I was at hometheaterschack.com when I found a thread on PFG (pigment free gray) DIY screens.

Does anyone here have any experience with this? It seems like a pretty good option judging by some screenies they've posted.

Check out the link for some more info...

http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/pro...esentation.html

We should test this out!

It's not quite ready for prime time for the lower lumen crowd. Soon though! You can follow the development in the 'Further Investigations' thread. When I get it figured out I was planning on letting you folks know!

The advantages of aluminum are that it actually reflects light, unlike mica which refracts (prism effect). If you are looking for the current compilation though, it's called 'Black Widow'.

mech

I've been watching this thread for a while, now. It makes sense to me. If adding 20% aluminum increases your total reflectivity by about...let's say 5% of so, then you can either add a little black for a grayer screen (until it gets back down to a gain of 1) or use a lower lumen pj.

This may actually be better suited for our low lumens pjs.

You know something that we have there that would be very suited to you guys would be CGiv.

mech

So the "black widow" is best suited (thus far) for commercial projectors, or anything that gives comparable brightness right?

What do you think minimum lumen output should be for using this screen?


(Thanks for keeping us posted mech)

I'd think so. But it's a very good question! I have to admit that I'm in unfamiliar waters with you folks in that I have no idea how many measured lumens these DIY projectors kick out. The Black Widow is in the N6 range of things number wise. And for us folks with commercial projectors, it is the best ambient light mix out there that I've tried. And I've tried a lot!



I do know that video optimized lumens of some pj's hit down in the 500-600 range so if you're around there it may be something for you. But I think it might be best to either try the CGiv, or wait until I finish the further investigations. One promising thing that has come out of them is that adding Valspar Flat Ultra White lightens the mix without affecting the neutrality - well non neutrality - of my tests. I just need to find a good base for Auto Air Aluminum.

I'll keep you folks up to date! Just remember one thing, neutral is what you want!

mech

I've been looking at commercial PJs like the Panasonic AE-2000U and Sanyo PLV-Z2000, and it surprises me that each of them only put out 400 lumens at most in a video optomised mode. According to a review, the Sanyo just barely gets to 600 lumens in it's brightest mode! The DIY PJs seem to vary greatly in lumen output from almost none up to 400 lumens. I'm thinking of rebuilding my screen eventually(just BO cloth); but I'd like to make it transparent for sound, as I'd love to get my center channel speaker behind the screen instead of under it.

It is amazing the way they rate them and the way they perform in real world environments. I believe my Mitsu HC3000U is somewhere around 550 or so optimized. I haven't seen the figure in a while but that's the number that seems to stick in my head.

mech

I may have gotten it neutral tonight. Then I'd have to take it up to an N9 which I think would be easy. We're a lot closer!

mech

I'm not sure if you folks understand neutrality and how it's vital to have a neutral screen. Maybe I could get wbassett to make a thread on that. Regardless if anyone is interested I've gotten the numbers dialed in and I'm going to try to tweak it a bit more neutral before I 'throw it out there'. But just in case anyone is interested in the spectrophotometer readings, here they are:

RGB
189 191 191
xyY
0.311 0.329 52.0
L*ab
77.3 -0.96 -0.31

As you can see the x and the a need a bit more work but I'm confident if having it done by next Tuesday. And then I'll try to get something in the Munsell N9 range for you folks to try. Sound good?

mech

PS I'm calling this base mech's headache for Black Widow!

Just want to say that those numbers are neutral and meet neutral specifications. Mech is just trying to get it even closer to the bullseye.

Gee, where to start?! It really would take its own thread to fully explain it, and even then it would only be touching the surface seeing there are volumes of books on color science as well as Universities that have degrees dedicated to all this. But in a nutshell when we talk about neutral we are talking about neutral as related to our D65 reference point. If you think of a target it might be easier to visualize.


Simply put, anything within the neutral tolerance zone is neutral. What that means is neutral isn't a color, it is a shade of gray between white and black. The reason why we strive for a D65 neutral screen is neutral reflects all colors equally. That means reds won't be pushed harder than blue or green. Of course the projector is a very important part of everything, the screen isn't magic. If the screen is off as far as its color balance though it will push all colors in that direction. Depending on how far off the screen is from neutral could mean the difference between whether you can compensate for the color shift at the projector or not. Naturally, the most accurate screen would be a neutral screen. Hope that makes sense.

