cinescope screen material

[squirrel101]

has anyone ever used a metal screen, reason i ask is i can get 4x10 sheet of prepainted aluminum in virtually any color , and it is very flexible for doing say a 2.35:1 screen was wondering how well it would do with a projector cuz when you hold a news/mag. print up to it it reads easily. you can also get in flat colors like flat grey.

[Beta Man]

no idea, but if it HOLDS paint (which I'm sure it does) then I'd just get it in a white (basically for purposes of being a primer) and then use one of the Screen Paint "Recipes" that have been used with success by others.


Don't see why a painted sheet of aluminum would be different than a wall painted As long as there is no texture in it.

[squirrel101]

the metal comes pre-colored in gloss or flat finish and is very slick and shiny, how does a curved screen work if your projecting 16:9 images, and do you need an xtra lens , i've settled on the jvc rs-10 projector and a 130" stewart screen unless this will be "as good" as i can't handle a premade cinecurve.

[Blu Man]

Pictures? Link?

[squirrel101]

the metal i used to fabricate racecar bodies , i used to race dirt late model , a 4x10 sheet is about $65.00 , i think a company called wrisco makes , just check around where you live for a racecar fabrication shop.

[Beta Man]

might be safer (since others have done it with success) to just go the Wilson-art designer White laminate

[Brain Sturgeon]

Sounds like your idea would work once your painted the aluminum with some image friendly material. You would obviously need to bend the aluminum smoothly to a certain radius-- most curved screens use a 40' radius, although there are calculators out there to calculate the exact curve needed to combat pincushion at your particular throw. The generic 40' is close to what most people need though.

Are you planning on doing the zoom method for scope material, or are you planning on introducing an anamorphic lens at some point? Honestly speaking, if you are not using a lens, then the benefit of a curved screen will be pretty minimal.

16:9 material looks fine on a curved screen, although you will need to find some way to mask the edges of the image to get the optimum projected image.

Good luck!

[squirrel101]

the lens part was what i was curious about? and whether or not you thought the high gloss finish would be a benefit instead of painting it?

[Beta Man]

from what I can tell, the finish/paint that comes on it would be an "Untested" quality...... if you have to paint it with a tried and true formula, so be it, but it may work as-is.... even looking at the finish in person won't tell you much until you project an image on it.

[Brain Sturgeon]

As Beta mentioned, you are not going to know how an image looks on that high gloss finish until you try it. My gut feeling would be that it is probably not going to be great for image quality as it may be overly reflective (for instance, I don't think that an image projected onto the high gloss finish on my car would look very good), but you never know.

In terms of the anamorphic lens, what are you curious about?

[squirrel101]

the lens is only good for a curved screen? and a curved screen requirs the lens ...correct? so then how about a 2.4:1 screen with no curve or a very large 16:9 screen with a mask for the black bars?

[My_Two_Cents]

What gauge aluminum sheet? I ask because Al sheet is my profession, and it creases, dents, bends extremely easily if it is thin enough. You definitely do not want any sort of discontinuity like this on your screen, or it'll stick-out like a sore thumb when you project onto it. I think you'd be better of with laminate. It's very easy to work with and will not damage unless you really do something crazy to it.

[Brain Sturgeon]

Originally Posted by squirrel101

the lens is only good for a curved screen? and a curved screen requirs the lens ...correct? so then how about a 2.4:1 screen with no curve or a very large 16:9 screen with a mask for the black bars?

No, not necessarily. An anamorphic lens has a tendency to introduce pincushion distortion to an image, particularly at short throw lengths (throw ratios less than 2). A curved screen can be used to combat this distortion, particularly in those situations with short throw lengths. At longer throw lengths, the issue becomes much less. A good number of people who have FP setups with an anamorphic lens do not use a curved screen because their pincushion distortion is minimal. A curved screen is not absolutely necessary for a scope setup, although there is a certain "cool" factor to it.

A 2.40:1 screen with no curve would work fine-- you may want to consider side masks for it when you watch 1.85:1 or 1.33:1 material. A large 16:9 screen with masking would also work fine. Carada makes an automated masking system called the Masquerade that will mask off the black bars of a 16:9 screen to improved the perceived contrast of a scope letterboxed image.

