Projector versus Big Screen TV

I was looking at some real nice projectors that can connect to anything, your computer, your phone, DVD player. You can hide the screen away easy as it rolls up to the ceiling and its very portable, much less worry about damage when moving it from location to location. Projectors have come a long way and are very high tech. Most of them can project a movie onto a 300 inch wide surface. Anyone here use them?

Thought about buying one many times as I have some space that could do it. But I'm fussy about image quality, and to achieve the image quality from a projector to match that of my OLED TV, you have to spend thousands.

I'd be interetsed to hear any experiences wit thhem though.

As long as I have a modestly sized screen, and a copy of a film that is a least half decent, worrying over tech in regards to film consumption is just not my thing. I don't care.

That's were I'm at. I've watched plenty of old obscure movies with video quality so poor that I couldn't make out people's faces who were in the background. But I was still able to get the story and enjoy the movie.

I'm not saying I don't prefer better resolution. Nor am I saying that the best resolution you can get may have an incremental effect on the quality of the film. But....I think this obsession with needing to have a theatre sized screen in your home, or an image that is completely pristine and sometimes even better than it would have looked during its original run during the theatre is...a distraction. To me it doesn't feel like any of this is so much about the movies as it is about a line we have begun to believe that we always need the next biggest and best tech innovation. Are DVD's better than VHS'. Yes. And are Blu Ray's better than DVD's. Yes. But at what point does better start to become irrelevant? At what point are we going to continue to let the format of a film dictate whether we experience it positively or negatively.

I think all of this is us as a society being more keen to honor the messaging coming from Sony, than from the likes of an Orson Welles. It's just beginning to feel a little bit backwards to me.


But I'm a filthy Luddite, so my opinion on this could probably be discarded. I'd probably rather be writing this response on a typewriter than this ****ing piece of shit laptop.

I very much agree. I do look for the best video quality when watching old movies but it's not always an option....and I agree about mega TV screens size too. I tell that to my wife every time we go to Costco and they have those mega screens in super high quality. Sure they look great BUT only if their input is 4k video. Try playing a 360p old movie and the large size will make the already poor video quality look like crap when compared to an average size TV. My TV is 42 inches and way big enough for our tiny living room.

I use to argue the same thing 25 years ago on a planted aquarium board. There were people there who's main interest wasn't underwater gardening but having the latest high tech stuff. Not me I'm low tech.

Ha...I'm writing this on a 15 year old desktop computer.

The format or delivery system means very little in contrast to experiencing a movie at home comparable to a public theater environment. Newer films that offer ultra4K HD and whatever the new high res is deserve to be seen on capable tech, but overall for me, being able to see a new release on a 150 inch screen with high def laser light seems great. If given a choice to see a movie on a standard television set at home or at the theater I will always choose the theater. So, with projection, I can now watch a huge library of films on a large screen compared to being limited to whatever I can find on DVD.

If something leads to watching more movies, go for it.


I just don't feel the same need for a film watching experience having to match up with that of a theater to find it worth doing.


Some movies definitely benefit from a bigger screen. And all films benefit from some amount of better resolution. But, like I said, I find a lot of these technical concerns get in the way. I will watch something on any screen, as long as the image isn't murky shit, the sound is mostly clear. Waiting for an ideal moment or ideal restoration or ideal technology is just too many factors for me to contend with.


I just put something on and if it isn't completely awful, continue watching.

It all comes down to bang for my buck. I am budgeted so I can't get the highest priority in projector tech, but if play my cards right I can choose the right machine with the highest resolution and adaptability to change of format. The truth is though I'm sketching out more and more on going to the theater so with a big screen at home that doesnt cost an arm and a leg, it starts to look pretty attractive.

Projectors are only good if you're using it in a dark room (i.e. a room that gets lots of sunlight is off the table) or getting a commercial model, which will negate the previous issue. But it'll also cost considerably more. Like $2-3k at least.

TVs are far and away the best way to enjoy media at home, as they are backlit and more consistent across environments. Considerably cheaper too.

I’m fussy about image quality too. I hate a picture that’s even a bit fuzzy. I like sharp, clear & well-lit.

__________________
I’m here only on Mondays, Wednesdays & Fridays. That’s why I’m here now.

EPSON appears to be the top brand and they offer a full range of options as well as pricing from the cheap to ultra deluxe, so I will likely be purchasing a mid-level machine.