Also white is much more forgiving than grays. White screens can be further away from neutral (within reason of course) and have less of an effect than a gray screen. The darker the shade of gray, the harder it will push colors if it is not neutral.

We look at many pieces of data when we test or design a screen application. The Chromaticity graph above is only one piece of the puzzle, there are many components we look at like, spectral curves (the flatter the better), Lab 'a' and 'b' values, xy values, color temperature, and also the RGB numbers. RGB is used a lot and is a 'snapshot' of the color, but to determine if something truly is neutral all the data has to be looked at.

I think I'd like to add that D65 is the standard in the video industry, be it movies, hdtv, whatever. That's the standard. And how does one mix up a D65 mix? With a spectrophotmeter and tons of time!

Yep! Those RGB numbers give me a color temp of 6598.4 (double check that for me Bill!) and I'd like it to be somewhere between 6455 and 6555 or so...

mech

That is if you're mixing... otherwise I'd say just get an OTS (Off the Shelf) and skip the hassle if all a person wants is simple but very good.

Mech....

So currently the best mix (providing you're rolling on the paint, not spraying) is the aluminum roof coating with Valspar flat ultra white?

No. The only finished products we have are the aluminum roof product with either True Value Winter Mist or Sherwin Williams Luminous White.

I hope to finish the Auto Air work on this by Tuesday. Knock on wood...

mech

Thanks mech. I didn't see it anywhere in the thread... does the Luminous White only come in 1 sheen? If not then which sheen is recommended?

scoodidabop - flat.

I've made the breakthrough with the Auto Air today and expect to have that finished by Tuesday!

The latest numbers:

182 183 183
0.312 0.329 47.3
74.4 -0.43 -0.14

That's a color temp of 6549! It doesn't get much better than that! And a nice spectral curve!



This will be a custom color match more than likely as there doesn't seem to be anything in EasyRGB that matches the base.

mech

Whoa! Lookin good there mech! Yowza

We're another step closer! Our first beta tester reported back!



Tuesday will be the day for me to finish it up and then I'll get to work on trying to tweak it for you guys. I'm still under the assumption that it (N7-7.5 range) will be too dark for you folks but please enlighten me if I'm cuckoo!

Earlier I had success in lightening the mix using Valspar Flat Ultra White and it caused no shift in the neutrality of the mix. I'll keep you folks up to date!

mech

One more thing, if I ever start talking to just myself please feel free to let me know!

mech

HA! You've got at least one listener here.

... and a lurker

Have you guys seen the beta tester's pictures? Should I have him post them here?

mech

Are they just screen shots or do they have some reference screen material in the images to demonstrate the improvement over a good matte ~N8 screen?

Screen shots alone don't really demonstrate the improvements to be had.

Screen shots are good fun and great to see so by all means get the tester to post them, but if there is no frame of reference they only demonstrate there is nothing terribly wrong with the screen or the digital camera they used.

I wonder where you could have gotten that from? lol!

mech

Well since I am the one who started out doing everything wrong with demonstration screen shots at AVS and had to redo a lot of presentations based on criticisms and direction from many helpful members, I ended up being the first one to routinely incorporate some basic on and off axis photos as well as screen shots of appropriate scenes for specific viewing situations. Any screen shots presented for the demonstration of a change or improvement I have always include a reference of some sort. Whenever I am just posting some screen shots to show how things look on a finished screen I usually indicate they are just gratuitous screen shots. So I developed a lot of these habits from my participation at AVS. To my knowledge no one else has tried any harder than I to present complete sets of screen shot demonstrations of their work.

Really? I notice that it took you quite some (well over a year) time but you finally have a neutral gray reference card. Where'd you get that idea? But it is nice to know that there were no standards before you Todd!

mech

Show me some comprehensive comparison screen shots done prior to the RS-MaxxMudd Investigation thread that I authored. Then laugh. I have never modified my photos because they are comparisons and any error is applied to both samples. You know as well as I do that screen shot comparisons are totally useless for determining neutrality anyway. They are however useful for backing up claims of blacker blacks and whiter whites. At least say blacker and whiter than what, a flat gray wall paint? Or showing relative differences in dark scene image quality in ambient light conditions. So far all I have seen are really bright scenes in darkness and ambient light conditions. Those are meaningless. Off axis comparison photos are very good at demonstrating the point at which a revolutionary new solution crosses over the equivalent matte surface performance.