[squirrel101]

if i use a 2.4:1 screen when i view something else won't that image become too tall the room i'm going to build will be 15' wide and as deep as 27' but only as deep as is necessary with 2 rows of seats. what would be the ideal screen size?

[Brain Sturgeon]

Originally Posted by squirrel101

if i use a 2.4:1 screen when i view something else won't that image become too tall the room i'm going to build will be 15' wide and as deep as 27' but only as deep as is necessary with 2 rows of seats. what would be the ideal screen size?

No. If you have a 2.40:1 screen, you need to do one of two things when you change AR's: 1) change the zoom and shift of your projector so that the image fully fills your screen vertically, or 2) engage/disengage the V-Stretch function of your projector/scalar and engage/disengage the anamorphic lens from the light path. As with all things, there a couple of other different ways of doing this, but these are the basic ones. Either way, you either have an image that fills the entirety of the screen (2.40:1 material) or one that is pillarboxed with unused screen real estate to the sides of the image (1.85:1 material). Your image is of a constant height. That's why they call it a CIH (constant image height) setup.

As far as screen sizes, the bigger the better of course. But there are limitations. The biggest scope screen that most "average" consumer projectors can decently handle is in the range of 10-12'. Even 12' may be pushing it a bit. Any more than that and you are going to need a projector that will be very expensive (read: >$25k). I would go with the biggest screen that you feel comfortable with and that your planned projector/screen combo can handle within a 9-12' range of scope screens.

[squirrel101]

thank you foyour help Mr.Brain as well as everyone else i may have to budget my self a little lower on the projector to under 3k so that being considered i know the sony hw-10 , , panasonic 3000, are a couple of good proj. i will probably buy a stewart screen that a local shop has which is a 130" 1.3 gain for 1800.00 any suggestions for a pj, i really like the picture quality of my plasma and the new theater will be blacked out.

[Brain Sturgeon]

Originally Posted by squirrel101

thank you foyour help Mr.Brain as well as everyone else i may have to budget my self a little lower on the projector to under 3k so that being considered i know the sony hw-10 , , panasonic 3000, are a couple of good proj. i will probably buy a stewart screen that a local shop has which is a 130" 1.3 gain for 1800.00 any suggestions for a pj, i really like the picture quality of my plasma and the new theater will be blacked out.

You're most welcome!

The Stewart screen should be excellent, and the 1.3 gain will help with the light output. Is the 130" in diagonal or width, and what AR is the screen? If the screen is 130" in width and 16:9 AR (a pretty big screen!), the picture may be a little light-challenged for your taste with the average projector in the $3k and below price range. If it's 130" in width (or diagonal) and 2.40:1 AR, you should be alright.

The Sony and Panasonic you mention are excellent choices for that price range. I've seen a couple of used JVC RS-1's which would also be a very good choice in that price range. Here are a couple for sale at AVS:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/vbcla...?do=ad&id=8909
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/vbcla...?do=ad&id=8970

(disclosure: I have nothing to do with these sales)

The Epson 6500UB, Sanyo Z3000, and JVC RS10 are some others in or just above that price range that you may want to look at.

[squirrel101]

i just found the hd-350 for 3800.00 i can go with this if i can get a screen that will be nearly as good as a stewart . is the carada 2nd best cause i can get one of those for around 800.00, suggestion on screen, ceiling height will be less than 8ft

[Brain Sturgeon]

Originally Posted by squirrel101

i just found the hd-350 for 3800.00 i can go with this if i can get a screen that will be nearly as good as a stewart . is the carada 2nd best cause i can get one of those for around 800.00, suggestion on screen, ceiling height will be less than 8ft

The RS10/HD350 is an excellent projector, and I would hesitate to call Carada "second best". Stewart is considered to be top of the line, but there are many "high end" theaters out there that use other screens, like Carada, or DaLite (particularly the High Power), or SMX, etc... with excellent results. I think you would be very happy with an RS10/Carada combo.

[squirrel101]

i just said that cuz i thought stewart supposed to be the best, i haven't seen the smx screens, got a link?