Use this form if the comment contains offensive or otherwise inappropriate content. An email message will be sent to our moderators who will take appropriate action if necessary.

Write your message to the moderator below:

(Enter the numbers exactly as they appear to the left)

Comment text appears below:
If Venky's question on the screen was for me, CinemaPete, I currently have a 4:3 screen (120 inches diagonally) which would produce a very decent size 16:9 image - but I will be switching to a 2.4 screen size very shortly that I am building myself. I'm jumping directly to a 2.4 screen rather than go the 16:9 screen route so that I can take advantage of super wide-screen movies and most other movies on BluRay shot in super wide-screen mode( in conjunction with using the 2.4:1 anamorphic mode on the AE4000u). I don't mean to infer everything on BluRay is in 2.4:1, it's not, but having a 2.4 screen give you great flexibility especially with a projector such as the Panasonic ae4000u if your material and player produces a super wide-screen image. Just in case you might be wondering, some people (including a friend of mine who was a "projectionist") have said that a 16:9 screen is the same as 2.4 - it's not. I won't put the math here to show you why it's not but the number 2.4 in reality represents a screen that is generally wider than a 16:9 screen (and if you are strict with your math, slightly less tall (vertically) than a 16:9 screen) - it's a wider and narrower screen than a typical 16:9 screen is. Viewing typical 16:9 material on a 2.4 screen (without some kind of zooming or anamorphic treatment) would produce black bars not only on the top and bottom but also to the left and right and 4:3 material would produce even wider (relative to the wider 2.4 screen's width) black bars left and right of the image. But having the 2.4 screen imposes no limits other than having the width and space to accommodate it (and this is assuming your projector's throw distance and lumen output relative to its distance from the screen are not degraded). Hope this answers your question.