence location. I used that first ST130 screen with Sony D50, G70 and G90 CRTs as I moved up to higher PQ. About 4 years ago I relocated and moved into an existing home with a once incredible award winning theater that needed updates. Two years ago I started the process and went with scope screen ST130 Gen4. I love it. With a Kris Deering calibration on my JVC RS3000, Panamorph DCR lens and a Lumagen Radiance Pro I’ve been ecstatic about the PQ. I did install Revel c763L Atmos speakers and upgraded the audio processor and added more outboard amplification but left the speakers in the 7 main channels as they were in phase 1.
> 
> However, I’ve recently decided it is time for Phase 2. I need to update my system audio and want to convert to an AT screen with high end in-wall speakers. This past weekend I attended the outstanding Audio Advice Live show in Raleigh, NC. I got to talk to experts including Adrian Silva from Stewart and JVC and Harman technical gurus and several installers and calibrators.
> My key learnings were:
> 
> 1) Since I’m used to the amazing performance of a Stewart ST130 G4 that any move to any brand of woven screen would be visually disappointing due to light drop. I’m not yet ready to buy the RS4100/NZ9 so my amazing RS3000 will have to do for a while.
> 
> 2) The age old rule of thumb about keeping a microperf screen 8-12” from the speakers is not a hard and fast rule. With todays room correction software most people that are spending at this level will have the capability to seamlessly EQ the upper frequencies via Dirac, ARC or Trinnov Optimizer to eliminate any concern with high frequency attenuation.
> 
> 3)The next “aha” was that horn based compression drivers actually perform better when very close to the screen material can at the “rule of thumb” distance.. The JBL Synthesis calibration gurus that certify full Synthesis systems always put their speakers close to the fabric to get the best result This goes for microperf and woven materials. Traditional dome drivers do not work as well when being that close to a microperf but compression drivers with a full horn work very well. In fact I was told that SCL-2s work great as close as you can get them to the screen.
> 
> These revelations are huge in my use case. I wanted a path to keep the quality of a ST130 screen but go Microperfs but was afraid that might not be feasible given the old rule of thumb. Now I’ll just get replacement fabric for my existing Stewart frame. I was also considering JBL SCL in wall speakers among a couple of other brands and now I know those will perform very well without moving my screen position. Finally, since I can keep the screen where it is I will not have to remount my projector 8-12” back. The only remaining possible issue will be whether I can see the perfs in real movie content from my 10.5’ primary viewing location. The other two rows will be fine and they will all get much better sound with audio projecting on a higher plane from behind the screen. If I can see the perfs in movie content I can move that front row back 12-18.”
> 
> I’ve seen many people over the years struggle with these issues but now it seems that most of the trade-offs can be mitigated or in practice no longer exist. These findings compare favorably to Don Stewart’s posts on this topic within this thread so I wanted to reinforce those. He has shown a frequency chart that shows 1.5-3 db attenuation that is relatively flat and very easy to EQ. He has mentioned that he had been told that horn style tweeter/midrange drivers do better than traditional dome style in a microperf screen and most recently he said that most installers are putting screens only 2-3 “ away for all speaker types. If you hear that you must go woven or have speakers 8-12” behind the screen there is hope. I think for several reasons that no longer applies. You can have or keep outstanding PQ and have awesome Audio.


I may be able to help with this in the coming days for you. I, too, am an RS3000 owner, as well as a ST130 G4 120-inch screen. Today I'll be receiving my 131-inch version of the same, but in microperf. 

Here are the concerns that I'll have answers for soon, in order of most concern:

1. I couldn't see the holes from my 11' MLP location with black felt behind the swatch sample. That's good, but will that be the case on a sky scene across a 131" screen? Soon I'll know.

2. My brightness is fine when zooming the image to the larger image size on my existing screen, but I'll take a hit in brightness with the microperf. Supposedly that's about 10%, which I hope isn't that perceptible due to the added reflected light with the 19% increase in screen size. I would rather avoid the louder high lamp or turning off the color flter, but those are options if needed. 

3. Only my center channel will be behind the screen, but it's an RBH in-wall cabinet (that I don't need to install in-wall) with a square AMT tweeter. It'll be about 4-5 inches from the screen thanks to a screen pocket in the wall from my original 110" screen. I have Dirac, and I don't expect there to be any issue with calibrating it to blend seamlessly, but we'll see. I'd be more concerned if my L/R speakers were be behind it from that distance from the screen.

Sounds like a similar scenario to yours, so I'll report back and let you know.


----------



## mrvideo

Erod said:


> Too bad the center channel burned up.


I was wondering where the center channel speaker was. Now I know.


----------



## Don Stewart

mrvideo said:


> I was wondering where the center channel speaker was. Now I know.


Center speaker might be located on fireplace mantel or phantom center channel.


----------



## kwenar

Don Stewart said:


> Center speaker might be located on fireplace mantel or phantom center channel.


Hi Don

Looks like the new 2.5 UST screen has completed testing and is available to order according to your Facebook page.

This is super exciting and looks great in the photos 

Hope I can get this ordered ASAP, 

One question is i see in the post that it is available in GreyHawk 70 material. Is this meant to be GreyMatte 70 or is this a new material I haven't seen before on your official website.

Thanks again for bringing a new solution to the market to help with overscan.


----------



## silver700

ThoBkk said:


> I use the Firehawk G5 in a similar setup, i think phantom has a max width of 90 inches so it wasn't an option for me. My ceiling is white and the room is also my office so i don't want to sit in the total dark all the time, especially when i just watch some background concert bluray and listen to the music mostly.
> I figured the G5 might be a good compromise between Studiotek and Phantom...
> 
> It's not installed yet, so can't give u more than my reasons for initially buying it, hower Ekki made a good german review about the G4/Phantom compared to other ALR screens, maybe u can get some good info out of it using google translate: Test Kontrast Leinwände / Beamer / Wohnzimmer | Cine4home.de
> 
> Overall the Firehawk and Phantom where by far the best, keep in mind he tested the older G4 version so its not even the new Firehawk, i translated the comparsion table for you:
> 
> View attachment 3327025
> 
> 
> 
> Also did u think about just getting 2 different screens? Keep the studiotek and get like a smaller Phantom/Firehawk for sports, additionally, as long as your projector has lens memory shouldnt be an issue.


Thank you for the great info. Is the Phantom the same the HALR Plus screen, @Don Stewart? I thought about getting 2 screens, but not sure I can get a screen to drop in front of the current mounted screen. Room to do this may be limited. Again thank you for the great info!!


----------



## Ricoflashback

kwenar said:


> Hi Don
> 
> Looks like the new 2.5 UST screen has completed testing and is available to order according to your Facebook page.
> 
> This is super exciting and looks great in the photos
> 
> Hope I can get this ordered ASAP,
> 
> One question is i see in the post that it is available in GreyHawk 70 material. Is this meant to be GreyMatte 70 or is this a new material I haven't seen before on your official website.
> 
> Thanks again for bringing a new solution to the market to help with overscan.
> 
> View attachment 3327852


I don't see a GrayHawk 70 listed as a screen material type on the stewardfilmscreen.com website. Maybe they mean GrayMatte 70? Even then - - the BlackHawk UST is like all the other lenticular surfaces, IMHO. It helps in the daytime but it's still a washed out mess with a UST projector. I'm more concerned with "at night" viewing with maybe a very dim light on. A white screen would be fine in a batcave but that's about it. The GrayMatte 70 with a .7 gain would seem to provide a good black floor with finer detail than a lenticular screen. More brightness, as well.

I'm hoping the larger, velvet flocked frame combined with the new beveled frame will address two issues - light refraction around the entire screen and with the new design, no loss of picture at the bottom due to the angle of a UST projector.


----------



## kwenar

Ricoflashback said:


> I don't see a GrayHawk 70 listed as a screen material type on the stewardfilmscreen.com website. Maybe they mean GrayMatte 70? Even then - - the BlackHawk UST is like all the other lenticular surfaces, IMHO. It helps in the daytime but it's still a washed out mess with a UST projector. I'm more concerned with "at night" viewing with maybe a very dim light on. A white screen would be fine in a batcave but that's about it. The GrayMatte 70 with a .7 gain would seem to provide a good black floor with finer detail than a lenticular screen. More brightness, as well.
> 
> I'm hoping the larger, velvet flocked frame combined with the new beveled frame will address two issues - light refraction around the entire screen and with the new design, no loss of picture at the bottom due to the angle of a UST projector.


The post on their Facebook showed another picture with zero loss of picture on the bottom of the screen so I think it would take care of both problems.
Would you go the Greymatte70 over the Blackhawk if you just had a bit of light in the room then? I can control my lights that are overhead and I only have a small amount of daylight during the day coming from the side.
I am trying to decide if I need the Blackhawk as I know it will cost more.


----------



## kwenar

Ricoflashback said:


> I don't see a GrayHawk 70 listed as a screen material type on the stewardfilmscreen.com website. Maybe they mean GrayMatte 70? Even then - - the BlackHawk UST is like all the other lenticular surfaces, IMHO. It helps in the daytime but it's still a washed out mess with a UST projector. I'm more concerned with "at night" viewing with maybe a very dim light on. A white screen would be fine in a batcave but that's about it. The GrayMatte 70 with a .7 gain would seem to provide a good black floor with finer detail than a lenticular screen. More brightness, as well.
> 
> I'm hoping the larger, velvet flocked frame combined with the new beveled frame will address two issues - light refraction around the entire screen and with the new design, no loss of picture at the bottom due to the angle of a UST projector.


----------



## Don Stewart

Gentlemen, the GrayMatte screen series has been around for quite a while and listed on our website under front screen materials. It was originally developed with a collaboration between the folks at Disney's Imagineering department and Stewart Filmscreen for Disney's 360 Circle-Vision venues. The problem was with white screens, when projecting in a 360 degree theater, the cross reflections was so bad that it created its own ambient light and washed out the black levels. After much R&D, the end result fix was a Neutral Density matte gray surface to preserve the black levels. That said, it is personally one of my favorite screen materials for applications where you have plenty of PJ lumens and need to add addition black level to the image. (See Circle-Vision Illustration below)


----------



## Ricoflashback

kwenar said:


> The post on their Facebook showed another picture with zero loss of picture on the bottom of the screen so I think it would take care of both problems.
> Would you go the Greymatte70 over the Blackhawk if you just had a bit of light in the room then? I can control my lights that are overhead and I only have a small amount of daylight during the day coming from the side.
> I am trying to decide if I need the Blackhawk as I know it will cost more.


I'd get a sample of both materials if you can. That's what I'll do. I'm really leaning more towards the Greymatte70 because I believe it will be a brighter picture with more detail than the Blackhawk material. Incidentally - - I have a lot of side light from an adjacent patio window that is one foot to the left of my lenticular screen. None of the UST screens that I know of can compensate for side light except for maybe the fresnel material but that has major "halo" problems above at night. 

So - for the daytime, unless you have pretty good light control (like blackout shades or shutters) - any projector screen picture won't look very good. But like I said - - I do 90% of my projector viewing at night when projectors looks the best. (PJ's are nocturnal in nature or with a bat cave like night without any moon!) 

I'll probably end up finding another room for an OLED TV and daytime viewing. Maybe off the kitchen or a family room. I was surprised at the picture on the Sony A90J - both the 65" and the 77". Yes - this is a more expensive solution but it might be less expensive than getting a regular throw projector with an electronic screen over an OLED TV - - which would be my ideal setup. Once we get our new house, I'll know what my budget is.


----------



## Ricoflashback

Don Stewart said:


> Gentlemen, the GrayMatte screen series has been around for quite a while and listed on our website under front screen materials. It was originally developed with a collaboration between the folks at Disney's Imagineering department and Stewart Filmscreen for Disney's 360 Circle-Vision venues. The problem was with white screens, when projecting in a 360 degree theater, the cross reflections was so bad that it created its own ambient light and washed out the black levels. After much R&D, the end result fix was a Neutral Density matte gray surface to preserve the black levels. That said, it is personally one of my favorite screen materials for applications where you have plenty of PJ lumens and need to add addition black level to the image. (See Circle-Vision Illustration below)


Thanks, Don. Can this material also be used with the new UST frame?


----------



## kwenar

Don Stewart said:


> Gentlemen, the GrayMatte screen series has been around for quite a while and listed on our website under front screen materials. It was originally developed with a collaboration between the folks at Disney's Imagineering department and Stewart Filmscreen for Disney's 360 Circle-Vision venues. The problem was with white screens, when projecting in a 360 degree theater, the cross reflections was so bad that it created its own ambient light and washed out the black levels. After much R&D, the end result fix was a Neutral Density matte gray surface to preserve the black levels. That said, it is personally one of my favorite screen materials for applications where you have plenty of PJ lumens and need to add addition black level to the image. (See Circle-Vision Illustration below)


Hi Don

I know the Greymatte70 has been around for awhile but my question was that last nights Facebook post listed a GreyHawk 70. I had never heard of this material and was wondering if this is a new material. I guess from your response is that this was a typo and was supposed to be listed as Greymatte70.


----------



## kwenar

Ricoflashback said:


> Thanks, Don. Can this material also be used with the new UST frame?


Yes it can.


----------



## Don Stewart

kwenar said:


> Hi Don
> 
> I know the Greymatte70 has been around for awhile but my question was that last nights Facebook post listed a GreyHawk 70. I had never heard of this material and was wondering if this is a new material. I guess from your response is that this was a typo and was supposed to be listed as Greymatte70.


Yep, it was a typo. Thanks Kwenar for catching that. It has now been corrected.
Best regards,
Don


----------



## Erod

Erod said:


> I may be able to help with this in the coming days for you. I, too, am an RS3000 owner, as well as a ST130 G4 120-inch screen. Today I'll be receiving my 131-inch version of the same, but in microperf.
> 
> Here are the concerns that I'll have answers for soon, in order of most concern:
> 
> 1. I couldn't see the holes from my 11' MLP location with black felt behind the swatch sample. That's good, but will that be the case on a sky scene across a 131" screen? Soon I'll know.
> 
> 2. My brightness is fine when zooming the image to the larger image size on my existing screen, but I'll take a hit in brightness with the microperf. Supposedly that's about 10%, which I hope isn't that perceptible due to the added reflected light with the 19% increase in screen size. I would rather avoid the louder high lamp or turning off the color flter, but those are options if needed.
> 
> 3. Only my center channel will be behind the screen, but it's an RBH in-wall cabinet (that I don't need to install in-wall) with a square AMT tweeter. It'll be about 4-5 inches from the screen thanks to a screen pocket in the wall from my original 110" screen. I have Dirac, and I don't expect there to be any issue with calibrating it to blend seamlessly, but we'll see. I'd be more concerned if my L/R speakers were be behind it from that distance from the screen.
> 
> Sounds like a similar scenario to yours, so I'll report back and let you know.


OK, follow up after a couple of days of viewing. Only one real quibble, and likely addressable. 

To the above questions I had going in:

1. Couldn't be happier here. If I pause a screen all one color and stare long enough, I can maybe barely see some texture, but it might just be grain from the content. The holes are just gone for the most part. Awesome, and with absolutely no moire effect whatsoever.

2. Brightness takes a small hit, but it is much smaller than I feared. The added surface area offsets that with additional reflected light as I hoped. I haven't gone to high lamp, nor have I had to turn off the color filter.

3. *This one is a bit tricky. After running Dirac, my center channel levels are good, and the REW frequencies responses are almost identical to the left and right channels. However, it seems to be a bit overly "locatable", if that makes sense. It's almost like it's drawing attention to itself more than the center channel that was below the screen before. in fact, it tends to not match the face of the person talking. I don't know if it's the distance behind the screen (about 4-5 inches), or the type of tweeter, which is an AMT. It's not at all bad, and it's clear as a bell, but as I said, it's just more specifically located than I expected. Perhaps I just need to get used to a horizontally oriented center channel behind the screen. *

Any thoughts on #3 ?


----------



## noah katz

Don,

What's the rationale for two HF drivers, which is likely to create lobes in the vertical polar response?



Don Stewart said:


> View attachment 3325377


----------



## noah katz

jimmyfan said:


> Where is the search option on this thread?


After starting to type in the search box at the top of the page there will be an option to search this thread (yes, it's bad UI design).


----------



## Don Stewart

noah katz said:


> Don,
> 
> What's the rationale for two HF drivers, which is likely to create lobes in the vertical polar response?


Hi Noah,
As mentioned in original post, the idea was to have the HF's cover the largest amount of back of the screen area as possible. I made at least 6 different sketch concepts, most with only one HF output to run by expert audio engineer consultants. I posted this one, just as an example of the sketches, as it was the most radical design of all the different concepts.

Regards,
Don


----------



## noah katz

Don Stewart said:


> As mentioned in original post, the idea was to have the HF's cover the largest amount of back of the screen area as possible.