Like I said screen shots are fun and always welcome but lets have some photographic demonstrations of the claims that are being made for the solutions you are promoting. If you are not willing to participate in an independent investigation of these claims at least make some effort to do it yourself.

I'm seeing the beginnings of something here, let me nip this one in the bud -

Keep it civil.

First it is impossible to do an 'indepenent' investigation on something a person developed themself. The nature of an 'independent' investigation would mean done by a third party unbiased individual/individuals.

So far we have had several people beta test the formula. Only one has had issues which were related to spraying methods, possibly weather conditions not being ideal. (Too cold perhaps) As far as I know asking people at random to beta test the screen is something unique and as close to an 'independent' test as can be done. I don't recall others having people test and get feedback this way.

Spectral curves were asked for because it was said that was the only true way to determine screen performance, even though CIE Chromacity graphs, xyY, and CIE L*ab readings were also done and all show the same results. They were provided as requested, and then other requests made, those were also provided. Everything humanly possible has been done to thoroughly test this and try to satisfy people that were/are in doubt. Even off angle shots have been done, as well as ambient lighting shots... scenes with industry test patterns and color bars... full color scenes, as well as dark scenes and shots of 'space' scenes'. It has also been compared to other advaced DIY screens as well as non-DIY screens.


Yes even this was done, and done against one of the best performing N8 neutral gray screens out there.

If made as per the recommendations and in the proper ratios we tested to produce the best images, then a dramatic difference will be seen.

For the LL guys, this may be too dark for their tastes, but we are very close to having an N9 version. (N9 is a very light gray which will work nicely with lower lumen output)

I have seen some incredible projectors made on this site. They are not as bright as some of the newer high powered digital projectors, but more inline with a CRT projector's light output. We're trying to get this lightened up so that you guys here can use it as well.

All I can say is this works and has had extensive testing done and lots of data to back it up. The screen shots are just visual icing.

Off angle shots were done, as were a wide variety of screen images and content. Honestly guys... we're not hiding anything or pulling the wool over anyone's eyes. Any reasonable requests will be accomodated. The data has been presented, and if people want screen shots, on angle, off angle, bright scenes, dark scenes, comparisons to known top performing DIY screens... stand by!

Please though realize that screen shots are only visual and because of compression and other camera introduced artifacts that make it impossible to judge solely by a screen shot on a website. That is exactly why we do so much testing and data readings. As good as some of the upcoming screen shots are going to be, they are not as good as how the screen looks and performs in person.

I can't give a date when a lighter N9 version will be ready for you guys, but mech has been working on a way to get it to a lighter shade more suitable for your needs.

It's great that all that work was done.

All we are asking is that you post it here for the members of LumenLab to see it for themselves.

I'm not questioning anything just asking for you to do what you have asked others to do in the past.

A little background on 'PFG' first.

The nickname 'PFG' stands for 'Pigment Free Gray'. Anything added to a base to alter the color, is technically a pigment. Therefore Aluminum is as pigment and is actually a known one. Nothing was 'discovered' or invented here, and as far as using aluminum for painting it certainly isn't new. The reason I called it Pigment Free was because it produced a gray without the use of conventional store tint colorants. No lamp black, or any other colors other than aluminum were used.

I was studying and researching screens and various ways they are made and to achieve a brighter image over a standard matte finish (whether it be gray or white) there are several methods typically employed. Glass beads are one way, pearls (mica, which is an interference method), non-interference methods (metals and other components that reflect, not refract), and the surface sheen (mostly a DIY method).

Glass beads are used for high gain screens and create a retro-reflective screen. What that means is the light hitting the screen is mostly reflected back to the source. Think of a traffic sign and your headlights. The sign looks bright and illuminated because the light is reflected back at the source, basically you. An angular reflective screen is like playing pool and doing a bank shot.

Mica is reflective, but also by nature refracts light. There are some commercial screens that use pearls, but not many and they are starting to become fewer. The problem is a color shifting caused by light being refracted. Each piece of mica acts as a tiny prism. Commercial screen companies use a very high grade of finely ground mica, but they also employ special methods to ensure uniform coverage over the entire screen as well as special construction methods to align the flakes in one direction.

