D
Deleted member 133
Guest
Folks,
First off a disclaimer: this thread has nothing to do with any of your home theatre rooms that I have visited, nor any that I have seen you post about - at least not directly.
What primed my need to post was a recent HT mag article wherein there were pictures of someone's HT - and the walls were a vivid red colour.
Now don't get me wrong; in the right setting that shade of red might have been been fantastic; or at least conjured images of fantasies. But in a HT?
I've also seen greens and blues and... well you get the drift.
My point, and question to all of you: are you willing to sacrifice the in-your-face cache of colour, in return for improved on-screen image?
I'll (hopefully) elaborate.
When in 2006 I re-did my very modest basement room that was and is my main HT I did a little research. I discovered the Munsell neutral value scale. Without any technical mumo-jumbo (do a Wiki search for that), it's basically a continuum of "colour" ranging from white through grey to black. The colours on that scale are "neutral" to other colours. This means they don't reflect or absorb any other colour relative to any other. (This is all my interpretation - to make my point that follows.)
What it means in practice is that it will not affect the colours of the images that are projected on your screen - either by reflections off it, nor by distracting your eye and fooling your brain. That bright red room?: well if onscreen there was an image that contained that same bright red (or even close to it) it would appear less vibrant, perhaps washed out, to your eyes because they're already bombarded with the red from the wall colours. Won't happen with a shade on the Munsell neutral value scale.
I choose a mid to light grey colour - chosen from a set of samples provided by a paint company for exactly this type of application. See the shot below of my room during the 2006 reno. Walls and ceiling are painted. Note that it's shot under bright fluorescent lighting so the walls appear lighter than they actually are. The speakers' wood gives a good contrast. The next shot shows that same corner of the room, now with black acoustic panels on the wall. The observant will notice the carpet: this is a holdover / testament to my cheapness. It's got too much colour. I've still not replaced it with a neutral darker grey area rug - which I intend to do (sometime.)
The bottom line is that the room is kept colour-deprived on purpose. To my eyes (and in comparison to other rooms I've been in - but this a VERY subjective judgement call on my part) it gives better on-screen colour / better perception of on-screen colour.
Yes it's not flashy. Yes it's dull. No it won't ever be featured in HT (or anywhere else.) And in cases where the better half will be an active user of the room as well, it just might not be her first choice. But it's my room and I had carte blanche when I re-did it. I opted for screen image over flash.
Would be interested to know if such thoughts ever crossed your mind(s) when building your HT.
Jeff Mackwood
First off a disclaimer: this thread has nothing to do with any of your home theatre rooms that I have visited, nor any that I have seen you post about - at least not directly.
What primed my need to post was a recent HT mag article wherein there were pictures of someone's HT - and the walls were a vivid red colour.
Now don't get me wrong; in the right setting that shade of red might have been been fantastic; or at least conjured images of fantasies. But in a HT?
I've also seen greens and blues and... well you get the drift.
My point, and question to all of you: are you willing to sacrifice the in-your-face cache of colour, in return for improved on-screen image?
I'll (hopefully) elaborate.
When in 2006 I re-did my very modest basement room that was and is my main HT I did a little research. I discovered the Munsell neutral value scale. Without any technical mumo-jumbo (do a Wiki search for that), it's basically a continuum of "colour" ranging from white through grey to black. The colours on that scale are "neutral" to other colours. This means they don't reflect or absorb any other colour relative to any other. (This is all my interpretation - to make my point that follows.)
What it means in practice is that it will not affect the colours of the images that are projected on your screen - either by reflections off it, nor by distracting your eye and fooling your brain. That bright red room?: well if onscreen there was an image that contained that same bright red (or even close to it) it would appear less vibrant, perhaps washed out, to your eyes because they're already bombarded with the red from the wall colours. Won't happen with a shade on the Munsell neutral value scale.
I choose a mid to light grey colour - chosen from a set of samples provided by a paint company for exactly this type of application. See the shot below of my room during the 2006 reno. Walls and ceiling are painted. Note that it's shot under bright fluorescent lighting so the walls appear lighter than they actually are. The speakers' wood gives a good contrast. The next shot shows that same corner of the room, now with black acoustic panels on the wall. The observant will notice the carpet: this is a holdover / testament to my cheapness. It's got too much colour. I've still not replaced it with a neutral darker grey area rug - which I intend to do (sometime.)
The bottom line is that the room is kept colour-deprived on purpose. To my eyes (and in comparison to other rooms I've been in - but this a VERY subjective judgement call on my part) it gives better on-screen colour / better perception of on-screen colour.
Yes it's not flashy. Yes it's dull. No it won't ever be featured in HT (or anywhere else.) And in cases where the better half will be an active user of the room as well, it just might not be her first choice. But it's my room and I had carte blanche when I re-did it. I opted for screen image over flash.
Would be interested to know if such thoughts ever crossed your mind(s) when building your HT.
Jeff Mackwood