# IscoIIIL or Carada Masquerade CIH System



## DeanHT (Sep 3, 2010)

Ok, everyone

If you had the opportunity to get either the IscoIIIL anamorphic lens plus the Ceneslide powered transport system for the lens or the Carada Masquerade CIH System paired with an acoustically transparent flat screen which one would you choose and why?

Screen: Will be a 235:1 Flat acoustically transparent screen due to the three front speakers being in the wall behind the screen. Also, the screen size will be somewhere between 120-140 inch diagonal.

Projector: Ceiling mounted Panasonic PT-AE4000U 

Setup: 7.1 setup with Onkyo 876 receiver 

Room: 15' width and 22' length and 9' ceiling

Sitting area is flexible at this moment - new construction - The basement and first floor is framed, second floor is next. :clap:

No ambient light issue.

Any information is greatly appreciated. Thanks, Dean


----------



## Prof. (Oct 20, 2006)

Well if I had the opportunity of getting an Isco lens with a Cineslide, that's what I would be getting! 
The Carada Masquerade is just a screen/ masking system to be used in conjunction with any standard projector..

The other thing is that the Panasonic PT-AE4000 uses a preset aspect ratio system, and to my knowledge (never having owned one) is not suitable for anamorphic projection!..


----------



## DeanHT (Sep 3, 2010)

The other thing is that the Panasonic PT-AE4000 uses a preset aspect ratio system, and to my knowledge (never having owned one) is not suitable for anamorphic projection!.. 


*Can anyone verify this?*


----------



## Gary Lightfoot (Aug 2, 2010)

DeanHT said:


> Ok, everyone
> 
> If you had the opportunity to get either the IscoIIIL anamorphic lens plus the Ceneslide powered transport system for the lens or the Carada Masquerade CIH System paired with an acoustically transparent flat screen which one would you choose and why?


Given the choice, and depending on your seating distance, I would choose the ISCO over a masking system every time. I used to zoom but found a lens gave a better image in my set up. I used simple curtain track for side masking. For me, image quality came first, and masking second. I can, and did live without masking for some time, but I don't think I could live without an A lens from my preferred seating distance.

A lens will usually give a better image over zooming, but is an expensive option - try the AE4000s zoom and see what you think of the image from your preferred seating distance (see below for more info). 

If you sit close enough to the 2.35 screen, and zoom to make the 2.35 movie fit the 2.35 screen, it's like moving your seating 33% closer, so pixels appear 33% larger and may give the image a 'chunkier' look. Depending on how close you are, you may even start to notice stair stepping of the pixels at the edges of curves for example (though this can depend on the projection technology). Using an anamorphic lens with vertical scaling means that you're using all 1080 display pixels (not source pixels, which will be 810 for 2.35) and so pixel size/density remains the same as when viewing 16:9 without the lens.

Beamax do a simple manual masking system that's incorporated into their screen, and might be worth a look if cost is an option (I can't post links yet so do a search on youtube for Beamax 1:2.35 aspect ratio)



DeanHT said:


> Screen: Will be a 235:1 Flat acoustically transparent screen due to the three front speakers being in the wall behind the screen. Also, the screen size will be somewhere between 120-140 inch diagonal.
> 
> Projector: Ceiling mounted Panasonic PT-AE4000U
> 
> ...



Viewing distance is important - it's not the physical size but the size of the image registering on the retina that's important. Compare sitting in the back row of a commercial theatre with a correctly implemented Constant Image Height set up with a 2.35 screen (not a multiplex with a 16:9 screen that masks down to scope like a tv) which puts you approx 3.7 to 5 times the image height back, with a 50 foot wide screen and then 8 feet away from an 8 foot wide 2.35 screen (2.4 x IH) - you'll get more visual impact from the 8 foot wide screen than from the commercial theatre.

Where do you sit when you go to a commercial theatre? If it's in the middle, then I would suggest that you have your seats 2.4 x the image height back. Most commercial theatres have seats in the range of 2 to 4 x the Image Height.