Just speculation, but my thought upon reading that was that it's because the horn's wavefront would have more fully formed and expanded, which would make the benefit be on a per-driver basis.


----------



## HTRaleigh

noah katz said:


> Just speculation, but my thought upon reading that was that it's because the horn's wavefront would have more fully formed and expanded, which would make the benefit be on a per-driver basis.


When I talked to the JBL Synthesis calibrator/certifies about the SCL line about my plans to swap my Studiotek 130G4 to Studiotek 130G4 Microperf indicated that the combination of the compression drivers and the horn wave guide worked better when closer to the screen because of the relatively large funneling effect. They ssid the SCL Lline of in-wall speakers would allow me to use the existing EZ Mount wall attachment. This will provide about an inch of clearance. Traditional speakers with dome style mid and high frequency drivers do need to be a few inches back from the screen. I was happy to hear this because my projector/Panamorph DCR is mounted at the minimum distance to the screen. Don’s findings and his sketch of a potential speaker design lines up with the JBL Tech’s experience.


----------



## Ricoflashback

General question on UST ALR screens. Compared to my past regular throw projector and "matte white" screen - - are there some visual artifacts or possibly the pixel resolution isn't as defined with this type of lenticular material? I know it's a compromise in a room with ambient light but if you can control the light to a greater extent, wouldn't a matte screen be better - say a matte gray? Even with light walls - - if you're watching at night with no other lights on - - while not a bat cave, the picture can be pretty good from past experience.


----------



## BrolicBeast

etherealsound said:


> That is awesome, how big is the screen?


Thanks! It's a 13’ wide 2.0 Aspect Ratio ST130G4 material. It came in two massive crates, packed like Megatron's sniper rifle!


----------



## Wrage25

Just ordered a Stewart studiotek 130g4 135 inch screen just curious how much better picture quality to expect coming from silver tickets screens?


----------



## Ricoflashback

Wrage25 said:


> Just ordered a Stewart studiotek 130g4 135 inch screen just curious how much better picture quality to expect coming from silver tickets screens?


I'd be interested to hear your opinion after getting the new screen. What type of SilverTicket screen do you have?


----------



## Erod

What shipping company does everyone use if they sell a screen? I have the box for Stewart, but most companies won't accept boxes with these dimensions.


----------



## Ricoflashback

Erod said:


> What shipping company does everyone use if they sell a screen? I have the box for Stewart, but most companies won't accept boxes with these dimensions.


I'd try DHL. Check their webpage for limits on packages. Call, also.


----------



## fredworld

Erod said:


> What shipping company does everyone use if they sell a screen? I have the box for Stewart, but most companies won't accept boxes with these dimensions.


I used UPS when I sold my old Firehawk screen about three years ago. I think they accept up to 108" length. My box was 105" . You might have to ship via freight if longer.


----------



## Wrage25

Ricoflashback said:


> I'd be interested to hear your opinion after getting the new screen. What type of SilverTicket screen do you have?


I have two of them matte white and a matte grey hoping with the Stewart I get much better picture quality!


----------



## Ricoflashback

Wrage25 said:


> I have two of them matte white and a matte grey hoping with the Stewart I get much better picture quality!


How was the matte grey? Also - - are you looking for a brighter image with teh ST 130 G4? Or - finer picture resolution? The descriptions says "Flexible Front" material. Maybe the special coating is the "secret sauce?" I take it that you have a bat cave environment? Again, I'll be real interested in your opinion once you get the screen. Thx.

*Recently reformulated StudioTek 130 G4, is a flexible, front projection screen material that now has less sparkle and offers amazing high dynamic range (HDR) of luminosity. This screen material also provides optimized white field uniformity — unmatched by competing gain screens. StudioTek 130 G4 is thirty percent brighter than a matte white screen surface. Featuring a fourth generation, proprietary optical coating, this screen material allows for crisp, sharp focusing of content as well as superb color and outstanding, white field uniformity. Certified by THX, StudioTek 130 G4 is the reference standard projection material within the AV industry.*


----------



## HTRaleigh

I think my box was about 125” and Stewart had to ship it freight.

I just went back to look. It was 135” for my 130” diagonal deluxe wallscreen. I love this screen. Now I plan to replace material with the ST13G4 Microperf to snap into my frame as I update the speakers.

Carrier: ALLSTATES WORLDCARGO
Carrier website: www.allstates-worldcargo.com
Shipping Dims/Weight

Package 11. WSDQ130CST13G4EZX
Tracking#: *****
135.00" (L) x 11.00" (W) x 11.00" (H)
Weight: 65.00lbs


----------



## Ricoflashback

HTRaleigh said:


> I think my box was about 125” and Stewart had to ship it freight.


If at all possible - - I'd have Stewart arrange for the shipping with their preferred shipping rates and then pay that cost. That would be the best way to do it.


----------



## Wrage25

Ricoflashback said:


> How was the matte grey? Also - - are you looking for a brighter image with teh ST 130 G4? Or - finer picture resolution? The descriptions says "Flexible Front" material. Maybe the special coating is the "secret sauce?" I take it that you have a bat cave environment? Again, I'll be real interested in your opinion once you get the screen. Thx.
> 
> *Recently reformulated StudioTek 130 G4, is a flexible, front projection screen material that now has less sparkle and offers amazing high dynamic range (HDR) of luminosity. This screen material also provides optimized white field uniformity — unmatched by competing gain screens. StudioTek 130 G4 is thirty percent brighter than a matte white screen surface. Featuring a fourth generation, proprietary optical coating, this screen material allows for crisp, sharp focusing of content as well as superb color and outstanding, white field uniformity. Certified by THX, StudioTek 130 G4 is the reference standard projection material within the AV industry.*
> 
> The grey has better contrast but with the downfall of artifacts in bright scenes. Hoping picture detail is much better with the Stewart along with having no artifacts and a bump in brightness would be nice and yes it is a bar cave!


----------



## MrLatte

How much more expensive are custom sized (and 2.4:1) screens? I see that a 133" 2.35:1 Studiotek 130 G4 Wallscreen 2.5 is a "production" model. If I wanted to order the same but in a 135" 2.4:1 aspect ratio, how much more is that? Thanks.


----------



## Wrage25

MrLatte said:


> How much more expensive are custom sized (and 2.4:1) screens? I see that a 133" 2.35:1 Studiotek 130 G4 Wallscreen 2.5 is a "production" model. If I wanted to order the same but in a 135" 2.4:1 aspect ratio, how much more is that? Thanks.


I’m not sure if there is a price difference probably just more shipping time for custom screens?


----------



## fredworld

MrLatte said:


> How much more expensive are custom sized (and 2.4:1) screens? I see that a 133" 2.35:1 Studiotek 130 G4 Wallscreen 2.5 is a "production" model. If I wanted to order the same but in a 135" 2.4:1 aspect ratio, how much more is that? Thanks.


You might want to try a local Stewart rep to get complete answers to your questions by accessing the *Stewart Rep Locator link from their website.*


----------



## Wrage25

Wrage25 said:


> I’m not sure if there is a price difference probably just more shipping time for custom screens?


I ordered mine on aug 23 and supposedly 8-10 weeks until I receive it


----------



## MrLatte

fredworld said:


> You might want to try a local Stewart rep to get complete answers to your questions by accessing the *Stewart Rep Locator link from their website.*


OK, I'll ask. I heard 9 weeks for the "standard" screen. I wonder how much longer for custom.


----------



## fredworld

MrLatte said:


> OK, I'll ask. I heard 9 weeks for the "standard" screen. I wonder how much longer for custom.


My 2.35:1 94" wide screen was a custom order. It took less than 6 weeks...but that was November '19, pre-Covid. I worked through my local dealer, Overture Audio/Video in Wilmington, DE.


----------



## Craig Peer

MrLatte said:


> OK, I'll ask. I heard 9 weeks for the "standard" screen. I wonder how much longer for custom.


Screens have been running around 5 weeks - custom or not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Wrage25

Craig Peer said:


> Screens have been running around 5 weeks - custom or not.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


that’s awesome news!! Hope the picture quality is as great as Stewart’s reputation!!


----------



## dormie1360

Craig Peer said:


> Screens have been running around 5 weeks - custom or not.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



My VistaScope with G4, ordered in early June, has had estimated delivery go from 8-10 weeks to 5-6 months.......the issue must be getting masking components........ 🤷‍♂️


----------



## LangBedang

I'd like to offer up a testimonial for the ST 130 G4 and how much of a difference a good screen can make. This is mostly for people who might be on a limited budget and have more difficulty justifying expensive purchases to upgrade their existing setup.

Background: I'm an enthusiast with a career in technology. I have done everything myself with help from forums like this. I started building my budget home theatre 6 years ago, starting off with a Epson 4030 and Silver Ticket STR 110". Slowly (as budget allowed), I have been investing in it more and more, with the most recent upgrade being to a JVC DLA-NP5.

The increases in projector quality were noticeable each time, but with this latest projector upgrade, it was obvious the screen was holding the picture back. After trying out a sample briefly, I upgraded to a WallScreen Deluxe 110" ST 130 G4 which I hung this morning.

After an hour of playing around:

1) HDR content is so much more watchable, even on low lamp. Previously, I had to put on high and use a custom mapping as it was just too dark;
2) Frame-by-Frame and Auto aperture now show details in the shadows;
3) No longer seeing screen texture in solid white scenes;
3) Am now seeing details we missed before (such as the texture in the animation in Spider-Man Into the Multiverse.

The kicker: my darling wife of 17 years (who doesn't have an eye (or ear) for AV performance and rarely admits that the money I spend on stuff is justified), says she can now see what I was talking about and is fully supportive of all the money I have dropped in the last month.

Now naturally, having white screen material instead of gray, and a higher gain are most responsible for the HDR performance, but the quality of the material does make a significant difference when resolving detail. Either way, I can attest that there is a remarkable difference and while it can be difficult to justify the price increase (although I got mine new for a steal), it really does make a difference and allow you to squeeze out the most of a higher-end projector.


----------



## Wrage25

LangBedang said:


> I'd like to offer up a testimonial for the ST 130 G4 and how much of a difference a good screen can make. This is mostly for people who might be on a limited budget and have more difficulty justifying expensive purchases to upgrade their existing setup.
> 
> Background: I'm an enthusiast with a career in technology. I have done everything myself with help from forums like this. I started building my budget home theatre 6 years ago, starting off with a Epson 4030 and Silver Ticket STR 110". Slowly (as budget allowed), I have been investing in it more and more, with the most recent upgrade being to a JVC DLA-NP5.
> 
> The increases in projector quality were noticeable each time, but with this latest projector upgrade, it was obvious the screen was holding the picture back. After trying out a sample briefly, I upgraded to a WallScreen Deluxe 110" ST 130 G4 which I hung this morning.
> 
> After an hour of playing around:
> 
> 1) HDR content is so much more watchable, even on low lamp. Previously, I had to put on high and use a custom mapping as it was just too dark;
> 2) Frame-by-Frame and Auto aperture now show details in the shadows;
> 3) No longer seeing screen texture in solid white scenes;
> 3) Am now seeing details we missed before (such as the texture in the animation in Spider-Man Into the Multiverse.
> 
> The kicker: my darling wife of 17 years (who doesn't have an eye (or ear) for AV performance and rarely admits that the money I spend on stuff is justified), says she can now see what I was talking about and is fully supportive of all the money I have dropped in the last month.
> 
> Now naturally, having white screen material instead of gray, and a higher gain are most responsible for the HDR performance, but the quality of the material does make a significant difference when resolving detail. Either way, I can attest that there is a remarkable difference and while it can be difficult to justify the price increase (although I got mine new for a steal), it really does make a difference and allow you to squeeze out the most of a higher-end projector.


Great to hear can’t wait to get mine!!!


----------



## Erod

LangBedang said:


> I'd like to offer up a testimonial for the ST 130 G4 and how much of a difference a good screen can make. This is mostly for people who might be on a limited budget and have more difficulty justifying expensive purchases to upgrade their existing setup.
> 
> Background: I'm an enthusiast with a career in technology. I have done everything myself with help from forums like this. I started building my budget home theatre 6 years ago, starting off with a Epson 4030 and Silver Ticket STR 110". Slowly (as budget allowed), I have been investing in it more and more, with the most recent upgrade being to a JVC DLA-NP5.
> 
> The increases in projector quality were noticeable each time, but with this latest projector upgrade, it was obvious the screen was holding the picture back. After trying out a sample briefly, I upgraded to a WallScreen Deluxe 110" ST 130 G4 which I hung this morning.
> 
> After an hour of playing around:
> 
> 1) HDR content is so much more watchable, even on low lamp. Previously, I had to put on high and use a custom mapping as it was just too dark;
> 2) Frame-by-Frame and Auto aperture now show details in the shadows;
> 3) No longer seeing screen texture in solid white scenes;
> 3) Am now seeing details we missed before (such as the texture in the animation in Spider-Man Into the Multiverse.
> 
> The kicker: my darling wife of 17 years (who doesn't have an eye (or ear) for AV performance and rarely admits that the money I spend on stuff is justified), says she can now see what I was talking about and is fully supportive of all the money I have dropped in the last month.
> 
> Now naturally, having white screen material instead of gray, and a higher gain are most responsible for the HDR performance, but the quality of the material does make a significant difference when resolving detail. Either way, I can attest that there is a remarkable difference and while it can be difficult to justify the price increase (although I got mine new for a steal), it really does make a difference and allow you to squeeze out the most of a higher-end projector.


The G4 material is a significant improvement over the G3, which was already terrific. 

This is especially true for HDR, and it also reduced sparkle.


----------



## Ricoflashback

kwenar said:


> Hi Don
> 
> Looks like the new 2.5 UST screen has completed testing and is available to order according to your Facebook page.
> 
> This is super exciting and looks great in the photos
> 
> Hope I can get this ordered ASAP,
> 
> One question is i see in the post that it is available in GreyHawk 70 material. Is this meant to be GreyMatte 70 or is this a new material I haven't seen before on your official website.
> 
> Thanks again for bringing a new solution to the market to help with overscan.
> 
> View attachment 3327852


What's the latest on this? Any idea on when it will be ready for shipment? Pricing?


----------



## Hostility

Hey guys, just recently picked up a Stewart cima screen used, there’s a couple of small black scuff marks maybe on the material. Any suggestions on how to clean it? I wiped with a damp cloth but it didn’t come out


----------



## fredworld

Hostility said:


> Hey guys, just recently picked up a Stewart cima screen used, there’s a couple of small black scuff marks maybe on the material. Any suggestions on how to clean it? I wiped with a damp cloth but it didn’t come out


See these *troubleshooting tips* from the Stewart website.


----------



## kwenar

Ricoflashback said:


> What's the latest on this? Any idea on when it will be ready for shipment? Pricing?


I still am awaiting more info from Adrian from Stewart as he told me they needed a few more weeks till they would know more. I don't want to harass him so I am patiently awaiting his next communication about price and ship times


----------



## Ricoflashback

Just a suggestion, Don, but on your website (which is very well laid out) I'd add a selection for "UST" projectors in your "Find A Screen" section. I know this is a much smaller segment of the screen solutions you provide but it is a rapidly growing market.


----------



## Craig Peer

Ricoflashback said:


> Just a suggestion, Don, but on your website (which is very well laid out) I'd add a selection for "UST" projectors in your "Find A Screen" section. I know this is a much smaller segment of the screen solutions you provide but it is a rapidly growing market.


Easy enough now to find all the UST screen materials listed in the screen material page - 

Materials - Stewart (stewartfilmscreen.com)


----------



## Ricoflashback

Craig Peer said:


> Easy enough now to find all the UST screen materials listed in the screen material page -
> 
> Materials - Stewart (stewartfilmscreen.com)


Yes, but it would be much easier if you had the option for a UST screen which would really filter our most of the other screen materials and frames. But I understand.


----------



## Iam2coo4u

I have had my Stewart AT screen for a few months now and I’ve started to notice some dots, especially sitting up close or when gaming. it’s a bit like a screen door effect. My main viewing point is 12 feet. Maybe 10’ from some seats. I could move them back, but they are placed based on my in wall side speakers so that’s really not the ideal solution 

The model # is below. Its 1.3 gain. I am using an EPSON LS12000 projector. It’s an extremely expensive screen so I’m a bit disappointed. I suspect there are some settings or something I can do to make this better. The whole room is already matte black including the wall behind it. 


*Stewart WallScreen Deluxe WSDQ110HST13G4EZX

What suggestions exist to try to minimize this effect?

