Projector vs large TV - Bang for buck

1) Will a screen give me a better image than using the wall - General consensus please folks

A screen will give you as near as possible a perfectly uniform flatness and colour and the border will help with perceived contrast. You can make a wall as near good as a screen but you need a perfectly smooth wall to begin with painted using a spray gun. If you just project onto a typical emulsion wall you can usually see some roller strokes and weird things happening with the light scatter.

Really thing other big this that will effect the projected image is ambient light - so can you black out the windows with black out blinds? And even if so are all the rest of the walls in the room white? Unfortunately even with the windows blacked out the light projecting onto the projector then reflects onto the white walls and bounces back onto the screen which can wash out the image a lot. Take a look at some of the home cinema rooms on avforums or even dans room on this thread
https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/living-room-with-in-wall-7-1-4-and-pj.18787450/ You dont have to paint every wall black but just paining some of the walls a darker colour can make a huge difference to the image you'll get.

The other thing that can help out massively is an ALR 'Ambient light rejecting' screen like a 'React.' These reject light that doesnt come at them from straight on - they're expensive but they can work really well in lighter home environments ( you still need draw the curtains / blinds)


2) If I get a screen it will be a fixed screen. They seem to range from £250 odd to £700/£800. Any advice on what brand I should go for and why. What does a £700 screen do that a £250 can't?!

Well the good news is fixed screens are typically cheaper and good quality - cheap pull downs can have problems with curling an uniformity.
For a decent 'normal' fixed screen you can look at brands like Granview and Sapphire. For a fixed frame light rejecting screen React are the most well known and they start at £800 i think optoma themselves also make one now.

3) How long do the bulbs last? Are they expensive to replace?

Bulb life in normal bulb based projectors varies I think the last gen Sony projectors where about 4000 hours JVC and Epsons where about 6000 hours - the bulbs are typically expensive for the genuine replacements £150 - £250 region and unfortunately a lot of the manufacturers only provide a 1 year warrantee on the bulbs. LED is defiantly better on life but few manufacturers are using it - Laser is a great solution with a very long life, great brightness and no degradation during the life of the bulb... but its expensive - the Epson Laser 4kshift projectors are £5,500

4) Can projectors be used during the day. Ie daylight coming through windows.
With a bright projector you can sort of get away with watching news, football, a cartoon or anything that is very brightly lit but even then it will be a bit washed out - you can absolutely forget about trying to watch a film or any time of drama with cinematic aspirations in that environment.

That all said I'd rather watch a movie on a decently setup 1080p projector than a 4k television any day of the week - but its not a simple as ' spend a couple of grand and you can have a projected image in a white living room that competes with a native 4k WGC HDR tv.'
 
Last edited:
“1) Will a screen give me a better image than using the wall - General consensus please folks”
It depends on how smooth the wall is, how far back you are sitting and the colour of the wall. A big factor is the paint used as well. Some paints are as good as screens when painted smoothly and correctly.

I ordered a large amount of sample screens and found my wall with basic paint was better than two thirds of the screens I tested. This was further enhanced by projector paint like http://www.pourascreen.org.uk/ which outperforms a lot of screens for a fraction of the price. It also works really well in daylight due to the gray.

White screens tend to make the blacks less black and whites writer. Darker screens enhance the blacks and contrast but dull brightness. Most screen companies will send you a free or cheap sample to try.


“3) How long do the bulbs last? Are they expensive to replace?”
That depends how you use them. If you constantly turn them off and on they won’t last long. If you are going to use a projector within two hours of turning it off you are better leaving it on as you will lose 2 hours life by cycling it. Bulbs life span is different per projector. Estimated life is normally listed in the specs.



“4) Can projectors be used during the day. Ie daylight coming through windows.”
Some can, some screens and paints help compensate for daylight. It’s a bit of a mind field and I don’t have time to go into this. You have to be careful if you have to much light. We use ours all year around as the main TV so it can work. But not all rooms are suitable and we found 120" is to big as a TV so we shrank the image down to just under 100". It works well with a FireTV that cycles your own photos when not in TV mode.
 
Last edited:
Some can, some screens and paints help compensate for daylight. It’s a bit of a mind field and I don’t have time to go into this. You have to be careful if you have to much light.

Projecting in daylight onto a wall must really show off the 4kness...
 
On the subject of projector during day, it's 11:25am. There is a window with blinds behind the screen too.

Hard to get fully accurate representation, but this is also the brightest time of the day - at 12:20 it's noticeably less bright

24130222_10159927995965227_5147611120902721707_o.jpg


Curtains will be nice to get, but no rush
 
Last edited:
you will be lucky to get more than 3000 hours out of a JVC , think i said before , why not make a screen . its sooo easy

Are these sarcasm quotes? :)

Put 642 hours on my JVC since beginning of June. That's 1300 a year, doesn't seem much actually, there has been a bit of downtime during the build I guess.
 
So guys...... Not sure what you lot are all arguing about but:

1) Will a screen give me a better image than using the wall - General consensus please folks

2) If I get a screen it will be a fixed screen. They seem to range from £250 odd to £700/£800. Any advice on what brand I should go for and why. What does a £700 screen do that a £250 can't?!

3) How long do the bulbs last? Are they expensive to replace?

4) Can projectors be used during the day. Ie daylight coming through windows.
Got a bit more time now.

The reason we used a wall is with the correct paint you get the same or better output then many screens with the advantages of a screen and none of the disadvantages. If you are unsure try doing what we did. Order a mixture of screen materials and with masking tape put them on the wall. Then paint some boards with projector paint and stick them up. The masking tape shouldn’t damage the wall and just pulls off.

This way you can compare your natural wall paint, special projector paint and different screens materials. Almost all the big screen companies gave us samples for free if you ask via email or phone. A few charged a small P&P fee.