Non-interference methods are the use of a material that is not translucent like mica, and therefore does not allow light to pass through, bending the light as it does and causing refraction. There are several commercial companies that use non-interference methods over interference methods.

Surface sheen. Perhaps the worse way to increase screen brightness because it also introduces hot spotting after a certain point.

I was very intrigued with the use of aluminum in screens. Aluminum is often used as a 'silver substitute' and has also been used at times for a second surface mirror, so the bright reflective properties had me curious.

While walking through Walmart I came across a general purpose water based paint. I had seen many oil based aluminum paints, but this was the first waterbased one I ran across. It was Black Jack 5168. I bought a gallon of it for $15.

The paint itself is very bright and highly reflective due to the aluminum. I mixed it with some Kilz2 expecting a bright silvery-white screen. Instead and to my surprise I got a very dark gray shade. Dark as far as screens go.

I mixed up ratios of 3:1 through 6:1. Ratios being 3,4, or 5 parts Kilz2 to 1 part of the aluminum paint. Interestingly, 3:1 through 5:1 looked virtually the same shade. 6:1 became noticeably lighter because at that level the amount of white base had reached the level of a very low dispersion of the aluminum throughout the mix.

Here is one of the very original 'PFG' test panels.


When I put it up on my test screen rig I wasn't sure what to expect. What I saw amazed me.

Here are some shots against a clone of a high end commercial screen around an N8.75 range of gray.


Right away the black levels jumped out at me, darker and deeper than any screen I had previously tested.



I did some lights on/lights off shots to check if it performed with normal room lighting on...

Lights off...

Lights on...


I quickly realized this had some potential and needed further testing.

Are the photographs in the preceding post of the experimental formula or the Henry 588 formula?

Sorry I see that it was the experimental Black Jack formula.

Do you have these screen shots with the Henry 588 formula?

At what angle would you say the performance of the Black Widow drops to match the Sherwin Willims "Gray Screen"?
That is the Gray Screen in the background correct?

I should mention when I first saw these screen shots I was totally blown away! If anyone has seen any of wbassett's ambient light photos of the Gray Screen you would understand why. Gray Screen was an amazing find for ambient light tolerance and the above screen shots make the GS look sick.

What I did next was to make up some test panels of the various ratios as well as a known N8 screen that performs exceptionally well both with lights off and on, Sherwin William Gray Screen. SW Gray Screen is the panel to the far left of the screen, the center two panels are PFG screens, and the far right is the lighter N8.75 shade of gray.

This provided a darker gray to compare the aluminum test panels to as well as a reference sample I am extremely familiar with.

Here is a shot of a colorful scene from The Rundown.

Color wise this darker panel was spot on with the SW Gray Screen reference panel.

All things being equal, if this were it, I would say SW Gray Screen was still the 'winner' due to the extreme ease it is to make a screen with, but take a closer look, specifically the letter box area. Blacks were ten fold better than anything I have seen with Gray Screen, and that is what my primary screen is made from, so I am very familiar with it and its performance.

Whites also matched SW Gray screen, look at the froth of the waterfall, it is virtually indistinguishable between the PFG panels and Gray Screen. Because the blacks were so much deeper and darker than with Gray Screen, it made perceived contrast look even better and increased depth and shadow detail as well.

Where it really excels though is with dark scenes.

There really was no contest between my reference panel and the PFG panels. The plasma swirl behind the Serenity name looked alive and flowing by comparison.





What is amazing is this is a very dark screen but whites and colorwise it performs like a much lighter screen. The deeper blacks also create an illusion of more depth. So with bright colorful images, it may initially in screen shots look the same as the N8 reference gray, but in person the difference is noticeable. Also as pointed out when you start looking at the screen shots closer you start seeing the difference.

Without the dark shots and space scenes I can see where people might look at the first shot of the waterfall and think 'big deal, I don't see any different worth shouting about'. That's why I take a wide variety of shots.

Also keep in mind this is with the prototype and the color balance was not nearly as good as the final versions, as well as screenies never fully show how good the screen looks in person.

Up coming will be some shots with test patterns as well as on/off angle and more screenies. Don't worry, contrary to what has been said, we have more data and screen shots of this thing than anyone could possibly want! Also there will be some pretty amazing real world shots of a full screen in action.

If you have a brighter projector I would definitely say give this a look. If not, as mentioned we're working on a lighter version of this that is more suitable for you guys.