Would light output or any other settings be likely to help?

would adjusting the projector position help? Thanks! *


----------



## Craig Peer

Iam2coo4u said:


> I have had my Stewart AT screen for a few months now and I’ve started to notice some dots, especially sitting up close or when gaming. it’s a bit like a screen door effect. My main viewing point is 12 feet. Maybe 10’ from some seats. I could move them back, but they are placed based on my in wall side speakers so that’s really not the ideal solution
> 
> The model # is below. Its 1.3 gain. I am using an EPSON LS12000 projector. It’s an extremely expensive screen so I’m a bit disappointed. I suspect there are some settings or something I can do to make this better. The whole room is already matte black including the wall behind it.
> 
> 
> *Stewart WallScreen Deluxe WSDQ110HST13G4EZX
> 
> What suggestions exist to try to minimize this effect?
> 
> Would light output or any other settings be likely to help?
> 
> would adjusting the projector position help? Thanks! *


12' viewing distance is the minimum distance to not see the perf. 10' is too close.


----------



## Jrsred10

BrolicBeast said:


> Thanks! It's a 13’ wide 2.0 Aspect Ratio ST130G4 material. It came in two massive crates, packed like Megatron's sniper rifle!


Have you got your screen going yet? Not a ton of impressions of them in the wild.


----------



## BrolicBeast

Iam2coo4u said:


> I have had my Stewart AT screen for a few months now and I’ve started to notice some dots, especially sitting up close or when gaming. it’s a bit like a screen door effect. My main viewing point is 12 feet. Maybe 10’ from some seats. I could move them back, but they are placed based on my in wall side speakers so that’s really not the ideal solution
> 
> The model # is below. Its 1.3 gain. I am using an EPSON LS12000 projector. It’s an extremely expensive screen so I’m a bit disappointed. I suspect there are some settings or something I can do to make this better. The whole room is already matte black including the wall behind it.
> 
> 
> *Stewart WallScreen Deluxe WSDQ110HST13G4EZX
> 
> What suggestions exist to try to minimize this effect?
> 
> Would light output or any other settings be likely to help?
> 
> would adjusting the projector position help? Thanks! *


Unfortunately, projector brightness, settings, and positions won't help. Like Craig mentioned above, 12ft is def the minimum. Some folks have gone as close to 10 and have only seen the perforations on disc menus, but 12 really is the minimum for a consistently proper presentation. Try moving the seats back a bit....depending on the dispersion of your surround in-walls, you might still be just fine after re-running room correction. The alternative would be selling the screen and grabbing the Stewart Harmony G2 woven screen.


----------



## BrolicBeast

Jrsred10 said:


> Have you got your screen going yet? Not a ton of impressions of them in the wild.


Naw, not yet--currently reconstructing the showroom to accommodate this screen as well as new speakers. Should be live by mid-October, though. Counting the days!


----------



## darksilkx

Hi all, any idea on how I can get Stewart samples prior to ordering a screen online? I contacted my vendor and they don't have them. I emailed Stewart last week on the contact us link. Got an auto response and nothing since then.


----------



## voyagerx

I have dealt with @Craig Peer for various orders, including a Stewart screen and getting a sample prior to ordering. I highly recommend, but I'm sure there are others on here who can help as well.


----------



## kingtspoon

Anyone with the ST 100, perforated, and LCR speakers behind the screen?
Or anyone with the ST 130, perforated, and LCR speakers behind the screen?
How's the sound quality with the speakers just a few inches behind the screen?
Would the perfs be visible from 10-11 ft seating distance on a 120" scope screen?

Notes: The Harmony G2 material is not an option since it's not available for retractable screens per Stewart which is a must have for my room. I have total light control / 0 ambient light with an Epson LS12000 projector.


----------



## Don Stewart

darksilkx said:


> Hi all, any idea on how I can get Stewart samples prior to ordering a screen online? I contacted my vendor and they don't have them. I emailed Stewart last week on the contact us link. Got an auto response and nothing since then.


Yes, we do prefer that you go through an authorized Stewart dealer to secure samples. We are currently somewhat thin on office support personnel as their is a big labor shortage here in Southern California. That said, we do have many job openings at this time, but yet to fill them all. Thank you for your patience.

Best Regards,
Don


----------



## HTRaleigh

I’m still in the decision making mode myself. I recently had a demo of an ST130 microperf with JBL SCL-4 LCR. It sounded great. I walked up to the screen when a movie was playing to look closely at the perfs and they disappeared once I was back to 10-11’ from the screen. My theater currently has a Stidiotek 130G4 that is 120” wide ( 130” diagonal) in a 2.40 scope format and I will rescreen with the ST130 microperf. From my research and talking to both Stewart and JBL folks I’ve learned that the compression drivers in the JBL Synthesis speakers work great with the microperf screen and do not require a large air gap that more traditional dome style drivers definitely need. Those need up to 8” of space to avoid comb filtering, where the compression drivers can be as close as 1” ( or less) with great results. I’ve been assured I can keep my current EZ Mount with great success with either an SCL-2 or SCL-4.

So if you want to keep the screen close to the wall I’d recommend the JBL SCL speaker series to get the compression drivers. The other learning is to stick with the Studiotek 130 material vs a woven material due to the significant loss of screen brightness going to any woven screen. Especially if you are used to the quality and brightness of the Studiotek 130.


----------



## kingtspoon

Great feedback @HTRaleigh I'll definitely keep this mind. I currently have a full SVS 7.2.4 system and would hate to sell my 3 Prime Pinnacle towers running as my LCR. They are amazing! I've got a few inches to spair behind the screen inside my alcove up to 10 inches max if I need to.


----------



## darksilkx

voyagerx said:


> I have dealt with @Craig Peer for various orders, including a Stewart screen and getting a sample prior to ordering. I highly recommend, but I'm sure there are others on here who can help as well.


Thank you, I'll reach out to Craig.


----------



## kosta88

Hello,
reading a bit of this thread (not all 238 pages!), I am trying to decide if to go with a Studiotek 130G4 Microperf X² THX Ultra.
I demoed the screen, and it was visually stunning to me. I am coming from a 0,85 Gain woven screen, which I've seen with NZ7, and then I've seen the Stewart with the NZ7, and was virtually blown away, it was like another PJ. My seating distance is 11-11,5ft, and the demo was at about 10ft, at this distance I was just barely able to discern the perforations on a white background, like logos and such. If I went behind the seat, the perforations disappeared.
However, I am trying to decide on an acoustic level. Picture is a clear winner.
In the demo, I am of course unable to listen without the screen and I can't put it up against my speakers. Which are: BeckerSound B300 (custom-built speakers with a horn, beckersounds - Eigenentwicklungen). I've read on couple of previous pages that speakers with compression drivers and wave guides / horns, shouldn't have any issues with perforated screens?
I am also listening to music on by B300 and woven screen, sounds good to me. Can I expect a similar or better performance from the ST130? Just not worse... considering B300 have horns which funnel the sound. I also angle my speakers slightly downwards and there is acoustic material all around the speakers, if that helps.


----------



## Ricoflashback

kwenar said:


> I still am awaiting more info from Adrian from Stewart as he told me they needed a few more weeks till they would know more. I don't want to harass him so I am patiently awaiting his next communication about price and ship times


Any update? Thx.


----------



## kwenar

Ricoflashback said:


> Any update? Thx.


Nope, not sure what is going on with these screens as I haven't heard any details further.


----------



## Craig Peer

kwenar said:


> Nope, not sure what is going on with these screens as I haven't heard any details further.


Contact Adrian again. Everyone was at Cedia for a week. Everyone was buried in emails and voice mails after Cedia.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Don Stewart

kwenar said:


> Nope, not sure what is going on with these screens as I haven't heard any details further.


We have now updated our order entry software to include the "Screenwall 2.5 UST" for both the GrayMatte 70 and StudioTek 100 screen materials and are now available to order through our dealers. Both of these materials use snap fasteners to attach to the frame. For the BlackHawk UST screen material, it attaches to the frame via screen edge binding grommets. The back of the frame has "S" hooks and bungee cord that is preattached to the frame at our factory. The order entry software for the BlackHawk material is still in progress.

Best Regards,
Don


----------



## Don Stewart

kosta88 said:


> Hello,
> reading a bit of this thread (not all 238 pages!), I am trying to decide if to go with a Studiotek 130G4 Microperf X² THX Ultra.
> I demoed the screen, and it was visually stunning to me. I am coming from a 0,85 Gain woven screen, which I've seen with NZ7, and then I've seen the Stewart with the NZ7, and was virtually blown away, it was like another PJ. My seating distance is 11-11,5ft, and the demo was at about 10ft, at this distance I was just barely able to discern the perforations on a white background, like logos and such. If I went behind the seat, the perforations disappeared.
> However, I am trying to decide on an acoustic level. Picture is a clear winner.
> In the demo, I am of course unable to listen without the screen and I can't put it up against my speakers. Which are: BeckerSound B300 (custom-built speakers with a horn, beckersounds - Eigenentwicklungen). I've read on couple of previous pages that speakers with compression drivers and wave guides / horns, shouldn't have any issues with perforated screens?
> I am also listening to music on by B300 and woven screen, sounds good to me. Can I expect a similar or better performance from the ST130? Just not worse... considering B300 have horns which funnel the sound. I also angle my speakers slightly downwards and there is acoustic material all around the speakers, if that helps.


The B300 speakers, and other speakers of similar design, are an excellent choice for behind the screen audio. It appears that the horn size is approximately 6" x 12" on the B300's giving around 72 square inches of HF output from the front of the speaker face. This allows the HF audio to cover a much larger surface area of of the back of the screen which in turn allows more HF through the screen with less EQ processing. As far as tilting and/or toeing in the L &R speakers, again, this can even add some additional surface area for sound distribution to the back of the screen with horn type speakers.


----------



## Ricoflashback

kwenar said:


> Nope, not sure what is going on with these screens as I haven't heard any details further.


Based on Don's post later on in the thread from your answer - - is this it? Is this the product you are talking about or something else? Thx.


----------



## kwenar

Ricoflashback said:


> Based on Don's post later on in the thread from your answer - - is this it? Is this the product you are talking about or something else? Thx.


Yes it is but I still have to wait on the one most people would want which is the Blackhawk material because the other two options are not ALR. It is probably because they never offered this material on a thick bezel before so it seems they are still working on that version to get it it right before they can release this for purchase.

Most people that have UST projectors will want an ALR version and not non ALR. The Greymatte70 or the other material is really only great if you have almost zero light in the room 

I will continue to wait till they reach out to me once it is available for purchase.


----------



## Ricoflashback

kwenar said:


> Yes it is but I still have to wait on the one most people would want which is the Blackhawk material because the other two options are not ALR. It is probably because they never offered this material on a thick bezel before so it seems they are still working on that version to get it it right before they can release this for purchase.
> 
> Most people that have UST projectors will want an ALR version and not non ALR. The Greymatte70 or the other material is really only great if you have almost zero light in the room
> 
> I will continue to wait till they reach out to me once it is available for purchase.


Thanks. The Blackhawk UST ALR material makes sense as long as it's truly for an Ultra Short Throw Projector.


----------



## kwenar

Ricoflashback said:


> Thanks. The Blackhawk UST ALR material makes sense as long as it's truly for an Ultra Short Throw Projector.


According to their website it is


----------



## Ricoflashback

kwenar said:


> According to their website it is


I'm beginning to think that the "Magic Bullet" fix to get rid of the halo/white reflection around the screen (not on the ceiling) is not a reality. I'm considering a custom "frame" solution, wrapped in black velvet, that I will affix around my screen and tack or screw into the wall that would provide an 8" black border all around the screen. Probably a much cheaper solution.


----------



## kwenar

Ricoflashback said:


> I'm beginning to think that the "Magic Bullet" fix to get rid of the halo/white reflection around the screen (not on the ceiling) is not a reality. I'm considering a custom "frame" solution, wrapped in black velvet, that I will affix around my screen and tack or screw into the wall that would provide an 8" black border all around the screen. Probably a much cheaper solution.


I think this will fix the issue once it is available based on what Adrian from Stewart told me. They tested multiple projectors to make sure it would hold the light in without blocking any of the picture that you are supposed to see. He was nice enough to let me talk to him on the phone even though he is a very busy person so that counts for something in my books. I appreciate that Stewart seems to be the only screen manufacture that is addressing these issues people have with UST projectors and once people get their hands on them I am sure they will get great reviews. 

I don't want a make work project like what you suggest as I want it to look as professional and factory made as possible. That option would definitely be more affordable but I am also not handy enough to make something like that look proper.

Hopefully I will be able to order one soon with the Blackhawk material. I will make sure I do a full review of the install to the end result of picture after everything is all said and done. I am optimistic that it will solve my issues I have with my Elunavison ALR screen.


----------



## kosta88

Don Stewart said:


> The B300 speakers, and other speakers of similar design, are an excellent choice for behind the screen audio. It appears that the horn size is approximately 6" x 12" on the B300's giving around 72 square inches of HF output from the front of the speaker face. This allows the HF audio to cover a much larger surface area of of the back of the screen which in turn allows more HF through the screen with less EQ processing. As far as tilting and/or toeing in the L &R speakers, again, this can even add some additional surface area for sound distribution to the back of the screen with horn type speakers.


Hello Don,
Thank you for the explanation. Looking at the diagramm, I see a word "CSP" - what does that mean?
Would you say it matters to put the speakers directly behind the screen or should there be some distance? I've read various opinions and seen some measurements here (though these have been done with a dome-tweeter from hifi speaker), but there is a lots of opinion that there should be 10-30cm distance from the back of the screen.
I would however much prefer to have almost no or very little distance.
Screen is coming in December, so I'm looking very much forward to it.


----------



## Don Stewart

kosta88 said:


> Hello Don,
> Thank you for the explanation. Looking at the diagramm, I see a word "CSP" - what does that mean?
> Would you say it matters to put the speakers directly behind the screen or should there be some distance? I've read various opinions and seen some measurements here (though these have been done with a dome-tweeter from hifi speaker), but there is a lots of opinion that there should be 10-30cm distance from the back of the screen.
> I would however much prefer to have almost no or very little distance.
> Screen is coming in December, so I'm looking very much forward to it.


The distance that you have read about is for a typical consumer speaker with about a 1" diameter dome HF tweeter. Your B300 speakers have about 70 X more surface area of distribution than a typical dome speaker that is placed up tight to the back of the screen. That said, the B300 speaker can be mounted close to the back of the screen because of its recessed horn design. CSP stands for a Cinema Sonic Processor which is just a fancy name for an EQ processor.

Regards,
Don


----------



## Don Stewart

To answer a few questions above, the BlackHawk screen is a true ALR screen with horizontal micro lenticular screen surface. Each lenticular line has a slightly different pitch angle from screen's bottom to top which angular reflects the UST PJ's incident light rays back to the viewing area. If you projected on the screen with a conventional long throw lens, the incident light rays angles would not match up with lenticular pitch angles so the image would not be properly reflecting light back to viewing area. The WallScreen 2.5 UST frame is designed for over scanning on the the light asorbing Velux frame finish which makes for an easier set up when installing a UST PJ. Photo below of prototype being tested with an LG UST PJ in our training classroom here at our factory.


----------



## Ricoflashback

kwenar said:


> I think this will fix the issue once it is available based on what Adrian from Stewart told me. They tested multiple projectors to make sure it would hold the light in without blocking any of the picture that you are supposed to see. He was nice enough to let me talk to him on the phone even though he is a very busy person so that counts for something in my books. I appreciate that Stewart seems to be the only screen manufacture that is addressing these issues people have with UST projectors and once people get their hands on them I am sure they will get great reviews.
> 
> I don't want a make work project like what you suggest as I want it to look as professional and factory made as possible. That option would definitely be more affordable but I am also not handy enough to make something like that look proper.
> 
> Hopefully I will be able to order one soon with the Blackhawk material. I will make sure I do a full review of the install to the end result of picture after everything is all said and done. I am optimistic that it will solve my issues I have with my Elunavison ALR screen.


Sounds great! Let us know how it works out. BTW - I would never undertake a project like making my own screen border. Definitely something I would farm out to an expert. Heck, I had professional installers that put together my screen and hung it properly. I left the math to them. If I ever get another screen, I'd do the exact same thing.


----------



## Ricoflashback

Don Stewart said:


> To answer a few questions above, the BlackHawk screen is a true ALR screen with horizontal micro lenticular screen surface. Each lenticular line has a slightly different pitch angle from screen's bottom to top which angular reflects the UST PJ's incident light rays back to the viewing area. If you projected on the screen with a conventional long throw lens, the incident light rays angles would not match up with lenticular pitch angles so the image would not be properly reflecting light back to viewing area. The WallScreen 2.5 UST frame is designed for over scanning on the the light asorbing Velux frame finish which makes for an easier set up when installing a UST PJ. Photo below of prototype being tested with an LG UST PJ in our training classroom here at our factory.
> 
> View attachment 3346780


That looks great! But the true test will be a totally darkened room to see if there is still the light halo around the frame. (Not on the ceiling like from a fresnel screen - - aka, the Tinker Bell Effect)

Can you please provide screen shots of that environment? Much thanks.