We were surprised to find that good paints even in one case none projector paint beat a lot of screens (at least out of what we tested). The Pourascreen for example is reflective, produces bright sharp images with vibrant colours. It also gives very good performance regardless of light conditions and gets rid of that washed out look. It had none of the viewing angle or sparkle problems of some screens so for 4k HDR daylight viewing it was amazing. Paint it on, put a nice black border around it and you have a great experience. I work across a number of buildings and 90% of the projectors are now without screens as paint now gives excellent performance regardless of lighting conditions for a fraction of the cost.

With screens we found that a lot of them had problems from poor viewing angles with just standing up and sitting down effecting the image. Others had sparkles or made the blacks grey. One screen martial we did like was the Elite screens Aeon CineWhite. The Cinegray looked brilliant as well but anyone sitting 45degree to the left or right of the center had a poor experience so we ruled that one out for us but might work for you?

With screens check the viewing angle and do not mount a projector screen next to a strong heat source like above a radiator.
 
The reason we used a wall is with the correct paint you get the same or better output then many screens with the advantages of a screen and none of the disadvantages.

Well apart from the fact that few people have perfectly smooth walls and unless you spray it on you end up with roller / pad / brush marks in the surface that show up.

so for 4k HDR daylight viewing it was amazing.

No projectors look 'amazing' in daylight - even non native 4k optoma pixel shifters :p
 
after reading avforums thread https://www.avforums.com/threads/acer-v9800-4k-dlp-projector-review-and-comments.2114465/page-10
they reference an explanation of how the jvc e-shift works

38700872192_9900f789e4_o_d.jpg


- ironic that the capability now being marketted as 4K capability, was previously sold as a 1080p enhancer.

the new benq https://www.projectorreviews.com/ar...uhd-home-theater-projector-priced-under-2000/
with native 1080p dlp x 4 shift method is interesting, how does their optical actuator make these 4 shifts ? I assume the shifted pixels will overlap ?
 
you will be lucky to get more than 3000 hours out of a JVC , think i said before , why not make a screen . its sooo easy

With my Optoma HD70 (albeit its almost always been run in eco mode + high altitude) I've rolled over the bulb counter twice at 3000 hours and on another 244 IIRC and its about 10 years old now - I'm quite surprised as projectors of that era usually struggled past 2000 hours. Aside from taking longer to reach normal brightness its still performing well.

Sadly once it does die it probably won't be worth spending the money on a replacement bulb versus putting it towards a new projector - as I mostly watch netflix, etc. even their "1080p HD" streams don't really justify above 720p.
 

Some interesting info in that article ;

“For clarity, we don’t consider any of these to be true 4K, but on a line between basic 1080p pixel shifters (x2) then the x4, and the 2716x1528x2. They all ultimately address 8.3 million pixels, but the pixel size and overlap varies. By our take true 4K projectors (which start at $4,999 list price these days with the Sony VW285ES), need to have at least 3840×2160 pixels without overlapping larger pixels with pixel shifting..”

Guess that article was also written by “stupid people”
 
after reading avforums thread https://www.avforums.com/threads/acer-v9800-4k-dlp-projector-review-and-comments.2114465/page-10
they reference an explanation of how the jvc e-shift works

....

- ironic that the capability now being marketted as 4K capability, was previously sold as a 1080p enhancer.

the new benq https://www.projectorreviews.com/ar...uhd-home-theater-projector-priced-under-2000/
with native 1080p dlp x 4 shift method is interesting, how does their optical actuator make these 4 shifts ? I assume the shifted pixels will overlap ?
The JVC and Epson e-shift doesn’t officially qualify as native 4k resolution and the Optima UHD65 doesn’t work in the same way as those two. A lot of the limitations and problems in the JVC and Epson are not in in the UHD65. That’s why the UHD65 pass’s the official tests and has the full 4k stamp while the JVC and Epson do not and are only listed as compatible.

You just need to watch the videos I posted earlier in this thread that shows the Optima and above projectors side by side. That video proves they are not the same method.

Or you can run the test vila talked about before. When he lied and said the 1:1 pixel mapped checker board will never run and is impossible to pass. Well that’s true for the JVC and Epson. But that precise checkerboard pattern and the 1 line pixel mapped 1:1 tests patterns both do display correctly, cleanly and sharply on the UHD65. This along with the video I posted proves that the Optima is not the same method as the JVC and Epson e-shift. EDIT: I am sure vila will respond with some strawmen argument on how some other obscure test no one has seen doesn’t pass. But that doesn’t change the fact they lied and the test talked about do pass.


For some reason a few people are having problems understanding the different methods all they see is Eshift and wrongly lump them all together not realizing they are different methods.

Like most people I agree the JVC and Epson do not count as 4k. They do not display the full 8.3 million discrete pixels per refresh rate cycle or pass the two mentioned 1:1 text patterns. The JVC and Epson have larger pixels that overlap while the Optima has correct sized pixels that do no overlap as proven both by the video and by the two main 1:1 4k test board pattern which pass.

Proving that eshift projectors like the JVC and Epson do not count doesn’t apply to the Optima as the Optima is not the same method and doesn’t have the same limitations. There are to many bad reviews out there that look at the JVC and Epson problems and apply them to the Optima even when the Optima doesn't have that problem. A classic example is pixels size. The Optima is the correct pixel size with discrete pixels the JVC and Epson are larger and overlapping pixels that are not discrete. Some of the reviews are being deceitful like vila is and saying the Optima doesn't count then posting evidence related to the old TV's or JVC and Epson which doesn't apply to the Optima.

No one is saying the JVC and Epson count as full 4k. They are different methods which look terrible. The Optima is nothing at all like the JVC and Epson method.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom