When using a 2:40 screen along with the anamorphic lens you get all the pixels back and get about 38% of your light back on screen. Without the lens you can still use lens memory to throw a 2:40 image onto your 2:40 screen but those black bars are still being projected outside the screen , reducing the brightness of your image.
Hey Zack, thanks for this video. Since projector has memory lens built in, I thought anamorphic lense doesn't make sense anymore, but it's not exactly as simple as that I understand. I'm wondering about two things : - Is today anamorphic lense worth its cost? Because, to me, if you are willing to go to the anamorphic lense path, then you should go with motorized one, with trigger etc something that brands like Panamorph. And those kind of product are in my mind very expensive. That's something to be aware of. On one side, we have Built in memory lense, which cost Zero, and on the other hand anamorphic lense which cost I think nowadays maybe $2000. I read a lot of people in forums who are using anamorphic lense and love it, other saying it doesn't make sense. Question is wide open to me, and depends to each one's sensitivity towards images. Chris is refering to progress on anamorphic lense over the last decade, to be honest, I haven't seen one in action since maybe 15 years, so would probably worth an experience update, right? - Second is, Format detection : I remember in the past, projector (especially Panasonic & Epson if I remember correctly) were able to detect the image format and trigger the correct memory lense automatically. Why this fonction looks to have disappeared and is not available on High end projector like JVC's. Isn't it a little pity to have to wonder the format of the program you want to whatch and have to manually select it on the remote? Activation of the anamorphic lense can be automatic I guess and hope. What would be your comment? And I would be interested to have Chris's opinion about it. Just to understand and maybe have his recommandation of this topic. Thanks Zack for very interesting those videos which ... raise questions
Projectors don't have internal lenses for specific aspect ratios certain projectors like JVC have lens memory which only zooms and adjusts the picture placement on the screen to fit the preset size. There's a few that come with an anamorphic lens like Barco's new projectors, but I think what you're referring to is something that would have to be down by a high end seperate component like a video scaler (Lumagen, MadVR) that was calibrated to insure the contents integrity was consistent throughout your viewing experience.
I laughed when he said "lower end" rs540... that "lower end" destroys the x5 and x7 in contrast and black levels without question and with a Panasonic player or madvr, you get dynamic tone mapping as well. if anything, the lower end wild be the x5
The problem is its not even that simple, not all movies are shot is 2:39, (most are) Avatar for example is shot in 1.85. Same with Robinhood Prince of Thieves. Your best off getting a 16:9
2:35 is out dated now. Go as wide as u can with a 16:9. I have a 150inch seymour screen with masking panels. Watching Nolan films u dont lose any of the height. Since nolan and his imax u r starting to see more and more of hollywood push imax.
When using a 2:40 screen along with the anamorphic lens you get all the pixels back and get about 38% of your light back on screen. Without the lens you can still use lens memory to throw a 2:40 image onto your 2:40 screen but those black bars are still being projected outside the screen , reducing the brightness of your image.
eggzackly
Yep
Hey Zack, thanks for this video. Since projector has memory lens built in, I thought anamorphic lense doesn't make sense anymore, but it's not exactly as simple as that I understand.
I'm wondering about two things :
- Is today anamorphic lense worth its cost?
Because, to me, if you are willing to go to the anamorphic lense path, then you should go with motorized one, with trigger etc something that brands like Panamorph.
And those kind of product are in my mind very expensive. That's something to be aware of. On one side, we have Built in memory lense, which cost Zero, and on the other hand anamorphic lense which cost I think nowadays maybe $2000.
I read a lot of people in forums who are using anamorphic lense and love it, other saying it doesn't make sense.
Question is wide open to me, and depends to each one's sensitivity towards images.
Chris is refering to progress on anamorphic lense over the last decade, to be honest, I haven't seen one in action since maybe 15 years, so would probably worth an experience update, right?
- Second is, Format detection : I remember in the past, projector (especially Panasonic & Epson if I remember correctly) were able to detect the image format and trigger the correct memory lense automatically.
Why this fonction looks to have disappeared and is not available on High end projector like JVC's. Isn't it a little pity to have to wonder the format of the program you want to whatch and have to manually select it on the remote?
Activation of the anamorphic lense can be automatic I guess and hope.
What would be your comment? And I would be interested to have Chris's opinion about it.
Just to understand and maybe have his recommandation of this topic.
Thanks Zack for very interesting those videos which ... raise questions
Projectors don't have internal lenses for specific aspect ratios certain projectors like JVC have lens memory which only zooms and adjusts the picture placement on the screen to fit the preset size. There's a few that come with an anamorphic lens like Barco's new projectors, but I think what you're referring to is something that would have to be down by a high end seperate component like a video scaler (Lumagen, MadVR) that was calibrated to insure the contents integrity was consistent throughout your viewing experience.
Where is the video you mentioned you would give us a link too concerning "brightness"????
I went with a custom 2.0 Stewart StudioTek100. Unbelievable screen, and the shape is a great compromise between 16x9 and 2.35
I laughed when he said "lower end" rs540... that "lower end" destroys the x5 and x7 in contrast and black levels without question and with a Panasonic player or madvr, you get dynamic tone mapping as well. if anything, the lower end wild be the x5
Best video on the subject, thank you!
So with a 16X9 screen and watching a movie you have black bars on top and bottom. To get rid of those black bars we would use the lens memory?
well, you wouldnt "get rid" of the black bars. you'll just move them above & below the viewing area of the screen.
Watch predominantly tv on your projector = get a 16.9. Watch predominantly movies = get wide screen
The problem is its not even that simple, not all movies are shot is 2:39, (most are) Avatar for example is shot in 1.85. Same with Robinhood Prince of Thieves. Your best off getting a 16:9
Wrong. You completely lost the point of it.
2:35 is out dated now. Go as wide as u can with a 16:9. I have a 150inch seymour screen with masking panels. Watching Nolan films u dont lose any of the height. Since nolan and his imax u r starting to see more and more of hollywood push imax.
Nonsense. Majority are still scope and the few IMAX ones are scope safe so don't spread misinformation