Screen Format

Discussion in 'Home Theater Projects' started by Rick Westfall, Jul 24, 2006.

  1. Rick Westfall

    Rick Westfall Stunt Coordinator

    Dec 8, 1998
    Likes Received:
    Most of my hardware has been purchased and is enroute. I'm looking at which screen to go with. Before I move on, I know there are alot of DIY'ers out there. Congrats on that, but I screw more things up than get it right so...I'm spending the money.

    I'm choosing a Carada screen, but am wondering if there is anyone out there that doesn't use the 16x9 ratio. My room will be used almost entirely for movies. Does it make more sense to go with the super wide 2.35:1 format?

    Thoughts or reflections if you own a wide format like this.

  2. chris_everett

    chris_everett Second Unit

    Jul 20, 2003
    Likes Received:
    I would guess that 1/3 of my movies are 16x9, so I went with that aspect ratio. Also, the limiting factor of my screen size was width, so a taller screen gives me the most picture in the most movies. The small "white bars" at the bottom and top of my screen disappear when I'm watching something.
  3. Jim Mcc

    Jim Mcc Producer

    Feb 11, 2004
    Likes Received:
    Oconomowoc, WI.
    Real Name:
    I also recommend 16:9 format. 2:35 is really in the minority of movies out there.
  4. ChrisWiggles

    ChrisWiggles Producer

    Aug 19, 2002
    Likes Received:
    This question really also depends on what films you're watching. I figure a good 80% of the films I watch are 2.35 or thereabouts.

    The other very important question is what kind of projector setup you have. If you have an anamorphic lens such that the 16:9 panel of the display is stretched to 2.35 and have processing in the chain that can do the anamoprhic squeeze, then a 2.35 screen can be a great way to go. You can get full panel resolution with both 2.35 material and 16:9 material (by removing the lens).

    I use a 16:9 screen because I use a CRT projector, so an anamorphic lens is not possible, and a fixed height screen would make 16:9 films take up significantly less raster than with a 16:9 setup.

    With the right hardware, I would probably recommend the more cinematic nature of a 2.35 screen where 2.35 films are wider than 16:9, rather than being shorter as they would be in a 16:9 setup.

    There is a forum dedicated to this at AVS too.

Share This Page