----------



## Don Stewart

Ricoflashback said:


> That looks great! But the true test will be a totally darkened room to see if there is still the light halo around the frame. (Not on the ceiling like from a fresnel screen - - aka, the Tinker Bell Effect)
> 
> Can you please provide screen shots of that environment? Much thanks.


The pitch angles of the lenticulars redirects and bends the light towards the viewers, not the ceiling. They also block ambient light from above the screen. That said, the screen has now been removed from the training room and disassembled, so getting a photo on the 12 foot high ceilings would be a project at this time.

Regards,
Don


----------



## Ricoflashback

Don Stewart said:


> The pitch angles of the lenticulars redirects and bends the light towards the viewers, not the ceiling. They also block ambient light from above the screen. That said, the screen has now been removed from the training room and disassembled, so getting a photo on the 12 foot high ceilings would be a project at this time.
> 
> Regards,
> Don


Thanks, Don. Much appreciated. Kwenar has been talking about this screen so I'll wait until he gets it to see how it's working for him. Anticipated production and ship date?


----------



## kosta88

Don Stewart said:


> The distance that you have read about is for a typical consumer speaker with about a 1" diameter dome HF tweeter. Your B300 speakers have about 70 X more surface area of distribution than a typical dome speaker that is placed up tight to the back of the screen. That said, the B300 speaker can be mounted close to the back of the screen because of its recessed horn design. CSP stands for a Cinema Sonic Processor which is just a fancy name for an EQ processor.


Great! So, since I like how to B300 also sound for music (using them with Xilica DSPs, each driver separately equalized for the room), I would also conclude that ST130G4 in combination with my speakers should be a good combination not only for movies, but also for music listening?


----------



## Don Stewart

Hi Kosta,
Myself, as a nearly lifelong semi-pro musician, I have found over the years that music preferences of sound timbre very a lot among listeners. As an example. If one goes into an audio retailer's demo room where there are a dozen sets of different speakers, and the store's staff gives you A-B comparisons of the different speakers, one person's ears may prefer the sound timbre of one set of speakers as where another person may prefer a completely different set of speakers. Since music is such an individual personal choice, it would be difficult for me to make that judgement call for another person. That being said, I can say your speakers can be EQ processed as indicated on the SPL graph that was published above and then fine tune adjusted to your personal liking.
Best Regards,
Don

BTW, here is some more info on the ST 130 G4 MP.


----------



## got_hd-dvd

Don Stewart said:


> To answer a few questions above, the BlackHawk screen is a true ALR screen with horizontal micro lenticular screen surface. Each lenticular line has a slightly different pitch angle from screen's bottom to top which angular reflects the UST PJ's incident light rays back to the viewing area. If you projected on the screen with a conventional long throw lens, the incident light rays angles would not match up with lenticular pitch angles so the image would not be properly reflecting light back to viewing area. The WallScreen 2.5 UST frame is designed for over scanning on the the light asorbing Velux frame finish which makes for an easier set up when installing a UST PJ. Photo below of prototype being tested with an LG UST PJ in our training classroom here at our factory.
> 
> View attachment 3346780


is there any UST screen material that can be used and would be acceptable for both long throw and UST projectors? I'm asking because in my experience the projector will be replaced more frequently than the screen will be, and having one material able to work well with both projector types seems like it would be desirable to have.


----------



## Don Stewart

got_hd-dvd said:


> Is there any UST screen material that can be used and would be acceptable for both long throw and UST projectors? I'm asking because in my experience the projector will be replaced more frequently than the screen will be, and having one material able to work well with both projector types seems like it would be desirable to have.


Yes, lambertian type screen surfaces that will equally accept PJ incident light rays from any angle and will then distribute the image back equally to all angles of view. These would include StudioTek 100 reference screen, GrayMatte 70, a neutral density gray with black level enhancing surface, and from time to time, GrayMatte 50 when we have left over remnants from when we do a custom production run for our Aerospace simulation customers and Disney Circle Visions.


----------



## aiyaaabatt

Hi all, I'm new to projectors and need some help picking a screen material. I'm leaning towards the Stewart 130 G4 but I'm not sure if it's ideal for my room situation. Details:

*Projector: *JVC NZ9. I plan to ceiling mount the projector all the way at the back wall (see red highlighted area in pic).
*Screen type and size:* Luxus drop down, 150'' 2.35:1. (Projector for movies only. I will use a wall mounted 83'' LG OLED for everything else)
*Room dimensions: *25' wide, 20' deep, 9.5' height (but where projector will be mounted there is only 8' height, see pic).

This is our basement living room and I am able to have zero ambient light other than what may possibly reflect off walls and ceiling while using the projector & screen. I know the room colors are not ideal. I am willing to paint the ceiling a dark gray color, and hoping to keep the walls the current gray unless strongly advised to paint as well.

Random Q if anyone feels like answering: because of the projector location height drop off, the center of the projector lens will be roughly 18'' lower than the planned top of the projector screen. Am I going to notice any visual degradation in the picture by having to use the vertical lens shift to account for these height differences?

Thanks in advance!


----------



## markmon1

aiyaaabatt said:


> Hi all, I'm new to projectors and need some help picking a screen material. I'm leaning towards the Stewart 130 G4 but I'm not sure if it's ideal for my room situation. Details:
> 
> *Projector: *JVC NZ9. I plan to ceiling mount the projector all the way at the back wall (see red highlighted area in pic).
> *Screen type and size:* Luxus drop down, 150'' 16:9. (Projector for movies only. I will use a wall mounted 83'' LG OLED for everything else)
> *Room dimensions: *25' wide, 20' deep, 9.5' height (but where projector will be mounted there is only 8' height, see pic).
> 
> This is our basement living room and I am able to have zero ambient light other than what may possibly reflect off walls and ceiling while using the projector & screen. I know the room colors are not ideal. I am willing to paint the ceiling a dark gray color, and hoping to keep the walls the current gray unless strongly advised to paint
> as well.
> 
> Random Q if anyone feels like answering: because of the projector location height drop off, the center of the projector lens will be roughly 18'' lower than the planned top of the projector screen. Am I going to notice any visual degradation in the picture by having to use the vertical lens shift to account for these height differences?
> 
> Thanks in advance!
> 
> View attachment 3348481
> 
> View attachment 3348482


I have an NZ9 pointing at a ST130 G4 screen at a similar height as you are proposing, and it's perfect. I couldn't recommend the ST130 G4 enough. Even if you have plenty of light, the G4's gain over the ST100 will allow you to close your NZ9's iris down a bit more and improve contrast. I run my NZ9 at mid laser -11 iris and contrast is great.

You will definitely benefit from doing a bout of 3 feet from the screen in velvet material. Perhaps this will be better for you than painting the walls as it's not a permanent change and will be much more impactful. Light control (just shutting off lights) will still give you those great JVC blacks on dark scenes. The velvet would improve the brighter scenes.

See this:


http://hifiandtheater.com/files/velvet.mp4


----------



## mrvideo

aiyaaabatt said:


> Projector for movies only. I will use a wall mounted 83'' LG OLED for everything else


I have to ask... why?


----------



## humbland

Please excuse if question this has been asked and answered. There are almost 5k posts in this thread...
We are setting up for a major HT remodel with a new Sony VPL XW6000ES 4K projector. Time to upgrade the screen. I've decided on a 123 inch diagonal Stewart Luxus, The question is: whether or not to go with the Stewart Studio Tek 100 (unity gain) or the Studio Tek 130 (1.3 gain) material. Viewing distance is about 15 feet.
Both of the Stewart formulations are industry standards. With the XW6000 (2500 lumens), brightness should not be an issue. However, with HDR pictures, my understanding is that most projectors need all the brightness possible. 90% of our viewing is SDR material (at least at this point). As more content becomes available, it's conceivable that we might view more HDR...
Thoughts?


----------



## aiyaaabatt

mrvideo said:


> I have to ask... why?


Because this is not a dedicated movie room, and we will often be watching things in social settings where we want some decent ambient lighting (e.g. sports). I know they make ALR screens that help, but I've never seen one in person and in all the online videos I've seen they still seem pretty washed out in settings with decent ambient lighting. Also, from what I've seen in cross comparison videos, ALR screens seem to affect the color accuracy by adding a slight tint. It just seems too risky to me, but I'd be glad to be convinced otherwise!


----------



## aiyaaabatt

markmon1 said:


> I have an NZ9 pointing at a ST130 G4 screen at a similar height as you are proposing, and it's perfect. I couldn't recommend the ST130 G4 enough. Even if you have plenty of light, the G4's gain over the ST100 will allow you to close your NZ9's iris down a bit more and improve contrast. I run my NZ9 at mid laser -11 iris and contrast is great.
> 
> You will definitely benefit from doing a bout of 3 feet from the screen in velvet material. Perhaps this will be better for you than painting the walls as it's not a permanent change and will be much more impactful. Light control (just shutting off lights) will still give you those great JVC blacks on dark scenes. The velvet would improve the brighter scenes.
> 
> See this:
> 
> 
> http://hifiandtheater.com/files/velvet.mp4


Great to hear of your success with the height differences and ST130 G4, and thanks for the tips! I think probably velvet on the ceiling is too much for WAF, so will likely have to paint it a dark gray color


----------



## ChopShop1

I have asked this in the JBL M2 thread, as that's my lcr setup and had hoped some folks may have had experience. I'd really like to run the ST130MP for the gain factor so I can get the most out of my JVC RS4500. I'm a bit concerned because I have a baffle wall that will only leave about 3" or so from the baffle of the LCR to the screen. I know the traditional answer had always been 12" at least, but a Harman tech who sets up their cinemas told me he likes to see the M2 placed as close as possible to the MP screen. I'd love to belief him, but it seems odd. I'd have thought these threads and outside writeups would be loaded with this info if it were true. Can anyone here offer some info on the matter? Thanks!


----------



## HTRaleigh

ChopShop1 said:


> I have asked this in the JBL M2 thread, as that's my lcr setup and had hoped some folks may have had experience. I'd really like to run the ST130MP for the gain factor so I can get the most out of my JVC RS4500. I'm a bit concerned because I have a baffle wall that will only leave about 3" or so from the baffle of the LCR to the screen. I know the traditional answer had always been 12" at least, but a Harman tech who sets up their cinemas told me he likes to see the M2 placed as close as possible to the MP screen. I'd love to belief him, but it seems odd. I'd have thought these threads and outside writeups would be loaded with this info if it were true. Can anyone here offer some info on the matter? Thanks!


JBL does recommend this. I was told this in a face to face discussion this summer with JBL factory calibration folks after I asked them this same direct question. Go to the John Schuermann’s discussion in the Official JBL Synthesis thread (pages 135-145 is a good starting place). He built his demo system with JBL SCL-2 speakers to have the wave guide as close to the back of the screen as possible. He had to do extra work because he used a Stewart masked screen with the roller at the top of his frame. He loves his setup and after EQ was completed the sound quality and soundstage has been recognized by many professional AV calibrators as sensational. I’m getting ready to do the same in my theater rebuild. I plan to continue to use my wall mounted EZ Mount on my Deluxe Wallscreen when I switch the material to the Studiotek 130G4 Microperf material. That should be about an inch behind the screen. The JBL compression drivers can project the sound through the Microperfs without comb filtering. I do plan to put in 4” of OC 703 in all non-speaker areas behind the screen.

So your setup at 3” should be fine but even better if you can further reduce that gap like John did. I think Don Stewart has also indicated on this thread this works well. I think the reco for dome type tweeters/midrange is still a minimum of 8” because of the much smaller cross sectional dimension of a non-horn dome tweeter vs a CD waveguide design.


----------



## ChopShop1

HTRaleigh said:


> JBL does recommend this. I was told this in a face to face discussion this summer with JBL factory calibration folks after I asked them this same direct question. Go to the John Schuermann’s discussion in the Official JBL Synthesis thread (pages 135-145 is a good starting place). He built his demo system with JBL SCL-2 speakers to have the wave guide as close to the back of the screen as possible. He had to do extra work because he used a Stewart masked screen with the roller at the top of his frame. He loves his setup and after EQ was completed the sound quality and soundstage has been recognized by many professional AV calibrators as sensational. I’m getting ready to do the same in my theater rebuild. I plan to continue to use my wall mounted EZ Mount on my Deluxe Wallscreen when I switch the material to the Studiotek 130G4 Microperf material. That should be about an inch behind the screen. The JBL compression drivers can project the sound through the Microperfs without comb filtering. I do plan to put in 4” of OC 703 in all non-speaker areas behind the screen.
> 
> So your setup at 3” should be fine but even better if you can further reduce that gap like John did. I think Don Stewart has also indicated on this thread this works well. I think the reco for dome type tweeters/midrange is still a minimum of 8” because of the much smaller cross sectional dimension of a non-horn dome tweeter vs a CD waveguide design.


Man, that's great! I can place the M2s all but touching the screen. Closer the better for me, as I can add a few more inches of absorption in the back for the SBA. It's really nice to be able to do this and not lose valuable real estate in room length for space between the speakers and the screen. I will need to keep a couple of inches for excursion of the subs (sealed, so no ports firing into the back of the screen) that will be placed in 8 positions on the baffle wall, most behind some part of the screen.


----------



## noah katz

Hi Don,

Any plans for a long throw (2.15:1 in my case) ALR screen?



Don Stewart said:


> ...the BlackHawk screen is a true ALR screen with horizontal micro lenticular screen surface. Each lenticular line has a slightly different pitch angle from screen's bottom to top which angular reflects the UST PJ's incident light rays back to the viewing area. If you projected on the screen with a conventional long throw lens, the incident light rays angles would not match up with lenticular pitch angles so the image would not be properly reflecting light back to viewing area.


----------



## Don Stewart

noah katz said:


> Hi Don,
> 
> Any plans for a long throw (2.15:1 in my case) ALR screen?


We currently have the FireHawk G5 ALR and Phantom HALR screens specifically designed for long throw lenses. These can be made in any aspect ratio and with no size limitations. (As long at they are under 40 feet by 90 feet)


----------



## grobalt

@Don Stewart
May i ask for the spec sheet of GrayMatte 50 ? Viewing angle is the information i am looking for


----------



## Don Stewart

grobalt said:


> @Don Stewart
> May i ask for the spec sheet of GrayMatte 50 ? Viewing angle is the information i am looking for


The GrayMatte 50 is not published on our website. The specs are as follows.
Gain: 0.5
Finish: Neutral Density Gray.
Half Gain Angle: Lambertian Surface. (Meaning the surface distributes the light equally to all angles of view)
Minimum Throw Distance: None, can be used with UST Lens or Standard Lens.
Mounting Options. Fixed frame or electric retractable models.
MicroPerf Option: Yes

Best regards,
Don


----------



## Erod

HTRaleigh said:


> JBL does recommend this. I was told this in a face to face discussion this summer with JBL factory calibration folks after I asked them this same direct question. Go to the John Schuermann’s discussion in the Official JBL Synthesis thread (pages 135-145 is a good starting place). He built his demo system with JBL SCL-2 speakers to have the wave guide as close to the back of the screen as possible. He had to do extra work because he used a Stewart masked screen with the roller at the top of his frame. He loves his setup and after EQ was completed the sound quality and soundstage has been recognized by many professional AV calibrators as sensational. I’m getting ready to do the same in my theater rebuild. I plan to continue to use my wall mounted EZ Mount on my Deluxe Wallscreen when I switch the material to the Studiotek 130G4 Microperf material. That should be about an inch behind the screen. The JBL compression drivers can project the sound through the Microperfs without comb filtering. I do plan to put in 4” of OC 703 in all non-speaker areas behind the screen.
> 
> So your setup at 3” should be fine but even better if you can further reduce that gap like John did. I think Don Stewart has also indicated on this thread this works well. I think the reco for dome type tweeters/midrange is still a minimum of 8” because of the much smaller cross sectional dimension of a non-horn dome tweeter vs a CD waveguide design.


What about an AMT tweeter?


----------



## ng4ever

Just got 2 for $500 awesome.


----------



## Don Stewart

From time to time, I like to post some other interesting products we produce here at Stewart Filmscreen. Photos of a large back projection simulation screen for the USAF Boeing's KC 46 air tanker we shipped last week. These are the most state of the art simulators using collimated optics to align the pilot and copilot's eye points of the projected image to the same parallax out the widow and nearly out to infinity. The projectors that are most commonly used in these sims are JVC, Barco and Sony. Typical cost for one of these simulators are $20M plus.

Getting ready to ship to the USAF.









Final finishing touches before packing.









How Collimated Optics Work









Boeing's KC 46 Tanker


----------



## kosta88

And I am still waiting for my screen...


----------



## Ellebob

Impressive Don!


----------



## Stan-Lee

humbland said:


> Please excuse if question this has been asked and answered. There are almost 5k posts in this thread...
> We are setting up for a major HT remodel with a new Sony VPL XW6000ES 4K projector. Time to upgrade the screen. I've decided on a 123 inch diagonal Stewart Luxus, The question is: whether or not to go with the Stewart Studio Tek 100 (unity gain) or the Studio Tek 130 (1.3 gain) material. Viewing distance is about 15 feet.
> Both of the Stewart formulations are industry standards. With the XW6000 (2500 lumens), brightness should not be an issue. However, with HDR pictures, my understanding is that most projectors need all the brightness possible. 90% of our viewing is SDR material (at least at this point). As more content becomes available, it's conceivable that we might view more HDR...
> Thoughts?


I have the same pj. Just got it and glad I got it. I have a StudioTek 100, 120” diagonal with a 13 ft throw distance. I am completely happy with performance. And this is in a living room that is not a dedicated movie room. But, we only watch movies at night so no issues with light. You really cannot go wrong with either screen choice.


----------



## ng4ever

Stan-Lee said:


> I have the same pj. Just got it and glad I got it. I have a StudioTek 100, 120” diagonal with a 13 ft throw distance. I am completely happy with performance. And this is in a living room that is not a dedicated movie room. But, we only watch movies at night so no issues with light. You really cannot go wrong with either screen choice.


I agree. I got my 120” one for $500 well worth it


----------



## Surge2018

Have not been happy with my Stewart Luxus motorized retractable screen, unfortunately. It arrived with an uneven roller which has caused 4 horizontal creases in the screen, which are noticeable, especially on brightly lit scenes. Stewart customer service has not been great either — but still waiting for them to fix this.

I understand the new Luxus design has a different mounting solution than my 2018 model, which is hanging from 2 hooks in my ceiling. Can the new one hang suspended like the old one?

EDIT: Stewart has taken care of me. Great service and support! Highly recommended. I was not impressed with a couple of other screen vendors I reached out to recently.


----------



## fredworld

Surge2018 said:


> Have not been happy with my Stewart Luxus motorized retractable screen, unfortunately. It *arrived with an uneven roller which has caused 4 horizontal creases in the screen*, which are noticeable, especially on brightly lit scenes. Stewart customer service has not been great either — but still waiting for them to fix this.
> 
> I understand the new Luxus design has a different mounting solution than my 2018 model, which is hanging from 2 hooks in my ceiling. Can the new one hang suspended like the old one?


I don't know how long you've had your screen but the creases should dissipate. Here are *search results for creases*. Perusing the messages will reveal various means for resolution.
One of my Stewart screens ended up with noticeable creases after I had it stored for about 6 months. I did nothing other than reinstall it into its frame and within several weeks they were barely noticeable. Within a few months they were gone. I'm surprised Stewart isn't advising accordingly. Perhaps because yours is retractable the problem exacerbates itself with each roll-up?


----------



## Ricoflashback

kwenar said:


> I think this will fix the issue once it is available based on what Adrian from Stewart told me. They tested multiple projectors to make sure it would hold the light in without blocking any of the picture that you are supposed to see. He was nice enough to let me talk to him on the phone even though he is a very busy person so that counts for something in my books. I appreciate that Stewart seems to be the only screen manufacture that is addressing these issues people have with UST projectors and once people get their hands on them I am sure they will get great reviews.
> 
> I don't want a make work project like what you suggest as I want it to look as professional and factory made as possible. That option would definitely be more affordable but I am also not handy enough to make something like that look proper.
> 
> Hopefully I will be able to order one soon with the Blackhawk material. I will make sure I do a full review of the install to the end result of picture after everything is all said and done. I am optimistic that it will solve my issues I have with my Elunavison ALR screen.


Did you get the screen with the new bezel and Blackhawk material?


----------



## Surge2018

fredworld said:


> I don't know how long you've had your screen but the creases should dissipate. Here are *search results for creases*. Perusing the messages will reveal various means for resolution.
> One of my Stewart screens ended up with noticeable creases after I had it stored for about 6 months. I did nothing other than reinstall it into its frame and within several weeks they were barely noticeable. Within a few months they were gone. I'm surprised Stewart isn't advising accordingly. Perhaps because yours is retractable the problem exacerbates itself with each roll-up?


Thanks for your message. Indeed, the creases come from the roller which has a slight raised part or ridge. The good news is that *Stewart is standing behind the product*, even though I’ve had it for 4 years. The *customer service is truly excellent*, highly recommended.


----------



## Surge2018

I am specifying a new Luxus retractable screen and thought I would ask the experts here if I should stay with Grayhawk G4 or switch to another material, such as StudioTek 130 G4.
Projector: JVC RS3000 (at some point I will replace this with the JVC laser; but I’m very happy with the RS3000)
Throw: 10’1”
Room width: 12’ - I am viewing on axis, room is narrow
Light controlled: never have lights on/no windows
Walls/ceiling: off-white/beige

I am happy with the Grayhawk G4. I think the StudioTek 130 will reflect more light on to the ceiling/side walls/speakers, which are very close to the screen. Is that correct?
Also, given the short throw distance, the 130 will create some visible hotspotting/non-uniformity.

I know there’s a usually a preference for higher gain, especially with HDR and projectors, but *higher gain does not come “free” — there are always trade-offs.*
That’s what I have heard. Thoughts? Thanks!


----------



## twinkletoes2035

Don Stewart said:


> From time to time, I like to post some other interesting products we produce here at Stewart Filmscreen. Photos of a large back projection simulation screen for the USAF Boeing's KC 46 air tanker we shipped last week. These are the most state of the art simulators using collimated optics to align the pilot and copilot's eye points of the projected image to the same parallax out the widow and nearly out to infinity. The projectors that are most commonly used in these sims are JVC, Barco and Sony. Typical cost for one of these simulators are $20M plus.
> 
> Getting ready to ship to the USAF.
> View attachment 3358738
> 
> 
> Final finishing touches before packing.
> View attachment 3358743
> 
> 
> How Collimated Optics Work
> View attachment 3358744
> 
> 
> Boeing's KC 46 Tanker
> View attachment 3358745


What rigid rear projection screens do you guys make?


----------



## nevir

I could use some help/suggestions selecting a screen material for a somewhat challenging space.

Details:

Projector XW6000 (rated for 2500k lumens), mounted on a shelf above the seating area
The screen would be at a 1.48x throw ratio (89" screen width, 132" lens-to-screen)
The room has a fair bit of ambient light (white walls, large exterior windows to one side, and one wall is open to an 'atrium' with skylights (~20 feet above)
The screen is going to be floating in the opening between the edge of the room and the atrium (aka not against a wall, and the atrium space will be visible to the sides of the screen when it is deployed)
My goals:

I'm looking for _decent_ quality during the day,
And_ good_ quality at night w/ lights off
I'm flexible on the screen size; though ~100" diagonal seems ideal
My current thinking:

Given the light level of the space, an ALR screen seems like a requirement
And given the throw ratio of 1.48x, GrayHawk seems like the 'right' choice on paper
But, it also seems like a black screen (phantom HALR) would be much better for the space (given the ambient light). How bad would it be to use one at a ~1.5x throw ratio?
What other thoughts do folk have?
Thanks in advance!


----------



## kwenar

Ricoflashback said:


> Did you get the screen with the new bezel and Blackhawk material?


Not sure what is going on as I still haven't been able to order one or find out pricing. It doesn't seem promising and I guess I will have to find other options. I am looking looking into getting some custom wall panels to eat the overscan. Nobody seems to make them though so I will have to probably partner with a company to try make something to my liking


----------



## Ricoflashback

kwenar said:


> Not sure what is going on as I still haven't been able to order one or find out pricing. It doesn't seem promising and I guess I will have to find other options. I am looking looking into getting some custom wall panels to eat the overscan. Nobody seems to make them though so I will have to probably partner with a company to try make something to my liking


Thanks. I suspect that Stewart couldn’t get rid of the overscan so it will just be an expensive UST screen in a land with lots of UST screen options. We’re finally moving to our new house and while I initially was looking to upgrade my screen to 120” - the room doesn’t accommodate that size. I’ll stick with my El Cheapo, 100” WEMAX screen that I purchased for $400 from Amazon. Outside of the clips on the corners, which really aren’t noticeable unless you look for them, the screen has been fantastic with great colors and lots of pop with my Formovie Global Theater T1 UST PJ.

The room was painted a darker gray color that matches the screen color. I might need some wall treatments as it has a higher ceiling, as well. Since I really can’t figure a way to decently mount a center speaker - I’ll go with a phantom center as my new Focal Chora 826-d’s (4) should be shipped soon.

Good luck with your project. I might go down that path or try a creative way to install a black felt border around my screen. Surprisingly, the overscan doesn’t bother me as much as I thought it would. A gray wall versus my current light, off white wall, should help. All the best and Happy Thanksgiving!


----------



## Surge2018

Just chiming in: I don’t think this is “overscan” - it’s the screen reflecting light to the sides. With a Grayhawk for example, that’s minimized. It’s the main reason I went with it and it was recommended by Stewart for this reason as well. If you have non-dark walls/ceiling or other objects close to the screen, a > 1 gain screen will typically reflect light off the screen surface and on to walls, etc.


----------



## Ricoflashback

Surge2018 said:


> Just chiming in: I don’t think this is “overscan” - it’s the screen reflecting light to the sides. With a Grayhawk for example, that’s minimized. It’s the main reason I went with it and it was recommended by Stewart for this reason as well. If you have non-dark walls/ceiling or other objects close to the screen, a > 1 gain screen will typically reflect light off the screen surface and on to walls, etc.


Do you have a UST projector? That is what we are talking about. Call it overscan, reflection - whatever. It’s more prevalent with a UST projector due to the extreme angle of projection. Even with my regular throw PJ, I had some stray light off the screen. Not the end of the world and it can be addressed but definitely noticeable.


----------



## Surge2018

Ricoflashback said:


> Do you have a UST projector? That is what we are talking about. Call it overscan, reflection - whatever. It’s more prevalent with a UST projector due to the extreme angle of projection. Even with my regular throw PJ, I had some stray light off the screen. Not the end of the world and it can be addressed but definitely noticeable.


Ah, no, I don't. Sorry... never mind. But it does impact normal front projectors as well - light reflects off the screen and 'lights up' the room around the screen.


----------



## Surge2018

Has anyone seen LUXUS G2 end caps in walnut, or another type of wood?


----------



## dankeff

Hi.

I am looking for some advice on the best Stewart screen and material for my home theatre setup. Below is setup/requirements:


Projector is an Epson LS12000B ceiling mounted
Using a Lumagen Radiance Pro for processing
Screen would be 100" tab tensioned 16:9 retractable wall mounted for front projection
Throw distance is ~3.2m
Screen will hang over a window however the window has curtains so the amount of light coming in from behind will be quite minimal. It is also not a window that ever gets direct sun at any time during the day.
I am able to completely darken the room and remove pretty much all ambient light
Room is not very wide (relative to the screen width) and seating area is pretty much directly in the centre of where the screen will be so I don't really need a wide viewing angle
There are plenty of other objects in the room on either side that are not light absorbing (white walls, book shelves etc.) so despite being able to fully control ambient light I cannot really control light reflection too well.

This may sound crazy (and something that would be assumed) but I want a screen with tight tolerances for size. Having bought a much cheaper brand screen (won't mention brand) and discovering that the size of the viewing area doesn't really match what is advertised (seems to not quite be true 16:9 because I can't quite get a 16:9 image to fit both height and width). I also found that the black border across the bottom of the screen isn't a uniform thickness meaning that the height of the viewable is larger in the middle of the image than at left and right (ie. the bottom of the viewable area is slightly curved)...the height of the viewable area in the middle of the screen is about 0.5cm larger than at left and right....when I pointed this out to manufacturer I was told that they work to tolerances of +/- 1 inch which seems huge doesn't it? Can anyone confirm what sort of tolerances I should expect from a Stewart screen? 

My current selection based on reading around on Stewart website and reviews and others comments is to get a Luxus screen but I am not sure which would be the best material to get. I definitely don't have a large amount of ambient light but I probably get some reflections off walls etc. and I don't need a super wide viewing angle (actually viewing angle is pretty narrow). I would also probably like an opaque layer in the screen just to be sure that any minimal light from behind doesn't cause any problems 

In the tool on the Stewart website if I select that I can fully control it recommends SnoMatte 100 but given the potential for some reflection in my room I suspect I should choose "partially control". If I select "Partial Control" I get recommendations of:


Phantom HALR
Firehawk G5
GrayHawk G4
GrayMatte 70
Phantom HALR Plus

From my limited knowledge I don't think I really need Phantom HALR so I have been looking at the other 3 options and it seemed like "GrayHawk G4" might be the best option for me. What do people think?

Please let me know if I am missing something obvious and being dumb (highly possible). Also let me know if you think the Luxus isn't the best screen option. It seemed to fit the bill for what I was looking for


----------



## fredworld

dankeff said:


> Hi.
> 
> I am looking for some advice on the best Stewart screen and material for my home theatre setup. Below is setup/requirements:
> 
> 
> Projector is an Epson LS12000B ceiling mounted
> Using a Lumagen Radiance Pro for processing
> Screen would be 100" tab tensioned 16:9 retractable wall mounted for front projection
> Throw distance is ~3.2m
> Screen will hang over a window however the window has curtains so the amount of light coming in from behind will be quite minimal. It is also not a window that ever gets direct sun at any time during the day.
> I am able to completely darken the room and remove pretty much all ambient light
> Room is not very wide (relative to the screen width) and seating area is pretty much directly in the centre of where the screen will be so I don't really need a wide viewing angle
> There are plenty of other objects in the room on either side that are not light absorbing (white walls, book shelves etc.) so despite being able to fully control ambient light I cannot really control light reflection too well.
> 
> This may sound crazy (and something that would be assumed) but I want a screen with tight tolerances for size. Having bought a much cheaper brand screen (won't mention brand) and discovering that the size of the viewing area doesn't really match what is advertised (seems to not quite be true 16:9 because I can't quite get a 16:9 image to fit both height and width). I also found that the black border across the bottom of the screen isn't a uniform thickness meaning that the height of the viewable is larger in the middle of the image than at left and right (ie. the bottom of the viewable area is slightly curved)...the height of the viewable area in the middle of the screen is about 0.5cm larger than at left and right....when I pointed this out to manufacturer I was told that they work to tolerances of +/- 1 inch which seems huge doesn't it? Can anyone confirm what sort of tolerances I should expect from a Stewart screen?
> 
> My current selection based on reading around on Stewart website and reviews and others comments is to get a Luxus screen but I am not sure which would be the best material to get. I definitely don't have a large amount of ambient light but I probably get some reflections off walls etc. and I don't need a super wide viewing angle (actually viewing angle is pretty narrow). I would also probably like an opaque layer in the screen just to be sure that any minimal light from behind doesn't cause any problems
> 
> In the tool on the Stewart website if I select that I can fully control it recommends SnoMatte 100 but given the potential for some reflection in my room I suspect I should choose "partially control". If I select "Partial Control" I get recommendations of:
> 
> 
> Phantom HALR
> Firehawk G5
> GrayHawk G4
> GrayMatte 70
> Phantom HALR Plus
> 
> From my limited knowledge I don't think I really need Phantom HALR so I have been looking at the other 3 options and it seemed like "GrayHawk G4" might be the best option for me. What do people think?
> 
> Please let me know if I am missing something obvious and being dumb (highly possible). Also let me know if you think the Luxus isn't the best screen option. It seemed to fit the bill for what I was looking forand


From what you describe I would lean towards your initial thoughts of SnowMatte 100 or a Studiotek 100. The Epsons are light cannons so I doubt very much that you'd need anything greater than 1.0 gain. I spent quite some time discussing options with July Lopez of Stewart, who really knows theh Stewart product lines. I went with his recommendation and I never looked back. Others might chime in with different thoughts as many on these forums enjoy their higher gain screens but for me, after living with a Firehawk 1.2 gain screen for 15 years the switch to the Studiotek 100 was impressive.


----------



## dankeff

Ok, interesting. Thanks!

i was slightly worried that with something like the studio Tek or snomatte the wide viewing cone might cause issues with room reflections which is why I wondered if grayhawk might be better and that has a gain of 0.9.

Will definitely discuss with Stewart once the holidays are over.


----------



## magnetic

To offer a counter point - having had both rooms with white walls and blacked out rooms, I definitely would -not- do a StudioTek 100 or 130 in a white walled room. It's a fantastic screen, but in an untreated room it will just be completely washed out in any mixed contrast scene. Firehawk has its downsides when it comes to uniformity, etc, but your brain is much better at ignoring those than it is washed out blacks.