There will be Henry shots posted as well as the new AA version.

This screen does work. I have seen it mentioned of a blue lean, but that was from discussions in the 'Investigations' thread elsewhere. I assure you and everyone that the finalized and recommeded versions have been balanced out and there is no color shift or lean.

I didn't break a protactor out, but I'd say the half gain point is around 70 degrees, or a 140 degree viewing angle.

FYI for everyone's information... Black Jack ended up being a discontinued product so we looked for other alternatives.

Most people are able to judge the 45 degree point easily due to the fact that it is the mid point of the 90 degree angle between the screen surface and the perpendicular path from projector to the center of the screen. So I take it then you can move past the 45 degree point and the Black Widow sample still appears to have the same brightness advantage over the GS that it does when viewing from in front?

Wow, that's quite a wide viewing angle for a screen with that much gain. That's quite an accomplishment. It will be really interesting to see the gain curves for the Black Widow solution. In order to overcome the much darker shade of gray the gain boost must be quite high. Do you think there is more than the usual gain vs viewing cone going on? Possibly an increase in reflective efficiency or something to accomplish such a feat? How much do you think the Sherwin Williams Luminous White is contributing to this gain boost? I understand the luminous white paints are supposed to be very efficient at reflecting light. Has anyone tried getting the Luminous White tinted Gray Screen?

If you still have both the Sherwin Williams Gray Screen and the Black Widow, could you just have a look and see at what angle white light projected on them together becomes equal in brightness?

I know the half gain point is what the commercial industry uses as a specification but the crossover point with a known screen solution like Gray Screen has more real world relevance. This is a better indication of what the compromise is when going to a higher gain screen from the basic matte screen surface.

Great work by the way. I know how long and hard you guys have worked on this and it looks like it has really paid off. I know you like to employ scientific principals and follow the commercial industry standards. I applaud that and please don't misconstrue my efforts to get you to provide some real world demonstrations of what this new paint mix can do as something negative on my part. I am simply trying to get you to provide the kind of photographic demonstrations that we can all relate to. You can give me all the specs you want on loud speakers but in the end I want to hear them side-by-side to really decide what sounds better. Fortunately we are able to do that in a relative way for DIY screen solutions through the use of comparison shots and the appropriate scenes displayed for various lighting conditions. I am simply attempting to coax you into providing a demonstration worthy of this accomplishment so that we can all relate to just how amazing this Black Widow solution is.

Who said what the gain is yet? Gain gets thrown around way too liberally at times. Since there is a viewing cone, there is some gain. How much, I can't say at the moment.



No, that would be impossible and contradict the laws of light and physics. As gain goes up, viewing cone goes down. There is no way around that.

When we have the gain readings finished I am sure it will make perfect sense.


No coaxing needed, we have taken all these shots at one time or another. We'll have to dig through the posts and emails, so much has been going back and forth as far as sample readings, screen testing, retesting that maybe it was in an email and didn't make it to the thread.

I have come to have a huge appreciation for the commercial guys when it comes to developing a screen. It's a full time job once it goes from theory to 'Let's actually make this work!'. All of us have full time jobs, many times ones that require more than 40 hours a week, so trying to balance work, family, and testing and developing a DIY screen can be a bit of a full plate (as well as cost some money too). If anything was 'missed' it wasn't because we were sloppy and didn't do the tests, more like it fell off the plate somewhere and we have to go find it and show it along with the rest.

That wasn't meant as a whoa is me thing! Just saying there is around eight months of data and testing that was done. On the plus side, a lot has been learned through the testing trials and mech may have a way to easily bump it up to an N9 shade.

Forgive me maybe I have made an incorrect assumption. In the past when a gray screen is employed to enhance contrast or ambient light tolerance there was usually an attempt made to increase the light reflected back at the seating area to compensate for the muted white levels inherent with a gray screen. Unless there is something else at work with the Black Widow mix, I assumed the ability to use a darker gray that produces whiter whites was achieved with an increase in gain relative to a matte SW Gray Screen. This can easily be characterized by taking a photo at the angle where the brightness of the reference screen and the sample under test are visually similar. The best way to do this is with either an all white image or the basic horizontal black and white bars.