THXs optimal seating for 1920 x 1080 16:9 will give you a 40 degree viewing angle, which is achieved if you sit 2.4 x IH back from the screen. That will give you around 52 degrees for 2.35 in the same seat if you zoom or use an anamorphic lens. SMPTE, CEA and Fox suggest a 3 x IH seating distance, but IMHO, you may find that 16:9 material could look too small in a CIH set up. You need to experiment

Because seating distance can be down to personal preference, I'd suggest you try projecting onto a wall and see what size/seating distance works best for you. It can be an expensive mistake to buy the screen only to find it's the wrong size for where you like to sit. You may find that a Constant Image Area set up is more to your liking (and is really the only set up where a 4 way masking system is needed).

HTH

Gary


----------



## Gary Lightfoot (Aug 2, 2010)

DeanHT said:


> The other thing is that the Panasonic PT-AE4000 uses a preset aspect ratio system, and to my knowledge (never having owned one) is not suitable for anamorphic projection!..
> 
> 
> *Can anyone verify this?*


The AE4000 does indeed use a preset system so you can, at the press of s button, zoom in and out to give you 16:9 and 2.35 in a CIH set up on a 2.35:1 screen.

I do know that there are people out there using AE4000s with anamorphic lenses, so it is possible, though I'm not sure if they have to use an external scaler to achieve the vertical stretch. I'd do a search on avsforum to see, as that's where I've seen owners using an A lens with their Ae4000s.

EDIT: Just found this info on Projector Central:

http://www.projectorcentral.com/epson_8500_panasonic_ae4000.htm



Projector Central said:


> 2.40 Format Widescreen Use.. The AE4000 can accommodate an external anamorphic lens with its onboard anamorphic stretch.


If you use a PC (HTPC) you can achieve that quite easily.

Gary


----------



## Gary Lightfoot (Aug 2, 2010)

Just a quickie - if cost is an option, and you do want the lens, you don't necessarily need an automatic sled. You can make a manual one (drawer rails are often used) or not even bother with one at all. If the pj has the option in it's menu (some call it 4:3 mode), you can keep the lens in place for 16:9 and scale the image to 16:9. This does mean a loss of horizontal resolution because you're not using all the pixels, but it's harder to see (if at all) the lose in horizontal res than it is to see the loss in vertical res. That's one of the reasons why anamorphic lenses seem to work so well compared to using the zoom function.

So as a cost exercise, you could save some money on the sled, and use that for the Beamax manual masking system. Then you get to have both items (although you lose the 'coolness' of the auto sled and electric masking) rather than one or the other.

Gary


----------



## Prof. (Oct 20, 2006)

Sound advice Gary..:T

The only time I use my lens sled is when I slide out the lens for cleaning! 
With the two AR buttons on the remote, I can leave the lens in place permanently..
There is some slight degradation in image quality with 16:9 movies, but not worth worrying about..in fact I've always watched most 16:9 movies in cinemascope mode..
That's something you can't do with just zooming!


----------



## DenisT (Jan 15, 2011)

> The other thing is that the Panasonic PT-AE4000 uses a preset aspect ratio system,
> and to my knowledge (never having owned one) is not suitable for anamorphic projection!..


I'm using the AE2000 with an ISCOII anamorphic lens. The VFit setting does a vertical stretch, filling the 16x9 screen with the 2.45:1 image. This is then H stretched to 2.45:1 with the lens. But I have to use zoom and focus to make it fit on the screen. The AE4000 allows you to save these zoom/focus settings as presets, so that you can easily switch from 16x9 to 2.45:1. It is made for anamorphic projection.

regards

Denis


----------



## Prof. (Oct 20, 2006)

Thanks Denis, that's good to know..:T


----------



## Mark Techer (Jan 17, 2008)

DenisT said:


> The AE4000 allows you to save these zoom/focus settings as presets, so that you can easily switch from 16x9 to 2.45:1. It is made for anamorphic projection.


Dennis, what is your throw ratio? 2.45:1 sounds a bit wide. It would happen if your either running a short throw or the lens is not corrected for grid distortion or both.


----------



## DenisT (Jan 15, 2011)

> Dennis, what is your throw ratio? 2.45:1 sounds a bit wide. It would happen if your either running a short throw or the lens is not corrected for grid distortion or both.


My mistake, it is actually 2.364:1. (16x9 * 1.33). 

Denis


----------



## Mark Techer (Jan 17, 2008)

DenisT said:


> My mistake, it is actually 2.364:1. (16x9 * 1.33).
> 
> Denis


The math is actually out to the 7th decimal place or 1.3333333 x 1.7777777 = 2.3703702


----------