----------



## fredworld

magnetic said:


> To offer a counter point - having had both rooms with white walls and blacked out rooms, I definitely would -not- do a StudioTek 100 or 130 in a white walled room. It's a fantastic screen, but in an untreated room it will just be completely washed out in any mixed contrast scene. Firehawk has its downsides when it comes to uniformity, etc, but your brain is much better at ignoring those than it is washed out blacks.


My apologies to @dankeff as I missed his "white walls" comment. All the more reason to reach out directly to a Stewart rep to discuss his situation in depth.


----------



## Surge2018

Grayhawk G4 is your best bet, @dankeff. Your room is similar to mine in terms of size and non-dark walls. I‘ve had a *Grayhawk G4* LUXUS for 4 years and love it. Stewart confirmed this as the best choice for my room (if you scroll up you’ll see my room). I’m actually replacing it with the new G2 LUXUS and staying with Grayhawk.


As far as size - I think Stewart is very precise when it comes to size. I recently measured my 100” diag. 16:9 and it’s perfect, easily to within 1/8”.


----------



## dankeff

Im actually wondering whether I should just paint the walls. It would not be that big a job and would likely help a lot. I would probably prefer to go for a dark grey though than black as black walls look pretty weird in a room 

Not sure how much that would help but maybe that would be enough not to need the Firehawk or Greyhawk. Ive definitely had a few people strongly recommend the studiotek but Im just worried about reflections.


----------



## Surge2018

dankeff said:


> Im actually wondering whether I should just paint the walls. It would not be that big a job and would likely help a lot. I would probably prefer to go for a dark grey though than black as black walls look pretty weird in a room
> 
> Not sure how much that would help but maybe that would be enough not to need the Firehawk or Greyhawk. Ive definitely had a few people strongly recommend the studiotek but Im just worried about reflections.


I agree. If you can paint the walls a dark color, StudioTek 100 or 130 is the best. If not, Grayhawk (I don’t recall the Firehawk specs). 
Another nice thing about a grayish 16:9 screen is that if you don’t use lens shift when viewing 2.34:1 content, the non-masked areas are not as white.


----------



## Ricoflashback

kwenar said:


> Not sure what is going on as I still haven't been able to order one or find out pricing. It doesn't seem promising and I guess I will have to find other options. I am looking looking into getting some custom wall panels to eat the overscan. Nobody seems to make them though so I will have to probably partner with a company to try make something to my liking


For what it's worth - - the darker, gray walls in our new house help minimize the faint white reflection (shadow) around the screen with the Formovie Global T1 UST projector. It's still noticeable but nowhere near what it was with lighter walls. I mean - you really have to look for it, even in a darkened room, when watching content.


----------



## Surge2018

Has anyone gone from the white painted screen case (or cassette) to the black painted case? This is for the retractable screens. I think the black will be less noticeable, the white does reflect projector light.


----------



## fredworld

dankeff said:


> Im actually wondering whether I should just paint the walls. It would not be that big a job and would likely help a lot. I would probably prefer to go for a dark grey though than black as black walls look pretty weird in a room
> 
> Not sure how much that would help but maybe that would be enough not to need the Firehawk or Greyhawk. Ive definitely had a few people strongly recommend the studiotek but Im just worried about reflections.


A BIG+1 for painting the walls. Mine are dark gray (Volcanic Ash) but my ceiling is black (Black Forest). No sheen in the paint mix. Absolutely flat or matte. Go to the *Home theater design thread* to get suggestions, if needed. Any sheen that's in the paint mix, regardless of how dark, will reflect light. My screen wall is black, also, and it disappears when the projector is on. I have absolute light control, also, it's a dedicated room. Once I described that to the Stewart rep his recommendation was an unqualified Studiotek 100. Everyone's MWV.


----------



## Surge2018

Dark walls are great if you have a room only used for home theater. If it’s a mixed use room (mine is built for 2 channel music and movies) and/or shared (eg a family room), dark walls and ceiling are harder to pull off, and still stay married


----------



## Stan-Lee

ST100 is my choice after owning both FireHawk, GrayHawk screens. Pictures/Videos taken with a Google Pixel: Stewart ST100 - Google Drive
and I have white carpeting, walls, etc. daytime is not too bad with a bright pj. Nightime is awesome!
Projector:
I had a Sony VPL-VW675 at first. I now have a Sony XW6000


----------



## Surge2018

Stan-Lee said:


> ST100 is my choice after owning both FireHawk, GrayHawk screens. Stewart ST100 - Google Drive
> and I have white carpeting, walls, etc. daytime is not too bad with a bright pj. Nightime is awesome!
> Projector:
> I had a Sony VPL-VW675 at first. I now have a Sony XW6000


Nice system!
Notice the reflection on the side of your speakers. If that bothers you, the Grayhawk is a better choice. In my case, my speakers are very close to the screen, as is the ceiling. StudioTek would like them up too much for my liking. And watching widescreen content on a 16:9 would require a lens shift to use the top masking.


----------



## Stan-Lee

Surge2018 said:


> Nice system!
> Notice the reflection on the side of your speakers. If that bothers you, the Grayhawk is a better choice. In my case, my speakers are very close to the screen, as is the ceiling. StudioTek would like them up too much for my liking. And watching widescreen content on a 16:9 would require a lens shift to use the top masking.


Thanks! Exactly. I don't see the reflection. there is reflection in the sample picture and video I posted in my Google drive. If you think you see reflection, it’s the game in the video/photo. I'm watching the center mass of screen and movie and etc....never see reflections.
FireHawk and GrayHawk both had too much speckle for me after using them for years. Wanted to lose that completely.
Nope, don't want the masking to constantly be changing in a movie. The latest Top Gun...had different aspect ratios throughout the movie.


----------



## HTRaleigh

About 25 years ago when I got started in this hobby I painted the theater walls and ceiling dark neutral gray. The front wall and side walls out about 3’ from the front wall to some columns was flat black. Then I installed the 100” diagonal Stewart Studiotek 130 16:9?screen. The contrast I got from my calibrated Sony CRT was awesome in that room and the gray and black helped a lot. I learned this from The Stereo Guide to Home Theaters magazine circa 1997/98 . They suggested going to a camera shop to get a photographic white balance card that had the middle gray scale on the flip side. I took it to a Porter Paint store to match the gray. The flat black I used up front was good but probably still had a little more reflectance than I’d use now. This was a dedicated space but the dark colors were conditional with my wife until she saw how great the movies looked.

I would never paint a dedicated theater space a light color.


----------



## Stan-Lee

HTRaleigh said:


> About 25 years ago when I got started in this hobby I painted the theater walls and ceiling dark neutral gray. The front wall and side walls out about 3’ from the front wall to some columns was flat black. Then I installed the 100” diagonal Stewart Studiotek 130 16:9?screen. The contrast I got from my calibrated Sony CRT was awesome in that room and the gray and black helped a lot. I learned this from The Stereo Guide to Home Theaters magazine circa 1997/98 . They suggested going to a camera shop to get a photographic white balance card that had the middle gray scale on the flip side. I took it to a Porter Paint store to match the gray. The flat black I used up front was good but probably still had a little more reflectance than I’d use now. This was a dedicated space but the dark colors were conditional with my wife until she saw how great the movies looked.
> 
> I would never paint a dedicated theater space a light color.


Agreed. I wish I had a dedicated room. 😔


----------



## adrift02

Recently installed a Luxus G4 (w/ an NP5, light controlled room, black walls) and have mixed feelings.

While I waited I was using a cheap $30 elastic 1.1 gain screen. Obviously it had its issues, but I was really enjoying the deep blacks and the NP5 carried the IQ nicely.

The G4 is bugging me with widescreen content as the horizontal bars w/exposed screen create a washed out effect next to true black. It wasn’t as bad with the cheapo screen. Also, not as big of an issue, but I also notice “sparkle” (?) in the middle of the screen (eye level) with white images, which I assume is peak light reflection from gain.

IQ is still great overall — I don’t notice the sparkle in movies and the black bar effect isn’t bad when it really matters (dark scenes), but thinking I would have been happier with an ST 100.

Thoughts? Am I focusing on minor negatives and ignoring big positives (brightness/HDR)? This is my first good screen, so maybe I need to adjust expectations?


----------



## DAlba

Anyone know what control4 driver to use for IP control of Director’s Choice screen?

I see these on control 4 website but none mention Stewart’s CVM system and they all say serial


----------



## martR

adrift02 said:


> Recently installed a Luxus G4 (w/ an NP5, light controlled room, black walls) and have mixed feelings.
> 
> While I waited I was using a cheap $30 elastic 1.1 gain screen. Obviously it had its issues, but I was really enjoying the deep blacks and the NP5 carried the IQ nicely.
> 
> The G4 is bugging me with widescreen content as the horizontal bars w/exposed screen create a washed out effect next to true black. It wasn’t as bad with the cheapo screen. Also, not as big of an issue, but I also notice “sparkle” (?) in the middle of the screen (eye level) with white images, which I assume is peak light reflection from gain.
> 
> IQ is still great overall — I don’t notice the sparkle in movies and the black bar effect isn’t bad when it really matters (dark scenes), but thinking I would have been happier with an ST 100.
> 
> Thoughts? Am I focusing on minor negatives and ignoring big positives (brightness/HDR)? This is my first good screen, so maybe I need to adjust expectations?


I have the same… same screen same problem… same spot.
But I have contacted Don, and the European distributor Rune and they advised that a ST100 would be more suited for me.
They would take care of the problem and make me a special offer for the ST100 replacing screen material but still haven’t heard from my dealer.
It’s been a month or two now…
If you ask me they advertise that it is a sparkle free screen but apparently it isn’t and I think they should replace it free of charge with the ST100 if you see how big the sparkle spot is and how apparent.
My set is professionally calibrated with 3d lut and I am good within the throw ratio.
The fast reply and help from Stewart was great but all communication stopped since.
No bashing here and I love the Stewart brand and the rest of the picture quality on the other parts of the screen is simply superb but this is just not good and in my view it is not correct that you must buy another screen because of that issue.
Just like you I wish I would have taken the ST100


----------



## fredworld

@martR and @adrift02 , fwiw, my Stewart ST100 has absolutely 0 artifacts regarding texture, sheen, sparkle or hotspotting. It has no noticeable light loss from any angle in my HT room. It has the most movie-like image of the three screens I've owned in 28 years. It was recommended by Stewart's July Lopez for my completely light controlled, black screen wall/ceiling and dark grey walled 18'x14'x7.5' room. My use content is with 90% movies, mostly in scope. 
Not bragging, but if it were me, I'd move confidently to the ST100. Hopefully, Stewart will satisfy your expectations.


----------



## adrift02

martR said:


> I have the same… same screen same problem… same spot.
> But I have contacted Don, and the European distributor Rune and they advised that a ST100 would be more suited for me.
> They would take care of the problem and make me a special offer for the ST100 replacing screen material but still haven’t heard from my dealer.
> It’s been a month or two now…
> If you ask me they advertise that it is a sparkle free screen but apparently it isn’t and I think they should replace it free of charge with the ST100 if you see how big the sparkle spot is and how apparent.
> My set is professionally calibrated with 3d lut and I am good within the throw ratio.
> The fast reply and help from Stewart was great but all communication stopped since.
> No bashing here and I love the Stewart brand and the rest of the picture quality on the other parts of the screen is simply superb but this is just not good and in my view it is not correct that you must buy another screen because of that issue.
> Just like you I wish I would have taken the ST100


I assumed it was possible to swap screens in the Luxus, but how difficult would that be? I do have a 60-day guarantee (I think?), but picked this up direct and would be handling the replacement on my own... seems like a _big_ ordeal. If I could somewhat painlessly swap the ST100 into the Luxus I'd probably consider that.

But honestly I can handle the sparkle. It's isolated to pure white, in an ~8" circle directly forward (peak light reflection I think) and I've yet to notice sparkle or IQ imperfections with movies. I only notice on my PC, but you can see (*theater = WIP) I've set up the OLED for that usage.










So that leaves me with the black level issue. Here's the thing: I turned down the iris aperture and it improved. But -6 is probably too low for HDR content and I'm losing the contrast benefits of 1.3 gain. That leads me to believe that regardless of light control (curtains) and velvet covering the screen wall, the ceiling/walls/floor are still too reflective. I'm wondering if I add velvet to the ceiling and floor (planned to wrap those mats in velvet FYI) plus maybe a strip on the wall (can't cover the absorbers), it would tone down reflections enough for the ST130 G4 to shine.

The above _also_ makes me think I have work to do if I was to use the ST100, since I clearly haven't reached "black hole" status. And if I solve the ST130 G4 reflections I'd probably want to continue with it since the ST100 wouldn't be quite as good for HDR? Though I know the NP5 is brighter than the NX5 so maybe it would be best?

So many things... wish I knew more at this stage in my journey... appreciate any input from ya'll!


----------



## martR

adrift02 said:


> I assumed it was possible to swap screens in the Luxus, but how difficult would that be? I do have a 60-day guarantee (I think?), but picked this up direct and would be handling the replacement on my own... seems like a _big_ ordeal. If I could somewhat painlessly swap the ST100 into the Luxus I'd probably consider that.
> 
> But honestly I can handle the sparkle. It's isolated to pure white, in an ~8" circle directly forward (peak light reflection I think) and I've yet to notice sparkle or IQ imperfections with movies. I only notice on my PC, but you can see (*theater = WIP) I've set up the OLED for that usage.
> 
> View attachment 3366463
> 
> 
> So that leaves me with the black level issue. Here's the thing: I turned down the iris aperture and it improved. But -6 is probably too low for HDR content and I'm losing the contrast benefits of 1.3 gain. That leads me to believe that regardless of light control (curtains) and velvet covering the screen wall, the ceiling/walls/floor are still too reflective. I'm wondering if I add velvet to the ceiling and floor (planned to wrap those mats in velvet FYI) plus maybe a strip on the wall (can't cover the absorbers), it would tone down reflections enough for the ST130 G4 to shine.
> 
> The above _also_ makes me think I have work to do if I was to use the ST100, since I clearly haven't reached "black hole" status. And if I solve the ST130 G4 reflections I'd probably want to continue with it since the ST100 wouldn't be quite as good for HDR? Though I know the NP5 is brighter than the NX5 so maybe it would be best?
> 
> So many things... wish I knew more at this stage in my journey... appreciate any input from ya'll!


Looking good, nice room

I have covered all my speakers in ultra black Adamantium and thats great and works.
I am also going to do my front wall with this Adamanitium and see how that change things. It is now very very dark brown and my ceiling is black and my screen is 1 meter from the ceiling so no reflections there, but will just cover it in Adamantium to be sure.
Today i changed my viewing position by raising my seat up, that also works.
If this all is just not enough i will place my projector lower and more to the half of the screen hight... that must do the trick because Stewart thinks that the angle is the problem.
But in all honestly i have a pretty good picture now and i also think i will get a pass on the ST100 screen if it's been offered to me. The ST100 is did see was looking a bit 'dull' to me.
The problem i have is that Stewart promised me that they will come back to me with a special offer for only the ST100 screen cloth material for in my own Stewart frame but that i and my dealer have heard nothing from them so far...
If i will do the exange if they come through? I have to think about that but i think not beacuse i love the extra light and HDR experiance.
I myself do not have a black level problem and the rest of the screen and my calibration is superb and top notch. Really really good.

What would work for you i think?
Dark ceiling.
Lower your screen so your eyes are at 1/3 of the screen hight... and lower your projector to the middle of the screen (hight).
And cover everything with black Adamantium. I dont know what stuff you have in the US but in europe the best you can get is Adamantium.
Then a good calibration.

In short for me... disapointed in Stewart that they still didn't come back to me with a speacial offer as they promised but on the other hand it is not the fault of Stewart (or the ST130 G4 screen material) that i have/had the sparkle problem but it is the angle from projector to the screen... the projector must be lowered to the middle of the screen hight. Well, more or less.