I fully understand the respect you have developed for the commercial guys doing this sort of work. I in turn respect the extent to which you have gone to educate yourself in color theory and all the scientific aspects of the development of front projection screen surfaces. I am only asking that you provide the basic demonstration photographs that all of us will understand and see how well the Black Widow works in layman's terms. I know you guys are busy but it typically only takes about as much time as has been devoted to rebutting my requests to setup and take the basic photo comparisons. I'm sorry that you feel this is great imposition on my part. I am only thinking of those who will benefit from the presentation of a few simple on axis and off axis photos with some frame of reference present in the photos. For many this will be far more meaningful than numbers and graphs, myself included.

I don't think anyone doubts your claims, but I think we would benefit from some demonstration of them that is easy to related to. That's all, but I certainly understand if you are too busy. Sooner or later someone here will give it a try and maybe they will have time to show it off compared to other know DIY screen surfaces.

Two things. First in response to above, I hope not! I think I clearly stated that this wasn't for LL folks.... yet!

Secondly to the rest of you folks watching this thread as I attempt in the future to make it more palatable for you (no promises here but I'll try! ):

For those that are curious, the developers of Black Widow are making a conscious decision to not respond to comments/criticism from forum member tiddler. There has long been personal issues between tiddler and the BW developers, and every exchange seems to spiral down quickly, into personal attacks (not placing blame here, the personalities involved simply don't seem to get along). Out of respect for this forum, we've decided not to engage him. We're happen to discuss BW with anyone else that chooses to comment (positively or negatively), or even try it out for themselves. Many have now tried the mix with positive results, and posted numerous screen shots. I'm sure they'll also be happy to engage other forum members who are curious about application, attributes, and results of the Black Widow mix.

And with that being said, I'm off to continue work on this!

mech

[moderator hat]I think that Tiddler's last comments are more than fair. I'd also like to see some direct comparisons. This doesn't seem to be unreasonable, or a personal attack in any way.

You, on the other hand appear to be singling Tiddler out, and are broadcasting that you aren't responding to him. While I don't see your post as "out of line" you're getting awfully close to the line. This is this thread's second warning. Keep things civil, or there will be a number of posts pruned from this thread, most likely also containing information that you might want to keep.
[/moderator hat]

It was in response to his previous comments directed at me, personally. Both here and elsewhere.

It was the 'maurice' comment, which has since been edited out (?).

That being said, I'll move on...

mech

I understand the way it feels to be referred to as Maurice and I apologize for that.

LemunLab? Is that a rip?

Sorry, it was not meant to be!
It's gone.

Edit by Durachko: No worries. I found it rather amusing.

LOL I completely missed it! "LemonLab" was what you were referring to. I thought you did not like being refered to as the Low Lumen crowd.

This thread has gotten way off track, in an attempt to try to steer it back...

Here are some shots of the finalized Auto Air version, yes off angle shots too.

(Keanu voice).... whoa. Nice screenies

Those are some mad Photoshop skillz you have there!!!

or

That's a really nice 108" LCD!!!

C'mon... that's not really a projected image, is it?
What kind of projector are you using? DIY?
Got any video of this?

I don't think he's using a DIY in fact I'm pretty sure he's already stated he's using a commercial unit.

The projector was an Infocus Screen Play 7210.

QUOTE (ProjectorCentral)

The Screenplay 7210 has many options that can be used to adjust the projector's lumen output; set for maximum brightness it can approach its stated 1100 lumen ceiling. However, it outputs about 400 ANSI lumens once optimized for video (lamp standard, gamma set to "film", white peaking off, with the color temperature set to 6500K). Combined with its high contrast performance, this is enough light output to easily drive the image up to 120" without any substantial loss of quality.

Contrast on the Screenplay 7210 is excellent, making even the darkest scenes easy on the eyes. Shadow details pop. However, blacks are not as solid as they can be with the DarkChip3. We would have preferred a bit deeper black level. Dark areas of the image also tend to show a substantial amount of dithering, which can become distracting in some cases.

Colors are accurate and natural, with realistic fleshtones. Saturation as a whole can seem slightly lackluster at times, but in most situations the ScreenPlay 7210's color performance was excellent.

Click quote to see entire review.

The camera & settings: Nikon D70, 28-105mm sigma lens, F-Stop - 16, WB - 0, ISO 200

I can't find the post where the size is stated but if I recall correctly it is around 98" diagonal 16:9.