Talk:Projection screen/Archive 1

No screen dimensions given
Why not list examples of various indoor (particularly theaters) and outdoor screen size dimensions? It would be interesting to know alongside the other information offered here. That's what I came to this page to learn, btw. 71.112.38.38 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:09, 8 January 2010 (UTC).

Rear projection screens
There is no mention in the article of rear projection or other indirect projection methods used in some cases. Though excedingly rare some theatres do use these methods to this day. Not to mention television. Unless I am missing it there is no seperate page for rear projection screens. If there is links need to be added here and on many other pages along with catagory tags IRMacGuyver (talk) 12:07, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Projected image quality
This is a substantial piece of work! I have been involved with this topic for some years. There is much information available on screens and on projectors - separately - but precious little in combining them into a 'projected display'. Further, there was little on putting facts and figures on the effects of ambient light, which is the real image killer.

To this end I was involved, with other engineer and consultant colleagues, in producing a 'best practice' paper on projected image quality. This was supported by InfoComm (the professional body for the audio-visual industry) and this work is posted here. There are also Excel spreadsheets to calculate the impact of ambient light on front and rear projected images.

This is an 'open source' project and you are both welcome to use what you want from it (credit appreciated!) and to make your own comments in turn. Gregjeffreys 18:37, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Gain
From article: "[Gain] is a measure of reflectivity of light compared to a screen coated with titanium dioxide". This could use a citation, since magnesium carbonate is also a reference material according to Da-Lite:. Shawnc 11:50, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * added reference (anon edit). The link was already in the article. Santtus 10:17, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

DNP transparent screen (Hologram anyone?)
"The transparent screen is similar to existing hologram screens used to view transmitted images, but the adoption of the roll-to-roll production process has made it easier to make the shift to a large-scale format that was difficult with hologram screens." May 25, 2004. Shawnc 13:19, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Work needed to make this article good?
What kind of work would be needed to make this article reach a good article status? I guess that much needs to be done. Mostly the article is just technical talk from a writer with background in physics. That's because I viewed the subject mostly due to what optical properties there are, and how they relate to various concepts in the industry. What are the kind of viewpoints you would want most? Commercial history? Maybe a more popularized introduction? Should the somewhat (perhaps) complex explanations be made easier to read, or should each paragraph perhaps be summed up in a simple-to-understand introducing sentence? Santtus 12:38, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Gain discussion
The discussion of gain describes both titanium dioxide and titanium oxide. Which is it? 160.91.89.157 17:26, 31 August 2006 (UTC) Sean
 * In this context, titanium oxide is just an often used, imprecise name for titanium dioxide. Perhaps this should be clarified in the article. Santtus 13:25, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

link spam
This article has been #1 hit on google with keywords "projection screen" for some time now, and has started to get it's share of link spam quite prevalent in Wikipedia articles. A certain set of useful, informative and at least somewhat neutral websites (including commercial websites) were used as reference for making this work. Links to those websites have been properly included in the end of the article, as a way to cite sources.

There are many equipment manufacturers and resellers, who would like to have their share of the links (and hits) coming from Wikipedia. Unfortunately, this has encouraged persons affiliated with such companies to insert such links in the article, that offer little of anything else but advertisement and partly repeated information already found from the links used to create this article. Moreover, many of the links are added by contributors, who have no history of useful edits. The links could of course be useful, however, but that is in doubt when the contributor hasn't bothered to improve the article in other ways except for the added link to their website.

For these reasons it is reasonable to expect even a minor degree of notability in any future links that will be added, and either some new information that is currently not in the article, or some information supporting/criticizing the article in a meaningful way.

Probably most wikipedians would very much hate to see the Wikipedia becoming a giant, free-to-use link depository and a tool for free hits and fame for any websites some people might want to promote. Santtus 14:22, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

relevant commercial links needed
There is a need to include information of businesses most highly relevant to commercial aspects of projections screens. As with other articles pertaining to commercially produced goods, it would be reasonable to include a list of the most notable manufacturers of these items, rather than re-sellers, unless the place of business is more important than the item being sold. This seems not to be the case considering projection screens, however. Vast edivence seems to suggest that the place of purchase is at most of secondary importance to professionals and consumers alike, if even that.

If some re-seller would be deemed to be notable, it should subsequently be included in the article. Some re-sellers may have been more important in the history, and those should be found out and listed.

Only manufacturer that comes to my mind now is Da-Lite, perhaps because of using much of their works in preparing this article. I'm unaware how to establish notability from a business I've never heard of, so I'm personally unable to provide references to such businesses. If anyone is able to do that, such references would be usefull and valued to the article. Santtus 17:42, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

screen paint is not relevant
Links to informational content ona reselelrs page is fine by my standards, however dropping 3 links to 'articles' on wall paint that acts as a screen (projectorcentral) is obvious abuse and toally irrelvant. Perhaps they should start the article on screen paint.... HMMurdock 01:49, 27 February 2007 (UTC) Paint is indeed not the most significant sub-topic in this area, and it should not be presented as such. I didn't get the impression that the paint was presented in such a way, though. There's now some kind of a link fight going on, hope it settles soon. Meanwhile I'm going to check the history on all the link inserts and any supportive arguments why a particular link should be there. Is there any guideline on the notability of links? Santtus 03:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC) Intermountain Design of Salt Lake City is a renowned manufacturer of high quality B/P screens using proprietary paint formulas creating supperior product used, primarily, in commercial applications; flight simulators etc.
 * Thanks for placing the adds here and not on the article. 62.220.237.65 23:06, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

though I'm sure it does seem this was advertising screen paint is very relavent as many places use it to screen movies on outdoor walls and other similar puroposes and it shouldn't be removed in it's entirety. Or rather it should be added back since it seems to be gone from the main article at this point IRMacGuyver (talk) 11:53, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

fogscreen
Says on the paragraph, "will be used" in Eurovision. Well, that event is over, now. Was it used there? 62.220.237.75 22:07, 30 August 2007 (UTC) $$Insert formula here$$

History
I'm having some confusion whether the projection screen was first used by Lumiere brothers, or some others. I got exhausted after trying to find it out. Anyone got good sources on this? I'd be willing to write a paragraph on this. 82.181.110.14 (talk) 15:23, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Do selectively reflective screens exist?
The existence of true color-selective screens emerged from Sony hype, and has not been adequately substantiated, despite the existence of United States Patent Application 20040240053. Sony's own purported press releases, and an alleged PopSci article regarding the original ChromaVue screen have magically disappeared. Original discussion can be found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:DLP "Colour-absorbing screen". I'd like to see such a screen. I'd REALLY like to see such a screen. I'd REALLY LIKE to see such a screen substantiated. It would be more accurate to say that such screen technology has been investigated. Marcus The box (talk)

Declining ratings :'-(
From Good Article to A to B to start :(

No, really, that's not my point. But, what does a project-dependent rating mean? The article isn't lousy or useless. Then again, that's just my opinion as the major contributor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.181.93.226 (talk) 19:11, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Untitled
Wrote the article from scratch. Various sources used, article focus mainly on home theater screens, as I have done most of my research on those due to personal interest on the subject. It would be good to have a discussion of the properties in projection screens used for different purposes, and I'd very much like to have the article cross-checked for errors, omitted important issues and such. I will welcome any comments. Thanks. Santtus 11:33, 15 July 2005 (UTC)