----------



## adrift02

martR said:


> Looking good, nice room
> 
> I have covered all my speakers in ultra black Adamantium and thats great and works.
> I am also going to do my front wall with this Adamanitium and see how that change things. It is now very very dark brown and my ceiling is black and my screen is 1 meter from the ceiling so no reflections there, but will just cover it in Adamantium to be sure.
> Today i changed my viewing position by raising my seat up, that also works.
> If this all is just not enough i will place my projector lower and more to the half of the screen hight... that must do the trick because Stewart thinks that the angle is the problem.
> But in all honestly i have a pretty good picture now and i also think i will get a pass on the ST100 screen if it's been offered to me. The ST100 is did see was looking a bit 'dull' to me.
> The problem i have is that Stewart promised me that they will come back to me with a special offer for only the ST100 screen cloth material for in my own Stewart frame but that i and my dealer have heard nothing from them so far...
> If i will do the exange if they come through? I have to think about that but i think not beacuse i love the extra light and HDR experiance.
> I myself do not have a black level problem and the rest of the screen and my calibration is superb and top notch. Really really good.
> 
> What would work for you i think?
> Dark ceiling.
> Lower your screen so your eyes are at 1/3 of the screen hight... and lower your projector to the middle of the screen (hight).
> And cover everything with black Adamantium. I dont know what stuff you have in the US but in europe the best you can get is Adamantium.
> Then a good calibration.
> 
> In short for me... disapointed in Stewart that they still didn't come back to me with a speacial offer as they promised but on the other hand it is not the fault of Stewart (or the ST130 G4 screen material) that i have/had the sparkle problem but it is the angle from projector to the screen... the projector must be lowered to the middle of the screen hight. Well, more or less.


Is Adamanitium paint or fabric? The black I used isn't the darkest but I think velvet is the next step, so going with fabric others have recommended from JOANN's. Not sure how long it will take, but will circle back with the results. I agree the ST130 G4 generally produces great IQ (still uncalibrated, under 100h), and my black levels are fine, it's just the contrast I'm struggling with re: black boarders with scope aspect.

The angle thing is interesting. What did they say on that? I'm still waiting on the mount, so my projector is firing from a closet shelf -- it's both too high and shifted ~6" right of the screen. Wonder if the sparkle will disappear once I ceiling mount it and have it firing straight at the screen? I should have _that_ done this weekend or next. 

Unfortunately I can't do anything about the screen positioning since it's already set to stop right above that center channel. Though it's pretty close to my eyes hitting the lower 1/3, so I hope that's not a contributing factor.


----------



## martR

Adamantium is cloth.








Fabrics


Various fabrics for home cinema needs




www.adamantium-audio.de





What they say about the angle?
Well I said that I think it’s the angle because I have my NZ9 hanging on the ceiling and I have lowered it by 20cm and it was much better with less sparkle.
So that’s why they think it’s the angle and I have to go even lower.
I am now just above my screen with the lens and I need to lower it by 40 more cm.
I think I will do that but not sure because it is now pretty good and I can live with it. 95% of the movie you don’t see it. So I am a bit in doubt to be honest.
First thing I will do is put Adamantium on my whole wall.
I hope it is all perfect then… if it’s not, then I lower the projector.
If you don’t have sparkle or doesn’t see it I think the ST130 G4 is the best screen out there but if you can’t get rid of it the ST100 will be the solution.
If I will get it perfect I will be very happy, if I don’t I wished I went for the ST100.
In the back of my mind I still hope Stewart come back to me as they promised but propose to exchange the ST130 G4 cloth for ST100 free of charge but maybe I am a bit to naïve on this part as it is like I said my own mistake and not Stewart’s
The only thing I think I am in my rights is that I did let them know after one week of purchase and you are in your rights to send it back.
Again although it is not there fault but a little help )after I owned three Stewart screens) would be nice I guess…

ps, my screen is 40 cm from the ground.


----------



## martR

Just get news from Don that they will exchange my ST130 G4 to a ST100
Wow, very happy with this and can’t thank Stewart enough.


----------



## Maico760

I have a StudioTek 100 16:9 150" screen and I have been noticing artifacts, mostly in brighter areas. I have looked at the screen and when looking at it extremely close up, you can notice it's not exactly flat. There are little bumps across the entire screen, esp. if you magnify. I have also shined a flashlight sideways across the screen and taken magnified pictures and gotten the below results. Has anyone else taken close up pictures of this screen to see how uniform it should be? Perhaps something happened to mine if it's supposed to be more uniform. 

Here are some basic close ups:

This is just normal with a few inches back:









This is getting real close and maybe 3x zoom.









This is shining a flashlight sideways and then taking a picture, perhaps 3x zoom.


----------



## fredworld

Maico760 said:


> I have a StudioTek 100 16:9 150" screen and I have been noticing artifacts, mostly in brighter areas. I have looked at the screen and when looking at it extremely close up, you can notice it's not exactly flat. There are little bumps across the entire screen, esp. if you magnify. I have also shined a flashlight sideways across the screen and taken magnified pictures and gotten the below results. Has anyone else taken close up pictures of this screen to see how uniform it should be? Perhaps something happened to mine if it's supposed to be more uniform.
> 
> Here are some basic close ups:
> 
> This is just normal with a few inches back:
> View attachment 3368161
> 
> 
> This is getting real close and maybe 3x zoom.
> View attachment 3368158
> 
> 
> This is shining a flashlight sideways and then taking a picture, perhaps 3x zoom.
> 
> View attachment 3368162
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 3368163


How do projected images look, using normal content and test patterns, from your usual seating distances? 
Have you shared your results with Stewart, and if so, what were their comments?
I have not investigated my ST100 as you have. Earlier I posted my subjective impressions in* this post*.


----------



## Maico760

fredworld said:


> How do projected images look, using normal content and test patterns, from your usual seating distances?
> Have you shared your results with Stewart, and if so, what were their comments?
> I have not investigated my ST100 as you have. Earlier I posted my subjective impressions in* this post*.


Mostly they look good. It is just in some uniform color, especially brighter or white areas, I can notice the screen in movement. I haven't talked with Stewart about this. I don't know if I'm just noticing it more or if it just started happening more.

This is with the naked eye you can see this, just have a flashlight pointed across the screen parallel to the screen, really close and shine across.










I also used a blacklight to clean the screen, I noticed a lot of markings and things you can't see otherwise. Those white bright spots, they come off on a microcloth by touching it to the screen so they are something, but you can't even see them otherwise.
























Mostly images do look good, like I mention I just notice it in some areas.







































I can go to the side and it's uniform.


----------



## Ricoflashback

Don - the new UST screen with the new bevel design to remove the light around the screen? 

Any idea on when this will be available? Thx.


----------



## fredworld

Maico760 said:


> Mostly they look good. It is just in some uniform color, especially brighter or white areas, I can notice the screen in movement. I haven't talked with Stewart about this. I don't know if I'm just noticing it more or if it just started happening more.
> 
> This is with the naked eye you can see this, just have a flashlight pointed across the screen parallel to the screen, really close and shine across.
> 
> View attachment 3368216
> 
> 
> I also used a blacklight to clean the screen, I noticed a lot of markings and things you can't see otherwise. Those white bright spots, they come off on a microcloth by touching it to the screen so they are something, but you can't even see them otherwise.
> 
> View attachment 3368219
> View attachment 3368220
> View attachment 3368221
> 
> 
> Mostly images do look good, like I mention I just notice it in some areas.
> 
> View attachment 3368227
> 
> 
> View attachment 3368228
> 
> 
> View attachment 3368236
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 3368244
> 
> 
> 
> I can go to the side and it's uniform.
> View attachment 3368243


I'm sorry I can't be of more help. Your images of content on my phone look very good, but I must admit that your magnified screen surface is unfamiliar to me. If I had your concerns I'd take it up with Stewart directly. 
Some off the cuff guesses on my part are that perhaps you're seeing damage from installation, packaging, aggressive cleaning, etc. Or it could be normal artifacts of the manufacturing process. I'd be surprised if Stewart doesn't have an answer.


----------



## Maico760

fredworld said:


> I'm sorry I can't be of more help. Your images of content on my phone look very good, but I must admit that your magnified screen surface is unfamiliar to me. If I had your concerns I'd take it up with Stewart directly.
> Some off the cuff guesses on my part are that perhaps you're seeing damage from installation, packaging, aggressive cleaning, etc. Or it could be normal artifacts of the manufacturing process. I'd be surprised if Stewart doesn't have an answer.


I contacted Stewart and see what they say. I have had this screen since September and I haven't cleaned it until recently and that was only due to this issue and it was a light clean with a draftsman brush, then with a microcloth to have things just stick to it with a dab. The texture has been there since I had the screen up. Could be from installation or before I can't be sure, but I had layers under the screen so it never touched the carpet only the foam and so I don't see how it could have happened to get uniform raised surface like I see. I don't remember my old screen being like this except for the sparkle. So not sure what's expected. I mean I think i just started to notice it more and more over time, it was always there and then started looking for it and can't unsee it. Like the sparkles I didn't notice them at first, then started seeing them and then saw them all the time. So unclear without confirmation of what the surface of the screen should look like. 

I also sit roughly 10 feet from the screen. It gets less noticeable I believe in the back row, which you are likely 17 to 18 feet from the screen and it also seems more visible on some streaming content. Some features of the projector like "Reality Creation" can lessen it. 

Someone sent me a location of downloadable 4K Demo Content that is higher quality. You can see some of the texturing in the white areas.



















This one, as you zoom in, you can see up close the white area is a checker box pattern.


----------



## adrift02

Quick question for those of you familiar with Stewart Luxus electric screens (have a 135" ST 130 G4 btw).

First, I assume it's normal for these drop down screens to not be exactly uniform/square? For example, I noticed the bottom side edges flare out slightly compared to the top side edges. Similarly, the bottom sides stretch slightly below the middle bottom. Making sure this is normal, which I assume to be the case being that they're not fixed frame and need to be "stretched".

Second question: how did you address these issues? I could run the projector with image spillover of course. But I can also mostly correct the sides with a slight -2 keystone adjustment. Know using keystone isn't ideal, so curious what you all think about the trade off there.

TIA!


----------



## clausdk

Are there any angle requirements for the ST130 G4 ?

My projector is at an angle of ~ 16° of the center of the image.

Line of sight looking slightly up onto the screen center is ~ 4°.


----------



## kosta88

Hello Don,
I have a huge problem. I received the screen. As my XY is separated in the middle, I didn't think Stewart would be in one piece. And now I have a problem that I can't get it into my home cinema.
Short of selling my screen, do I have any alternatives?
I tried cutting the wall a bit, however I came up to concrete, and currently unsure if I can cut it any further.
Can I contact you somewhere personally?
Thank you
Kosta


----------



## Don Stewart

clausdk said:


> Are there any angle requirements for the ST130 G4 ?
> 
> My projector is at an angle of ~ 16° of the center of the image.
> 
> Line of sight looking slightly up onto the screen center is ~ 4°.


If you are talking vertical offset you are fine. If you mean horizontal offset from screen center, not so much.


----------



## Don Stewart

kosta88 said:


> Hello Don,
> I have a huge problem. I received the screen. As my XY is separated in the middle, I didn't think Stewart would be in one piece. And now I have a problem that I can't get it into my home cinema.
> Short of selling my screen, do I have any alternatives?
> I tried cutting the wall a bit, however I came up to concrete, and currently unsure if I can cut it any further.
> Can I contact you somewhere personally?
> Thank you
> Kosta


What size and screen model do you have? You can DM me here on AVS.

Regards,
Don


----------



## kosta88

Don Stewart said:


> What size and screen model do you have? You can DM me here on AVS.


Wallscreen Series, 3467x1375mm. I wrote you a private conversation.


----------



## Don Stewart

Ricoflashback said:


> Don - the new UST screen with the new bevel design to remove the light around the screen?
> 
> Any idea on when this will be available? Thx.


It is available now with choice of StudioTek 100 or GrayMatte 70 for UST projectors..
Regards,
Don


----------



## Don Stewart

A pre-press release notice.
Our Harmony G2 AT weave screen is going from big to HUGE! Completely "Seamless" 2.4:1 CinemaScope sizes to over 15 feet high by 34 feet wide. Also available in any aspect ratio customer specifies.


----------



## Ricoflashback

Don Stewart said:


> A pre-press release notice.
> Our Harmony G2 AT weave screen is going from big to HUGE! Completely "Seamless" 2.4:1 CinemaScope sizes to over 15 feet high by 34 feet wide. Also available in any aspect ratio customer specifies.
> View attachment 3373175


Now that's the "big screen experience!" 

I suppose if you have to ask what it costs, then you can't afford it. And, you'll need a pretty big room for that puppy. Another option is to buy your local theater. Just kidding. Looking forward to seeing pics of this screen in someone's villa.


----------



## Don Stewart

Ricoflashback said:


> Now that's the "big screen experience!"
> 
> I suppose if you have to ask what it costs, then you can't afford it. And, you'll need a pretty big room for that puppy. Another option is to buy your local theater. Just kidding. Looking forward to seeing pics of this screen in someone's villa.


Not to mention it takes a big PJ to light it up. We were using a Barco Njord to do some testing. The cost of the screen and frame is just a fraction of the PJ cost.


----------



## Ricoflashback

Don Stewart said:


> It is available now with choice of StudioTek 100 or GrayMatte 70 for UST projectors..
> Regards,
> Don


Thanks, Don! Will this be available with the Blackhawk UST screen material? I thought this fabric was compatible with UST projectors. It seems like the most elegant solution - - especially if you can get rid of the faint, white shadow around the screen with the new bezel design.

P.S. - "Black Hawk UST material is an available option on Stewart Filmscreen’s Balon Series screen system. This slim bordered screen is designed to blend seamlessly into any room and there is also optional LED light available. The maximum size for a 16X9 screen available with BlackHawk UST material is 120 inches."

Any reason why it wouldn't work with the new bezel frame?


----------



## Don Stewart

Ricoflashback said:


> Thanks, Don! Will this be available with the Blackhawk UST screen material? I thought this fabric was compatible with UST projectors. It seems like the most elegant solution - - especially if you can get rid of the faint, white shadow around the screen with the new bezel design.
> 
> P.S. - "Black Hawk UST material is an available option on Stewart Filmscreen’s Balon Series screen system. This slim bordered screen is designed to blend seamlessly into any room and there is also optional LED light available. The maximum size for a 16X9 screen available with BlackHawk UST material is 120 inches."
> 
> Any reason why it wouldn't work with the new bezel frame?


Yes. it is available in very limited numbers with 2.5 inch UST frame. I will DM you with more info on this.


----------



## Ricoflashback

Don Stewart said:


> Yes. it is available in very limited numbers with 2.5 inch UST frame. I will DM you with more info on this.


Absolutely! I'm very interested. Thank you. 

P.S. - Kwenar is too.


----------



## Craig Peer

adrift02 said:


> Quick question for those of you familiar with Stewart Luxus electric screens (have a 135" ST 130 G4 btw).
> 
> First, I assume it's normal for these drop down screens to not be exactly uniform/square? For example, I noticed the bottom side edges flare out slightly compared to the top side edges. Similarly, the bottom sides stretch slightly below the middle bottom. Making sure this is normal, which I assume to be the case being that they're not fixed frame and need to be "stretched".
> 
> Second question: how did you address these issues? I could run the projector with image spillover of course. But I can also mostly correct the sides with a slight -2 keystone adjustment. Know using keystone isn't ideal, so curious what you all think about the trade off there.
> 
> TIA!


Just overscan. Do not use keystone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Don Stewart

Maico760 said:


> I contacted Stewart and see what they say. I have had this screen since September and I haven't cleaned it until recently and that was only due to this issue and it was a light clean with a draftsman brush, then with a microcloth to have things just stick to it with a dab. The texture has been there since I had the screen up. Could be from installation or before I can't be sure, but I had layers under the screen so it never touched the carpet only the foam and so I don't see how it could have happened to get uniform raised surface like I see. I don't remember my old screen being like this except for the sparkle. So not sure what's expected. I mean I think i just started to notice it more and more over time, it was always there and then started looking for it and can't unsee it. Like the sparkles I didn't notice them at first, then started seeing them and then saw them all the time. So unclear without confirmation of what the surface of the screen should look like.
> 
> I also sit roughly 10 feet from the screen. It gets less noticeable I believe in the back row, which you are likely 17 to 18 feet from the screen and it also seems more visible on some streaming content. Some features of the projector like "Reality Creation" can lessen it.
> 
> Someone sent me a location of downloadable 4K Demo Content that is higher quality. You can see some of the texturing in the white areas.
> 
> View attachment 3369331
> 
> 
> View attachment 3369332
> 
> 
> This one, as you zoom in, you can see up close the white area is a checker box pattern.
> 
> View attachment 3369335
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 3369336
> 
> 
> View attachment 3369341


----------



## Don Stewart

Sir, that checkerboard pattern you mention in your post is not from the screen surface. It is the pixel grid from your projector. I realize you are a newbie, but please be advised all digital projectors will show the pixel pattern if you go up and view the screen from a just few feet away.

Best Regards,
Don


----------



## kosta88

I watched Dune yesterday on my (new-ish) Stewart Studiotek 130 G4. I was seated 3.4m from the screen (measured just before the movie start, reclining seat and such). I was told to "enjoy the movie" and not look for perforations. However, in bright scenes in the desert, it was more than disturbing. No matter how much I try to not look at the perforations, they are there.

I also have a large sample of XY SoundMax4K here, which I hung over the Stewart, just to see the difference.
Here are some pics:





Heimkino-Umbau - Heimkinoverein


Hallo,ich habe mich dazu entschlossen, meinen aktuellen Heimkino umzubauen, ich hoffe jetzt mit anderen Erfahrungen als beim ersten Bau.Hier sieht man ein Foto des aktuellen Kinos. Hinter der Kamera befindet sich ein ähnlicher Bereich mit einem großen…




www.heimkinoverein.de





I'd like to know if what I see here is a big difference really? Because, for me, it's not. I measured the difference, and it came up 70nits vs 80nits of the Stewart. I expected way more. PJ is a NZ7.
In general, slightly higher brightness, bit better colors, not really much sharper on the distance, and smooth picture on XY (I do not see the weave on the XY).

I am really thinking of selling the Stewart again.


----------



## magnetic

kosta88 said:


> I watched Dune yesterday on my (new-ish) Stewart Studiotek 130 G4. I was seated 3.4m from the screen (measured just before the movie start, reclining seat and such). I was told to "enjoy the movie" and not look for perforations. However, in bright scenes in the desert, it was more than disturbing. No matter how much I try to not look at the perforations, they are there.
> 
> I also have a large sample of XY SoundMax4K here, which I hung over the Stewart, just to see the difference.
> Here are some pics:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Heimkino-Umbau - Heimkinoverein
> 
> 
> Hallo,ich habe mich dazu entschlossen, meinen aktuellen Heimkino umzubauen, ich hoffe jetzt mit anderen Erfahrungen als beim ersten Bau.Hier sieht man ein Foto des aktuellen Kinos. Hinter der Kamera befindet sich ein ähnlicher Bereich mit einem großen…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.heimkinoverein.de
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like to know if what I see here is a big difference really? Because, for me, it's not. I measured the difference, and it came up 70nits vs 80nits of the Stewart. I expected way more. PJ is a NZ7.
> In general, slightly higher brightness, bit better colors, not really much sharper on the distance, and smooth picture on XY (I do not see the weave on the XY).
> 
> I am really thinking of selling the Stewart again.



Looking to switch my own screen to MP- curious, what distance do you stop seeing the perfs at?


----------



## ThoBkk

magnetic said:


> Looking to switch my own screen to MP- curious, what distance do you stop seeing the perfs at?


I sit 4.5 meters away and there's no way to see them.


----------



## Hawks07

magnetic said:


> Looking to switch my own screen to MP- curious, what distance do you stop seeing the perfs at?


It’s something you will have to try yourself with a sample. I sit 12’ and can’t see them which is probably where most people stop seeing them. 
I start to see them at around 11’ myself.


----------



## hokeyplyr48

Don Stewart said:


> Here is the SP graph, Speaker, 3" away with no EQ added. Measurement was done at Lucas Film's Skywalker Sound, for THX division.
> View attachment 3086492


Does this same graph apply to the G4? I’ve only got about 3.5-4” of depth behind the screen for what I’m looking to do, to have enough distance to try and see if I can see the microperfs. Thought woven would be my only option, given not having 8-12” I can do behind the screen, but if I can do 3.5-4”, then this might work.


----------



## Don Stewart

hokeyplyr48 said:


> Does this same graph apply to the G4? I’ve only got about 3.5-4” of depth behind the screen for what I’m looking to do, to have enough distance to try and see if I can see the microperfs. Thought woven would be my only option, given not having 8-12” I can do behind the screen, but if I can do 3.5-4”, then this might work.


Yes. We have our own proprietary perforating machines in-house. All of our MicroPerf materials, including ST 130 G4, are done on the same perforating machine. These perforating machines are largest perforating machines in the world. The MicroPerf machine will allow for seamless materials up to over 14' high and our CinemaPerf machine will allow for one piece seamless screens up to 38' high. We always recommend to get a sample to check your viewing distance.


----------



## hokeyplyr48

Thanks Don, I’ve ordered a sample from @Craig Peer to validate whether I can see the perfs from my seating distance. However the sample won’t really help me with regards to determining high frequency impact / comb filtering. I’ve seen it mentioned several times here regarding horns being better in this regard due to the wider area. I have Triad Silver LCRs which are dome tweeters, and will be mounted about 3.5-4” behind the screen. Based on your experience / customers, do you think this will be a huge issue after room correction?


----------



## Don Stewart

hokeyplyr48 said:


> Thanks Don, I’ve ordered a sample from @Craig Peer to validate whether I can see the perfs from my seating distance. However the sample won’t really help me with regards to determining high frequency impact / comb filtering. I’ve seen it mentioned several times here regarding horns being better in this regard due to the wider area. I have Triad Silver LCRs which are dome tweeters, and will be mounted about 3.5-4” behind the screen. Based on your experience / customers, do you think this will be a huge issue after room correction?


It would be best if you also had some EQ. Here are measurments with and without EQ with dome tweeter set up.


----------



## hokeyplyr48

What distance is that at? Didn’t see it annotated on the chart. Yes, I should be able to have Audyssey EQ to help mitigate the roll off (I think)


----------



## Erod

I sit 11' from my new Stewart ST130 microperf, and yes, I can ever so slightly see the perforations on solid bright images. Don't see them at all on regular scenes.

Everything else is awesome, but that bothered me at first after having a solid G4 screen before.

I will say that time has erased that bother, and the advantages of a bigger screen without having to put my center channel too low far outweighs the occasional scene. I don't really look for it anymore because it doesn't bother me anymore.

I appreciate greatly the added brightness of the G4 material versus the duller color and brightness of weaves. I think this is the way to go for AT screens for sure.

And Dirac perfectly calibrated my center channel, even though my AMT tweeter is only 4 inches from the screen.

So a couple months in, and my fears of making the change were alleviated.


----------



## magnetic

hokeyplyr48 said:


> Thanks Don, I’ve ordered a sample from @Craig Peer to validate whether I can see the perfs from my seating distance. However the sample won’t really help me with regards to determining high frequency impact / comb filtering. I’ve seen it mentioned several times here regarding horns being better in this regard due to the wider area. I have Triad Silver LCRs which are dome tweeters, and will be mounted about 3.5-4” behind the screen. Based on your experience / customers, do you think this will be a huge issue after room correction?


Making the same decision as you, where my center would be 4”, the less smoothed response measured in another thread here is definitely less re-assuring. Question is how audible is it..


----------



## Don Stewart

magnetic said:


> Making the same decision as you, where my center would be 4”, the less smoothed response measured in another thread here is definitely less re-assuring. Question is how audible is it..
> 
> View attachment 3379097


Please note that the graph below was conducted by Harmon-JBL and test were done by a professional audiologist in a real Anechoic Chamber that Harmon-JBL has at their facility. Also note that the graph shows the average between zero degrees on center axis to 30 degrees off axis.


----------



## hokeyplyr48

At what distance? 4”? 8”? 1’?


----------



## magnetic

Don Stewart said:


> Please note that the graph below was conducted by Harmon-JBL and test were done by a professional audiologist in a real Anechoic Chamber that Harmon-JBL has at their facility. Also note that the graph shows the average between zero degrees on center axis to 30 degrees off axis.


Thanks Don - I was not in any way trying to dispute that - it's just done with a much different level of smoothing, and since we don't have access to the raw data in that measurement I'm using the only thing out there that captures the effect of comb filtering. Again whether it's audible I haven't seen discussed.

For me the choice between the Harmony G2 and ST MP is not so obvious.


----------



## adrift02

Anyone here managed vibration issues w/ their Luxus electric screen? When it’s deployed the near hollow casing is vibrating with high frequencies (not low).


----------



## Justinmorgand

I’m looking to pull the trigger in a Stewart 140” 2.40 microperf screen through audio advice but my question is what is the differences between the studio tek 130 G4 and the Firehawk G5. Is it just the difference one is good with some lights on and one you must have the room with as little light as possible? Is it that simple? I will have a light controlled room (I just finished electrical yesterday) and I’m Considering both but leaning right now towards the G4. Thanks in advance for all the input!


----------



## fredworld

Justinmorgand said:


> I’m looking to pull the trigger in a Stewart 140” 2.40 microperf screen through audio advice but my question is what is the differences between the studio tek 130 G4 and the Firehawk G5. Is it just the difference one is good with some lights on and one you must have the room with as little light as possible? Is it that simple? I will have a light controlled room (I just finished electrical yesterday) and I’m Considering both but leaning right now towards the G4. Thanks in advance for all the input!


I think you'll get better replies if you outline your intentions more clearly.
What type/brand/model projection device?
How far is seating from the screen?
What is the extent of your light control?
What speakers and how far behind the screen will they sit?
What's your most extreme viewing angle?
I'd also suggest contacting Stewart directly. Before I pulled the trigger on my Studiotek I spoke with July Lopez at Stewart. His advice and obvious understanding of Stewart products was invaluable in my decision.
I hope this helps.


----------



## Justinmorgand

fredworld said:


> I think you'll get better replies if you outline your intentions more clearly.
> What type/brand/model projection device?
> How far is seating from the screen?
> What is the extent of your light control?
> What speakers and how far behind the screen will they sit?
> What's your most extreme viewing angle?
> I'd also suggest contacting Stewart directly. Before I pulled the trigger on my Studiotek I spoke with July Lopez at Stewart. His advice and obvious understanding of Stewart products was invaluable in my decision.
> I hope this helps.


Thanks for the response
Projector will be Sony 6000es, and mlp is 12’ 6” from the screen, the room has one window which will have a curtain and Lutron black out shades, the speakers behind the screen are arendal 1723 monitors and can be moved forward / back and side or side depending on need. The room is 24’ long, 14’ 9” wide and 8’ high. So probably not really any crazy angles. Two rows with 4 seats each and will be a bar top with bar stools behind the second row.

Watching movies is mainly my goal but I’m a big sports and party guy so will have people over for those events as well when the lights won’t be turned off completely.


----------



## Dawn Gordon

Justinmorgand said:


> Thanks for the response
> Projector will be Sony 6000es, and mlp is 12’ 6” from the screen, the room has one window which will have a curtain and Lutron black out shades, the speakers behind the screen are arendal 1723 monitors and can be moved forward / back and side or side depending on need. The room is 24’ long, 14’ 9” wide and 8’ high. So probably not really any crazy angles. Two rows with 4 seats each and will be a bar top with bar stools behind the second row.
> 
> Watching movies is mainly my goal but I’m a big sports and party guy so will have people over for those events as well when the lights won’t be turned off completely.


If you want complete darkness, don't forget to install side and bottom channels with your Lutron blackout shades.


----------



## calvinwalfred

Don, does your company sale frames only? I need a frame for 120” Firehawk Gen 4 material.


----------



## Craig Peer

Justinmorgand said:


> Thanks for the response
> Projector will be Sony 6000es, and mlp is 12’ 6” from the screen, the room has one window which will have a curtain and Lutron black out shades, the speakers behind the screen are arendal 1723 monitors and can be moved forward / back and side or side depending on need. The room is 24’ long, 14’ 9” wide and 8’ high. So probably not really any crazy angles. Two rows with 4 seats each and will be a bar top with bar stools behind the second row.
> 
> Watching movies is mainly my goal but I’m a big sports and party guy so will have people over for those events as well when the lights won’t be turned off completely.


A photo of your room might help.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Don Stewart

calvinwalfred said:


> Don, does your company sale frames only? I need a frame for 120” Firehawk Gen 4 material.


With all my years at Stewart Filmscreen, I can't recall ever being asked this question. Usually it is the other way around. DM me the serial number and I will run it next week to get the history.
Regards,
Don


----------



## Justinmorgand

Craig Peer said:


> A photo of your room might help.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Rooms not ready, I’m still building it. I’m doing it myself so taking some time but will put drywall up this week. I’ve decided to go with the Studiotek G4 but after a bit I don’t like it I’ll try and sell the G4 material and buy the fire hawk


----------



## Craig Peer

Justinmorgand said:


> Rooms not ready, I’m still building it. I’m doing it myself so taking some time but will put drywall up this week. I’ve decided to go with the Studiotek G4 but after a bit I don’t like it I’ll try and sell the G4 material and buy the fire hawk


In a light controlled room the Studiotek 130 G4 will have a better picture. I had a Firehawk and switched to the ST130. One of the best improvements I've made. Best results will be had by making the room non reflective. Check out my build thread in my signature.


----------



## ThoBkk

Dawn Gordon said:


> If you want complete darkness, don't forget to install side and bottom channels with your Lutron blackout shades.


In case the Lutron shades aren't bought yet, i can recommend renson fixscreen shades, they run in channels and have a gasket at the bottom. 100% blackout without any light leakage at all. I think screen innovation has a similar product.


----------



## Bill DePalma

I had a serious pipe burst over the Christmas holiday and my basement HT was totaled by 3 feet of standing water ( I was out of town) I will be rebuilding and replacing asap, and my first thoughts go to screen replacement. I will be replacing a Carada 1.4 cinema white screen that is 2.0 aspect ratio, 125”x61” inside dimension fixed frame screen. I have owned a Stewart screen in the past and would like to possibly purchase the 130 G4 screen. Does Stewart do 2.0 aspect screens? I have reached out to Mike G at AVS as well. Anyway, I thought I would get a jump on the screen replacement as I imagine lead times are long. Any alternative manufacturers would be welcome since this sounds like a very costly upgrade. I have a JVC RS 2000 and a Lumagen (all undamaged) as projection elements.
thanks


----------



## Don Stewart

Bill DePalma said:


> I had a serious pipe burst over the Christmas holiday and my basement HT was totaled by 3 feet of standing water ( I was out of town) I will be rebuilding and replacing asap, and my first thoughts go to screen replacement. I will be replacing a Carada 1.4 cinema white screen that is 2.0 aspect ratio, 125”x61” inside dimension fixed frame screen. I have owned a Stewart screen in the past and would like to possibly purchase the 130 G4 screen. Does Stewart do 2.0 aspect screens? I have reached out to Mike G at AVS as well. Anyway, I thought I would get a jump on the screen replacement as I imagine lead times are long. Any alternative manufacturers would be welcome since this sounds like a very costly upgrade. I have a JVC RS 2000 and a Lumagen (all undamaged) as projection elements.
> thanks


Each screen and frame is made to order so any aspect ratio is available. Do you have insurance for damages? 3 feet of water is a lot.


----------



## soundnew

Hi, I got my new WallScreen 2.5 today. It is 4 meters wide. I was surprised to see that the long sides were divided, hope that this is sturdy enough. At least it was easier to get into the room.

I have to say that I fin the installation manual not adequate. I do have two vertical brackets. Where exactely should I put those? Close to the middle of the screen? Also I have three wall mounts. Is it really necessary to use all of them or would two be enough? 

Thank you!


----------



## Bill DePalma

thanks, yes I have insurance but who knows how it will shake out. Pretty crazy just getting the water out but there is a good team working on it. All my floor standing speakers are gone, as well as my media collection and…. So I am starting with an upgrade that I have wanted for a long time, screen replacement. All good things i guess.
thanks for the info that Stewart essentially custom builds each screen to spec. The 2.00 ratio really works for me as I watch multiple formats. Thanks so much


----------



## voyagerx

soundnew said:


> Hi, I got my new WallScreen 2.5 today. It is 4 meters wide. I was surprised to see that the long sides were divided, hope that this is sturdy enough. At least it was easier to get into the room.
> 
> I have to say that I fin the installation manual not adequate. I do have two vertical brackets. Where exactely should I put those? Close to the middle of the screen? Also I have three wall mounts. Is it really necessary to use all of them or would two be enough?
> 
> Thank you!


I recently installed a 151” wide WallScreen 2.5. It also had two vertical brackets that had pre marked and installed screws in the top and bottom frames where they could go. I believe they could be adjusted if needed keeping relatively close to the same area but I left them where the existing screws were. 

Mine only came with two brackets and I used both. Yours is likely heavier but can’t speak to whether all 3 are required or not.


----------



## kwenar

soundnew said:


> Hi, I got my new WallScreen 2.5 today. It is 4 meters wide. I was surprised to see that the long sides were divided, hope that this is sturdy enough. At least it was easier to get into the room.
> 
> I have to say that I fin the installation manual not adequate. I do have two vertical brackets. Where exactely should I put those? Close to the middle of the screen? Also I have three wall mounts. Is it really necessary to use all of them or would two be enough?
> 
> Thank you!


Did you get one of the new 2.5 UST screens or is this for regular long throw? I have been looking into getting one of these but haven't had luck in even ordering one so I was curious if anyone had received one yet


----------



## soundnew

kwenar said:


> Did you get one of the new 2.5 UST screens or is this for regular long throw? I have been looking into getting one of these but haven't had luck in even ordering one so I was curious if anyone had received one yet


I got the regular 2.5.


----------

